Jump to content

Sha

Members
  • Posts

    1,070
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    48

Everything posted by Sha

  1. Scammers are sending emails pretending to be from Morrisons, Tesco's and possibly other supermarkets ! The one supposedly from Morrisons says they are giving 5,000 extra store points with each shop this weekend. Readers are instructed to 'click to verify'. Do not click. Morrisons has confirmed it is a scam and said they and Tescos have received a number of calls from customers who have received these emails.
  2. This is a general election to elect the future Prime Minister. Overseeing Brexit will be just part of the role of the chosen candidate.
  3. Getting back to the topic. My question would be; "Why are all political parties so secretive about what the 'Northern Powerhouse' project really is and how safe is EMMA?" The answer to this will be important and not just to residents of S. Warrington who live on the doorstep of the Daresbury demon - because if EMMA 'blows her top' all of the North West and beyond will be affected!
  4. If people are voting on national policy then government housing policy and legislation re greenbelt and green field land will certainly be a consideration. Most people will base their decisions on how they think 'national policy' will eventually effect them personally. The old, disabled & sick will obviously be especially concerned with protection of the National Health, low paid, unskilled workers depending on what industry they are in may be mostly concerned about increasing immigration possibly leading to even lower wages. For people with well paid stable careers, who are living in £500,000+ houses in leafy urban areas, the threat of losing what they have worked for and the prospect of ending up with negative equity will naturally be a priority concern.
  5. I wouldn't say that South Warrington is a 'safe seat'. The proposed mass housing developments on Appleton & Grappenhall green fields are currently the most important issue that has affected these areas in decades. The fact the Tory government has made it easier for developers to encroach on the green belt and use increasingly more greenfield sites for housing will not be a vote catcher for David Mowatt. Add to that the fact he appears to be sitting on his *** and doing nothing to help the people he is paid to represent - starkly in comparison to Helen Jones N. Warrington who puts up a fight for green fields in her constituency. But, on saying that......the other candidates seem also to be sitting on their ***** in relation to this. So are any of these individuals worth voting for?
  6. The candidates have been chosen - has anybody seen or heard anything from them yet? South Warrington, I haven't, and as there is such an uproar over the mass planned developments on greenfield sites - without so much as a peep from any of the candidates - I can't say that I am in the least bit aspired.
  7. Sha

    Deputy PCC

    Wow! (or ouch! - depending on whose reading). And all without stopping for breath! The lady of the constant erms might benefit from some coaching from you to aid her in her side-line public speaking post.
  8. Confused52, My comment was on your description of HACA as 'the most responsible developer'. You say you 'approach the subject without prejudice', - perhaps also without much knowledge? Re Bewsey Old Hall. The 'constraints' were lifted and the Hall which should have merited 'specialist building' works was in effect 'gutted and stuffed'! Whilst HACA - who supposedly are to promote social/affordable housing turned down the offer of a housing association to build family homes and instead chose yuppie type apartments as their 'enabling development' - which looked like rabbit hutches on stilts and totally ruined the setting of the Hall. There was no proper consideration for wildlife in the plans and the inspector forced them to delay developments until bat roosts had been built. Incidentally, this didn't solve the problem of the bats as they wouldn't settle in the new roosts and it wasn't until after an unfortunate arson attack on the farmhouse part of the Hall where the bats roosted that building finally went ahead. Personally, I would have expected a 'responsible developer' who stated they were paying £25k per year on security to have been able to prevent such an incident. I also would have expected them to try hard to supply the type of affordable housing which was needed most in the area - how far they went in any effort to do this I could not fathom as details on their procurement procedure were refused. - so not exactly 'open & transparent' either! You say " large housing developments pushed by them are generally better designed than those by Miller or Wilson/Barratt etc." Try googling Bloor Homes - there's quite a number of negative write ups from people who have bought homes from them. So I don't really agree with your statement, however I think your choice of the word 'pushed' is interesting! When you emphasize that you are 'without prejudice', it appears you are suggesting that I am prejudiced. I admit that I am, but only due to knowledge of their past workings, some of which I believe to have been detrimental to our town. Under their previous names of Commission for New Town and English Partnerships they, in my opinion, failed to deliver the benefits which were supposed to result from the 'New Towns' project - sustainable communities where people could live and work with reduced need to travel to work, with pleasant surroundings and good community facilities where people would enjoy to live. Doesn't sound much like Warrington does it? South side of the town are large dormitory estates for people who, lacking high paid employment opportunities in Warrington travel long distances to work in surrounding cities. North side of the town people travel from outlying areas to work in poorer paid employment of which there are increasing numbers of opportunities without sufficient affordable housing to support the workers needed. The cultural contributions promised to the town never materialised, Walton Hall and Bewsey Old Hall were supposed to become heritage/Arts centres. Due to neglect and refusal of the promised money Walton Hall fell into disrepair a large section of it had to be demolished in the 1970's, the sad fate of Bewsey Old Hall has already been mentioned. Peel Hall was sold off to Satnam etc. etc. Some of the estates built by Commission for New Town were decent housing with generous open space but considering the money available to CNT at the time it would have been a scandal if they weren't. South Warrington didn't do so very well with regards to infrastructure and to this day the promised roads, medical and community facilities have not materialised and to add insult to injury they are now trying to build even more housing whilst attempting to side-step their obligations to provide basic infrastructure.! HACA is certainly not what I would describe as "the most responsible developer"!
  9. The genetic line of millions of people alive in 1940 were cut off before 1945! Perhaps to ensure survival negotiation would be the most sensible.
  10. Gosh Sid, no wonder you have to 'try' to get to sleep! Perhaps counting sheep might be more effective!
  11. "the most responsible developer" Confused52 are you confused, deluded or do have links with them? Bewsey Old Hall, a first example that springs to mind.
  12. Why not just wave them goodbye? What do we need with a failing store selling ill-fitting clothes?
  13. Confused52 Why do you suppose that HCA are "preferring to seek planning consent under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (England and Wales) Act 1990" Do you think it could be anything to do with the fact that the original agreement as 'Development Corporation under the New Town Act' included details of the infrastructure that they were to provide should it become necessary to develop this land? Infrastructure such as the Howshoots Link and the South Warrington Distributor road, additional crossing over the Ship Canal, community facilities including shops a medial centre additional classrooms etc. etc. etc. Their 'deemed consent' goes hand in hand with the original infrastructure obligations which also remain as 'full material considerations'. As is also the fact that this land was meant to be 'held in reserve'. Their preference to seek planning permission under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 are an attempt to get out of their obligations, as is the splitting of these sites. As a 'guardian' of public land one would expect the HCA to be setting an example in ethics and not behaving like a wily developer. As I see it HCA are treading a very shaky path and so too are Warrington planners.
  14. A poster on the News page says the protesters are not objecting to development so long as the infrastructure is in place. Whilst this is the stance of Appleton's councillors it doesn't really reflect the views of the local population. I've copied my reply on here to save me writing out the same points again. Mark Eltringham on 26th April 2017 8:49 pm 8:49 pm They’re not objecting to the homes, they’re arguing that the infrastructure needs to be improved to make them work. …………………………………….. Not quite right Mark, most protesters don't want any more housing on what remains of Appleton/Grappenhall's green fields but they are being led to believe by local Lib Dem councillor 'campaigners' that this land has been 'predestined' to be developed and that it is not worth objecting to the proposed developments and thus the best they can strive for is to secure adequate infrastructure. This is utter baloney! These areas were classed 'strategic development' sites - only to be used for development if there were no other areas available to enable the housing targets to be met. Since Satnam's challenge to the planning dept's cocked up long term plans 'strategic development' classifications have been removed. However, this does not change the fact that this is green land and should still be considered for development secondary to brownfield etc. Warrington needs lower cost, affordable housing and not more 4/5 bedroom 'aspirational' 500k residences and there is more than enough land available elsewhere - Arpley Meadows, Omega, etc etc where housing developments would be beneficial. Warrington planning dept have been allowing development vastly over target for years so that to fulfil the housing quota to 2027 we should only have to be building under 400 units per year. Now the cumulative calculation slate has been wiped clean and the past overdevelopment no longer applies to the target figures, so we do have to supply a higher quota per year. Whatever, there are plenty of other sites which should be considered before green land is destroyed. The last round of developments in Appleton/Grappenhall were allowed to be completed without the infrastructure to properly support them. This infrastructure should be put in place now but without us being blackmailed into accepting any further housing. What people should be protesting about is a planning dept not fit for purpose, a council that gives money to housing associations to build affordable homes outside of our borough but most of all about misleading political careerists.
  15. I've also been to meetings where the chambers,back room, and foyer were jam-packed and even with people standing outside on the balcony and steps in foul weather - which were not cancelled. Whatever, the delay will give the Lib Dem councillors more time to think of something to say - only registering to speak by the skin of their teeth didn't give the impression they would be well prepared, it should also give Judith Wheeler time to arrange a substitute. Plus a repeat 'performance' and at a bigger venue will give them more publicity! I heard the chairman cited H&S reasons, so maybe rules have tightened up more recently.
  16. With less than 24hrs before the meeting Judith Wheeler & Co managed to get requests to speak in. Wow! what commitment! It will be interesting to hear what they have to say and more interesting to see what they don't!
  17. I'm sure Dan's a great guy and committed to the town but unfortunately it won't be him who makes any major decisions. The £multimillion question is ....what kind of tin pot tack are they going to throw up to blight our skyline under the excuse of progressing this bid and what public services are going to be cut to pay for it?
  18. I agree Dizzy, Perth looks lovely, and makes me want to go there too! But, do any of you honestly believe that this competition really has anything at all to do with culture? In these days of 'fake austerity' it seems to me like nothing more than an excuse for pouring public money into developer's pockets. Check out how much previous contestants have spent on building 'cultural' venues in order to be a 'contestant', then check how many of these venues have become money draining white elephants only to lie empty or be converted to cheap offices etc. WBC has for years allowed its built heritage to be destroyed, have employed a 'regeneration officer' infamously renown for destroying precious roman heritage in Chester and wouldn't know what 'culture' was if it smacked them in the face. They have embarked upon a town centre regeneration programme that CABE actively criticized and refused to support, whilst the beautiful Victorian Bridge St which could have been the town's best tourist attraction has been left to rot. They have allowed a town centre nightlife of drugs, drink and violence to flourish, have allowed the ancient home of the first Lord of Warrington to be converted into yuppie apartments and but for mass public outrage would have sold off Walton Hall and Gardens to become a 'boutique hotel'. etc. etc. etc. Notably, they were recently voted worst in the country for culture. Yet despite all this I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were well placed in, or even won, this farce of a competition, because I think the real criteria is how much profit the contestants can generate for the developer friends of this greedy, materialistic government.
  19. A lot of people shop online these days but most people I know 'shop around' online then once they've found a few things they are interested in they go to the shop and check out the quality and fit - who wants to drive all the way to out of town locations just on the off-chance they might find something? M&S has never really been that popular with the younger set and in recent years popularity has dropped, not necessarily because of quality but 'fit'. Their suppliers seem to be cutting from ancient or asian patterns but people in Europe are now taller, more angular etc. Whatever, 'going shopping' is more for the inclusion of the social aspect and like your wife Geoff people will go to places which are pleasant to visit. You are right to ask " what sort of message does this send out that M&S are leaving the Town Centre?" I think we all know the answer to that!
  20. South Warrington Lib Dem's have a 'campaign' on Facebook to protest against the proposed developments at Appleton Cross (planning application number 2017/29930) and Grappenhall (planning application number 2017/29929). The Lib Dems have aided developers set the infrastructure in place in anticipation of these developments by supplying 100 extra pupil places at Stockton Heath Primary - it was the Lib Dem administration that overturned the original decision not to demolish and rebuild the old school - despite the fact that there were already 900 surplus primary places within a 2 mile radius. Stockton Heath Village has been 're-imaged' - more updated infrastructure in place and a 'selling point'. Also, an attempt was made by Lib Dem Councillor's to have a medical centre built on the open space/playing fields Bridge Lane - which if it hadn't been opposed by local residents would have meant the public paying the costs and enabled HCA's developers to get out of including one in these proposals. Also note, that with just one day to go before the development control meeting no-one from this so called 'campaign group' has yet registered to speak against either of these applications and Judith Wheeler, so called, 'leader of the campaign', who due to her involvement will not be able to vote, has not up to yet arranged a substitution for her seat on the development control committee! What a farce! this 'campaign' looks to be nothing other than a publicity stunt by political careerists! It will be interesting to see whether any 'opposition' they put up is actually relevant!
  21. Sha

    Happy Easter

    Happy Easter! hope you all have a lovely weekend!
  22. "It's been around since Muhammad" but only rears it's head periodically, by those who find it useful decide to stir up hatred for their own ends and means. So when will the current uprising end -- when the US / Israeli partnership have achieved their goals of ethnic cleansing in Syria & created a greater Israel?
  23. It's downright ridiculous charging people for parking at a hospital especially when a private company is getting the profit, how much does Warrington Hospital get out of this arrangement?
  24. WHO set the housing targets in the core strategy which were so easily challenged through the courts?
  25. It wouldn't surprise me either Sid. The fact they didn't put up a fight might mean they are saving their efforts until a later date. What developer would just sit back and let £ multi-millions drift away? What's most crucial here are the grounds given for refusal and how they are worded. It's one thing refusing an application to appease the public - the real commitment to refusal is ensuring that it's refused on solid grounds. Any appeal can only appeal the grounds given for refusal and sometimes the real solid grounds are the ones not stated and which therefore cannot be used later. Weak grounds make for an easy appeal!
×
×
  • Create New...