swanageview: Core strategy response

Tuesday, December 07, 2010

Core strategy response

24 comments:

Anonymous said...: 900 homes in 20 years would increase the population by half a percent a year. This is less than the rate we have had since about 1930. How does this constitute "over-development". At what point was Swanage correctly developed? When it had 5000 people, 6000, 7000, 8000, 9000 or 10,000? Why would 12,000 be a problem? Come on, lets have some convincing arguments for this. It looks like nonsense to me.; 7/12/10 10:09 pm
Anonymous said...: It is.

those figures may have been accurate when Labour wanted lychett to act as an over fill for Poole and B'mouth, since the Con Lib guys got in this wont happen, unless the people, god bless 'em, want it.; 7/12/10 10:40 pm
Anonymous said...: The only ones moving in to increase Swanage's population will be older people, second home owners, and retirees. Young families will continue to leave as there is little in the way of jobs or education (after 2011) to stay here. Unless a new income source is developed here (such as ahigh-tech, internet based business park) the town will be unable to support young families starting out on life's road. Budgens (to pick just one) only pays so much.; 8/12/10 8:28 am
Anonymous said...: those figures may have been accurate when Labour wanted lychett to act as an over fill for Poole and B'mouth, since the Con Lib guys got in this wont happen, unless the people, god bless 'em, want it.

I assume that you are referring to the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) figures. The breakdown was 2,750 across Lychett and Upton with 2,100 for the rest of Purbeck. There was outrage at the figure of 2,750. Purbeck District Council fought hard against this and won. The 'bargaining tool' was to add 300 more houses to the 2,100. So the rest of Purbeck is now dealing with a figure of 2,400 which is more housing than was actually required by the much hated RSS.

Oh, and another thing Swanage as ever gets the highest number of houses. A town at the end of a giant cul-de-sac even PDC recognise that. High house prices, low paid employment. So if you have money and don't need to work welcome to Swanage!; 8/12/10 9:29 am
Anonymous said...: Why should retired people not move here. They have the same rights as everyone else. Once again I am appalled at this casual discrimination on age grounds. If it were colour or religion there would be an outcry. Why do you think people become subhuman when they celebrate their 65th birthday.; 8/12/10 10:06 am
Anonymous said...: Nothing wrong with retired people at all - but do they want to live in a place where young families are leaving?

I have lived in 55+ age restricted communities and believe me, they are not happy places. In fact, they have a higher mortality rate than places with all ages.

Can't you understand that the influx of second home owners/retirees from affluent parts of the UK have distorted property values in Purbeck since the mid-1990s, to the point that local young folk have no option but to leave?

Nothing wrong at all with oldies (I am one myself) but I do not want Swanage to be a community where families are on the decline in number due to lack of jobs that can support the high property prices. Swanage was a bustling place for young families not so many years back. That is changing so fast we might not see it happen until it is too late.; 8/12/10 11:38 am
Anonymous said...: I don't think it right or desirable to try to control this. It is nobody else's business where anybody chooses to live. House prices in Swanage move in relation to London and home county prices according to the local estate agents. That is how the market operates.

I would take issue that the influx you refer to has "distorted" prices as this pre-supposes there is some sort of natural level. What has pushed up prices in the UK and USA has been the shift from funding lending for house prices from domestic savings to money raised internationally. What we have seen is a bubble caused by money from the countries that have a trade surplus flowing back in the form of loans.; 8/12/10 5:11 pm
Anonymous said...: Fair enough. Embrace your Milton Friedman-esque market forces theory with vigour.

But.....

In 20 years' time (if you and I are still on this mortal coil), you will see a Swanage with a handful of young families. The rest will have been forced out, because of 'market forces' you embrace.

Remember, when Thatcher sold off council housing, the bottom fell out beneath the young and the lower middle class, as far as property is concerned.

I will sit back and see how DCC, PDC and STC react to the requirement to provide 'social housing' in hyper-inflated (in terms of housing prices)Swanage.

By the way - London and the home counties have jobs to support housing prices. Swanage does not.
It is a false comparison. That is why your point is based on false assumptions. Are you an estate agent????; 8/12/10 5:46 pm
Anonymous said...: I don't think its my business to tell people where they should live. I don't think its the government's either. Its about very simple liberty. How you can construe this as Friedmanite baffle me. If you think people should be bossed around in this way try to think through the consequences of your position.; 8/12/10 7:42 pm
Anonymous said...: I simply have care and concern for others. You place personal liberty over shared concern. No doubt you sleep well at night.; 8/12/10 8:13 pm
Anonymous said...: Yes but I have never met anyone who did not claim to be concerned for others. Its a terrible cliche.

Denying people the right to buy homes here because of their age, on the grounds that this will depress property prices to the advantage of age groups you approve of strikes me as a very strange way to demonstrate concern. Anyone who wants to move from Swanage to elsewhere in the south would be screwed as well since they would have to sell into an artificially depressed market but have to buy in a normal one. Now much trace of care for them.; 8/12/10 10:31 pm
Anonymous said...: Of course, this may become moot if either the Euro or the dollar - or both - collapse. Either event will take down the pound. Better prepare for the bartering system. The house of cards might collapse yet. The banks that lend these mortgages were saved from collapse by an infusion of one trillion dollars in TARP money, lent by the Americans who borrowed it from China. It is all a shell game, passing debt on like a hot potato. Don't be misled about your home's 'value' - it is built on an illusion, not a foundation.; 9/12/10 3:01 am
Anonymous said...: Response to the Core Response:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8StRAJCork; 9/12/10 3:18 am
Anonymous said...: Yes, but money is an illusion and a psychological prop. Its just a way of counting. The trouble is people think it is something real and tangible. If a currency collapses another one takes it place. People go on making and buying and need a means of lubricating their exchanges. Reversion to barter has never lasted for more than a very short time. In the absence of a currency things like cigarettes are used as counting units.; 9/12/10 10:00 am
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said...
Yes, but money is an illusion and a psychological prop. Its just a way of counting. The trouble is people think it is something real and tangible.

!0 AM Are you being serious?; 9/12/10 10:57 am
Anonymous said...: Of course I am being serious. Currencies come and go. There is a great deal of wailing and gnashing of teeth when this happens but come and go they do. Banks go to great lengths to make us believe there is permanence in money as you would expect but you would not want to believe that would you.; 9/12/10 9:29 pm
Anonymous said...: Actually after that barb a few posts ago I find that I'm warming to Friedman. He advocated fighting recessions by expanding the money supply which we have on the form of quantitative easing. This is exactly what the bond markets are now terrified of as it will dilute the value of the sovereign debt they own. Something the latterday Friedmanites steer clear of mentioning. Friedman also argued that a steady, small expansion of the money supply was the only wise policy, and he warned against efforts by a treasury or central bank to do otherwise.; 10/12/10 11:49 pm
Anonymous said...: And the legalisation of drugs and prostitution and just about anything else. The Thatcherites had some strange heroes.; 11/12/10 11:11 pm
Anonymous said...: I don't think it right or desirable to try to control this. It is nobody else's business where anybody chooses to live. House prices in Swanage move in relation to London and home county prices according to the local estate agents. That is how the market operates.

I would take issue that the influx you refer to has "distorted" prices as this pre-supposes there is some sort of natural level. What has pushed up prices in the UK and USA has been the shift from funding lending for house prices from domestic savings to money raised internationally. What we have seen is a bubble caused by money from the countries that have a trade surplus flowing back in the form of loans.

You sound like you know what you are on about, so why don't you suggest an intellectual and positive way of solving the housing crisis in Swanage.
How do you suggest that Swanage avoids becomeing a dead seaside resorts as many others have become and becomes a place that draws young families to it.; 21/12/10 11:31 am
Anonymous said...: Unfortunately I do not think there is a "Swanage answer" to the high price of housing. If there was it would have been applied long ago. As I have said on here more than once it is an national problem with national and international causes not a local one with local causes and solutions. You could say a whole hen house of chickens have come home to roost.

However, there are things that can be done to help. Some years ago a group of people set up a Swanage housing association but it is now incorporated into a larger one. Perhaps the time is ripe for a successor organisation to be set up.; 21/12/10 9:52 pm
Anonymous said...: To move on to the second question, again we are looking at national demographic changes. The population is moving south and the retired are, oddly enough, just about the most mobile section of the population. Swanage will not "die". It will change and some people will see any change as a problem.

As far a attracting non retirees here, I think that we can do something. Swanage seems able to attract two different groups. Those with skills at the upper end of the construction industry, electrical engineers for example, who travel to contract work round the country and arts professionals of all sorts who can base themselves here and either send themselves or their work out of the town. Painters and writers are in the latter group, actors and musicians in the former. I know of a number who have moved here.

I am not sure who the "we" who should be deliberately intervening is, or what demographic model they are supposed to aspire to. The need to develop an appropriate arts infrastructure has long been identified as a restraint but.

As for tourism, what can be done to attract more people with money to spend? We are very good at putting on free attractions like the carnival which bring in crowds of people looking to have a cheap outing. I was criticised rather strongly on here a couple of years ago when I said we expect our visitors to sleep in fields and eat in the streets but that is what we do.

I was pleased to see that another art gallery is opening. Anything like this helps reposition Swanage. No doubt there will be those who say "Oh No, not what Swanage needs" but the visual arts bring in money and have just about the highest added value element and do no harm to the environment. Not a lot of use to most locals I admit but that is more of a reflection on the locals in many ways.; 22/12/10 11:13 am
Anonymous said...: I think it is worth adding that concern for the death of Swanage may be excessive. It is consistently placed in the top ten of British resorts and in the top 5 or 6 or small ones along with Tenby and Whitby. I can think of a lot of places that are a lot worse. It does not attract vast amounts of regeneration money for the simple reason that other places are a great deal worse. Our problems are more to do with concerns about inappropriate development than no development.; 22/12/10 12:39 pm
Anonymous said...: Sorry this is a serial posting. I realised that it seems strange to discuss whether Swanage is fading away in a thread started by someone concerned that too many houses may be built here. If PDC had encountered a complete lack of interest on the part of landowners in developing their land I could understand it. How can it be dying and overdeveloped at the same time?; 22/12/10 4:34 pm
Anonymous said...: Overdevelped with market housing and flats that we don't need.; 8/1/11 8:58 pm

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)