Jump to content

Southern Area Plan Voted Through By Non-Representatives


Fossils
 Share

Recommended Posts

The final decision on the area plan is political, hence why it was approved by Tynwald. As much as they try to pretend it has nothing to do with them the decision is entirely theirs, bunch of spineless sods the lot of them.

 

 

I make no comment about Ballakilley land use, except that any development there still needs planning consent.

 

For me the main point is that the Island needs a robust and unambiguous planning policy framework and development plan worked up in consultation with the community and all interest groups. This includes area plans. Thus I would have voted for the southern area plan, and I hope a plan for Douglas and the East will be developed in less time than this plan took to develop.

 

I hope lessons will be learned from the process of developing this plan. In particular I am concerned that the community seems to feel it was not involved properly. This allegation should be investigated.

 

Also have some concerns about aspects of planning policy e.g. the various permitted development orders and planning guidance, particularly Planning & the Economy.

 

But good development is planned development with the same rules applying for everyone.

Edited by Chris Thomas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to say I was astonished - at the time - that Tynwald approved a proposal that was opposed by all the Rushen MHKs, PE, PSM + Rushen Commissioners, and the majority of the local population

 

However, they then moved on to approve the student fees proposals which were frankly daft & had produced the biggest Tynwald post-bag in recent memory - with even the Bishop voting in favour

 

I'm now further convinced that they put something in the air-conditioning to bend them all to CoMins will

 

I have often thought that when land is re-zoned like this and suddenly becomes worth hundreds of thousands an acre there should be some form of windfall tax on the landowner when they sell to a developer.

 

Maybe that tax could go some way to paying the student fees?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is not clear is, who now owns the land?

 

What is also not clear is who will own most of the houses when they are built. Will most of them simply become expensive rental properties owned by off Island companies and Individuals, and managed by local Estate Agents, as many are now. Never mind increasing Local Auth rents and damming everyone who lives in one of their properties, do something about the Private rentals. Not many of the powers that be would agree with that one I think. Where are they going to find all the buyers to live in these houses anyway. People are leaving the Island in droves, or so I believe. And how many of them will be 'affordable' [available to local 'Poor People'] anyway. Rents need sorting out all right. An investigation into 'Private Rentals' would seem a good idea. I don't think it will happen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to say I was astonished - at the time - that Tynwald approved a proposal that was opposed by all the Rushen MHKs, PE, PSM + Rushen Commissioners, and the majority of the local population

 

However, they then moved on to approve the student fees proposals which were frankly daft & had produced the biggest Tynwald post-bag in recent memory - with even the Bishop voting in favour

 

I'm now further convinced that they put something in the air-conditioning to bend them all to CoMins will

 

I have often thought that when land is re-zoned like this and suddenly becomes worth hundreds of thousands an acre there should be some form of windfall tax on the landowner when they sell to a developer.

 

Maybe that tax could go some way to paying the student fees?

 

Exactly what Peter Karran has been calling for for years, always talked down to bring in HNWI to build their mansions on green land. And we all know how much HNMI are coveted by this government party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that apart from any "Brown Envelope" involvement, this decision might well have been driven by IoMG's love of the construction industry as their stated saviour above all saviours to our current problems. Any development of the site may keep, what, 300-400 in direct work and attached industries and suppliers. The needs of the many above the views of the few-ish......?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is not clear is, who now owns the land?

 

What is also not clear is who will own most of the houses when they are built. Will most of them simply become expensive rental properties owned by off Island companies and Individuals, and managed by local Estate Agents, as many are now. Never mind increasing Local Auth rents and damming everyone who lives in one of their properties, do something about the Private rentals. Not many of the powers that be would agree with that one I think. Where are they going to find all the buyers to live in these houses anyway. People are leaving the Island in droves, or so I believe. And how many of them will be 'affordable' [available to local 'Poor People'] anyway. Rents need sorting out all right. An investigation into 'Private Rentals' would seem a good idea. I don't think it will happen

 

To be fair, bad private landlord issue is now on political agenda, and there are a couple of consultations at the moment which should lead somewhere.

 

Also Housing (Rent Control) Act 1948 does in principle give tenants the right to appeal rent and the like, although I believe there have been only 8 referrals to Rent & Rating Appeal Commissioners about rents since 2007. This process could be used more to make the market better and fairer it seems to me. Has anybody got more information about this, or direct experience?

 

But I agree other opportunities for rent-to-buy and affordable financing need to be created to increase the availability of houses.

Edited by Chris Thomas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minister David Cretney said words to the effect that he was supporting the plan but wouldn't want any harm to the area because his Grandfather lived up Surby? WTF that had to do with it I don't know. (I'll find his irrelevant words when they come on Hansard.)

 

Totally irrelevant- The real question is whether Eddie Lowey ever rambled about this land?

Edited by Moghrey Mie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is not clear is, who now owns the land?

 

What is also not clear is who will own most of the houses when they are built. Will most of them simply become expensive rental properties owned by off Island companies and Individuals, and managed by local Estate Agents, as many are now. Never mind increasing Local Auth rents and damming everyone who lives in one of their properties, do something about the Private rentals. Not many of the powers that be would agree with that one I think. Where are they going to find all the buyers to live in these houses anyway. People are leaving the Island in droves, or so I believe. And how many of them will be 'affordable' [available to local 'Poor People'] anyway. Rents need sorting out all right. An investigation into 'Private Rentals' would seem a good idea. I don't think it will happen

 

Private rent is, as it always has been, set by market forces, the government have no place getting involved in trying to set rents.

 

They can assist people to pay rent, as they do with Benefits but that is all they should be doing. What next? The government setting house prices? What we pay for clothes? Food? That has been tried in the former USSR among others, it did not really work.

 

They do have a role in ensuring that rental properties are up to standard, ie not damp ridden s*it holes but apart from that they should stay out of it.

 

Look at most things they get involved in..............they end up costing far more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minister David Cretney said words to the effect that he was supporting the plan but wouldn't want any harm to the area because his Grandfather lived up Surby? WTF that had to do with it I don't know. (I'll find his irrelevant words when they come on Hansard.)

 

Totally irrelevant- The real question is whether Eddie Lowey ever rambled about this land?

 

Hasn't Eddie rambled about everything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...