When has the council listened to the people? Do they even read letters sent to councillors? There is far too much building in every square inch in Southampton and the end results are appalling. There are far too many properties for sale - we do not need more houses. We are heading for a recession.

These nimbys are being incredibly selfish. They need to start looking further than the end of their own noses.

Communist blocks of flats in disguise. The legacy of this Labour administration is cramming in as many homes as physically possible. Look at many modern developments. If there are houses they are tall and narrow with gardens just about big enough for a small table and chairs and nothing else, and if you're lucky you'll get an off-road parking space. Note all the cars parked with wheels on pavements on modern crammed in developments. Mind you, I suppose we shouldn't be using cars whatsoever, if you listen to the spiel of this government.

Undoubtedly it will be multi-occupancy ...that's "flats" to you and me! Permission will be given by the council, regardless of any protests by the local residents and regardless of however good their reasons. The council, by pursuing their policy of "flats, flats and more flats, wherever we can fit them in, and as many as can be fitted in" have created so many precedents that refusal would be inconsistent and would inevitably lead to permission being granted if the issue went to appeal.Hoisted by it's previous planning policies, the council would almost certainly give permission rather than spending money on a pointless appeal.

I do wonder where these people would be living if everybody had the same attitude.

Its about time we built houses in this town and not flats and this is a 3 bedroom house. I live close to the Road and would like to move into a house rather than my flat.

Nimbys of the highest order

I wonder what was there before their houses?

Where do they expect their children to live?

If everyone had this attitude every house would be one of these "houses of multiple occupancy"

NIMBYS

local wrote:
Communist blocks of flats in disguise. The legacy of this Labour
administration is cramming in as many homes as physically possible.
Look at many modern developments. If there are houses they are tall and
narrow with gardens just about big enough for a small table and chairs
and nothing else, and if you're lucky you'll get an off-road parking
space. Note all the cars parked with wheels on pavements on modern
crammed in developments. Mind you, I suppose we shouldn't be using cars
whatsoever, if you listen to the spiel of this government.

Communist? Calm down, Senator McCarthy

I expect these are the same people writing to their councilors complaining that their children cannot afford houses in the area . It would be a great shame to build on greenfield around England but this attitude will push our councilors towards doing this and so spoiling our countryside and environment further.

No, we are not NIMBYS. If you lived here, you would realise that this development would turn an already dangerous blind corner into a death trap. Nevermind where our children will live; where are they supposed to play now if the street and the park are turned into a car park?

How many people know that the Councillors on the Planning Panel do not read the letters of objection ?
If there should be a hearing, and that is not likely, a planning officer reads out a report to the Panel and they must make their decision on that information.
Since a change in the Planning rules, only proposals for more than 10 housing units,
a massive development ( in square metres ) and anything deemed to be in the public interest comes before the Planning panel, all other decisions are made behind closed doors by Delegated Powers.
If I am wrong I am willing to be corrected by anyonee with superior knowledge of the subject.

They've got all the shiniest rhetoric here, haven't they:

stop another home being built in their quiet cul-de-sac.

Strike one. Noise pollution

on a blind bend opposite a children's playground.

Won't somebody think of the children!

multi-occupancy and therefore be out of character with the area

We don't need no stinkin' students/immigrants!

they fear increased on-street parking, which they say would create "an accident waiting to happen".

Ah, so it's a safety concern, then. Not a noise issue as previously stated

no choice but to move if the development went ahead

There's always a choice, sweetheart. This is akin to the psycho who kicks his pregnant wife in the stomach, screaming "now look what you've made me do"

And on and on and on. It's gonna happen, people. Deal with it

Firstly, as a resident who lives extremely close to this proposal I would like to stress that this is NOT a case of NIMBY. It is a case that we have raised because of issues of health and safety as well as to preserve the character of the street (something that the Hampshire Planning Policy commends). We DO need suitable buildings for a growing population but those builds must be appropriate. This proposal will put a large strain on an already weakened infrastructure because it is clearly designed as an HMO. This complaint is NOT about the people who will end up living there, it is about the quality of life that they and exisiting residents will have. If this proposal is adapted in a way that will not place our children at risk of accident and the local sewerage and other infrastructure in danger of collapse then there would be no reason to raise an objection. Finally, I feel that calling someone you don't know a 'sanctimonious tool' says more about the person writing such abusive language than it does about the person being linguistically abused. I'm proud of our local residents for standing together to fight for a better quality of home for everyone wanting to live in Southampton, but I am saddened by the rudeness shown by people on this commentary who, I would wager, have not even taken the time to consult the plans or look at the area to which they refer.

"I would like to stress that this is NOT a case of NIMBY"

Ah a case of NNMBY then.

"Neighbour Leslie Black said that she would have no choice but to move if the development went ahead."

Why would this one development leave you with no choice but to move?
Where would you go?

You already live in a quiet little cul-de-sac, close to the school, near to shops, no parking restrictions, easy access to dual carriageway and motorway.



"On the street it forces traffic on to the wrong side of the road and impedes bin lorries and emergency vehicles."

How big is this cul-de-sac that could have all this activity?

Clifton Rd resident wrote:
No, we are not NIMBYS. If you lived here, you would realise that this development would turn an already dangerous blind corner into a death trap. Nevermind where our children will live; where are they supposed to play now if the street and the park are turned into a car park?

in their quiet cul-de-sac.

I think you need to look closer to home, if its the lovely cul de sac that we are told it is, why would this bend be dangerous, speeding residents?

How about:

Speed bumps
Traffic lights
Chichanes
Change layout of the road

Simple

would the Clifton residents mind so much it it were a two bathroom property and not a three bathroom property? This seems to be the cliftons residents main concern.

There is obviously a demand for this type of property or developers would not be building them. At a time when people are worried about the money markets and job security, I say well done to the developers bringing work and income to our local area.


We should be supporting the development of our local communities and not fighting it. We need to show that Southampton is a place that supports investment; otherwise the developers will take their money elsewhere.

Good luck Clifton residents!

Remember that each household in you cul-de-sac needs to write their objection individually. Do not submit a joint effort as it will be dealt with as One objection. It should go to Committee to be decided if so many objections are received.

While I can see that the word ‘NIMBY’ is a very good shorthand way of saying ‘NOT IN MY BACK YARD’. I do think the term is over used and is wrongly used as a term of abuse or in a negative way.

NIMBYs should be proud of what they do – if they, the people who will be affected by the project, don’t point out the problems, who will?

Think of the abuse which would be handed out if a resident of Southampton were to voice their concerns over a house extension at 23 Railway Cuttings, East Cheam. You would be rightly told that as it did not affect you it is none of your business.

Whereas a housing development, industrial estate, phone mast or tower block in your street or neighbourhood IS your concern.

So to all NIMBYs, don’t be put off by those who use the term in a negative way.

Stand up for what you think is right.

concerned wrote:
While I can see that the word ‘NIMBY’ is a very good shorthand way of saying ‘NOT IN MY BACK YARD’. I do think the term is over used and is wrongly used as a term of abuse or in a negative way. NIMBYs should be proud of what they do – if they, the people who will be affected by the project, don’t point out the problems, who will? Think of the abuse which would be handed out if a resident of Southampton were to voice their concerns over a house extension at 23 Railway Cuttings, East Cheam. You would be rightly told that as it did not affect you it is none of your business. Whereas a housing development, industrial estate, phone mast or tower block in your street or neighbourhood IS your concern. So to all NIMBYs, don’t be put off by those who use the term in a negative way. Stand up for what you think is right.

well said, I wouldn't want anything that de valued my property or ruined my local area in built 'in my back yard' either. NIMBY's have every right to be NIMBY's.

People that call others NIMBY'S would also turn into NIMBY'S if something effected them.

Having read all of the comments, I would agree that some verge on the offensive, certainly the tone is totally unecessary.

As for the accusation (!?) of "NIMBY!", why not ? The local residents are the ones who will be affected so they have every right to make their feelings known. I get the impression that those making the accusations of "NIMBY-ism" are totally unaffected so can throw their stones with impunity. These HMOs are indeed putting too much additional strain on local infrastructure across the whole of Southampton, parking is always a problem as developers simply regard the provision of parking and gardens as an unecessary overhead that eats into their profits.And yes, if someone was to apply to build an HMO next to me, I would similarly be up in arms, and not the least because it would devalue my home.

I am unaffected by the development, living on the other side of Southampton, so have no axe to grind. Except that, I have seen Southampton become overloaded by HMOs, apartments and flats, and the destruction of houses and gardens by their being substituted by over-intensive habitation. And whilst I agree, people have to live somewhere, including my own children, I would not want them in "my back yard" but rather somewhere where there was good infrastructure, space to breathe and somewhere where I would wish my childrens children could be brought up, and not the overintensive battery dwellings that are the only things being built now.

I cannot see anything selfish in that aspiration.

Southampton needs homes for families, not anonymous blocks of flats. And gardens should be valued, contributing to people's emotional and physical well-being, and not simply as "brownfield sites" ready to be exploited by developers!

i heard that horrid pub the gate inn in burgess road where all the moronic chavs work and drink was going to be turned into flats,no questions asked,nudge,nudge,wi
nk,wink.

Thank you concerned, Southampton - I am fed up with people referring to other people as NIMBY's when they have a perfectly valid point to make - most of us have worked hard to provide homes for ourselves and our families - why shouldn't we stick up for our rights where matters affect us directly - you can be sure anyone would if affected - they just haven't been yet - give it time though - they will be the one's shouting loudest when their home/family is under threat!

It is easy to accuse others of being NIMBY, but how many of us will not complain if our own locality is under threat?

In the past I have represented this area on County Council, so know it. Over the years character of the area has changed, concerns of the resident are genuine. Road is narrow, with cars parked in the road in case of fire it could be difficult for emergency services to get through.

Remarks implying residents may be anti immigrants are irresponsible. I am also an immigrant and residents of Millbrook ward used to vote for me.

Cllr.Moulton is right about people power. Residents should use it and make sure councillors listen to them. Hope Cllr.Moulton will make sure that Tory majority on the committee is exercised in favour of the residents.

Residents should also contact their MP Alan Whitehead and ask him to object as well.

I wish objectors all the luck.

I support the residents of Clifton Road, on principle if nothing else.

Like a number of other people have said, I too am sick and tired of property developers maximising profits (fat cats) at teh expense of the areas that they come to, create eyesores and problems, then b*gger off to their large houses in places like Chilworth where they remain unaffected by their actions.

During the term of this current government I have certainly seen an increase in the number of houses (ugly ones at that) which are being crammed into places where they should not be. Isn't it about time that this was stopped, particularly the building of flats in places where there are houses?

If you ask me its all money saving and back handers on the part of the government and local councils - combined with utter greed on the part of property developers.

Good luck with your fight!

Christoff wrote:

concerned wrote: While I can see that the word ‘NIMBY’ is a very good shorthand way of saying ‘NOT IN MY BACK YARD’. I do think the term is over used and is wrongly used as a term of abuse or in a negative way. NIMBYs should be proud of what they do – if they, the people who will be affected by the project, don’t point out the problems, who will? Think of the abuse which would be handed out if a resident of Southampton were to voice their concerns over a house extension at 23 Railway Cuttings, East Cheam. You would be rightly told that as it did not affect you it is none of your business. Whereas a housing development, industrial estate, phone mast or tower block in your street or neighbourhood IS your concern. So to all NIMBYs, don’t be put off by those who use the term in a negative way. Stand up for what you think is right.

well said, I wouldn\\\'t want anything that de valued my property or ruined my local area in built \\\'in my back yard\\\' either. NIMBY\\\'s have every right to be NIMBY\\\'s. People that call others NIMBY\\\'S would also turn into NIMBY\\\'S if something effected them.

I have to agree, however it does fully depend on the reasons for the objection otherwise NIMBY is not the right word

In this case, it smells of NIMBY's.

A cul-de-sac that would turn into a death trap! Come-on, surely a dead end road would not have 10 ton lorries speeding down it!

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
It is easy to accuse others of being NIMBY, but how many of us will not complain if our own locality is under threat? In the past I have represented this area on County Council, so know it. Over the years character of the area has changed, concerns of the resident are genuine. Road is narrow, with cars parked in the road in case of fire it could be difficult for emergency services to get through. Remarks implying residents may be anti immigrants are irresponsible. I am also an immigrant and residents of Millbrook ward used to vote for me. Cllr.Moulton is right about people power. Residents should use it and make sure councillors listen to them. Hope Cllr.Moulton will make sure that Tory majority on the committee is exercised in favour of the residents. Residents should also contact their MP Alan Whitehead and ask him to object as well. I wish objectors all the luck.

zzzzzzzzzzzz......so
ap box..........

im a wrote:

Christoff wrote:

concerned wrote: While I can see that the word ‘NIMBY’ is a very good shorthand way of saying ‘NOT IN MY BACK YARD’. I do think the term is over used and is wrongly used as a term of abuse or in a negative way. NIMBYs should be proud of what they do – if they, the people who will be affected by the project, don’t point out the problems, who will? Think of the abuse which would be handed out if a resident of Southampton were to voice their concerns over a house extension at 23 Railway Cuttings, East Cheam. You would be rightly told that as it did not affect you it is none of your business. Whereas a housing development, industrial estate, phone mast or tower block in your street or neighbourhood IS your concern. So to all NIMBYs, don’t be put off by those who use the term in a negative way. Stand up for what you think is right.

well said, I wouldn\\\'t want anything that de valued my property or ruined my local area in built \\\'in my back yard\\\' either. NIMBY\\\'s have every right to be NIMBY\\\'s. People that call others NIMBY\\\'S would also turn into NIMBY\\\'S if something effected them.

I have to agree, however it does fully depend on the reasons for the objection otherwise NIMBY is not the right word In this case, it smells of NIMBY's. A cul-de-sac that would turn into a death trap! Come-on, surely a dead end road would not have 10 ton lorries speeding down it!

lol, you maybe right.

I must admit I haven't been down too many death trap cul-de-sacs lately.

Can everyone just get a reality check. Does nobody watch the news and see the mass devastation and destruction of the world through wars and natural disasters. This is an application for a lovely home for a family to enjoy, get over it everyone and do something about things that are really important and for the good of all.
If everyone ranted and raved about the more important things that are happening in the world then maybe everyone would be more happier and forgiving and not so bitter and twisted in their own little worlds.

RB wrote:
Can everyone just get a reality check. Does nobody watch the news and
see the mass devastation and destruction of the world through wars and
natural disasters. This is an application for a lovely home for a
family to enjoy, get over it everyone and do something about things
that are really important and for the good of all.
If everyone ranted and raved about the more important things that are
happening in the world then maybe everyone would be more happier and
forgiving and not so bitter and twisted in their own little worlds.

So only the major, mega-important issues in life are worthy of being considered? And what exactly are you, personally, doing about those, given that you've got time to sit here and pick holes in other people's seemingly trivial behaviour? Get yourself a friggin' reality check. If I come round to your house and burgle you senseless, will you accept "hey look man, there are starving children in Africa that don't even HAVE 42" widescreen TVs!" as justification, and take no further action? Of course you bleedin' won't. Grow up and let people have the say that people died fighting for their right to have

It amazes me that developers are scrapping around for these pathetic little sites when there are acres upon acres of prime building land still in Southampton. Can you believe that the council have sanctioned a new school at Studland Road when the other 4 primary schools in Millbrook are under subscribed? Both the Redbridge site and Studland Road are ideal for 'affordable' housing. Plus the old Millbrook and Oaklands schools will be empty in 5 years time, more land there.

Over the other side of the city Woolston school is going, and there are acres of dead space in Weston which could be developed.

Where in the planning applicationmaterial does it say it is to be an HMO? The Council has defined it as a dwelling in their description (if i am looking at the right planning application for that street online at the moment).

If it is just one dwelling (albeit with 3 bathrooms - which is possible) then I can't see why it will cause a huge increase in parking etc - doesn't this blow the neighburs' arguments out of the water. I guess they will have design concerns but the article looks like the trasnport is the major issue. And no, I am not the developer, nor am i anything to do with the application, or work for the Council before you accuse.....

Where in the planning applicationmaterial does it say it is to be an HMO? The Council has defined it as a dwelling in their description (if i am looking at the right planning application for that street online at the moment).

If it is just one dwelling (albeit with 3 bathrooms - which is possible) then I can't see why it will cause a huge increase in parking etc - doesn't this blow the neighburs' arguments out of the water. I guess they will have design concerns but the article looks like the trasnport is the major issue. And no, I am not the developer, nor am i anything to do with the application, or work for the Council before you accuse.....

Where in the planning applicationmaterial does it say it is to be an HMO? The Council has defined it as a dwelling in their description (if i am looking at the right planning application for that street online at the moment).

If it is just one dwelling (albeit with 3 bathrooms - which is possible) then I can't see why it will cause a huge increase in parking etc - doesn't this blow the neighburs' arguments out of the water. I guess they will have design concerns but the article looks like the trasnport is the major issue. And no, I am not the developer, nor am i anything to do with the application, or work for the Council before you accuse.....if i am looking at the wrong application which is 'pending consideration' on that street then i apologise in advance, but pretty sure it is the right one.

Where in the planning applicationmaterial does it say it is to be an HMO? The Council has defined it as a dwelling in their description (if i am looking at the right planning application for that street online at the moment).

If it is just one dwelling (albeit with 3 bathrooms - which is possible) then I can't see why it will cause a huge increase in parking etc - doesn't this blow the neighburs' arguments out of the water. I guess they will have design concerns but the article looks like the trasnport is the major issue. And no, I am not the developer, nor am i anything to do with the application, or work for the Council before you accuse.....if i am looking at the wrong application which is 'pending consideration' on that street then i apologise in advance, but pretty sure it is the right one.

Where in the planning applicationmaterial does it say it is to be an HMO? The Council has defined it as a dwelling in their description (if i am looking at the right planning application for that street online at the moment).

If it is just one dwelling (albeit with 3 bathrooms - which is possible) then I can't see why it will cause a huge increase in parking etc - doesn't this blow the neighburs' arguments out of the water. I guess they will have design concerns but the article looks like the trasnport is the major issue. And no, I am not the developer, nor am i anything to do with the application, or work for the Council before you accuse.....if i am looking at the wrong application which is 'pending consideration' on that street then i apologise in advance, but pretty sure it is the right one.

and apologies for the repeated message - not trying to make a poin, my computer wasnt working,,,,,,,,

we live in a small cul de sac of 15 houses in swaythling. all our letters and campaigning didn't stop this **** useless council ignoring us to allow a tower block, shops and more flats on a site the size of a postage stamp at the end of the road. Parking for 72 cars and about 150 units so possibly 200 plus people wanting to park? amazing. it will ruin or lives for sure all to pay for a dr's surgery. to many backhanders going on for sure!!

Bambi wrote:

RB wrote: Can everyone just get a reality check. Does nobody watch the news and see the mass devastation and destruction of the world through wars and natural disasters. This is an application for a lovely home for a family to enjoy, get over it everyone and do something about things that are really important and for the good of all. If everyone ranted and raved about the more important things that are happening in the world then maybe everyone would be more happier and forgiving and not so bitter and twisted in their own little worlds.

So only the major, mega-important issues in life are worthy of being considered? And what exactly are you, personally, doing about those, given that you\'ve got time to sit here and pick holes in other people\'s seemingly trivial behaviour? Get yourself a friggin\' reality check. If I come round to your house and burgle you senseless, will you accept \"hey look man, there are starving children in Africa that don\'t even HAVE 42\" widescreen TVs!\" as justification, and take no further action? Of course you bleedin\' won\'t. Grow up and let people have the say that people died fighting for their right to have

In response to your rather perverse comment, why dont use your freedom of speech and use it towards more worthwhile causes. And for your information, I dont own a 'friggin' 42" TV.

Bambi wrote:

RB wrote: Can everyone just get a reality check. Does nobody watch the news and see the mass devastation and destruction of the world through wars and natural disasters. This is an application for a lovely home for a family to enjoy, get over it everyone and do something about things that are really important and for the good of all. If everyone ranted and raved about the more important things that are happening in the world then maybe everyone would be more happier and forgiving and not so bitter and twisted in their own little worlds.

So only the major, mega-important issues in life are worthy of being considered? And what exactly are you, personally, doing about those, given that you\'ve got time to sit here and pick holes in other people\'s seemingly trivial behaviour? Get yourself a friggin\' reality check. If I come round to your house and burgle you senseless, will you accept \"hey look man, there are starving children in Africa that don\'t even HAVE 42\" widescreen TVs!\" as justification, and take no further action? Of course you bleedin\' won\'t. Grow up and let people have the say that people died fighting for their right to have

What a perverse response. So why dont you use your freedom of speech for more passionate causes! To put your mind at rest, I dont own a 'friggin' 42"!