Housing plan 'will ruin our community'

Gazette: Housing plan 'will ruin our community' Housing plan 'will ruin our community'

RESIDENTS say their lives will be ruined if plans for 50 homes on Colchester’s Gas Rec playing fields go ahead.

Developer Denis Diggin said the flats and houses, off Bromley Road, will secure the future of Gas Recreation Football Club and the 8th Colchester Scouts.

One of the two football pitches would be retained and a clubhouse, Scout hut, astroturf training pitch and drop-off area for Roach Vale Primary School are included in the plans.

Homeowners in Salary Close, which would be used as the entrance to the development, say the plans will ruin their community.

The group Save Our Salary Close has been set up to protest against the proposals. Spokesman Zena Smart said: “This area can’t cope with the increased traffic this development would produce.

“It would ruin our lives and a big concern."

READ TODAY'S GAZETTE FOR THE FULL STORY 

Comments (15)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:36pm Tue 28 Jan 14

angryman!!! says...

With 1,000s of homes being built the council has to draw a line. This land was brought with no planning convent. He now turns around trying to be god like saying I will leave half of it undeveloped! How about no, we will have it all left. If the council Agrees to this then the flood gates are open
With 1,000s of homes being built the council has to draw a line. This land was brought with no planning convent. He now turns around trying to be god like saying I will leave half of it undeveloped! How about no, we will have it all left. If the council Agrees to this then the flood gates are open angryman!!!
  • Score: 8

12:48pm Tue 28 Jan 14

zt00013 says...

angryman!!! wrote:
With 1,000s of homes being built the council has to draw a line. This land was brought with no planning convent. He now turns around trying to be god like saying I will leave half of it undeveloped! How about no, we will have it all left. If the council Agrees to this then the flood gates are open
We are not building enough houses. A simple truth which eludes you and every other fanatical nimby fool on this site.
[quote][p][bold]angryman!!![/bold] wrote: With 1,000s of homes being built the council has to draw a line. This land was brought with no planning convent. He now turns around trying to be god like saying I will leave half of it undeveloped! How about no, we will have it all left. If the council Agrees to this then the flood gates are open[/p][/quote]We are not building enough houses. A simple truth which eludes you and every other fanatical nimby fool on this site. zt00013
  • Score: -3

12:54pm Tue 28 Jan 14

Boris says...

Last week, we were told that the Dishland (Mr Diggin's) scheme had the backing of residents. This was on the basis of comments by spokesmen for two local residents' associations. I wrote at the time:
"All very well to report the views of the chairs of residents' associations, but what about ordinary residents? And what about the people involved with the football club? Do they all agree with the Dishland project?
It is up to them. if they don't like it, they should write in and object to the planning permission being granted."
Predictably, we now have at least one local resident, with her new group, who are opposed.
It is up to these people to write in to the planners and comment on the plans,. for or against. This is much more important than declarations to this newspaper.
Last week, we were told that the Dishland (Mr Diggin's) scheme had the backing of residents. This was on the basis of comments by spokesmen for two local residents' associations. I wrote at the time: "All very well to report the views of the chairs of residents' associations, but what about ordinary residents? And what about the people involved with the football club? Do they all agree with the Dishland project? It is up to them. if they don't like it, they should write in and object to the planning permission being granted." Predictably, we now have at least one local resident, with her new group, who are opposed. It is up to these people to write in to the planners and comment on the plans,. for or against. This is much more important than declarations to this newspaper. Boris
  • Score: 1

1:01pm Tue 28 Jan 14

Jack222 says...

Get a sense of proportion - some houses which we desperately need means 'lives will be ruined' - try Syria for ruined lives!

It's a NIMBY complaint, ignore it.
Get a sense of proportion - some houses which we desperately need means 'lives will be ruined' - try Syria for ruined lives! It's a NIMBY complaint, ignore it. Jack222
  • Score: -1

1:03pm Tue 28 Jan 14

Boris says...

zt00013 wrote:
angryman!!! wrote:
With 1,000s of homes being built the council has to draw a line. This land was brought with no planning convent. He now turns around trying to be god like saying I will leave half of it undeveloped! How about no, we will have it all left. If the council Agrees to this then the flood gates are open
We are not building enough houses. A simple truth which eludes you and every other fanatical nimby fool on this site.
I am not going to descend to zt's level of personal abuse. It is true that we need to build more houses, but they must be social housing and not upmarket private housing.
Meanwhile I agree with angryman that developers should not be surprised when they are told that no, they can't build on land designated for leisure purposes. Colchester needs plenty of football pitches, both to cater for people's need for exercise and friendly sporting contests, and to provide green lungs for the housing estates all round them.
I don't live in that part of Colchester so I am not coming down hard on one side or the other, but I'm with angryman in saying that we need to keep our football pitches. How can reducing the number of pitches from 2 to 1 be right?
[quote][p][bold]zt00013[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]angryman!!![/bold] wrote: With 1,000s of homes being built the council has to draw a line. This land was brought with no planning convent. He now turns around trying to be god like saying I will leave half of it undeveloped! How about no, we will have it all left. If the council Agrees to this then the flood gates are open[/p][/quote]We are not building enough houses. A simple truth which eludes you and every other fanatical nimby fool on this site.[/p][/quote]I am not going to descend to zt's level of personal abuse. It is true that we need to build more houses, but they must be social housing and not upmarket private housing. Meanwhile I agree with angryman that developers should not be surprised when they are told that no, they can't build on land designated for leisure purposes. Colchester needs plenty of football pitches, both to cater for people's need for exercise and friendly sporting contests, and to provide green lungs for the housing estates all round them. I don't live in that part of Colchester so I am not coming down hard on one side or the other, but I'm with angryman in saying that we need to keep our football pitches. How can reducing the number of pitches from 2 to 1 be right? Boris
  • Score: 6

1:07pm Tue 28 Jan 14

Boris says...

Jack222 wrote:
Get a sense of proportion - some houses which we desperately need means 'lives will be ruined' - try Syria for ruined lives!

It's a NIMBY complaint, ignore it.
There speaks a supporter of the property developer.
.
Sure, some people use over-the-top language. So do we all, sometimes. But let's not use that as a reason for supporting someone who is only in this to make a profit out of depriving the neighbourhood of open space.
[quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote: Get a sense of proportion - some houses which we desperately need means 'lives will be ruined' - try Syria for ruined lives! It's a NIMBY complaint, ignore it.[/p][/quote]There speaks a supporter of the property developer. . Sure, some people use over-the-top language. So do we all, sometimes. But let's not use that as a reason for supporting someone who is only in this to make a profit out of depriving the neighbourhood of open space. Boris
  • Score: 6

2:18pm Tue 28 Jan 14

cynicalsubber says...

No-one would disagree that we need a lot more homes in this country. But it's the 'where' and the 'what type' that is important. Brownfield sites should be developed before leisure facilities. Small, social housing should be built for all the singletons who will never be able to get on the inflated housing ladder. And nothing should be contemplated for anywhere in Colchester until we have decent infrastructure and new access roads in place.
No-one would disagree that we need a lot more homes in this country. But it's the 'where' and the 'what type' that is important. Brownfield sites should be developed before leisure facilities. Small, social housing should be built for all the singletons who will never be able to get on the inflated housing ladder. And nothing should be contemplated for anywhere in Colchester until we have decent infrastructure and new access roads in place. cynicalsubber
  • Score: 3

4:00pm Tue 28 Jan 14

Colonel Kurtz says...

Does not matter how much you complain. CBC has only one mission, that is to build as many new houses as it can regardless of local people concerns. The likes of John Lewis who wanted to build a store in Stanway are rejected as it might conflict with another housing estate.

That's why we are the fastest growing town in Britain.

Brown envelopes from property developers are always welcome at the Town hall.
Does not matter how much you complain. CBC has only one mission, that is to build as many new houses as it can regardless of local people concerns. The likes of John Lewis who wanted to build a store in Stanway are rejected as it might conflict with another housing estate. That's why we are the fastest growing town in Britain. Brown envelopes from property developers are always welcome at the Town hall. Colonel Kurtz
  • Score: 3

5:35pm Tue 28 Jan 14

angryman!!! says...

Zt so by that thought (limited) process we should just go about building everywhere so why not castle park, high woods, your back garden!
Yes the country needs housing but cramming them into one small part of the country around the capital is just going to cause it to so self combust!
Colchester has had more than its fair share of development and for a couple of years was the fastest growing borough in the country! Topped with huge developments at severals, mile end and the hythe plus lots of smaller developments at stanway and the garrison not include decelopments in tendering that will have huge impacts on Colchester like the proposed development around elmstead market. We need to try and preserve the little green space we have already and ensure new developments give u the best possible space.
Also the argument about Syria is childish, pathetic, yes somebody has always got it worse than you but does that mean we just except everything bad in praise that it could be worse. Get a grip you fool
Zt so by that thought (limited) process we should just go about building everywhere so why not castle park, high woods, your back garden! Yes the country needs housing but cramming them into one small part of the country around the capital is just going to cause it to so self combust! Colchester has had more than its fair share of development and for a couple of years was the fastest growing borough in the country! Topped with huge developments at severals, mile end and the hythe plus lots of smaller developments at stanway and the garrison not include decelopments in tendering that will have huge impacts on Colchester like the proposed development around elmstead market. We need to try and preserve the little green space we have already and ensure new developments give u the best possible space. Also the argument about Syria is childish, pathetic, yes somebody has always got it worse than you but does that mean we just except everything bad in praise that it could be worse. Get a grip you fool angryman!!!
  • Score: 2

12:49pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Harry.Brown says...

its tough im afraid some one above is talking about brown envelopes or greasing.
goes on all the time anyone can be bought everyone has a price?
are you telling me if i went along to any of those types and chucked a case full of cash on the floor and said i want this or that done they would go oh la di dah cant do that
rubbish.
ruin our neighbourhood or quality of life what a load of *******
its tough you will never beat the system its all about consumption and cash
stop living with rose color specs you got to get real
neil diamond......money talks! ! !
you got money
you get power
you got power
that gets you more money!
its tough im afraid some one above is talking about brown envelopes or greasing. goes on all the time anyone can be bought everyone has a price? are you telling me if i went along to any of those types and chucked a case full of cash on the floor and said i want this or that done they would go oh la di dah cant do that rubbish. ruin our neighbourhood or quality of life what a load of ******* its tough you will never beat the system its all about consumption and cash stop living with rose color specs you got to get real neil diamond......money talks! ! ! you got money you get power you got power that gets you more money! Harry.Brown
  • Score: 0

6:16pm Wed 29 Jan 14

stevedawson says...

We might be the fasted growing town.we are also becoming the most down at the heal mess.walk round our town and cringe councillors all this has happened on your watch.
We might be the fasted growing town.we are also becoming the most down at the heal mess.walk round our town and cringe councillors all this has happened on your watch. stevedawson
  • Score: 0

10:28pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Hamiltonandy says...

Would be great if developers were encouraged to built on the derelict land down by the Colne. Look at the bottom of East Hill downstream of the bridge. Then parts of the Hythe but finally a developer seems to be preparing the land at the bottom of Hythe Hill on the left before the old bridge. Remember how Brook Street was completely ignored for years but finally they started on a new development.
Would be great if developers were encouraged to built on the derelict land down by the Colne. Look at the bottom of East Hill downstream of the bridge. Then parts of the Hythe but finally a developer seems to be preparing the land at the bottom of Hythe Hill on the left before the old bridge. Remember how Brook Street was completely ignored for years but finally they started on a new development. Hamiltonandy
  • Score: 0

8:50am Thu 30 Jan 14

zena smart says...

Firstly, we were not wrong when describing the situation as 'ruin our community'. The word ruin means to destroy and it would do that. As for our lives - how long do you think I will be able to cope with monster trucks, diggers etc no more that 10 yards from my door - day in and day out. That would most certainly destroy my life as it is now. So sorry Jack 222 but life as I know it will be ruined and will never be the same. No it doesn't compare with Syria or any other war torn country but it affects me here and now. As for planning being submitted last week - NO IT HASN'T. Either it's been incorrectly submitted and rejected before it got past the front desk or Colchester Planning has forgotten to put it on the list. I think the former as the picture in the Gazette is still a very amateur one ( seem to have lost our drive, carport and garage!!!) I urge people to submit their opinions when eventually the plans are submitted (either for or against) - to give the committee a true perspective as I beilieve there are more against than for.
Firstly, we were not wrong when describing the situation as 'ruin our community'. The word ruin means to destroy and it would do that. As for our lives - how long do you think I will be able to cope with monster trucks, diggers etc no more that 10 yards from my door - day in and day out. That would most certainly destroy my life as it is now. So sorry Jack 222 but life as I know it will be ruined and will never be the same. No it doesn't compare with Syria or any other war torn country but it affects me here and now. As for planning being submitted last week - NO IT HASN'T. Either it's been incorrectly submitted and rejected before it got past the front desk or Colchester Planning has forgotten to put it on the list. I think the former as the picture in the Gazette is still a very amateur one ( seem to have lost our drive, carport and garage!!!) I urge people to submit their opinions when eventually the plans are submitted (either for or against) - to give the committee a true perspective as I beilieve there are more against than for. zena smart
  • Score: 0

11:55am Thu 30 Jan 14

zena smart says...

So I was wrong! Today we recieved a letter stating that planning had been submitted on 23rd January but it's not on the list!! lets see if I can access it.
So I was wrong! Today we recieved a letter stating that planning had been submitted on 23rd January but it's not on the list!! lets see if I can access it. zena smart
  • Score: 0

4:50pm Mon 3 Feb 14

U.T.G EDD says...

I must say that you guys that are opposed to this development surely cannot be thinking of the bigger picture! We have tried for years and years to get the council to help with the redevelopment of this site for the community to no avail! They just do not have the money! This place is run down and becoming an absolute eyesore! Not only this surely a few months of building site traffic going past your door is a small price to pay for the value this development will actually give to the community! If left as it is this place will be abandoned and who's to say what unsavory things will happen then! Only last year we had travellers turn up and camp on the football pitches I fear that if this plan doesn't go ahead then you people that are opposed to this will be kicking yourself when this site ends up being a dumping ground and a travellers site!
Be careful what you wish for!!!!
Mark gas rec
I must say that you guys that are opposed to this development surely cannot be thinking of the bigger picture! We have tried for years and years to get the council to help with the redevelopment of this site for the community to no avail! They just do not have the money! This place is run down and becoming an absolute eyesore! Not only this surely a few months of building site traffic going past your door is a small price to pay for the value this development will actually give to the community! If left as it is this place will be abandoned and who's to say what unsavory things will happen then! Only last year we had travellers turn up and camp on the football pitches I fear that if this plan doesn't go ahead then you people that are opposed to this will be kicking yourself when this site ends up being a dumping ground and a travellers site! Be careful what you wish for!!!! Mark gas rec U.T.G EDD
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree