Plans for 1,400 new homes in Hampshire given go-ahead (From Daily Echo)

great news , now the nimbys have to realise that

Welcome to the real world NIMBY's of Botley.

So now who are you going to vote?
I might not agree with your NIMBY ways but have the Liberal council listened to the Eastleigh voters?
It doesn't look like it does it!

This is the final nail in the coffin for the Lib Dems in this region. Diane James from UKIP was aware of this development and opposed it. Labour Candidate knew nothing about it, too busy writing books about how much he wishes Margaret Thatcher was dead. Maria Hutchings is more concerned about her children not being taught in a state school as they aren’t good enough. Give UKIP and Diane James a chance to start putting things right in this area.
.
On another note, is that the end to the Golf Course? This is a double blow to the area if it is because there are not many top golf courses such as Botley Park in the area. It's an absolute gem of a course and for a lot of people the nearest top quality golf course.

I grew up in Botley, it was a beautiful village and has grown out of recognition over the years and to build yet more homes would be total devastation, so please Eastleigh council rethink your plans, so Diane James you have my vote if you can stop this developement.

loosehead wrote:
So now who are you going to vote?
I might not agree with your NIMBY ways but have the Liberal council listened to the Eastleigh voters?
It doesn't look like it does it!

There are considerably more people in the Eastleigh borough than those who protested. Just because people who wanted the development were not out marching in support, does not mean that they did not contact their councillor to their opinion.

I am not a NIMBY from Botley but I have to declare that I am a golfer at Botley Park. It is clear to me that none of the people above were at the meeting last evening. This issue is more important than the golf course or the over developement of the Botley area. One of the main issues is that this is a totally undemocratic decision to let Keith House and his party off the hook in the debacle they have created on the housing issues within the Borough. It must have been like "mannah from heaven" when Macdonalds suddenly joined forces with to the deveopers and put in for planning permission. Or was it? We all know that Eastleigh Borough Council is heavily involved with the Rose Bowl, a developement that very few people were aware about when it was first built in 2000. I live in Hedge End and I can honestly say that no one I know of were ever informed or consulted on the processes before it suddenly was being approved and built. The fact that they have now heavily invested in the ground, the golf course and the hotel is rather suspicious to say the least. The traffic problems in the area created by the ground being where it are enormous. Here is my point the new developement will cause even greater traffic and therefore polution problems which the planners brushed over last night as only 850 extra vehicle movements at peak times. Who are they really kidding 1,400 houses circa 2,800 cars you are probably talking about 6,000 to 7,000 vehicle movements per day. So Mickey and Lockssmart, it is not great news the congestion and polution will be 10 times worse than it is now. There were other issues flooding, site access, heavy traffic in minor roads,sanitation, flooding etc etc. Those at the meeting were left in no doubt and are now perfectly aware that the politicians are clearly not listening. Therefore the only course of action is firstly to ensure that we do not end up with a Lib Dem MP and then when the local elections tale place to kick the councillors out.

just hope there are enough "affordable homes" in the package, have,nt looked at the plans but i would imagine there are more than enough "luxury" ones

Lets see how many times the word NIMBY can be used, some people seem to feel very clever using this acronym.....

Just the tip of the iceberg, more immigration = more houses on greenbelt.........vo
te UKIP

Cllr Kyrle voted against - that's county councillor Kyrle who wants to get re-elected in May isn't it? Beware Libdems bearing hollow gifts............

derek james wrote:
just hope there are enough "affordable homes" in the package, have,nt looked at the plans but i would imagine there are more than enough "luxury" ones

Correct! I'm amazed how easily people are hoodwinked by the wringing of hands and cynical use of people on the housing lists as an excuse to justify this profit driven and profit motivated venture.
Only a small percentage will be allocated for affordable housing for locals (and the developers will try to drive this down to a min %)
There are already plenty of houses available in Eastleigh for those who can afford one - just visit one of the many estate agents with windows full of them.
If the concerns were genuine, they would be prioritising brownfield sites for AFFORDABLE housing as they come up, to reduce those housing lists.

The number of people who attended the meeting last night just showed that the planning application need to be reconsidered. It is a shame that people's views were only heard but did not seemed to have a big impact on the decision made.

denniss wrote:
I am not a NIMBY from Botley but I have to declare that I am a golfer at Botley Park. It is clear to me that none of the people above were at the meeting last evening. This issue is more important than the golf course or the over developement of the Botley area. One of the main issues is that this is a totally undemocratic decision to let Keith House and his party off the hook in the debacle they have created on the housing issues within the Borough. It must have been like "mannah from heaven" when Macdonalds suddenly joined forces with to the deveopers and put in for planning permission. Or was it? We all know that Eastleigh Borough Council is heavily involved with the Rose Bowl, a developement that very few people were aware about when it was first built in 2000. I live in Hedge End and I can honestly say that no one I know of were ever informed or consulted on the processes before it suddenly was being approved and built. The fact that they have now heavily invested in the ground, the golf course and the hotel is rather suspicious to say the least. The traffic problems in the area created by the ground being where it are enormous. Here is my point the new developement will cause even greater traffic and therefore polution problems which the planners brushed over last night as only 850 extra vehicle movements at peak times. Who are they really kidding 1,400 houses circa 2,800 cars you are probably talking about 6,000 to 7,000 vehicle movements per day. So Mickey and Lockssmart, it is not great news the congestion and polution will be 10 times worse than it is now. There were other issues flooding, site access, heavy traffic in minor roads,sanitation, flooding etc etc. Those at the meeting were left in no doubt and are now perfectly aware that the politicians are clearly not listening. Therefore the only course of action is firstly to ensure that we do not end up with a Lib Dem MP and then when the local elections tale place to kick the councillors out.

I have to agree on the traffic issue raised. I was a resident in West End High Street for 2 years and the traffic whenever there was an event at the Rose Bowl was ridiculous. I used to sit in traffic jams from Junction 7 all the way to the house. It literally would have been quicker to get out and walk. You also have pedestrians so eager to get to the venue that they walk in the road without a care. Having grown up in Hedge End and Botley, I know the area very well and with the extra traffic that will undoubtedly arise, I guarantee the lane between Botely and Hedge End train station will see more accidents, and there will be more clogging up of traffic from J7, through Hedge End and now also into Botley.

CharlieOxbridge wrote:
This is the final nail in the coffin for the Lib Dems in this region. Diane James from UKIP was aware of this development and opposed it. Labour Candidate knew nothing about it, too busy writing books about how much he wishes Margaret Thatcher was dead. Maria Hutchings is more concerned about her children not being taught in a state school as they aren’t good enough. Give UKIP and Diane James a chance to start putting things right in this area. . On another note, is that the end to the Golf Course? This is a double blow to the area if it is because there are not many top golf courses such as Botley Park in the area. It's an absolute gem of a course and for a lot of people the nearest top quality golf course.

please stop your tedious electioneering. How many people do you actually think read these comments?
S far Ms James has done nothing but a bit of xenophobic scaremongering appealing to the obvious section of society. If that is enough to get her voted in then well done. Please stop with the preaching.

All of the above using the acronym N.I.M.B.Y are C.O.M.P.L.E.T.E G.I.B.B.O.N.S.T.U.F.
F.E.R.S.

Larouche wrote:

denniss wrote:
I am not a NIMBY from Botley but I have to declare that I am a golfer at Botley Park. It is clear to me that none of the people above were at the meeting last evening. This issue is more important than the golf course or the over developement of the Botley area. One of the main issues is that this is a totally undemocratic decision to let Keith House and his party off the hook in the debacle they have created on the housing issues within the Borough. It must have been like "mannah from heaven" when Macdonalds suddenly joined forces with to the deveopers and put in for planning permission. Or was it? We all know that Eastleigh Borough Council is heavily involved with the Rose Bowl, a developement that very few people were aware about when it was first built in 2000. I live in Hedge End and I can honestly say that no one I know of were ever informed or consulted on the processes before it suddenly was being approved and built. The fact that they have now heavily invested in the ground, the golf course and the hotel is rather suspicious to say the least. The traffic problems in the area created by the ground being where it are enormous. Here is my point the new developement will cause even greater traffic and therefore polution problems which the planners brushed over last night as only 850 extra vehicle movements at peak times. Who are they really kidding 1,400 houses circa 2,800 cars you are probably talking about 6,000 to 7,000 vehicle movements per day. So Mickey and Lockssmart, it is not great news the congestion and polution will be 10 times worse than it is now. There were other issues flooding, site access, heavy traffic in minor roads,sanitation, flooding etc etc. Those at the meeting were left in no doubt and are now perfectly aware that the politicians are clearly not listening. Therefore the only course of action is firstly to ensure that we do not end up with a Lib Dem MP and then when the local elections tale place to kick the councillors out.

I have to agree on the traffic issue raised. I was a resident in West End High Street for 2 years and the traffic whenever there was an event at the Rose Bowl was ridiculous. I used to sit in traffic jams from Junction 7 all the way to the house. It literally would have been quicker to get out and walk. You also have pedestrians so eager to get to the venue that they walk in the road without a care. Having grown up in Hedge End and Botley, I know the area very well and with the extra traffic that will undoubtedly arise, I guarantee the lane between Botely and Hedge End train station will see more accidents, and there will be more clogging up of traffic from J7, through Hedge End and now also into Botley.

you were too dim then to take the back roads via Moorgreen road, whenever there is an event on , I can get from Jn7 to West End High street in 10 minutes.

denniss wrote:
I am not a NIMBY from Botley but I have to declare that I am a golfer at Botley Park. It is clear to me that none of the people above were at the meeting last evening. This issue is more important than the golf course or the over developement of the Botley area. One of the main issues is that this is a totally undemocratic decision to let Keith House and his party off the hook in the debacle they have created on the housing issues within the Borough. It must have been like "mannah from heaven" when Macdonalds suddenly joined forces with to the deveopers and put in for planning permission. Or was it? We all know that Eastleigh Borough Council is heavily involved with the Rose Bowl, a developement that very few people were aware about when it was first built in 2000. I live in Hedge End and I can honestly say that no one I know of were ever informed or consulted on the processes before it suddenly was being approved and built. The fact that they have now heavily invested in the ground, the golf course and the hotel is rather suspicious to say the least. The traffic problems in the area created by the ground being where it are enormous. Here is my point the new developement will cause even greater traffic and therefore polution problems which the planners brushed over last night as only 850 extra vehicle movements at peak times. Who are they really kidding 1,400 houses circa 2,800 cars you are probably talking about 6,000 to 7,000 vehicle movements per day. So Mickey and Lockssmart, it is not great news the congestion and polution will be 10 times worse than it is now. There were other issues flooding, site access, heavy traffic in minor roads,sanitation, flooding etc etc. Those at the meeting were left in no doubt and are now perfectly aware that the politicians are clearly not listening. Therefore the only course of action is firstly to ensure that we do not end up with a Lib Dem MP and then when the local elections tale place to kick the councillors out.

your figures are quite bizarre - I presume you are not their highways expert

Well there goes my vote for the lib-dums, whats the alternative, Labour - don't think so, the tories Hyacinth Bucket - don't think so but can UKIP make a difference? time to give them a chance methinks, that's where my vote is going this time bye bye lib-dums another lost vote through to an own goal

nedscrumpo wrote:
All of the above using the acronym N.I.M.B.Y are C.O.M.P.L.E.T.E G.I.B.B.O.N.S.T.U.F.

F.E.R.S.

Gibbon stuffers?

elvisimo wrote:

denniss wrote: I am not a NIMBY from Botley but I have to declare that I am a golfer at Botley Park. It is clear to me that none of the people above were at the meeting last evening. This issue is more important than the golf course or the over developement of the Botley area. One of the main issues is that this is a totally undemocratic decision to let Keith House and his party off the hook in the debacle they have created on the housing issues within the Borough. It must have been like "mannah from heaven" when Macdonalds suddenly joined forces with to the deveopers and put in for planning permission. Or was it? We all know that Eastleigh Borough Council is heavily involved with the Rose Bowl, a developement that very few people were aware about when it was first built in 2000. I live in Hedge End and I can honestly say that no one I know of were ever informed or consulted on the processes before it suddenly was being approved and built. The fact that they have now heavily invested in the ground, the golf course and the hotel is rather suspicious to say the least. The traffic problems in the area created by the ground being where it are enormous. Here is my point the new developement will cause even greater traffic and therefore polution problems which the planners brushed over last night as only 850 extra vehicle movements at peak times. Who are they really kidding 1,400 houses circa 2,800 cars you are probably talking about 6,000 to 7,000 vehicle movements per day. So Mickey and Lockssmart, it is not great news the congestion and polution will be 10 times worse than it is now. There were other issues flooding, site access, heavy traffic in minor roads,sanitation, flooding etc etc. Those at the meeting were left in no doubt and are now perfectly aware that the politicians are clearly not listening. Therefore the only course of action is firstly to ensure that we do not end up with a Lib Dem MP and then when the local elections tale place to kick the councillors out.

your figures are quite bizarre - I presume you are not their highways expert

Taken from Wikianswers.com:

The average household in the UK in 2000 mainly owned one car however the last data took in 2009 showed an average of 2 cars per household. We predict by 2012 each household will have at least three cars as they are essential to live a normal life.

No I am not their Highways expert but I can add up. You only have to look at this report to see that I have underestimated the number of cars per property on this proposed new developement. So for 1,400 x 2 = 2,800 vehicles then one movement in and one movement out totals 5,600. As this devleopement only includes a two classroom primary school, then most mothers will most probably do a minimum of 4 trips per day to junior scholls or to Wildern or Wyvern so my figures will be on the low side. Do your own maths. Oh and I haven't mentioned refuse collections, food or furniture deliveries and visting by friends or families. This is just one example of how the planners sought to pull the wool over the eyes of the people who have genuine concerns about the whole impact of this developement.

MGRA wrote:

Larouche wrote:

denniss wrote:
I am not a NIMBY from Botley but I have to declare that I am a golfer at Botley Park. It is clear to me that none of the people above were at the meeting last evening. This issue is more important than the golf course or the over developement of the Botley area. One of the main issues is that this is a totally undemocratic decision to let Keith House and his party off the hook in the debacle they have created on the housing issues within the Borough. It must have been like "mannah from heaven" when Macdonalds suddenly joined forces with to the deveopers and put in for planning permission. Or was it? We all know that Eastleigh Borough Council is heavily involved with the Rose Bowl, a developement that very few people were aware about when it was first built in 2000. I live in Hedge End and I can honestly say that no one I know of were ever informed or consulted on the processes before it suddenly was being approved and built. The fact that they have now heavily invested in the ground, the golf course and the hotel is rather suspicious to say the least. The traffic problems in the area created by the ground being where it are enormous. Here is my point the new developement will cause even greater traffic and therefore polution problems which the planners brushed over last night as only 850 extra vehicle movements at peak times. Who are they really kidding 1,400 houses circa 2,800 cars you are probably talking about 6,000 to 7,000 vehicle movements per day. So Mickey and Lockssmart, it is not great news the congestion and polution will be 10 times worse than it is now. There were other issues flooding, site access, heavy traffic in minor roads,sanitation, flooding etc etc. Those at the meeting were left in no doubt and are now perfectly aware that the politicians are clearly not listening. Therefore the only course of action is firstly to ensure that we do not end up with a Lib Dem MP and then when the local elections tale place to kick the councillors out.

I have to agree on the traffic issue raised. I was a resident in West End High Street for 2 years and the traffic whenever there was an event at the Rose Bowl was ridiculous. I used to sit in traffic jams from Junction 7 all the way to the house. It literally would have been quicker to get out and walk. You also have pedestrians so eager to get to the venue that they walk in the road without a care. Having grown up in Hedge End and Botley, I know the area very well and with the extra traffic that will undoubtedly arise, I guarantee the lane between Botely and Hedge End train station will see more accidents, and there will be more clogging up of traffic from J7, through Hedge End and now also into Botley.

you were too dim then to take the back roads via Moorgreen road, whenever there is an event on , I can get from Jn7 to West End High street in 10 minutes.

I did take the back roads once or twice but it didn't make any difference to journey time and just added an extra few miles to the journey and when you're already spending £250 plus on petrol each month it all adds up. You're obviously too dim to realise that the point I was making was that the roads in the surrounding areas are already congested and building more houses will only make matters worse.

elvisimo wrote:

CharlieOxbridge wrote: This is the final nail in the coffin for the Lib Dems in this region. Diane James from UKIP was aware of this development and opposed it. Labour Candidate knew nothing about it, too busy writing books about how much he wishes Margaret Thatcher was dead. Maria Hutchings is more concerned about her children not being taught in a state school as they aren’t good enough. Give UKIP and Diane James a chance to start putting things right in this area. . On another note, is that the end to the Golf Course? This is a double blow to the area if it is because there are not many top golf courses such as Botley Park in the area. It's an absolute gem of a course and for a lot of people the nearest top quality golf course.

please stop your tedious electioneering. How many people do you actually think read these comments? S far Ms James has done nothing but a bit of xenophobic scaremongering appealing to the obvious section of society. If that is enough to get her voted in then well done. Please stop with the preaching.

and here we have the "Elvis loves Pets" candidate for Eastleigh...

Saintsincethe60s wrote:
Well there goes my vote for the lib-dums, whats the alternative, Labour - don't think so, the tories Hyacinth Bucket - don't think so but can UKIP make a difference? time to give them a chance methinks, that's where my vote is going this time bye bye lib-dums another lost vote through to an own goal

Do the sums! A vote for UKIP is a vote for the Libdems.

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote:
So now who are you going to vote?
I might not agree with your NIMBY ways but have the Liberal council listened to the Eastleigh voters?
It doesn't look like it does it!

There are considerably more people in the Eastleigh borough than those who protested. Just because people who wanted the development were not out marching in support, does not mean that they did not contact their councillor to their opinion.

Linesman I can only compare this to the Dibden tragedy.
A few Nimby's several of them being councillors didn't want a container Port as this would devalue their homes & take away a dog walking area.
they drummed up support from other like minded people they cost watersiders jobs & many were indeed in favour of it.
we then have Lidls which is down the road from me.
In opposition the Labour Party were vehemently against this warehouse but once elected changed their minds & allowed it?
Now I was for the container Port,I was/are in favour of Lidl's just feel it's a waste of six good homes.The problem with it is the local people of that area ( Millbrook & Lordhill) were very opposed & were promised by their councillors it wouldn't happen.
this development in Botley is being objected to by many who bought houses on what was green fields so are being very hypocritical in their objecting to this development.
All I feel is if they feel the council (Liberal) aren't listening to them as in the allotment case then they should vote for another party to show who is the power.
if they're not Labour but have voted Liberal in a Anti Tory vote then maybe UKIP is the way to go?
if enough Liberal voters switch their votes to UKIP & UKIP get elected it could be very interesting in parliament & I'd love to see the three main Parties reactions to it

Lockssmart wrote:
Welcome to the real world NIMBY's of Botley.

am i a NIMBY if i simply like to retain green spaces?

bom'ha wrote:

Lockssmart wrote:
Welcome to the real world NIMBY's of Botley.

am i a NIMBY if i simply like to retain green spaces?

Are you a cow?

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote: So now who are you going to vote? I might not agree with your NIMBY ways but have the Liberal council listened to the Eastleigh voters? It doesn't look like it does it!

There are considerably more people in the Eastleigh borough than those who protested. Just because people who wanted the development were not out marching in support, does not mean that they did not contact their councillor to their opinion.

Linesman I can only compare this to the Dibden tragedy. A few Nimby's several of them being councillors didn't want a container Port as this would devalue their homes & take away a dog walking area. they drummed up support from other like minded people they cost watersiders jobs & many were indeed in favour of it. we then have Lidls which is down the road from me. In opposition the Labour Party were vehemently against this warehouse but once elected changed their minds & allowed it? Now I was for the container Port,I was/are in favour of Lidl's just feel it's a waste of six good homes.The problem with it is the local people of that area ( Millbrook & Lordhill) were very opposed & were promised by their councillors it wouldn't happen. this development in Botley is being objected to by many who bought houses on what was green fields so are being very hypocritical in their objecting to this development. All I feel is if they feel the council (Liberal) aren't listening to them as in the allotment case then they should vote for another party to show who is the power. if they're not Labour but have voted Liberal in a Anti Tory vote then maybe UKIP is the way to go? if enough Liberal voters switch their votes to UKIP & UKIP get elected it could be very interesting in parliament & I'd love to see the three main Parties reactions to it

Now I know you do not understand this. As I said before I live in Hedge End the houses are not in my back yard, yes I would lose the golf course I enjoy playing on but the issues are very simple. This is a politically motivated decsion by failed LibDem councillors who have neglected to do their jobs for the past few year to the extent that the 5 year plan for housing has been completely neglected by them. The major problems are traffic, transportation, polution, sewage disposal, flooding, lighting, loss of wild life habitat et all. Yes, the people who live much nearer than me to the proposed site are worried about their homes and their enjoyment of the area but you have to remember that the small villages around have been established for hundreds of years so the present residents have not bought their homes that are on green fields. It is the green fields they are trying to protect!

I'm a NIMBY and seriously proud of it!!!

Nimbys are people who care, not reckless and shortsighted.
Join the Nimbys NOW!!! Suppiort England.

Nick Clegg does not care about England, our Country or Culture.

denniss wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote: So now who are you going to vote? I might not agree with your NIMBY ways but have the Liberal council listened to the Eastleigh voters? It doesn't look like it does it!

There are considerably more people in the Eastleigh borough than those who protested. Just because people who wanted the development were not out marching in support, does not mean that they did not contact their councillor to their opinion.

Linesman I can only compare this to the Dibden tragedy. A few Nimby's several of them being councillors didn't want a container Port as this would devalue their homes & take away a dog walking area. they drummed up support from other like minded people they cost watersiders jobs & many were indeed in favour of it. we then have Lidls which is down the road from me. In opposition the Labour Party were vehemently against this warehouse but once elected changed their minds & allowed it? Now I was for the container Port,I was/are in favour of Lidl's just feel it's a waste of six good homes.The problem with it is the local people of that area ( Millbrook & Lordhill) were very opposed & were promised by their councillors it wouldn't happen. this development in Botley is being objected to by many who bought houses on what was green fields so are being very hypocritical in their objecting to this development. All I feel is if they feel the council (Liberal) aren't listening to them as in the allotment case then they should vote for another party to show who is the power. if they're not Labour but have voted Liberal in a Anti Tory vote then maybe UKIP is the way to go? if enough Liberal voters switch their votes to UKIP & UKIP get elected it could be very interesting in parliament & I'd love to see the three main Parties reactions to it

Now I know you do not understand this. As I said before I live in Hedge End the houses are not in my back yard, yes I would lose the golf course I enjoy playing on but the issues are very simple. This is a politically motivated decsion by failed LibDem councillors who have neglected to do their jobs for the past few year to the extent that the 5 year plan for housing has been completely neglected by them. The major problems are traffic, transportation, polution, sewage disposal, flooding, lighting, loss of wild life habitat et all. Yes, the people who live much nearer than me to the proposed site are worried about their homes and their enjoyment of the area but you have to remember that the small villages around have been established for hundreds of years so the present residents have not bought their homes that are on green fields. It is the green fields they are trying to protect!

why are you attacking me?
you feel betrayed by the council which I've said.
I've suggested if you never want to vote Tory then give UKIP a go but if you think Tory is the better option please vote for my party

Never going to vote for Lib Dem again.
They are going to lose this election because of this decision.

The Lib/Lab/Con party are condoning what could be millions of migrants from Bulgaria and Romania arriving next January.

The government has no idea at all how many will be coming, and refuses to try and stop the invasion.

I call them the Lib/Lab/Con party because their policies are almost as one!

Only UKIP have pledged to fight the open-borders policy of the Lib/Lab/Con and that's where I will be trusting my vote.