Today's most viewed
'Outskirts of Swindon can't cope with new homes'
CENTRAL Swindon should be the town's new housing hub, not green fields on its outskirts.
So says the Council For The Protection of Rural England.
It is lobbying the town's MPs to get them to back a drive to slash the number of new homes built in Swindon by Government order.
Charmian Spickernell, the chairman of the CPRE's North Wiltshire group, said: "There needs to be a major investment in water supplies, sewerage and public transport to support the proposed increase of 36,000 more houses in Swindon and an additional 13,000 new homes in the surrounding areas.
"Already there are instances of severe sewage overflow; the existing infrastructure cannot cope.
"It is time the Government listened to our concerns over building in the flood plains, for the protection of Coate Water, and for maintaining the separate identities of Swindon's neighbouring communities.
"Expansion outwards has left a dead centre and a fall in the economy, the need now is to support the move for regeneration within Swindon itself."
Under the Regional Spatial Strategy, Swindon has to supply 36,000 new houses by 2026.
Swindon Council has already told Government it has major worries that it does not have enough funding to provide infrastructure, such as roads, schools and public buildings for planned projects.
Now the CPRE has begun lobbying MPs to get the town's housing total reduced by the Government.
And it is calling on members of the public to send their thoughts on the plans to the Government Office For The South West.
"If we don't make our voices heard now it will be too late," said Mrs Spickernell.
"This summer is the last chance for people to let their MPs know what they feel about housing development before housing levels are set for every district in the south west for the next 20 years."
To see details of the Regional Spatial Strategy, and comment on the plan, visit the website at www.gosw.gov.uk.
7:50am Wednesday 14th May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: H, Up the Hill on 8:21am Wed 14 May 08
So lets build 35000 houses in the town centre. I think not somehow. Soapbox
So lets build 35000 houses in the town centre. I think not somehow. Soapbox
Posted by: Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon on 8:23am Wed 14 May 08
Having look for the documents the problem as always is there are a lot of well meaning words but not a lot of specifics. I was only talking yesterday to the Parish Clerk about the plans for our Parish, and despite the fact we will it seems get more houses than originally agreed, at this point we have no real idea where. This sadly seems typical of Government consultation, give as little detail as possible and have a short deadline.
Having look for the documents the problem as always is there are a lot of well meaning words but not a lot of specifics. I was only talking yesterday to the Parish Clerk about the plans for our Parish, and despite the fact we will it seems get more houses than originally agreed, at this point we have no real idea where. This sadly seems typical of Government consultation, give as little detail as possible and have a short deadline.
Posted by: Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon on 8:23am Wed 14 May 08
Having look for the documents the problem as always is there are a lot of well meaning words but not a lot of specifics. I was only talking yesterday to the Parish Clerk about the plans for our Parish, and despite the fact we will it seems get more houses than originally agreed, at this point we have no real idea where. This sadly seems typical of Government consultation, give as little detail as possible and have a short deadline.
Having look for the documents the problem as always is there are a lot of well meaning words but not a lot of specifics. I was only talking yesterday to the Parish Clerk about the plans for our Parish, and despite the fact we will it seems get more houses than originally agreed, at this point we have no real idea where. This sadly seems typical of Government consultation, give as little detail as possible and have a short deadline.
Posted by: docklander, swindon on 8:35am Wed 14 May 08
If houses need to be built then surely the infrastructure needs to be in place prior to the start of any building commences. I am concerned with the statement in the article
"Already there are instances of severe sewage overflow; the existing infrastructure cannot cope".
Does it all still flow to Barnfield Road and then into the River Ray. I hope not.
If houses need to be built then surely the infrastructure needs to be in place prior to the start of any building commences. I am concerned with the statement in the article
"Already there are instances of severe sewage overflow; the existing infrastructure cannot cope".
Does it all still flow to Barnfield Road and then into the River Ray. I hope not.
Posted by: Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon on 8:55am Wed 14 May 08
At paragraph 4.2.3 of the Swindon HMA Sub-Regional Strategy they highlight exactly the problem the article mentions, [bold]'Further significant growth is possible if basic infrastructure can be provided in step with development and potentially serious water supply issues can be addressed.'[/bold] The report sights 36,000 houses by 2026, with a projected growth of 49'000. projections in 2003 were 10,000 less.
At paragraph 4.2.3 of the Swindon HMA Sub-Regional Strategy they highlight exactly the problem the article mentions,
'Further significant growth is possible if basic infrastructure can be provided in step with development and potentially serious water supply issues can be addressed.' The report sights 36,000 houses by 2026, with a projected growth of 49'000. projections in 2003 were 10,000 less.
Posted by: Polymath, Swindon on 9:13am Wed 14 May 08
Does this figure take into account the few/several thousand students that may soon be living here?
Does this figure take into account the few/several thousand students that may soon be living here?
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 9:31am Wed 14 May 08
Have these people not realised: there is nowhere in the town centre left to build houses.
Any suitable land has long since been turned into 'luxury' blocks of flats, many of which now remain unsold and even long-term unfinished as the economy worsens.
Swindon currently has a population of c.180,000.
36,000 new homes means an influx of at least 70,000 new people - where on earth are they going to come from?
Have these people not realised: there is nowhere in the town centre left to build houses.
Any suitable land has long since been turned into 'luxury' blocks of flats, many of which now remain unsold and even long-term unfinished as the economy worsens.
Swindon currently has a population of c.180,000.
36,000 new homes means an influx of at least 70,000 new people - where on earth are they going to come from?
Posted by: mkeen61267, Swindon on 9:32am Wed 14 May 08
I would not worry about any new homes for a few years as most of the builders in priory Vale have packed up and dissapeared. Something called a recession is on its way and there will be no more new houses built in Swindon for a few years. Perhaps in the meantime the local council can actually get their act together and get funding for when they restart to ensure the infrastructure is in place, which they did not do when Priory Vale was agreed.
I would not worry about any new homes for a few years as most of the builders in priory Vale have packed up and dissapeared. Something called a recession is on its way and there will be no more new houses built in Swindon for a few years. Perhaps in the meantime the local council can actually get their act together and get funding for when they restart to ensure the infrastructure is in place, which they did not do when Priory Vale was agreed.
Posted by: Tobz on 9:37am Wed 14 May 08
Hohohoho! And how does this sit mith Madam Snelogroves comments of yesterday then???
Hohohoho! And how does this sit mith Madam Snelogroves comments of yesterday then???
Posted by: Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon on 9:40am Wed 14 May 08
[bold]70,000 new people - where on earth are they going to come from?[/bold] What is 1% of 70 million, solve the riddle and you will have your answer.
70,000 new people - where on earth are they going to come from? What is 1% of 70 million, solve the riddle and you will have your answer.
Posted by: john c, swindon on 10:11am Wed 14 May 08
As long as the infrastructure is in place and the houses are of good quality I do not mind where they are built. I just hope that the increase in supply will lead to a reduction in the real cost of homes so that my children will be able to afford a home of their own when their time comes.
(I do not mind if my own home is worth a little less as a result)
As long as the infrastructure is in place and the houses are of good quality I do not mind where they are built. I just hope that the increase in supply will lead to a reduction in the real cost of homes so that my children will be able to afford a home of their own when their time comes.
(I do not mind if my own home is worth a little less as a result)
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 10:22am Wed 14 May 08
RFM, that's why I said 'where on earth' are they going to come from ;)
RFM, that's why I said 'where on earth' are they going to come from ;)
Posted by: oldtownbloke, Swindon on 10:52am Wed 14 May 08
"Now the CPRE has begun lobbying MPs to get the town's housing total reduced by the Government."
Good luck to them. If they can get our MPs to tow anything but the party line and actually serve the interests of the town, then they deserve a large medal.
"Now the CPRE has begun lobbying MPs to get the town's housing total reduced by the Government."
Good luck to them. If they can get our MPs to tow anything but the party line and actually serve the interests of the town, then they deserve a large medal.
Posted by: Al Smith, Swindon, UK on 10:56am Wed 14 May 08
Yes but the centre can't cope either! Where exactly are these new town centre homes going to go? Farringdon Rd park (with views of a stagnant pond sorry canal), perhaps demolish the Zurich offices (so 1000's have to commute to an out of town office).
Yes but the centre can't cope either! Where exactly are these new town centre homes going to go? Farringdon Rd park (with views of a stagnant pond sorry canal), perhaps demolish the Zurich offices (so 1000's have to commute to an out of town office).
Posted by: Polymath, Swindon on 10:56am Wed 14 May 08
For an example of a place which implemented an "urban growth boundary" see the following URL:
www.tinyurl.com/3obz
vh
(Portland, Oregon, USA.)
There are pros and cons to focusing growth within an existing urban area, and I suppose in the end it all comes down to individual point of view.
Swindon town centre and the suburbs can accommodate new housing on undeveloped and brownfield land. This is known as intensification. A higher population density makes public transportation more feasible and therefore (a little paradoxically) reduces congestion. However, without large urban extensions (i.e. new suburbs), the housing supply in Swindon may be overly limited and therefore house prices will remain prohibitively high.
For an example of a place which implemented an "urban growth boundary" see the following URL:
www.tinyurl.com/3obz
vh
(Portland, Oregon, USA.)
There are pros and cons to focusing growth within an existing urban area, and I suppose in the end it all comes down to individual point of view.
Swindon town centre and the suburbs can accommodate new housing on undeveloped and brownfield land. This is known as intensification. A higher population density makes public transportation more feasible and therefore (a little paradoxically) reduces congestion. However, without large urban extensions (i.e. new suburbs), the housing supply in Swindon may be overly limited and therefore house prices will remain prohibitively high.
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 11:09am Wed 14 May 08
Polymath, people seem to have quickly forgotten the horrendous problems caused by intensification.
Remember the late 60s and 70s - when high rise blocks of flats were seen as the answer to all our housing problems?
As it turns out, all intensification causes are ghettos, crime, drugs and deprived inner city areas.
Why oh why are we ignoring the lessons of recent history?
Polymath, people seem to have quickly forgotten the horrendous problems caused by intensification.
Remember the late 60s and 70s - when high rise blocks of flats were seen as the answer to all our housing problems?
As it turns out, all intensification causes are ghettos, crime, drugs and deprived inner city areas.
Why oh why are we ignoring the lessons of recent history?
Posted by: Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon on 11:10am Wed 14 May 08
Oddly reading the SHMASRS document one would be forgiven for believing that the SWRDA are basing their policy on the fact that SBC think Swindon is wonderful and will develop at a far greater rate than any other town, and thus need more houses than similar sized Boroughs.
Oddly reading the SHMASRS document one would be forgiven for believing that the SWRDA are basing their policy on the fact that SBC think Swindon is wonderful and will develop at a far greater rate than any other town, and thus need more houses than similar sized Boroughs.
Posted by: Polymath, Swindon on 11:30am Wed 14 May 08
Frontier(s). I'm not talking high-rise tower blocks (which, incidentally, often reduced population density due to laws regarding natural light that resulted in towers being spaced far apart).
I'm talking of adding an extra house here or there. It's about making better use of existing land and infrastructure. Perhaps also adding housing above local shops. It's all about infilling and/or building up when appropriate to the local community.
The council will then have more council tax income per square mile and this used more effectively for resident for amenities such as parks. Communal space where people can actually meet each other. Society has become too insular and it's causing a lot of problems.
I'd say that a lack of education and a poor economy is to blame for ghettos, crime, drugs, deprivation.
Frontier(s). I'm not talking high-rise tower blocks (which, incidentally, often reduced population density due to laws regarding natural light that resulted in towers being spaced far apart).
I'm talking of adding an extra house here or there. It's about making better use of existing land and infrastructure. Perhaps also adding housing above local shops. It's all about infilling and/or building up when appropriate to the local community.
The council will then have more council tax income per square mile and this used more effectively for resident for amenities such as parks. Communal space where people can actually meet each other. Society has become too insular and it's causing a lot of problems.
I'd say that a lack of education and a poor economy is to blame for ghettos, crime, drugs, deprivation.
Posted by: Polymath, Swindon on 11:32am Wed 14 May 08
Should have been ... "The council will then have more council tax income per square mile and this can be used more effectively for residents, for amenities such as parks."
See, my lack of education. It's criminal!
Should have been ... "The council will then have more council tax income per square mile and this can be used more effectively for residents, for amenities such as parks."
See, my lack of education. It's criminal!
Posted by: Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon on 11:34am Wed 14 May 08
[bold]I'd say that a lack of education and a poor economy is to blame for ghettos, crime, drugs, deprivation.[/bold] People create ghettos, not social policy, if it were not so every person who came from a 'challenging' background would turn to crime, drugs etc. It is too easy to blame society as a whole for those who are basic amoral. We have got in this mess because we have lost sight of this.
I'd say that a lack of education and a poor economy is to blame for ghettos, crime, drugs, deprivation. People create ghettos, not social policy, if it were not so every person who came from a 'challenging' background would turn to crime, drugs etc. It is too easy to blame society as a whole for those who are basic amoral. We have got in this mess because we have lost sight of this.
Posted by: Polymath, Swindon on 11:53am Wed 14 May 08
@ RFM. Did people or policy create the middle-class, white ghetto that is Bath?
@ RFM. Did people or policy create the middle-class, white ghetto that is Bath?
Posted by: mkeen61267, Swindon on 12:03pm Wed 14 May 08
I would rather live in a white middle class ghetto like Bath than on a sink estate full of uneducated, amoral, drug using wasters whose only ambition is to to appear on the X factor or watch TV all day and that is just the parents!!
I would rather live in a white middle class ghetto like Bath than on a sink estate full of uneducated, amoral, drug using wasters whose only ambition is to to appear on the X factor or watch TV all day and that is just the parents!!
Posted by: Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon on 12:16pm Wed 14 May 08
I think as I have previously posted I wasn't overly impressed with Bath. Anyone can cause a ghetto that was my point, amorality has no class distinction. Morally corrupt people, are morally corrupt, rich or poor.
I think as I have previously posted I wasn't overly impressed with Bath. Anyone can cause a ghetto that was my point, amorality has no class distinction. Morally corrupt people, are morally corrupt, rich or poor.
Posted by: NIGE, PURTON on 12:47pm Wed 14 May 08
[quote][bold]Robert Feal-Martinez[/bold] wrote:
[bold]70,000 new people - where on earth are they going to come from?[/bold] What is 1% of 70 million, solve the riddle and you will have your answer.[/quote] actually 1% of 70 million is 700,000
but you were close
Robert Feal-Martinez wrote:
70,000 new people - where on earth are they going to come from? What is 1% of 70 million, solve the riddle and you will have your answer.
actually 1% of 70 million is 700,000
but you were close
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 1:10pm Wed 14 May 08
[quote]The council will then have more council tax income per square mile and this used more effectively for resident for amenities such as parks.[/quote]
Oh yes, I'm sure the additional tax revenue will be used to fund... parks.
Re. my earlier point, it seems that people are keen to ignore past planning mistakes.
Forcing lots of people to live in over-developed areas has never, and will never, result in anything but the kind of places that those areas have always caused in the past.
While, of course, it is people who create ghettos, it is possible to encourage and discourage such behaviour through socio-economic policies. One aspect of that is town planning.
You rarely seen ghettos full of farmers, now do you?
The council will then have more council tax income per square mile and this used more effectively for resident for amenities such as parks.
Oh yes, I'm sure the additional tax revenue will be used to fund... parks.
Re. my earlier point, it seems that people are keen to ignore past planning mistakes.
Forcing lots of people to live in over-developed areas has never, and will never, result in anything but the kind of places that those areas have always caused in the past.
While, of course, it is people who create ghettos, it is possible to encourage and discourage such behaviour through socio-economic policies. One aspect of that is town planning.
You rarely seen ghettos full of farmers, now do you?
Posted by: Harry on 1:37pm Wed 14 May 08
I think they have a point. The centre of Swindon is very low rise and sparsely developed for a town of its size. There is a proliferation of two storey buildings that, over time, could very easily be replaced by taller buildings. I'm not talking about skyscrapers, but 3, 4 and 5 storey buildings that are common in other large towns.
It will need serious investment, but investment has been sadly lacking over recent years.
I think they have a point. The centre of Swindon is very low rise and sparsely developed for a town of its size. There is a proliferation of two storey buildings that, over time, could very easily be replaced by taller buildings. I'm not talking about skyscrapers, but 3, 4 and 5 storey buildings that are common in other large towns.
It will need serious investment, but investment has been sadly lacking over recent years.
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 1:53pm Wed 14 May 08
Harry, that would turn Swindon into even more of a disaster area.
The simple fact of the matter is that the UK, as a whole, is under-developed.
Therefore it's ludicrous to suggest a town like Swindon shouldn't spread but should instead become some built-up, town-wide inner city type area.
Many sociologists believe that flat dwelling is actually bad for human mental health - why are we seemingly hell bent on ensuring that our chickens are not kept in battery conditions and must be free range yet seem to want to force ourselves to live in the kind of conditions we wouldn't wish on animals?
Harry, that would turn Swindon into even more of a disaster area.
The simple fact of the matter is that the UK, as a whole, is under-developed.
Therefore it's ludicrous to suggest a town like Swindon shouldn't spread but should instead become some built-up, town-wide inner city type area.
Many sociologists believe that flat dwelling is actually bad for human mental health - why are we seemingly hell bent on ensuring that our chickens are not kept in battery conditions and must be free range yet seem to want to force ourselves to live in the kind of conditions we wouldn't wish on animals?
Posted by: Al Smith, Swindon, UK on 2:22pm Wed 14 May 08
Time and time again people (or rather developers) forget that British people in general do not like flats. We don't have the tradition of people growing up in flats. So whilst the average joe might be happy with a flat for a few years in their 20's.
Have a look at who owns the flats built in the centre of Swindon, I suspect it's BTL landlords and property speculators.
Time and time again people (or rather developers) forget that British people in general do not like flats. We don't have the tradition of people growing up in flats. So whilst the average joe might be happy with a flat for a few years in their 20's.
Have a look at who owns the flats built in the centre of Swindon, I suspect it's BTL landlords and property speculators.
Posted by: Al Smith, Swindon, UK on 2:47pm Wed 14 May 08
Whoops, didn't finish that sentence! So whilst the average joe might be happy with a flat for a few years in their 20's, they won't want to settle down for good in the place.
Whoops, didn't finish that sentence! So whilst the average joe might be happy with a flat for a few years in their 20's, they won't want to settle down for good in the place.
Posted by: Taxpower, Swinetown on 3:33pm Wed 14 May 08
Council For The Protection of Rural England quite happy to go to Towns, park their cars to shop there. Or maybe we should bar rurals to come to town!
Council For The Protection of Rural England quite happy to go to Towns, park their cars to shop there. Or maybe we should bar rurals to come to town!
Posted by: Grumpy, Swindon on 4:10pm Wed 14 May 08
[quote][bold]Taxpower[/bold] wrote:
Council For The Protection of Rural England quite happy to go to Towns, park their cars to shop there. Or maybe we should bar rurals to come to town![/quote] Now you're talking! Let's start with the ever moaning lot from Wootton Bassett and move on from there.
The CPRE have never been fans of any town or city developing regardless of where in the country it might be. I would be interested to look at the social structure of it's members. I suspect they wouldn't fit in with the majority of people who live and work in large towns. In an expanding population people will have to live somewhere, would the CPRE prefer them to live in expanding villages? I suspect not, so the only option is to expand towns and lessen the development in the villages surrounding the towns and cities.
Taxpower wrote:
Council For The Protection of Rural England quite happy to go to Towns, park their cars to shop there. Or maybe we should bar rurals to come to town!
Now you're talking! Let's start with the ever moaning lot from Wootton Bassett and move on from there.
The CPRE have never been fans of any town or city developing regardless of where in the country it might be. I would be interested to look at the social structure of it's members. I suspect they wouldn't fit in with the majority of people who live and work in large towns. In an expanding population people will have to live somewhere, would the CPRE prefer them to live in expanding villages? I suspect not, so the only option is to expand towns and lessen the development in the villages surrounding the towns and cities.
Posted by: Al Smith, Swindon, UK on 4:38pm Wed 14 May 08
I suspect too many of members of the CPRE are the scumbags (sorry there's no other word for them) who have helped make rural life unaffordable for those who were born and raised (or actually work) in the countryside.
They're probably the same ones who complain about the noise from tractors and the smell from muck spreading - failing to realise that the countryside is just a big industrial estate (or the agro-industrial complex as the communists called it).
Finally, they probably fall into one of these catergories:
- City/town worker (and/or spouse) who wants a nice house in the country and commutes to work everyday shops in the big town and has some bygone vision of what the countryside is
- 2nd home / holiday home owners who have some bygone vision of what the countryside is
- retired to the country who have some bygone vision of what the countryside is
Rant over...
I suspect too many of members of the CPRE are the scumbags (sorry there's no other word for them) who have helped make rural life unaffordable for those who were born and raised (or actually work) in the countryside.
They're probably the same ones who complain about the noise from tractors and the smell from muck spreading - failing to realise that the countryside is just a big industrial estate (or the agro-industrial complex as the communists called it).
Finally, they probably fall into one of these catergories:
- City/town worker (and/or spouse) who wants a nice house in the country and commutes to work everyday shops in the big town and has some bygone vision of what the countryside is
- 2nd home / holiday home owners who have some bygone vision of what the countryside is
- retired to the country who have some bygone vision of what the countryside is
Rant over...
Posted by: Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon on 9:18am Thu 15 May 08
Nige I think you missed the point.
Nige I think you missed the point.
Posted by: Intro to reality, Peartree Enclosure on 7:47pm Thu 15 May 08
For 10's of thousands of years all the water from all the rainfall in a huge area to the North West of Swindon has emptied into the River Thames. The proposal to infill these areas is incredibly short-sighted. There is an area of land near this enclosure that has been a 'sponge or filter' for rainwater for thousands of years, it passes through it slowly and generally allows the water to travel slowly to its outfall.If the gov/council decides that it is allright to fill these areas with roofs and roads, so be it.
However,unless,a huge amount of drainage infrastructure is built, Cricklade and its envirions will be under water at times of heavy rain. The River Thames developed its pathway over thousands of years to support and allow the passage of normal rainfall, once again we are changing this and expecting nature to cope. If our great myopic councils/government wish to continue with their strategies for building, so be it. I hope they have enough helicopters/tents/em
ergency equipment etc. to help the populace when it happens.
For 10's of thousands of years all the water from all the rainfall in a huge area to the North West of Swindon has emptied into the River Thames. The proposal to infill these areas is incredibly short-sighted. There is an area of land near this enclosure that has been a 'sponge or filter' for rainwater for thousands of years, it passes through it slowly and generally allows the water to travel slowly to its outfall.If the gov/council decides that it is allright to fill these areas with roofs and roads, so be it.
However,unless,a huge amount of drainage infrastructure is built, Cricklade and its envirions will be under water at times of heavy rain. The River Thames developed its pathway over thousands of years to support and allow the passage of normal rainfall, once again we are changing this and expecting nature to cope. If our great myopic councils/government wish to continue with their strategies for building, so be it. I hope they have enough helicopters/tents/em
ergency equipment etc. to help the populace when it happens.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
