Forum Home Forum Home > Chalfont St Peter > Holy Cross Development
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Plans to increase housing in CSP
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Plans to increase housing in CSP

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 37>
Author
Message
Flyboy View Drop Down
Villager
Villager
Avatar

Joined: 27 June 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 346
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Flyboy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 August 2009 at 7:27pm
Originally posted by Pants 2 Tight Pants 2 Tight wrote:

Originally posted by Flyboy Flyboy wrote:

People have to live somewhere and the youth of the village are being squeezed out by high property prices and lack of space. I have seen neighbours' children having to move to Slough, Watford or Uxbridge because there are no affordable homes in Chalfont Saint Peter.
...and what 'right' do they have to live here? It's a privilege to live in a nice house in a nice area. It's something you earn. Just because the youth can't afford to buy a house here doesn't mean that we should trash the area and fill it with loads of crappy under-size dwellings.
Originally posted by Flyboy Flyboy wrote:

I too don't understand people's attiitudes of NIMBYism, if it were their childen who were being forced out, I wonder how they would be reacting then?
Well, the youth should get a decent job and move here when they can afford to... and I would tell my kids that too.

God, I don't know how I would cope if my children had to live in ..(gulp)..Slough, Watford or Uxbridge.
 
So, people who have lived in the village for more than twenty years should leave because there are too many selfish people that don't want them to have a chance to live in a nice house in a nice area. What if they already work here, should they leave their jobs, because there are too many selfish NIMBYists to allow them a chance to live in the area they grew up in. Or should they spend a small fortune on commuting back to their home town, in a nice area, just to work. Where would they park? How long would it take for you to complain that outsiders are coming in and taking up all the parking spaces and the parish or district councils have to increase the parking charges because of it?
 
Your post is the epitome of what a NIMBY is. Thank you for the demonstration.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Pants 2 Tight View Drop Down
Chalfontonian
Chalfontonian
Avatar

Joined: 11 April 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 520
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pants 2 Tight Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 August 2009 at 7:52pm
Originally posted by Flyboy Flyboy wrote:

So, people who have lived in the village for more than twenty years should leave because there are too many selfish people that don't want them to have a chance to live in a nice house in a nice area.


If you can't afford to live somewhere, then you move to the nearest place that you can afford. That's how it works. That's how I started and, through hard work, that's why I now live in a nice detached house in Buckinghamshire.

Don't dismiss all my views as NIMBYism either. I just don't want all the green areas within the village to disappear under concrete and I'm sure any other reasonably minded person wouldn't either.
Back to Top
Flyboy View Drop Down
Villager
Villager
Avatar

Joined: 27 June 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 346
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Flyboy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 August 2009 at 8:28pm
But why should they move, they have more right to be here than the ones who are rich enough to move here.
Back to Top
ArtB View Drop Down
Chalfont Snapper
Chalfont Snapper
Avatar

Joined: 24 April 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 3405
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ArtB Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 August 2009 at 8:48pm
Originally posted by Pants 2 Tight Pants 2 Tight wrote:


If you can't afford to live somewhere, then you move to the nearest place that you can afford. That's how it works.
And that's the reason we are all in the god awful state we are in today. It's about time the powers that be woke up and fixed the cause instead of filling the cracks with sub-standard plaster!
 
Art
*** If you're not part of the solution, you may be part of the problem!
Back to Top
Malc London View Drop Down
Chalfont Snapper
Chalfont Snapper
Avatar

Joined: 11 January 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 8473
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Malc London Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 August 2009 at 8:53pm
Originally posted by Flyboy Flyboy wrote:

But why should they move, they have more right to be here than the ones who are rich enough to move here.


No-one has a "right" to live anywhere.  I wouldn't mind still living in the area I was brought up, but high levels of immigration soon put me in a minority and like many others we were forced out.


Back to Top
Pants 2 Tight View Drop Down
Chalfontonian
Chalfontonian
Avatar

Joined: 11 April 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 520
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pants 2 Tight Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 August 2009 at 9:02pm
Originally posted by Flyboy Flyboy wrote:

But why should they move, they have more right to be here than the ones who are rich enough to move here.

No, they don't.
Back to Top
Toffeeman View Drop Down
Newcomer
Newcomer
Avatar

Joined: 22 January 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 36
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Toffeeman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 August 2009 at 9:16pm
Right to be somewhere!?  Surely a right is earnt not as a matter of course. It's like saying you can't move somewhere else because you weren't born in that area. I would love my children to grow up and live near me but if they don't work for it they will live where they can afford.
Back to Top
slowhand View Drop Down
Newcomer
Newcomer
Avatar

Joined: 03 February 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 24
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote slowhand Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 August 2009 at 6:13am
I wonder if there would be the same amount of outcry against the building, if the proposed homes to be built were all to be substantial dwellings to be sold in the higher price bracket. These would surely keep the riffraff, (sorry, I meant lower paid workers ) out of the village.
Back to Top
Malc London View Drop Down
Chalfont Snapper
Chalfont Snapper
Avatar

Joined: 11 January 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 8473
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Malc London Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 August 2009 at 8:36am
I don't want ANY building on Green Belt land.
 
As for affordable housing, there is plenty in the village. Start with the precinct flats, then the flats above the shops in Market Place, the New flats near Church Lane car park (partly owned, part rent), then there are the ex-local authority housing, and finally the flats along the A413. There are probably a lot more I have missed.
 
 
Back to Top
Number42 View Drop Down
Villager
Villager
Avatar

Joined: 11 August 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Number42 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 August 2009 at 10:14am
It's good to see a few people becoming aware of these issues and expressing their feelings -already quite a division!  However, I am alarmed at the way some posts are bordering on being abusive rather than stating opinions - is that normal on the Forum?
 
Back to the topic, and three points:
 
1. Numbers. It's not the fact that new houses are being proposed, it is the volume and density that's the problem (IMHO): a 12% increase in the population.  And this is completely out of proportion compared with the proposals for all the other areas within CDC.  I doubt this would have happened had two sites not recently become available for development:
    - Holy Cross, where 400+ high density dwellings are proposed. Holy Cross is of course privately owned by an order of nuns in Switzerland.  It (Holy Cross, not Switzerland!) is not Green Belt.  They have brought in a Development Consultant to make proposals about how they could best (here 'best' = most profitably) develop the site, and I gather it has been offered to CDC for housing. 
    - Newlands Park, where 200+ are proposed.  Most of Newlands Park is protected Green Belt, but I gather there is a part which is Brown Belt, and it's that area which these proposals apply to.
The other proposed sites are Gold Hill Common/Austenwood, Nortoft Road,and Chalfont St Peter North (Rickmansworth Lane area).  You can see some maps at the CDC web site, under planning, Core Strategy, but they are only vague at this stage.
 
2. Bigger picture: Nearly 800 new dwellings being proposed without due consideration for all the implications on services and utilities and the environment.  BTW, some (less than half) are said to be 'affordable' homes.  I image some work is now being done looking at a few of the potential problems, but there isn't nearly enough time to do it properly before CDC have to submit their formal proposals.
 
3. Consultation.  I am told (by CDC) that they wrote to all key stakeholders and to every single household in the area in June/July last year.  So far I have only come across the Parish Councils and the Chambers of Commerce who say they were involved.  Apparently CDC received 80 responses from people in the Chalfont St Peter area, so they must have written to somebody!.  Hardly representative, almost pathetic in terms of response rate, but the issues were very nebulous at the time.  This was called the "Four Choices" consultation (1. Urban concentration, 2. Target Amersham & Chesham, 3. Target Amersham, Chesham and Chalfont St Peter, 4. Dispersed pattern throughout the District, including across the Green Belt).  Some, me included, would argue that to be a too restrictive choice - what about 'Dispersed pattern but not Green Belt'? (an emotive phrase).
Does ANYONE recall receiving a letter from CDC asking their opinions?
 
No building plans exist at this stage, it's more in the hands of' Development Consultants', but if CDC's proposals are approved and submitted to the Secretary of State in February 2010, shortly after that developers will be invited to submit plans. 
 
Meanwhile Chalfont St Peter Parish Council are, I gather, making plans (early stages) to propose an alternative development of the village in a more balanced, sustainable and holistic manner.  Watch out for proper local consultation, and check  the web site previously mentioned:
 
 
Hope that's helpful.  And I hope we get a lot more people aware and involved.
 
That's the answer - what's the question?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 37>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.05
Copyright ©2001-2016 Web Wiz Ltd.