No ECO - Town for Leicestershire

[lou]

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/news...il/article.html

[davieG]

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/news...il/article.html

How much money have the councils spent on supporting (City) not supporting (County) this.

I'm not convinced that their pro/anti stances weren't influenced by who the sitting government was.

Party Politics = baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

[Edmund]

To be fair lou people had a right to moan about it. I don't know where you live but im guessing it wouldn't affect you judging by your comment.

I live ten minutes from the city centre, five minutes from the countryside. With this new eco town with "affordable housing" not only would traffic be a nightmare the countryside starts to get further and further away from you also bringing the value of housing down.

We have to put up with all the new builds which are creeping in to the country already without having to deal with a whole new estate.

Thank god they came to there senses.

On a lighter note, did anyone hear about the story of staff in the co-op supermarket getting attacked and people asking them to stop there bosses from building the town. Apparently they had to have a big sign explaining they had nothing to do with the co-op that owned the land.

[Ultra]

One side believes housing should be a right. The other seeks to retain it as a privilege.

Don't believe all the guff about "green and pleasant land". As residents of Barkby, Birstall, Thorpe Astley and elsewhere will know, councils will be quite happy to see large developments built - as long as they're by the likes of David Wilson, Jelsons etc, aiming for the upper end of the market.

Anything that might possibly lead to an influx of "oiks", "chavs" or - horror!- "ethnics" into an area obviously has to be fought to the death.

But now the government has backed off, no-one needs to go quite that far. The homelessness issue will continue to be one for the city alone to deal with.

[Ultra]

On a lighter note, did anyone hear about the story of staff in the co-op supermarket getting attacked and people asking them to stop there bosses from building the town. Apparently they had to have a big sign explaining they had nothing to do with the co-op that owned the land.

So you find it amusing that people are physically assaulted in their own workplace?

Your ignorance is only matched by your illiteracy.

[lou]

To be fair lou people had a right to moan about it. I don't know where you live but im guessing it wouldn't affect you judging by your comment.

I live ten minutes from the city centre, five minutes from the countryside. With this new eco town with "affordable housing" not only would traffic be a nightmare the countryside starts to get further and further away from you also bringing the value of housing down.

We have to put up with all the new builds which are creeping in to the country already without having to deal with a whole new estate.

Thank god they came to there senses.

On a lighter note, did anyone hear about the story of staff in the co-op supermarket getting attacked and people asking them to stop there bosses from building the town. Apparently they had to have a big sign explaining they had nothing to do with the co-op that owned the land.

To be fair when you buy a house you buy the house and garden NOT the land around it. Ive been in a position where Ive had greenfield behind us which was subsequently built on, its life Im afraid. Theres always a danger that any land could be built on, I had to live with it. Its always going to be the "not in my back yard" scenario I guess. Your happy that its now been passed onto someone elses back yard .

[lou]

One side believes housing should be a right. The other seeks to retain it as a privilege.

Don't believe all the guff about "green and pleasant land". As residents of Barkby, Birstall, Thorpe Astley and elsewhere will know, councils will be quite happy to see large developments built - as long as they're by the likes of David Wilson, Jelsons etc, aiming for the upper end of the market.

Anything that might possibly lead to an influx of "oiks", "chavs" or - horror!- "ethnics" into an area obviously has to be fought to the death.

But now the government has backed off, no-one needs to go quite that far. The homelessness issue will continue to be one for the city alone to deal with.

It was the blatent snobbery of most of the protests that pissed me off to be fair.

[Edmund]

Your ignorance is only matched by your illiteracy.

You what?

For about the eighth time im fooking dyslexic. I can't help how I type things. Its a arse when I post a new message because I have to go through it spell checking and rearranging words everytime.

Ignorance? What you been smoking ultra?

So you find it amusing that people are physically assaulted in their own workplace?

Stop putting words in my mouth. I just found the story amusing its not like a bank robber pistol whipping somebody you doughnut. I never mentioned anybody was physically assaulted? It was verbally.

To be fair when you buy a house you buy the house and garden NOT the land around it. Ive been in a position where Ive had greenfield behind us which was subsequently built on, its life Im afraid. Theres always a danger that any land could be built on, I had to live with it. Its always going to be the "not in my back yard" scenario I guess. Your happy that its now been passed onto someone elses back yard .

Yep like you said its life survival of the fittest. This is one battle we won.

But its not like we haven't put up with new builds, they pop up everywhere and of course they always will. But this was a completely different scale. Were talking a whole new town which would have a huge knock on effect to surrounding areas.

The argument is there are more suitable places to put this town.

[Guest]

You only have to look at Thorpe Asthma to see that building a new town in our county is a complete and utter waste of time and resources. No doubt had the Penbury development been given the green light, the developers would delay in putting in community facilities, change the plans in order to cram in more residential property, and Arriva would decide that running buses to and from the site would not be cost effective.

[davieG]

You what?

For about the eighth time im fooking dyslexic. I can't help how I type things. Its a arse when I post a new message because I have to go through it spell checking and rearranging words everytime.

Ignorance? What you been smoking ultra?

Stop putting words in my mouth. I just found the story amusing its not like a bank robber pistol whipping somebody you doughnut. I never mentioned anybody was physically assaulted? It was verbally.

Yep like you said its life survival of the fittest. This is one battle we won.

But its not like we haven't put up with new builds, they pop up everywhere and of course they always will. But this was a completely different scale. Were talking a whole new town which would have a huge knock on effect to surrounding areas.

The argument is there are more suitable places to put this town.

I lived in Great Glen for 17 years and every new development was subject to protest, the most vociferous protesters being those that had moved into the new houses that were the subject of the previous protest being the latest inhabitants to have a field at their backs.

If people are so against any new development they should not move into them but find a long established house to buy.

[Bellend Sebastian]

So you find it amusing that people are physically assaulted in their own workplace?

In fairness, I assume he was amused by the jaw dropping stupidity of the people involved rather than the fact that workers being assaulted. Which I found amusing too.

Anyway, I almost wish they had built it, just to piss off the bloke that sits next to me at work. He goes on about greenbelts and all that, but I suspect if it was green land north of Leicester he wouldn't give a toss

[Edmund]

I lived in Great Glen for 17 years and every new development was subject to protest, the most vociferous protesters being those that had moved into the new houses that were the subject of the previous protest being the latest inhabitants to have a field at their backs.

If people are so against any new development they should not move into them but find a long established house to buy.

As far as im aware, there still building new builds in glen. Glen is almost joining Oadby and Stoughton and soon they will all be one. Who knows maybe Fleckney and Kibworth might be part of it in years to come.

It's not always the land which is an issue its also the rushed jobs these developers do. They now cram 4 houses into land which years back would have only one house situated on it.

In fairness, I assume he was amused by the jaw dropping stupidity of the people involved rather than the fact that workers being assaulted. Which I found amusing too.

[purpleronnie]

I'm in two minds about these eco towns, its a good idea in principal if it sticks to those guidelines, new houses and affordable housing has to be built somewhere, and this whole 'not in my back yard' irritates me, infact my house back in the UK backs onto fields, these fields had plans for 2,000 new houses and the survey was made by residents and I was the only one who agreed with it, all the rest didnt want it due to selfish reasons, if no new houses were built the people moaning about them would be homeless, it seems we accept everything thesedays but as soon as a new house is planned to be built its like the end of the world.

[davieG]

As far as im aware, there still building new builds in glen. Glen is almost joining Oadby and Stoughton and soon they will all be one. Who knows maybe Fleckney and Kibworth might be part of it in years to come.

It's not always the land which is an issue its also the rushed jobs these developers do. They now cram 4 houses into land which years back would have only one house situated on it.

And no doubt they are still protesting especially those that have moved into the newest builds. It's all right these people complaining about this expansion now they've moved into their new homes but don't other people have the same right to live in a decent village/town environment rather than on an old industrial site which you later find is on polluted land or next to some bypass,

I think that's what they call affordable housing which is probably only there at the insistence of the planners. Besides there must be demand for it otherwise they wouldn't build them and they wouldn't sell.

[Edmund]

And no doubt they are still protesting especially those that have moved into the newest builds. It's all right these people complaining about this expansion now they've moved into their new homes but don't other people have the same right to live in a decent village/town environment rather than on an old industrial site which you later find is on polluted land or next to some bypass,

I think that's what they call affordable housing which is probably only there at the insistence of the planners. Besides there must be demand for it otherwise they wouldn't build them and they wouldn't sell.

I see what your saying, its a never ending process. There will always be someone who is not happy but you have to bring common sense in at some point.

Demand, hell yes there is loads. The sad thing is these houses are erected in short a time possible and these nice heritage villages will turn into just another David Wilson town. Back in the day houses were built with decorum and heritage. Go around London Road, Stoneygate and the tall high buildings have character and built well yet these new builds look like 4 pieces of cardboard where you can hear your next door neighbor going up and down there stairs.

But thats life everything is money orientated and it will not change for the forceable future.

[Guest]

I'm in two minds about these eco towns, its a good idea in principal if it sticks to those guidelines, new houses and affordable housing has to be built somewhere, and this whole 'not in my back yard' irritates me

It irritates me too, but you only have to look at why we have no affordable housing. My mate used to live off of Narborough Rd. She had a great little terraced house, affordable at the start of the housing boom, just right for a first time buyer. Now, at this present time, a lot of the houses are empty over the summer, whilst the Uni holidays take place, or a few are being occupied by European workers, who need cheap digs. There are few people who own their house outright. Most of this formerly affordable housing is part of a landlord's portfolio.

With the current recession, and the possibility that some of these properties are currently in negative equity, there is no way that landlords will sell them. No, they will keep hold of them until the market rises again, and they can make a profit, which means that such houses are unlikely to be available to first time buyers ever again.

The fact that this situation has happened saddens me.

[davieG]

I see what your saying, its a never ending process. There will always be someone who is not happy but you have to bring common sense in at some point.

Demand, hell yes there is loads. The sad thing is these houses are erected in short a time possible and these nice heritage villages will turn into just another David Wilson town. Back in the day houses were built with decorum and heritage. Go around London Road, Stoneygate and the tall high buildings have character and built well yet these new builds look like 4 pieces of cardboard where you can hear your next door neighbor going up and down there stairs.

But thats life everything is money orientated and it will not change for the forceable future.

I love those houses too, but you're living in a dreamworld if you think that's going to be repeated, most people wouldn't be able to afford that standard of building not that we even have the craftsmen to build them these days, it's the same with business premises, they're all these curved roof clones.

So it's not the houses being built that's your problem it's the quality of them, isn't that down to the planners - where my daughter lives in Oxfordshire they are virtually all built of stone - I presume that's because the planning department insist on it.

I went down the Earl Shilton by-pass on Saturday on the way back from Tamworth and Mr Wilson's building homes right up to that - surely that's not better than gradually expanding Villages. I agree they could be better done.

[Jon the Hat]

There are hundreds of thousands of empty houses in this country. Developers who want to build a new house shoud be required to refurbish an empty one to the same energy efficient standards on a one to one basis. This would provide jobs and quality housing stock in areas which are in decline. Alternatively we could actually make developers put in the amenities required. Roads, schools, shops etc. at the same time, not sell the houses then pocket the cash and walk away.

[Jon the Hat]

I love those houses too, but you're living in a dreamworld if you think that's going to be repeated, most people wouldn't be able to afford that standard of building not that we even have the craftsmen to build them these days, it's the same with business premises, they're all these curved roof clones.

Most people couldn't afford then when they were build either The houses we lust after have always been costly. The crap gets knocked down eventually and something else built.

[Edmund]

I love those houses too, but you're living in a dreamworld if you think that's going to be repeated, most people wouldn't be able to afford that standard of building not that we even have the craftsmen to build them these days, it's the same with business premises, they're all these curved roof clones.

So it's not the houses being built that's your problem it's the quality of them, isn't that down to the planners - where my daughter lives in Oxfordshire they are virtually all built of stone - I presume that's because the planning department insist on it.

I went down the Earl Shilton by-pass on Saturday on the way back from Tamworth and Mr Wilson's building homes right up to that - surely that's not better than gradually expanding Villages. I agree they could be better done.

Yeah it is the planners fault but you can't blame them because business is business and like you said to make housing affordable to the majority, they will cut costs back as much as possible.

Im sure these monopoly planning developers would build houses like they use to if they knew the end user could afford it but again like you said we would be living in a ream world as its not the case.

Jon The Hat makes some good points about resurrecting old houses but the truth is it will cost the developers more than building a house from scratch and again these guys are out there to make as much money as possible. I doubt the moral values really enter there thoughts at any stage.

Holland is a nice example of old housing kept as it should be but at the same time I suppose the country is mass populated due to its size and there is hardly any space to build new houses. They came up with a cunning plan of building good quality thin houses but add an extra storey to save space.

[Webbo]

Holland is a nice example of old housing kept as it should be but at the same time I suppose the country is mass populated due to its size and there is hardly any space to build new houses. They came up with a cunning plan of building good quality thin houses but add an extra storey to save space.

They already do that over here. The living rooms are unbearable small, you wouldn't want to live in 1 of those houses unless you had to.

[Stuliasz]

I have been involved in some of the work and discussions surrounding this proposal and whilst the principal of the idea is ok, some of the practicalities and frankly quite ridiculous proposals to try and make it work meant the site at Pennbury was never going to be suitable. I'm quite glad we can move on from it now.

[Edmund]

They already do that over here. The living rooms are unbearable small, you wouldn't want to live in 1 of those houses unless you had to.

Depends on the house I suppose. Most of the houses ive been in Holland have living rooms bigger than over here. The house may be smaller width wise but much bigger lenght wise. Are we even thinking of the same types

[Phube]

Boooo... the NIMBY's win again!!

[Fosse Boy]

As far as im aware, there still building new builds in glen. Glen is almost joining Oadby and Stoughton and soon they will all be one. Who knows maybe Fleckney and Kibworth might be part of it in years to come.

It's not always the land which is an issue its also the rushed jobs these developers do. They now cram 4 houses into land which years back would have only one house situated on it.

If it gets any further south than there I'll start to worry...

Anyway, fuck off Pennbury, you town that will never be...