HOUSING - Affordable Housing, Council Housing, Housing Associations, Building in the Green Belt, Private Housing, etc

[bigchrisfgb]

Sorry but has anyone read the articles and has anyone read my posts? The land that they are campaigning against being developed is NOT green belt land, it is mostly brown field land and the rest has no definition.

The campaign is to get the land classified as green belt land so that no development can take place on it. Most of the land currently has permission for industrial units or has been earmarked for housing development for a significant amount of years.

This isn't a case of a lovely green hill with Duck ponds and Rabbit holes all around, these are brown fields (most of the time with no vegetation on them) surrounded by hotels, office developments, main roads (The A19 being a major road), supermarkets, railway lines, and other housing.

[bigchrisfgb]

Originally Posted by merleb

I think local people should have a large say in any local developments. That's what localism is for. Better that then central government making sweeping decisions and ignoring local voices.

I am local to the area in question, it's just around the corner from where I live. my sister actually lives in Holystone as well. My sister herself has had the Holystone action group knock on her door asking what she thought of various things. She said she has no concern over the proposed plans and that her concerns for the area is the fact that the council seems to keep on changing the road layout outside of her house every year for failed traffic calming measures and that it is apparent that children outside of the catchment area are using the local school (it has a very good ofstead report) and the parents who "commute" their children to the local school park their cars in dangerous locations.

Anyway the Holystone action group decided to ignore her concerns and said some comments intent on scaremongering her into opposing the Scaffold Hill plans.

[merleb]

Originally Posted by bigchrisfgb

Sorry but has anyone read the articles and has anyone read my posts? The land that they are campaigning against being developed is NOT green belt land, it is mostly brown field land and the rest has no definition.

The campaign is to get the land classified as green belt land so that no development can take place on it. Most of the land currently has permission for industrial units or has been earmarked for housing development for a significant amount of years.

This isn't a case of a lovely green hill with Duck ponds and Rabbit holes all around, these are brown fields (most of the time with no vegetation on them) surrounded by hotels, office developments, main roads (The A19 being a major road), supermarkets, railway lines, and other housing.

Local people should have a huge say in what developments occur in THEIR back yard. The Holystone campaign is a victory for localism and a victory for campaigning in general. Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they should be suppressed.

Sure we can all pontificate about preferring brown field sites to Green Belt but do we really want them in our own area? We are all nimbys when it comes down to it.

[merleb]

Originally Posted by bigchrisfgb

I am local to the area in question, it's just around the corner from where i live. my sister actually lives in Holystone as well. My sister herself has had the Holystone action group knock on her door asking what she thought of various things. She said she has no concern over the proposed plans and that her concerns for the area is the fact that the council seems to keep on changing the road layout outside of her house every year for failed traffic calming measures and that it is apparent that children outside of the catchment area are using the local school (it has a very good ofstead report) and the parents who "commute" their children to the local school park their cars in dangerous locations.

Anyway the holystone action group decided to ignore her concerns and said some comments intent on scaremongering her into opposing the Scaffold Hill plans.

In the true democratic tradition your sister could always start her own rival campaigning pressure group...

With two rival groups we could easily ascertain which opinion is more representative of the community as a whole. The fact that no rival group exists, or has enough backing, does give a clue however.

That the Holystone group has come this far is a victory for localism.

[bigchrisfgb]

Originally Posted by merleb

In the true democratic tradition your sister could always start her own rival campaigning pressure group...

With two rival groups we could easily ascertain which opinion is more representative of the community as a whole. The fact that no rival group exists, or has enough backing, does give a clue however.

That the Holystone group has come this far is a victory for localism.

She doesn't want too, she just wants the Holystone action group to stand up for the views and concerns of the local residents and not to just focus on one policy which all the residents don't agree on.

[bigchrisfgb]

Originally Posted by merleb

Local people should have a huge say in what developments occur in THEIR back yard. The Holystone campaign is a victory for localism and a victory for campaigning in general. Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they should be suppressed.

Sure we can all pontificate about preferring brown field sites to Green Belt but do we really want them in our own area? We are all nimbys when it comes down to it.

I'm not disputing that, but people who would be in favour of housing developments in general shouldn't oppose similar developments just because they are in their local back yard.

The Holystone campaign isn't a victory, what you are forgetting is that the recent article suggests that it has only gained recognition from the council that their is a petition on the application but that in general the council is very much in favour of the development. The title of the article is misleading. It's like you saying I shouldn't do something then me saying to you that your comment is noted but going on and doing what I wanted to do regardless.

For the record though even though I am in favour the said development I do believe it will go ahead, maybe not on merit but on what is on offer.

The land owner is very wealthy and very powerful, I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't have "friends" on the council committee, and he also also offering land and money to Rising sun county park who's opinion will be a huge deciding factor on the Subject.

[merleb]

Originally Posted by bigchrisfgb

She doesn't want too, she just wants the Holystone action group to stand up for the views and concerns of the local residents and not to just focus on one policy which all the residents don't agree on.

But the Holystone Action Group was not really intended to be fully and comprehensively representative of all the community. Nor can it truly be. No group can ever fully represent every single voice or opinion. Instead they present a simplified, broad consensus of opinion - in this case it is general disapproval for the development plans. In real terms it is a pressure group to campaign against what it does not agree with.

If she is not happy with that then she, or anyone else can start their own pressure group.

Instead of her, or you, moaning about a perceived lack of democracy or representation, go and act and put your views forward yourselves. At least the Holystone group can be bothered, and feel strongly enough, to campaign for what they care about.

[bigchrisfgb]

Originally Posted by merleb

But the Holystone Action Group was not really intended to be fully and comprehensively representative of all the community. Nor can it truly be. No group can ever fully represent every single voice or opinion. Instead they present a simplified, broad consensus of opinion - in this case it is general disapproval for the development plans. In real terms it is a pressure group to campaign against what it does not agree with.

If she is not happy with that then she, or anyone else can start their own pressure group.

Instead of her, or you, moaning about a perceived lack of democracy or representation, go and act and put your views forward yourselves. At least the Holystone group can be bothered, and feel strongly enough, to campaign for what they care about.

I have put my thoughts to the council, both online, and in person.

A problem planning officers have is that people only really share their thoughts if they oppose plans and people don't generally comment if they approve any plans.

[Chatton11]

Some very good points being made on both sides of the argument here. My own personal problem with what HAG are saying is that they claim the site is a Wildlife Corridor for wildlife to access the country park. Now, unless that wildlife is accessing the site from the A19, the A19 Holystone roundabout, or the Holystone development itself, then it isn't a wildlife corridor! I think that site is quite apart from the debate about Green Belt. I agree that the members of HAG have every right to make their opinions heard, but it is annoying when the Chronicle just print whatever that Keith bloke says as fact regardless of whether it is. Agree with Chris that it's just scaremongering becasue they don't want the development. I can't understand how it's such a surprise as there's been the stub road and roundabout there since their development was built.

[Irish Blood English Heart]

Originally Posted by bigchrisfgb

Sorry but has anyone read the articles and has anyone read my posts? The land that they are campaigning against being developed is NOT green belt land, it is mostly brown field land and the rest has no definition.

The campaign is to get the land classified as green belt land so that no development can take place on it. Most of the land currently has permission for industrial units or has been earmarked for housing development for a significant amount of years.

This isn't a case of a lovely green hill with Duck ponds and Rabbit holes all around, these are brown fields (most of the time with no vegetation on them) surrounded by hotels, office developments, main roads (The A19 being a major road), supermarkets, railway lines, and other housing.

Fair enough I got this mixed up with the developments planned on green belt in N.Tyneside.

[Tyr]

I'd rather see housing development on the near Newcastle green lands than in satelite towns- such houses would be far more desirable too.

Local people should have a huge say in what developments occur in THEIR back yard. The Holystone campaign is a victory for localism and a victory for campaigning in general. Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they should be suppressed.

Sure we can all pontificate about preferring brown field sites to Green Belt but do we really want them in our own area? We are all nimbys when it comes down to it.

Such localism is a problem, not at all something which should be encouraged. As you say we're all NIMBYs, if we let people always dictate what happens in their back yard then we would never get any necessary buildings made.
I'm all for more local power however local doesn't mean a neighbourhood, it means what is best for the city or the region.

[bigchrisfgb]

Originally Posted by Tyr

I'd rather see housing development on the near Newcastle green lands than in satelite towns- such houses would be far more desirable too.

Hows that? The main development in question (Scaffold Hill) is surrounded by 2 Metro stations, both in walking distance. It has Cobalt business park on it's door step (the UK's biggest business park), it has 2 supermarkets nearby (both in walking distance) and also is local to schools, other public transport and is next door to Rising sun county park.

Not only that but the planned hosting is a mix of small and large housing.

How would a hosting development in say Scotswood be more attractive to a housing development in Holystone or Northumberland park?

[Tyr]

I didn't say it would.
I was referring to towns outside of the city

[bigchrisfgb]

Originally Posted by Tyr

I didn't say it would.
I was referring to towns outside of the city

I think I still don't get by what you mean.

[Adrian_Swall]

The biggest contribution from NCC is the new Callerton Park which is to have thousands of new houses.
What is overlooked is there is only the Metro going through the area but there are no shops, schools or other infrastructure.
So a huge 'Green Belt' development.
I suspect this area has been chosen because there are not many locals to object.

[bigchrisfgb]

Originally Posted by Adrian_Swall

The biggest contribution from NCC is the new Callerton Park which is to have thousands of new houses.
What is overlooked is there is only the Metro going through the area but there are no shops, schools or other infrastructure.
So a huge 'Green Belt' development.
I suspect this area has been chosen because there are not many locals to object.

Callerton park is a strange one.

Surely the airport would be against the idea, I mean having that many houses near to the airport would surely cause problems for them in the future if there were to go ahead with their master plan for the airport. Also as you say their isn't anything in the way there of local infrastructure, surely a big part of any housing plans would have to include this.

I'm sure Tesco's would like to get their grubby little hands in on this, maybe they could build one of their Tesco towns.

[Graham56]

Originally Posted by bigchrisfgb

Callerton park is a strange one.

Surely the airport would be against the idea, I mean having that many houses near to the airport would surely cause problems for them in the future if there were to go ahead with their master plan for the airport. Also as you say their isn't anything in the way there of local infrastructure, surely a big part of any housing plans would have to include this.
I'm sure Tesco's would like to get their grubby little hands in on this, maybe they could build one of their Tesco towns.

The same could be said of what is now Kingston Park, 40 yrs ago it was all fields.Look at the place now.

[Tyr]

Originally Posted by bigchrisfgb

I think I still don't get by what you mean.

Better to build new houses in Newcastle, green belt or no, than in Consett or the like.

[Turnbull2000]

Originally Posted by Newcastle Historian

North Tyneside green land is saved from housing
by Rachel Wearmouth, Evening Chronicle, November 28th 2011


CAMPAIGNERS fighting to save some of Tyneside's green spaces have won the first phase of their protest. Cheering broke out in a council chamber when controversial plans to build thousands of new homes on green spaces were temporarily withdrawn.

Going by the News Guardian, this proposal has now been rejected outright by the council. Seems we're never going to get the houses we need, as every proposal is knocked back thanks to selfish councillors and NIMBY scum.

If the likes of this sterile field and the empty land (currently a temp carpark) opposite the hospital are unacceptable for desperately needed housing, where is?

[merleb]

Originally Posted by Turnbull2000

Going by the News Guardian, this proposal has now been rejected outright by the council. Seems we're never going to get the houses we need, as every proposal is knocked back thanks to selfish councillors and NIMBY scum.

If the likes of this sterile field and the empty land (currently a temp carpark) opposite the hospital are unacceptable for desperately needed housing, where is?

Scotswood.


And your reference to "Nimby Scum" is an insult to ordinary people everywhere.