Full house last night, because on the bill,(agenda) we're going to debate this consultation document that's been a work in progress for a few years, I guess, by officers from SLDC. They had been asked to come up with proposals of how we cater for a growing population over the next 20 years. Now I don't know how they come up with the projected rises in population, but I suppose they look at births and deaths ratios and extrapolate. I'm naive enough to think that they have consulted with a few clever professors, looked stuff up in learned journals, and entered data into sophisticated bits of computer software programmes. I also like to think that their hearts are in the right place and they are doing the best job they can, and that they are in these jobs because they're capable people.
When they finally reached their conclusions, about life the universe and everything, it ran to thousands of pages, and they present their findings to Deep Thought, (read the town council), for them to debate the pro and cons of their findings
Bare in mind that these were not plans, these were proposed options, which should be looked at over time, and in some depth.
So last night, we, Ulverston town council, after a debate, which must have lasted, oh, all of half an hour, came up with our response to these proposed options..
So what profound wisdom did we come up with as a way forward. We would write and ask them to "look again". Some wanted the whole exercise to be scrapped altogether, but we stepped back from the brink of that extreme view and settled for "look again".
So like in the hitch hikers guide to the universe, we now expect these conclusions to be sifted, mulled over and extrapolated some more, perhaps for another 20'000 years whilst we wait for the answer we want to hear. We didn't want to hear that the answer was 1,600, we wanted to hear 42.
Meanwhile the young first time buyers, the lifeblood of the town are forced to move away from their place of birth, their home town because they can't afford to live here. It seems that even though the developers are legally bound to provide low cost homes, 35% it says in the proposals, most of the public and the councillors don't believe this would happen. We would only build homes for posh people and out of town 2nd home owners. Come on, this is such a defeatist attitude, this is a manifesto of doom.
My own opinion is that we should go back to building council houses, but that's a big national debate, long over due, but we are where we are. If we have to do this with private building consortium's then we have to believe we can enforce the rules, otherwise we're going to end up with a town full of geriatrics and second home owners.
This thing called snappily the Local development framework, was just that, a framework for debate, but it was hijacked before it even started by the nimbys and the man in the pub. Shame on the council that all we could come up with as a response was "LOOK AGAIN."
When they finally reached their conclusions, about life the universe and everything, it ran to thousands of pages, and they present their findings to Deep Thought, (read the town council), for them to debate the pro and cons of their findings
Bare in mind that these were not plans, these were proposed options, which should be looked at over time, and in some depth.
So last night, we, Ulverston town council, after a debate, which must have lasted, oh, all of half an hour, came up with our response to these proposed options..
So what profound wisdom did we come up with as a way forward. We would write and ask them to "look again". Some wanted the whole exercise to be scrapped altogether, but we stepped back from the brink of that extreme view and settled for "look again".
So like in the hitch hikers guide to the universe, we now expect these conclusions to be sifted, mulled over and extrapolated some more, perhaps for another 20'000 years whilst we wait for the answer we want to hear. We didn't want to hear that the answer was 1,600, we wanted to hear 42.
Meanwhile the young first time buyers, the lifeblood of the town are forced to move away from their place of birth, their home town because they can't afford to live here. It seems that even though the developers are legally bound to provide low cost homes, 35% it says in the proposals, most of the public and the councillors don't believe this would happen. We would only build homes for posh people and out of town 2nd home owners. Come on, this is such a defeatist attitude, this is a manifesto of doom.
My own opinion is that we should go back to building council houses, but that's a big national debate, long over due, but we are where we are. If we have to do this with private building consortium's then we have to believe we can enforce the rules, otherwise we're going to end up with a town full of geriatrics and second home owners.
This thing called snappily the Local development framework, was just that, a framework for debate, but it was hijacked before it even started by the nimbys and the man in the pub. Shame on the council that all we could come up with as a response was "LOOK AGAIN."
Hi Colin
ReplyDeleteThanks for the blog. I'm the Councillor at SLDC responsible for the LDF.
Thought it was worth saying that the Council isn't going to build lots of houses! Our job is to make sure that we have sufficient sites available in South Lakeland to take us over the next 15 years. As you so clearly explain, there is an element of estimation in our figures. Perhaps we have overstated the need? In which case there won't be so many houses built. But if we've understated it then we will get yet another price spike in our area. Ulverston is lucky in that it hasn't reached the crazy situation as in Kendal where a teacher needs up to 10 years income to buy a family home. Providing a good supply of sites will help avoid this happening.
Peter Thornton
I think you may have missed the irony of my blog post Peter. The main thrust of it was that it was not a plan by the Council to build lots of houses,but obviously you missed that. But nice to see my blog reaches the movers and shakers.
ReplyDeleteNice to hear what goes on. Young couples must find the housing situation difficult. And how on earth do single people manage to get a place of their own without a large income? It is almost as bad as the post-war years (Things were incredibly difficult for us too. No children meant a permanent place at the bottom of the housing list, but starting a family in a bed-sit and still have to wait years was not our solution) But if an area is popular I can't see things changing much unless a lot of land is made available. But would far more housing draw yet more people to the area? I don't envy your position!
ReplyDelete