Those of us who know and love Poundbury look forward to the next 25 years to see this Cornish town completed. Only a hint of snark from Tanya so congratulations for that. The fact is that the King and his master planner from Poundbury, the genius Leon Krier have a vision for urban living which as Tanya says, excites all those looking for affordable housing in Newquay and indeed all those who just wish to live in a more human and harmonious environment.
Arkadian X
2 months ago
Without accompanying pictures this article is meaningless. I don’t understand why UnHerd never publishes them.
It looks really pretty. A bit like a film set for a Jane Austen adaptation except that some of the pastel shades are a bit too bright – rather like icing sugar – and give the impression of Toy Town. But that is my only reservation.
Ray Andrews
2 months ago
What I want to know is what Charles is doing for the globalist plutocrat rentiers. All this attention to folks who can’t put a roof over their heads is sickening.
David Jennings
2 months ago
“It is true that it is expensive for Newquay — an open-market three-bedroom house is £330,000 in Nansledan against £250,000 outside it.” If “30% is reserved for social housing, affordable housing, and shared ownership”, then basic economics means that the other homebuyers are to pay more to cover those subsidized (40% subsidy it seems from the article) costs. If the author and readers want subsidized housing to allow for a greater mix of people in a community – a noble goal – that will be the cost of such a rule.
At its best, Ms. Gold’s article sets out the compromises any development must consider. I don’t think Nansledan is worthy of both “cheering and pitiable” but rather is a concious choice and many are wanting to make it. Kudos for the King to offer such a choice when the simpler, less risky development path is to keep doing what has been done before.
Lesley Keay
2 months ago
I am not sure what TG is trying to convey with this article. Is she saying that it is wrong for a private developer to provide housing? Or is she just upset that it is the Duchy of Cornwall who is the developer? Does she not understand that it takes capital to invest in housing and that capital is usually provided by the private sector. Yes, there is a need for government to provide some of that investment and there has been significant under-investment for decades. She also fails to understand that most new housing developments have covenants imposed on them with regards to all sorts of things. Some of them relate to exterior decor, others can be about having a garden shed, or where the bins have to be located. Covenants can be imposed by the developer, others will be imposed by the local planning department. All in all this article seems to be more about TG’s republicanism rather than an attempt by a developer to provide some much needed housing.
Anna Bramwell
2 months ago
What would a new village built according to the local aesthetic look like? And why do more houses built reduce the availability?, forcing tenants into mouldy flats owned by public bodies?
Dougie Undersub
2 months ago
A good article, except for the gratuitous dog at greedy landlords.
Christopher Barclay
2 months ago
I presume Charles got planning permission to build on farmland. Or can he just do what he wants?
R S Foster
2 months ago
…wiki suggests that just one in 1,500 people in England are committed enough to Republicanism to even subscribe to the “Republic” website…so they would be the miserable whinging couple with the obnoxious child that are held in strong but polite dislike by the good people of Nansledan…my guess is that they work remotely for the Grauniad, Auntie or C4…and could afford to buy there on Daddy’ money..!
Yes, that’s rather perplexing. Surely one of the first amenities you need. Maybe some enterprising locals will start a cider club, like Eddy Grundy in The Archers.
I grew up not far from Port Sunlight and that didn’t have a pub for decades. Always found the overdone aesthetics a bit on the sinister side, to be honest. The Lady Lever Gallery is worth a visit.
Last edited 1 month ago by Al M
Richard Craven
1 month ago
Mountbatten was my stepfather’s parents’ landlord in the 1970’s.
Alan Osband
1 month ago
She ‘pities the republicans here who statistically must exist , but people now will do a lot for good housing ‘ . Poor Tanya obviously couldn’t find one .
The heart on that woman !
Andrew Horsman
2 months ago
Whether it’s called Nasledan or Nansledan, it sounds like hell on earth. And it’s what Charles, if gets his WEFy way, wants for us all. No pub, no church, no life, no spirit; just homogenised serfs praising their feudal lord from the safety of their identikit pastel-coloured pods. Horrendous.
There is little point in having a church if there is not a congregation clamouring for one. Methodists used to meet in houses for prayer until there were enough of them to build a church. Today the Methodist hierarchy are desperate to close as many churches as they can. They talk of evangelism but are like bankers intent on closing churches if they can’t extract enough cash from them. The same applies for Anglican hierarchy who have not been evangelical for centuries.
What they need is a multi purpose village hall that can double as a place of worship when needed. That would create a heart for the village. People could pray, do yoga, keep fit, have affordable coffee mornings and bake and bring their own cakes, jumble sales etc.
It would be an alternative to the overpriced boutique businesses.
In the increasingly warm summer months the various denominations could always hold open air services in the surrounding countryside.
They might make some converts.
It sounds like a new town but unlike most in the UK, well designed and well built. And what facilities appear as it moves towards completion will depend on what the locals want. That’s freedom, choice, and democracy all in action. Get the chip off your shoulder and be glad somebody is doing something wonderful
Guess it depends on what you are comparing it against?
Sounds pretty ok to me, trying to mix the best of the old while accommodating new needs and materials. Better than Barrett homes. Well done him for trying.
It is very difficult to determine from the article what living there would be like. On the one hand, it could by idyllic. On the other there is a hint that it is fine as long as you know your place and are prepared to do a lot of forelock-tugging.
There is an episode of ‘The Windsors’ satirising Poundbury. I have the uncomfortable feeling that the satire might not be far from the truth.
I don’t think I would like it, and I’m pretty damn sure I would not fit in with the necessary mindset, particularly if that mindset consists of expressing enless praise for Charles, and massaging his clearly fragile ego.
Fortunately, this is idle speculation. Charles is no more relevant to my life than I am to his – or at least it would be the case if my taxes did not have to support the cost of the Coronation (aka “Charlie’s big w*nk”) or cover his late mum’s and grandmum’s inheritance tax bills.
If ‘Hell on Earth’ means ‘a bit boring’ then fair enough. As for day to day life, social housing schemes such as Muirhouse or West Pilton in Edinburgh, ca. 1980s amd peak Trainspotting time, might be a better fit for such a hyperbolic description, despite the presence of both a church and a pub.
Those of us who know and love Poundbury look forward to the next 25 years to see this Cornish town completed. Only a hint of snark from Tanya so congratulations for that. The fact is that the King and his master planner from Poundbury, the genius Leon Krier have a vision for urban living which as Tanya says, excites all those looking for affordable housing in Newquay and indeed all those who just wish to live in a more human and harmonious environment.
Without accompanying pictures this article is meaningless. I don’t understand why UnHerd never publishes them.
I went to Instagram to have a butcher’s, where the correct spelling seems to be Nansledan.
It looks like one of those eerie, deserted villages that Steed and Emma Peel used to encounter in The Avengers.
It looks really pretty. A bit like a film set for a Jane Austen adaptation except that some of the pastel shades are a bit too bright – rather like icing sugar – and give the impression of Toy Town. But that is my only reservation.
What I want to know is what Charles is doing for the globalist plutocrat rentiers. All this attention to folks who can’t put a roof over their heads is sickening.
“It is true that it is expensive for Newquay — an open-market three-bedroom house is £330,000 in Nansledan against £250,000 outside it.” If “30% is reserved for social housing, affordable housing, and shared ownership”, then basic economics means that the other homebuyers are to pay more to cover those subsidized (40% subsidy it seems from the article) costs. If the author and readers want subsidized housing to allow for a greater mix of people in a community – a noble goal – that will be the cost of such a rule.
At its best, Ms. Gold’s article sets out the compromises any development must consider. I don’t think Nansledan is worthy of both “cheering and pitiable” but rather is a concious choice and many are wanting to make it. Kudos for the King to offer such a choice when the simpler, less risky development path is to keep doing what has been done before.
I am not sure what TG is trying to convey with this article. Is she saying that it is wrong for a private developer to provide housing? Or is she just upset that it is the Duchy of Cornwall who is the developer? Does she not understand that it takes capital to invest in housing and that capital is usually provided by the private sector. Yes, there is a need for government to provide some of that investment and there has been significant under-investment for decades. She also fails to understand that most new housing developments have covenants imposed on them with regards to all sorts of things. Some of them relate to exterior decor, others can be about having a garden shed, or where the bins have to be located. Covenants can be imposed by the developer, others will be imposed by the local planning department. All in all this article seems to be more about TG’s republicanism rather than an attempt by a developer to provide some much needed housing.
What would a new village built according to the local aesthetic look like? And why do more houses built reduce the availability?, forcing tenants into mouldy flats owned by public bodies?
A good article, except for the gratuitous dog at greedy landlords.
I presume Charles got planning permission to build on farmland. Or can he just do what he wants?
…wiki suggests that just one in 1,500 people in England are committed enough to Republicanism to even subscribe to the “Republic” website…so they would be the miserable whinging couple with the obnoxious child that are held in strong but polite dislike by the good people of Nansledan…my guess is that they work remotely for the Grauniad, Auntie or C4…and could afford to buy there on Daddy’ money..!
…touched a nerve with somebody, then…
It sounded nice until it said “no pub”.
Yes, that’s rather perplexing. Surely one of the first amenities you need. Maybe some enterprising locals will start a cider club, like Eddy Grundy in The Archers.
I grew up not far from Port Sunlight and that didn’t have a pub for decades. Always found the overdone aesthetics a bit on the sinister side, to be honest. The Lady Lever Gallery is worth a visit.
Mountbatten was my stepfather’s parents’ landlord in the 1970’s.
She ‘pities the republicans here who statistically must exist , but people now will do a lot for good housing ‘ . Poor Tanya obviously couldn’t find one .
The heart on that woman !
Whether it’s called Nasledan or Nansledan, it sounds like hell on earth. And it’s what Charles, if gets his WEFy way, wants for us all. No pub, no church, no life, no spirit; just homogenised serfs praising their feudal lord from the safety of their identikit pastel-coloured pods. Horrendous.
There will be a pub and shops. Possibly a church if the CofE sees fit. But it’s still being built. The plan is 25 years to completion.
Surely they need the pub(S) ASAP.
There is little point in having a church if there is not a congregation clamouring for one. Methodists used to meet in houses for prayer until there were enough of them to build a church. Today the Methodist hierarchy are desperate to close as many churches as they can. They talk of evangelism but are like bankers intent on closing churches if they can’t extract enough cash from them. The same applies for Anglican hierarchy who have not been evangelical for centuries.
What they need is a multi purpose village hall that can double as a place of worship when needed. That would create a heart for the village. People could pray, do yoga, keep fit, have affordable coffee mornings and bake and bring their own cakes, jumble sales etc.
It would be an alternative to the overpriced boutique businesses.
In the increasingly warm summer months the various denominations could always hold open air services in the surrounding countryside.
They might make some converts.
It sounds like a new town but unlike most in the UK, well designed and well built. And what facilities appear as it moves towards completion will depend on what the locals want. That’s freedom, choice, and democracy all in action. Get the chip off your shoulder and be glad somebody is doing something wonderful
Guess it depends on what you are comparing it against?
Sounds pretty ok to me, trying to mix the best of the old while accommodating new needs and materials. Better than Barrett homes. Well done him for trying.
It is very difficult to determine from the article what living there would be like. On the one hand, it could by idyllic. On the other there is a hint that it is fine as long as you know your place and are prepared to do a lot of forelock-tugging.
There is an episode of ‘The Windsors’ satirising Poundbury. I have the uncomfortable feeling that the satire might not be far from the truth.
I don’t think I would like it, and I’m pretty damn sure I would not fit in with the necessary mindset, particularly if that mindset consists of expressing enless praise for Charles, and massaging his clearly fragile ego.
Fortunately, this is idle speculation. Charles is no more relevant to my life than I am to his – or at least it would be the case if my taxes did not have to support the cost of the Coronation (aka “Charlie’s big w*nk”) or cover his late mum’s and grandmum’s inheritance tax bills.
If ‘Hell on Earth’ means ‘a bit boring’ then fair enough. As for day to day life, social housing schemes such as Muirhouse or West Pilton in Edinburgh, ca. 1980s amd peak Trainspotting time, might be a better fit for such a hyperbolic description, despite the presence of both a church and a pub.