HOUSING CRISIS AREA MEETING
New Lobby/Action/Support Group.
WEDS APRIL 19th, 7PM, The Red Lion meeting room, High St, Swanage.
Numerous readers of The Gazette have requested that a meeting be set up for all those affected in whichever way by the articles in The Gazette over the past three months regarding the current housing crisis - locals, second home owners, businesses, etc. Everyone welcome. Come and give your opinion - action, not reaction is required. Please make the effort to attend if you have an opinion to express.
Posted by Anonymous to swanage view at 12:48 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
22 comments:
The taxing of social housing to pay for the Sandford Bypass makes PDC not just hypocritical but also immoral.
I think you may have misread what's going on with PDC's transport plan.
The Sandford bypass would be "prohibitively expensive", and so almost certainly won't be built.
so what is the infrastructure tax for then?
I’m fed up with all these contrary policies.
PDC are taxing new buildings including social housing to pay for more roads, and yet under government guidance they are actively discouraging people from owning cars by restricting car spaces in the same new buildings, and even passing blocks of flats with no car parking at all.
Housing must be carbon neutral in a decade or so, but where is the public transport initiative?
You can bet the new structure plan will propose exactly what PDC have already decided, and centre on projects which will be funded externally or by stealth taxes. No shocks there then.
PDC are taxing planing approvals to pay for transport, not roads. Read theri documentation. PDC is not a highway authority in any case. Roads are county council. Its probably unlawful anyway as the departmental guidance about asking developers for a contribution (section 106) says very clearly that: 1. the money has to be used for something having a close relationship to the development and 2. it cannot be used as an improvement levy. Its hard to see how a contribution in Swanage to pay for a cycle track in Bere Regis comes within 1.
"Dorset County Council has approved plans to ensure that, in future, house-builders and other developers provide money towards tackling road congestion and poor accessibility problems made worse by their development in the district. Development proposals which fail to address the traffic issue will be refused planning permission."
That means more roads or not?
So the Swanage Regatta Committee will owe a fortune attracting all those people in August, won't they?
Anyway if the roads coped when Swanage was twice as busy in the summer in the 50's and 60's what's changed now?
We already have a park and ride don’t we?
It’s not just a few pence on council tax, THE FEES ARE DRACONIAN!
Dear 6:57
they are talking about people who build houses.
As I've already said - a quote from PDC - The Sandford bypass would be "prohibitively expensive",
It aint gonna happen.
Since when have the Swanage Regatta Committee started building houses?
Park and Ride starts at Corfe.
In the 50's it started at Waterloo, or they were driven here by Daddy who then drove back to wherever and carried on working.
Whatever the money is spent on any extra cost is a disincentive and will result in the supply of new homes being reduced. As the demand is not reduced the end result can only be even higher prices.
I am very gloomy about this situation. Short of a general economic collapse prices will go higher and higher.
Remember the reaction when the Office of the Deputy PM, which runs local government, came up with a figure of 3000 as the number of new homes needed in Purbeck, or was it Dorset. Screams of horror from our councillors.
The Sandford bypass may well be "prohibitively expensive" but one of the few specific spatial objectives in the Core Strategy Development Plan 2006-2026 is S09; "tackling congestion on the A351 Wareham to Bakers Arms". If that don't mean a bypass what does?
The last thing I read was that they wanted to signpost traffic up Morden Road to the A35 so it would go a very long way round.
I am surprised to hear that road building is financed directly from local tax receipts. I always thought that major schemes, like bypasses were financed centrally and that infrastructural investment was financed by debt rather than revenue. Has it changed? All those motorways and bypasses the rest of the country has were paid for this way (and latterly by private sector money), so I am a tiny bit surprised that a Sandford bypass would be different. When was the decision to change the way road building is financed made? Did Prescott slip it through on the sly? There was nothing in the papers.
If you read some more of PDC's literature you'll discover that a lot of the traffic is Poole to Weymouth.
PDC are trying to get this traffic onto the Dorchester Road.
Oh, for goodness sake. This housing situation will go on getting worse until we have a government that builds a couple of hundred thousand homes a year in the public sector. Its a plain and simple fact that the "property owning democracy" business has failed and simply priced millions out of the market.
Do you want to start a thread about transport policy? A lot of people interested in that might not read a thread on housing. Sending Poole- Weymouth/Dorchester traffic along the northern route sounds very sensible apart from the congestion on the road into Weymouth from Dorchester until the relief road is built. At the moment they need to go down through Crossways/Warmwell to avoid this. The distance is very much the same as going via Wareham and I though this was the route most people used now that most of the road west of Wareham has a speed limit. I would think its quicker although its not a journey I ever need to make so I can be certain.
Have you seen a traffic survey on journeys through Sandford? It would be interesting reading. I suspect a lot of it is from the estates that line the road having unwisely been permitted without the needed transport infrastructure being provided.
When the train line is eventually connected to Swanage a park and ride at Holton Heath would remove a proportion of tourist traffic from tha A351 as would a marketing campaign to persuade visitors from Poole and Bournemouth to come by train. Somehing like a third of our visitors start their journey in the conurbation so this could have a big impact if properly handled.
Fine, so can we have a commitment to scrap the steam locomotives and run a proper train service please.
I still ask where is the logic in taxing new buildings (when we are trying to encourage the provision of more homes)? These infrastructure improvements are necesary NOW and will be to the benefit of everyone in the community. They should come out of general taxation. If I turn two semis into one house do I get a rebate?
Does anyone know if the new tax will be challanged in court?
9.56 they are not just talking about people who build houses. Quote: "Contributions from recreation, tourist and retail development will be requested at £633 per additional daily trip as calculated from a transport assessment."
Dear 12:41
Thanks, I missed that bit.
9:56
Infra structural investment is not paid for from tax revenue. It is paid for by borrowing so its only the interest that has to be funded in the short term. The problem is th e treasury gets very worked up about the public borrowing requirement as they think its inflationary. Why it causes inflation when the government borrows but not when I borrow defeats me. Perhaps someone could explain.
Meant to add the fact that any impediment to more houses being built is bonkers. So is a charge on any development that will boost our local economy. ?These people want Swanage to be nothing but a nest of retirees.
Oppps! Sorry - MISPRINT! The HOUSING CRISIS MEETING is on WEDS APRIL 18th - not 19th as listed.
Has anyone from PDC -the relevant housing authority been invited so we can ask why they don't follow the simple advice, when in a hole stop digging.
I guess that most of their advice comes from central gov't.
They're probably not good with simple advice.
Post a Comment