Send pictures to us
Send us your pictures and video by text, email or by uploading. Click here to find out how. »
|
|
|
|
Anger as planners pass £500m VT site scheme
2:13pm Tuesday 19th August 2008
Comments (54)
By Matt Smith »
IT WAS the most controversial development proposal in Southampton's recent history.
A £500m plan to build 1,620 new homes on the derelict waterside shipyard in Woolston that had lain empty for five years since Vosper Thornycroft walked away.
Yet the regeneration vision for the prime location, renamed Centenary Quay, attracted a whopping 1,639 objections - a total exceeding even the complaints received over the St Mary's Stadium plans almost a decade ago.
But after a marathon six-hour planning meeting - and to the audible anger of the 80 residents that filled the specially hired Central Hall in St Mary's - the city council's planning panel voted to pass the plans.
It marked a victory for the developers Crest Nicholson and landowners Seeda, a regional development agency, who can now start work to build 160 of the proposed homes, a 100-bed hotel and superstore.
The decision also gave the seal of approval to the masterplan for the whole site, which includes the prospect of up to 1,300 jobs - about half for locals - a public plaza, cafes/restaurants, shops, a health facility, and a new shipyard for luxury US boat-builder Palmer Johnson.
Watch a promotional video of the yachts that will be built in Woolston
Yet today campaigners have vowed to continue their fight to thwart the housing plans which have provoked strong feelings and prompted two noisy demonstrations through the city centre streets.
Andrew Middleton, chairman of the development section of the Woolston Community Association, which has led the battle, said: "We are not giving up by any means. Everyone is determined not to give up.
"We will take advice from the professionals.
There are lots of details that have got to be approved. Stage by stage we will have a go at them where we can."
Boat building welcomed back to Woolston - click here for other Woolston Riverside stories
Architects for Crest Nicholson earlier hailed the plans as a "fantastic, unique development"
that would not only "revitalise Woolston, create jobs and restore the high street" but also "create a real identity and lasting legacy for Southampton".
Architect Pankaj Patel promised a "memorable place for people to live, work and visitors to come."
The city's chamber of commerce - among just six supportive representations - backed the "truly mixed-use development".
It opened the floor for about a dozen objectors to launch a ferocious attack on the plans for 1,472 flats and just 148 town houses - with 11 per cent of the homes dubbed "affordable".
The objectors warned that the scheme tried to cram too many homes on to the 17.5-acre site, that it would lead to traffic congestion from the 3,000 people expected to live there and that less than one parking space per home was "grossly inadequate".
They also savaged plans for three waterfront apartment towers rising up to 25 storeys high as "monstrous" and totally out of character, and branded the consultation of residents a "farce".
Labour ward councillor Warwick Payne said the density was "eye-wateringly" high and campaigner Jane Foster warned: "It will be the largest planning disaster Southampton has ever seen."
Cabinet member for economic development Councillor Royston Smith backed residents' concerns over the number of homes and parking, while Itchen MP John Denham faxed in a last minute objection after prompting from constituents.
Sport England, critical of the lack of sports pitches and recreation space, and the Co-op, worried about a drop in trade from proposed competition over the road, had also made objections.
But councillors on the planning panel voted by a majority of four to two to approve the scheme.
They said they were largely constrained by the principles established by an earlier vision for the site by world-famous architect Richard Rogers, which was approved two year ago.
That was of higher density and had fewer family homes. Other improvements and changes, such as a hotel and supermarket, with proposed road junction improvements, had made the latest scheme acceptable, panel chairman Councillor Matt Dean said.
Councillors agreed extra conditions to explore the retention of a historic crane and boost the number of parking spaces to one for every home with more than one bedroom - an extra 195 residential spaces on top of the 1,361 originally proposed.
Debbie Aplin, managing director of Crest Nicholson Regeneration, said she was "relieved"
the plans had been passed after more than two years' work.
She said the site would be transformed into a "vibrant, cohesive development" suitable for all ages with a quality of buildings that would be "exemplary for the area".
Responding to criticism over the consultation she said: "We really did listen to the community".
And she has promised further consultation over the materials and landscaping detail still to be worked out.
The whole site is scheduled to be completed by 2018.
- See today's Daily Echo for the full story
Your Say YourEcho
Looking from the outside, says...
8:54am Tue 19 Aug 08
lionel, says...
9:01am Tue 19 Aug 08
nimby hater, Woolston says...
9:04am Tue 19 Aug 08
The demonstrations were non-existent .20 or 30 people at the most. There is overwhelming support for the scheme from both residents and the wider community. Im not sure where the anger was vented, unless, it refers to a couple of NIMBYs who have their own agendas and need to get there 15mins. of stardom.
I know it is the silly season, but please try and write a balanced article.
Fred, says...
9:09am Tue 19 Aug 08
lionel wrote:The Echo is saying because it doesn't know how many of those 80 are not even related to Woolston by where they work or live. Rent a mob more like.
Hmm, 80 objectors at the meeting, so where were the other alleged 1500+ ? Sounds like a phony war to me.
To be fair, says...
9:12am Tue 19 Aug 08
nimby hater wrote:20 or 30 people at a demonstration is not non existant is it? He didn't state numbers, just said that the demos were noisy.
Is this balanced journalism. Matt Smith should be ashamed of the grossly inaccurate reporting of events running up to the decision. The demonstrations were non-existent .20 or 30 people at the most. There is overwhelming support for the scheme from both residents and the wider community. Im not sure where the anger was vented, unless, it refers to a couple of NIMBYs who have their own agendas and need to get there 15mins. of stardom. I know it is the silly season, but please try and write a balanced article.
I feel you are unfairly criticising his article due to your feelings about the subject.
I don't see how Matt's article is grossly inaccurate
I and I, says...
9:14am Tue 19 Aug 08
Watch this space
Matthew, Woolston says...
9:16am Tue 19 Aug 08
You clearly have worked very hard to this point and are passionate about the subject but I feel your efforts would now be better spent on ensuring this development as good as it can be rather than wasting energy on something which cannot be overturned.
Fred, says...
9:16am Tue 19 Aug 08
I and I wrote:Plans are already well developed around the UK for the Government to step in and buy up all sorts of flats to a) help the building firms, b) spend out of recession and c) secure votes from the underclass who will be promised these flats for their votes at the General Election.
Who wants to bet the flats won't sell, the council will get hold of them and will fill them with Pikey scum? Watch this space
Fred, says...
9:19am Tue 19 Aug 08
Matthew wrote:Perhaps he should be offered a seat on the Board of the development company?
Mr. Middleton, I think it's time you did one of two things. Either step down and let this one be or work with the developers rather than against them to ensure this development is executed in the best manner possible. You clearly have worked very hard to this point and are passionate about the subject but I feel your efforts would now be better spent on ensuring this development as good as it can be rather than wasting energy on something which cannot be overturned.
I and I, says...
9:20am Tue 19 Aug 08
Fred wrote:I assume by 'underclass' you mean Pikey Scum? ;-)
I and I wrote: Who wants to bet the flats won\'t sell, the council will get hold of them and will fill them with Pikey scum? Watch this spacePlans are already well developed around the UK for the Government to step in and buy up all sorts of flats to a) help the building firms, b) spend out of recession and c) secure votes from the underclass who will be promised these flats for their votes at the General Election.
You are an idiot, says...
9:24am Tue 19 Aug 08
I and I wrote:Look on the bright side, at least it will mean a place for you and your family to live.
Who wants to bet the flats won't sell, the council will get hold of them and will fill them with Pikey scum? Watch this space
The Coup, Woolston says...
9:36am Tue 19 Aug 08
I for one would like to see WCA work with the developers to make the site something to be proud of! Also I think a community association should be looking to take the lead in improving the area e.g. improving play facilities, better youth facilities, tackling anti-social behaviour and developing community pride....
Anyone want to join me in a coup to overthrow them?
Comrade Commie, Communist UK says...
10:23am Tue 19 Aug 08
I and I, says...
10:37am Tue 19 Aug 08
You are an idiot wrote:sorry, I'm not pikey scum.
I and I wrote: Who wants to bet the flats won't sell, the council will get hold of them and will fill them with Pikey scum? Watch this spaceLook on the bright side, at least it will mean a place for you and your family to live.
What is idiotic about stating the truth? It happens with developments all over the country. Why else would developers be keen to build flats knowing they will be hard to sell given the current state of the economy? It's because they know they can be bailed out by the councils who will then fill them with 'chip-eaters'.
I feel sorry for the Woolston residents and suspect that is the REAL reason they are objecting.
Mr E, Eastleigh says...
10:58am Tue 19 Aug 08
You are an idiot, says...
11:04am Tue 19 Aug 08
I and I wrote:Just a racist idiot then.
You are an idiot wrote:sorry, I'm not pikey scum. What is idiotic about stating the truth? It happens with developments all over the country. Why else would developers be keen to build flats knowing they will be hard to sell given the current state of the economy? It's because they know they can be bailed out by the councils who will then fill them with 'chip-eaters'. I feel sorry for the Woolston residents and suspect that is the REAL reason they are objecting.I and I wrote: Who wants to bet the flats won't sell, the council will get hold of them and will fill them with Pikey scum? Watch this spaceLook on the bright side, at least it will mean a place for you and your family to live.
Anon, Southampton says...
11:06am Tue 19 Aug 08
Perhaps we shoulds all stop paying our council tax. All 1,639...
I'm sure they'd quickly change their minds then!
Bob444, Southampton says...
11:10am Tue 19 Aug 08
a whopping 1,639 objections - a total exceeding even the complaints received over the St Mary's Stadium plans almost a decade ago.
The planners ignored the People's wishes then, too. What's the point of us expressing our objections when those planners (who are supposed to be out servants, and are paid by us) just bow down to big business.
ern, southampton says...
11:14am Tue 19 Aug 08
Southampton has been dumping its rubbish this side of the river ever since it absorbed it in 1920.
Nothing has changed.
Osama Bin Laden, A Cave far far away says...
11:15am Tue 19 Aug 08
southy, redbridge says...
11:19am Tue 19 Aug 08
mr.southampton, Southampton says...
11:36am Tue 19 Aug 08
There are a lot of parrallels with the Docklands development in London, 20 or so years ago where a large chunk of land, previously occupied by a major employer of people from the adjacent working-class neighbourhood which had grown around the docks had become disused.
Unfortunately aside from what is now a flash middle class enclave the neighbouring community on the Isle of Dogs has seen little benefit in terms of jobs, education or living conditions.
Permission for this deveopment has now been granted so it's time for the locals who opposed the development to start to figure how the plans can be made to deliver real improvements to Woolston in employment, healthcare, opportunities etc.
I guess developers and Government have learnt lessons from Docklands (incidentally Janet Foster's book is a great view on how the community missed out on the 'regeneration' and a good starting point for any local campaigner) but it's up to the community to make sure that elected officials are serving their interests.
mr s, soton says...
11:43am Tue 19 Aug 08
well done the council. very smart move.
john cook, woolston says...
11:46am Tue 19 Aug 08
Anon wrote:well done to the council, now we get rid of the woolston ghetto. no doubt most people who live in southampton will be for this development. why should we listen to a minority of whingeing nimbys.
Nice to see Southampton City Council listens to it's residents. Perhaps we shoulds all stop paying our council tax. All 1,639... I'm sure they'd quickly change their minds then!
In the know, says...
12:03pm Tue 19 Aug 08
Anon wrote:The Police are about to check those 1639 signatures to see if any fraud took place.
Nice to see Southampton City Council listens to it's residents. Perhaps we shoulds all stop paying our council tax. All 1,639... I'm sure they'd quickly change their minds then!
I and I, says...
12:06pm Tue 19 Aug 08
You are an idiot wrote:Wrong again. 'Chip eaters' are not a race.
I and I wrote:Just a racist idiot then.You are an idiot wrote:sorry, I'm not pikey scum. What is idiotic about stating the truth? It happens with developments all over the country. Why else would developers be keen to build flats knowing they will be hard to sell given the current state of the economy? It's because they know they can be bailed out by the councils who will then fill them with 'chip-eaters'. I feel sorry for the Woolston residents and suspect that is the REAL reason they are objecting.I and I wrote: Who wants to bet the flats won't sell, the council will get hold of them and will fill them with Pikey scum? Watch this spaceLook on the bright side, at least it will mean a place for you and your family to live.
I would accept you calling me a snob though (if you need a hand to get it right)
Another Nimby Hater, Woolston says...
1:44pm Tue 19 Aug 08
The remaining local businesses now have a straw to hold onto that Woolston still has a future for them - who knows, maybe the WCA might actually visit the "community" it claims to represent and use some of them now and again .
fed up with snobbery, .... says...
1:45pm Tue 19 Aug 08
SAvewoolston, Woolston-Southampton says...
1:54pm Tue 19 Aug 08
Woolston Resident wrote:I was at the meeting yesterday and two things became very apparent. The Chair felt he was about to loose the case, so he called in Palmer Johnston to basically explain that. " We might pull out of the whole deal if you do not let this go ahead." So the debate is not really about just the housing development it is about regenerating the whole area. And no one wants to stop the commersial side because the reality is we do need the regeration the whole of the WCA development section wants that.
I'm not sure the Echo are being even-handed in the reporting of these
"protestors". You keep talking about these "noisy rallys" but fail to
inform readers they were attended by only a couple of dozen people.
The decision has been made. The development will be built. I believe
that many people in Woolston are glad it is progressing. Just happens
that people in favour don't go courting publicity like the WCA do.
And anyway, what have the WCA ever done for Woolston? Please could they
tell us what facilities they have improved in the area?
Personally I blame the council planners for bad planning. Kevin Westgate should have had the balls to turn around and say yes I think there is an issue with the roads- perhaps Crest you should consider building less housing. The Design girl was shaddy and even though realising that shading and public space was an issue she never said- perhaps Crest you should build less houses. I am ofe with Crests work and I applaud you for Bristol- you did well. But buy the land and dont build that amount of housing please...our future is in your hands.
SAvewoolston, Woolston-Southampton says...
2:01pm Tue 19 Aug 08
nimby hater wrote:Okay so lets get started then. Debbie Aplin and the slimy guy from seeda...I personally invite you to our WCA Development section meeting tonight or in a fortnight from 20.00pm with stickers that say 20mph for all of us to put on our dustbins and help the community start getting to grips with the 20mph speed restrictions that you want to impose.
Is this balanced journalism. Matt Smith should be ashamed of the
grossly inaccurate reporting of events running up to the decision.
The demonstrations were non-existent .20 or 30 people at the most.
There is overwhelming support for the scheme from both residents and
the wider community. Im not sure where the anger was vented, unless,
it refers to a couple of NIMBYs who have their own agendas and need to
get there 15mins. of stardom.
I know it is the silly season, but please try and write a balanced
article.
Then tell us in real terms how we can work together and please then have the courtesy to listen... we are the best source of knowledge you have here
Jane Foster, Woolston-Southampton says...
2:03pm Tue 19 Aug 08
Woolston Resident wrote:I was at the meeting yesterday and two things became very apparent. The Chair felt he was about to loose the case, so he called in Palmer Johnston to basically explain that. " We might pull out of the whole deal if you do not let this go ahead." So the debate is not really about just the housing development it is about regenerating the whole area. And no one wants to stop the commersial side because the reality is we do need the regeration the whole of the WCA development section wants that.
I\\\\\\\'m not sure the Echo are being even-handed in the reporting of these
\\\\\\\"protestors\\\\\\\". You keep talking about these \\\\\\\"noisy rallys\\\\\\\" but fail to
inform readers they were attended by only a couple of dozen people.
The decision has been made. The development will be built. I believe
that many people in Woolston are glad it is progressing. Just happens
that people in favour don\\\\\\\'t go courting publicity like the WCA do.
And anyway, what have the WCA ever done for Woolston? Please could they
tell us what facilities they have improved in the area?
Personally I blame the council planners for bad planning. Kevin Westgate should have had the balls to turn around and say yes I think there is an issue with the roads- perhaps Crest you should consider building less housing. The Design girl was shaddy and even though realising that shading and public space was an issue she never said- perhaps Crest you should build less houses. I am ofe with Crests work and I applaud you for Bristol- you did well. But buy the land and dont build that amount of housing please...our future is in your hands.
Jane Foster, Woolston-Southampton says...
2:14pm Tue 19 Aug 08
To be fair wrote:Why are you so pathetic?
nimby hater wrote:20 or 30 people at a demonstration
Is this balanced journalism. Matt Smith should be ashamed of the
grossly inaccurate reporting of events running up to the decision. The
demonstrations were non-existent .20 or 30 people at the most. There is
overwhelming support for the scheme from both residents and the wider
community. Im not sure where the anger was vented, unless, it refers
to a couple of NIMBYs who have their own agendas and need to get there
15mins. of stardom. I know it is the silly season, but please try and
write a balanced article.
is not non existant is it? He didn't state numbers, just said that the
demos were noisy. I feel you are unfairly criticising his article due
to your feelings about the subject.
I don't see how Matt's article is grossly inaccurate
Matt Smith is an absolutely brilliant journalist!
Matt works in Southampton and certainly must know and understand the ill feeling about the density of housing on this estate. He reflected public feeling and animosity in a very truthful light all the way through. He lives in Southampton.
Seeda who will (I pray) will be out after the next election anyway- have had no regard throughout for the community and callings of concern about the construction aspects of the site or the density, congestion and parking problems, they have been too obsessed with money and greed. When never considering in reality maybe this is not what the taxpayers wants or that it won`t work.
Crest is`nt silly they will buy the land and build according to demand. By then hopefully this country will have a new government that cares about the local community and treats them as kowledgeable professionals that they are and not a bunch of noisy idiots!
I must say...I am pleased this is all over and look forward to working with Crest to achieve their goals- especially the ones that are non-greed based
I and I, says...
2:51pm Tue 19 Aug 08
fed up with snobbery wrote:I hate pikey scum regardless of whether they are Black or White. I don't have any problem with people that live on council estates, just the ones that are anti social, fraudulently claiming benefits and bringing down the areas in which they live. When this developments starts getting filled up with them you will hate them too.
wow betide any of the classist idiots on this site that ever get into any financial issues and end up with reposession of the middle class suburb house that are so loved. The way this economy is going it is highly likely that some WILL end up on council estates that are so despised and will also be branded as chip eating scum by the snobby people you aspire to be. It will be interesting to see how you react to the torrent of abuse given then. It smells of racism, like it or not and is disgusting, bigoted behaviour.
When will you and this government realise that this country is going down the toilet because of the pandering to the above types?
Britain is a mess because of it's lazy, ignorant, scrounging chav underclass.
Go and get your second portion of chips
To be fair, says...
2:53pm Tue 19 Aug 08
Jane Foster wrote:I thought I was sticking up for Matt??? was that not clear?
To be fair wrote:Why are you so pathetic? Matt Smith is an absolutely brilliant journalist! Matt works in Southampton and certainly must know and understand the ill feeling about the density of housing on this estate. He reflected public feeling and animosity in a very truthful light all the way through. He lives in Southampton. Seeda who will (I pray) will be out after the next election anyway- have had no regard throughout for the community and callings of concern about the construction aspects of the site or the density, congestion and parking problems, they have been too obsessed with money and greed. When never considering in reality maybe this is not what the taxpayers wants or that it won`t work. Crest is`nt silly they will buy the land and build according to demand. By then hopefully this country will have a new government that cares about the local community and treats them as kowledgeable professionals that they are and not a bunch of noisy idiots! I must say...I am pleased this is all over and look forward to working with Crest to achieve their goals- especially the ones that are non-greed basednimby hater wrote: Is this balanced journalism. Matt Smith should be ashamed of the grossly inaccurate reporting of events running up to the decision. The demonstrations were non-existent .20 or 30 people at the most. There is overwhelming support for the scheme from both residents and the wider community. Im not sure where the anger was vented, unless, it refers to a couple of NIMBYs who have their own agendas and need to get there 15mins. of stardom. I know it is the silly season, but please try and write a balanced article.20 or 30 people at a demonstration is not non existant is it? He didn't state numbers, just said that the demos were noisy. I feel you are unfairly criticising his article due to your feelings about the subject. I don't see how Matt's article is grossly inaccurate
what truth?, says...
2:55pm Tue 19 Aug 08
I and I wrote:How are you stating the truth? You're giving us your prediction of what might happen. You said "who wants to bet...". You didn't even claim it was a truth at the time, so why defend it as if it was after the fact? Silly boy! (but not idiotic)
You are an idiot wrote:sorry, I'm not pikey scum.
I and I wrote: Who wants to bet the flats won't sell, the council will get hold of them and will fill them with Pikey scum? Watch this spaceLook on the bright side, at least it will mean a place for you and your family to live.
What is idiotic about stating the truth? It happens with developments all over the country. Why else would developers be keen to build flats knowing they will be hard to sell given the current state of the economy? It's because they know they can be bailed out by the councils who will then fill them with 'chip-eaters'.
I feel sorry for the Woolston residents and suspect that is the REAL reason they are objecting.
King Mush, Woolston says...
3:06pm Tue 19 Aug 08
Mr E wrote:Me
Who is going to fork out for an executive flat with a panoramic view of woolston sewage farm?
keep lookin behind you, ha ha says...
3:19pm Tue 19 Aug 08
mattb, Woolston says...
3:42pm Tue 19 Aug 08
mr.southampton wrote:You can hardly compare Woolston 2008 to the Isle of Dogs 1981. IOD had tenements and about 15% unemployment.
whilst I don\'t necessarily disagree with the development, after all something has to be built there (and calls for \'family homes\' translates as a call for homogenous, middle class suburbia rather than those rough people who live in flats, take drugs or as another commentator puts it \'eat chips\') but I do feel the benefits to Woolston as a whole have been overplayed. There are a lot of parrallels with the Docklands development in London, 20 or so years ago where a large chunk of land, previously occupied by a major employer of people from the adjacent working-class neighbourhood which had grown around the docks had become disused. Unfortunately aside from what is now a flash middle class enclave the neighbouring community on the Isle of Dogs has seen little benefit in terms of jobs, education or living conditions. Permission for this deveopment has now been granted so it\'s time for the locals who opposed the development to start to figure how the plans can be made to deliver real improvements to Woolston in employment, healthcare, opportunities etc. I guess developers and Government have learnt lessons from Docklands (incidentally Janet Foster\'s book is a great view on how the community missed out on the \'regeneration\' and a good starting point for any local campaigner) but it\'s up to the community to make sure that elected officials are serving their interests.
There are however some similarities with the process and response to the proposals. Whilst the LDDC didn't listen to what the Isle of Dogs community were saying, likewise the community put the barriers up as soon as any change was suggested ("Yuppies out" and all that). Ironically here it is the other way around ("Chip-eaters out"?).
You can blame the Council as much as you want, but whatever is eventually built on the VT site is reliant on the community's acceptance of it to make it work.
Otherwise it will become a standalone community resulting in no benefit to existing people whatsoever.
The problem that has blighted Woolston as a neighbourhood centre over the past decade, and perhaps since the floating bridge closed, is that it has no passing trade. No one needs to pass through it and local people can bypass it to get into town or out to Tescos. As a result retailers struggle to reach critical mass and start to close down.
Waterside Park helped to a certain degree by creating some more passing trade through woolston, but the further increase in local population as a result of this new development will increase local spend and help the local centre.
Sure, there are transport issues which will need to be addressed, but there always are. The new road layout should work well and protect existing residential streets from congestion.
All in all I am delighted that this has been approved, and am looking forward to watching this being developed, and woolston becoming the more vibrant neighbourhood centre it should be.
clair, VT says...
3:57pm Tue 19 Aug 08
clair
wheres the breaks?, southampton says...
4:38pm Tue 19 Aug 08
chaos magick, the vatican says...
4:53pm Tue 19 Aug 08
keep lookin behind you wrote:nonse.
Build and keep building, the masses will always whine about something,cant wait to see it done myself. Just hope they dont put a bus route to it
Finlay, Des Moines, Iowa says...
5:01pm Tue 19 Aug 08
An author wrote on this forum correctly that VT had 5000 people a day going to work at the site and now considerably less were going to live there but the people are squinnying at this. Most odd!
The developer has a major headache afore them in decontaminating the site first - Next they have the responsibility of achaelogical responsibilites as the banks of the Itchen were sites of the oldest inhabitants to these shores ever and then produce a skyline that says "WOW!" to all the affluent land and sea visitors with the money to afford the homes.
It will be a big project to get right and the envy of many. Ocean Village changed a scumbag zone of the city and now a $million wont get you in the place. Woolston is next.
...unless you like the minging views of the derilect site like the NIMBY's posting here are trying to protect.
Wewullywinky, says...
5:08pm Tue 19 Aug 08
Neale, Woolston says...
5:34pm Tue 19 Aug 08
I and I wrote:You two will be getting your handbags out in a minute!
You are an idiot wrote:Wrong again. \'Chip eaters\' are not a race. I would accept you calling me a snob though (if you need a hand to get it right)I and I wrote:Just a racist idiot then.You are an idiot wrote:sorry, I\'m not pikey scum. What is idiotic about stating the truth? It happens with developments all over the country. Why else would developers be keen to build flats knowing they will be hard to sell given the current state of the economy? It\'s because they know they can be bailed out by the councils who will then fill them with \'chip-eaters\'. I feel sorry for the Woolston residents and suspect that is the REAL reason they are objecting.I and I wrote: Who wants to bet the flats won\'t sell, the council will get hold of them and will fill them with Pikey scum? Watch this spaceLook on the bright side, at least it will mean a place for you and your family to live.
paul gadd, southampton says...
5:36pm Tue 19 Aug 08
chaos magick wrote:hello,hello,good to be back in the company of nonces like me.
keep lookin behind you wrote: Build and keep building, the masses will always whine about something,cant wait to see it done myself. Just hope they dont put a bus route to itnonse.
Andrew, Southampton says...
6:15pm Tue 19 Aug 08
If banks wont lend people will have to put more of their own money in and why do this as a 2 bed here is clearly not even worth £100,000.
Crest will have a job suckering people into put large amounts of their own cash in now lenders wont lend on more than a couple of new builds in a block.
Why would a investor buy one? As even £100,000 needs 20% down leaving £80,000 to be funded, leaves a buy to let mortgage of about £420pcm and a service charge of around £100 a month which makes £520 a month.
Then rent it for £600 and pay a 10% agents fee leaving you £540per month and tyou make a whopping £20 per month!!! This proves this will not happen.
Ocean village has flats for £120,000 and Chapel for £90,000 now . I am sure it costs more to build in Woolston than what the end product is worth.
Robert Foster, Highfield says...
6:42pm Tue 19 Aug 08
Woolston Resident, says...
8:48am Tue 19 Aug 08
The decision has been made. The development will be built. I believe that many people in Woolston are glad it is progressing. Just happens that people in favour don't go courting publicity like the WCA do.
And anyway, what have the WCA ever done for Woolston? Please could they tell us what facilities they have improved in the area?