<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Urgent &#8211; Next Phase (Development)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/news/urgent-next-phase/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/news/urgent-next-phase/</link>
	<description>Community blog for residents of Kingsway Village, BY residents of Kingsway Village, Gloucestershire.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:56:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hank</title>
		<link>http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/news/urgent-next-phase/#comment-1534</link>
		<dc:creator>Hank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:20:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/?p=1267#comment-1534</guid>
		<description>Hi HM

I wont be able to go.
All I know is that the meeting starts at 6pm and is in committee room 1.
I had an email giving me these details as I objected to the application.

H</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi HM</p>
<p>I wont be able to go.<br />
All I know is that the meeting starts at 6pm and is in committee room 1.<br />
I had an email giving me these details as I objected to the application.</p>
<p>H</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: holbeach miserable</title>
		<link>http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/news/urgent-next-phase/#comment-1529</link>
		<dc:creator>holbeach miserable</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:15:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/?p=1267#comment-1529</guid>
		<description>Hank,

Are you going?

I may also make an appearance and voice my own concerns, do you have details of the time of the review?

regards

HM</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hank,</p>
<p>Are you going?</p>
<p>I may also make an appearance and voice my own concerns, do you have details of the time of the review?</p>
<p>regards</p>
<p>HM</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hank</title>
		<link>http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/news/urgent-next-phase/#comment-1517</link>
		<dc:creator>Hank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:45:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/?p=1267#comment-1517</guid>
		<description>I recently received notification that planning application 08/01552/REM is due to be considered on 7 July at 6pm, is anyone going along to speak?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I recently received notification that planning application 08/01552/REM is due to be considered on 7 July at 6pm, is anyone going along to speak?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baz_k</title>
		<link>http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/news/urgent-next-phase/#comment-1295</link>
		<dc:creator>Baz_k</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:27:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/?p=1267#comment-1295</guid>
		<description>I also believe you can submit comments online too, so if you don&#039;t want to waste a stamp.

The only other comment I would make is that, the rise in Social Housing numbers (taking Blanky42&#039;s counting) will lead to the estate being completed sooner and hitting the targets for things like the Local Centre etc to be built.  If we go down the road of objecting on these grounds then the estate will stay as it is until the economy recovers, so you&#039;re looking at least until 2010/11ish... That may not be a problem, I&#039;m just highlighting it.  

The other thing is that a lot of the houses are being bought and then let out to private tenants. Whilst this is not a bad thing either, at least with Social Housing, it is easy to complain to a Housing Association (as Blanky42 has pointed out) and you get action, you might not get such quick action of a private landlord.  

As Blanky42 says, any issues are being caused by a minority and we should ensure this minority is highlighted to the relevent people, however the Majority are fine and this is the important thing.  

I have to say, I live on Thatcham Ave and I find it great, very little noise or problems like that.  I have good neighbours and am getting to know others on the estate too.  My wife and I are even encouraging our friends to move here. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I also believe you can submit comments online too, so if you don&#8217;t want to waste a stamp.</p>
<p>The only other comment I would make is that, the rise in Social Housing numbers (taking Blanky42&#8242;s counting) will lead to the estate being completed sooner and hitting the targets for things like the Local Centre etc to be built.  If we go down the road of objecting on these grounds then the estate will stay as it is until the economy recovers, so you&#8217;re looking at least until 2010/11ish&#8230; That may not be a problem, I&#8217;m just highlighting it.  </p>
<p>The other thing is that a lot of the houses are being bought and then let out to private tenants. Whilst this is not a bad thing either, at least with Social Housing, it is easy to complain to a Housing Association (as Blanky42 has pointed out) and you get action, you might not get such quick action of a private landlord.  </p>
<p>As Blanky42 says, any issues are being caused by a minority and we should ensure this minority is highlighted to the relevent people, however the Majority are fine and this is the important thing.  </p>
<p>I have to say, I live on Thatcham Ave and I find it great, very little noise or problems like that.  I have good neighbours and am getting to know others on the estate too.  My wife and I are even encouraging our friends to move here. <img src='http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: blanky42</title>
		<link>http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/news/urgent-next-phase/#comment-1294</link>
		<dc:creator>blanky42</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:27:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/?p=1267#comment-1294</guid>
		<description>I have carefully considered application 08/01552/REM by comparison with the original application 06/01155/REM. The &quot;Schedule Of Accommodation&quot; on the new application does not include all housing so distorts the overall numbers. At first glance the numbers seem OK. However, if you sit down with the old and new plans and count the actual houses you will see that on the Persimmon B1 site originally 27 houses and 9 apartments (25%) were &quot;social&quot; but under the new proposals this increases to 47 houses and 9 apartments (40%). Low cost housing remains at 7 houses.

This is a significant increase and despite postings protesting prejudice etc we have to acknowledge there are problems - stone throwing at passing cars, property damage, abusive language - from a minority of the nearby social housing children. No, I&#039;m not mistaken as I have challenged these children and walked them, or watched them, go back to their homes. Neighbours report the same and worse incidents. Yes, this is reported to the Housing Association (who have taken action) but the end result is some, prejudiced by experience, private householders have no desire for any increase in the social housing.

Please submit any objections, quoting the planning reference,  to Gloucester City Council, Development Control, 4th Flr, Herbert Warehouse, The Docks, Gloucester, GL1 2EQ. 

I understand the deadline for objections is 2 April 2009.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have carefully considered application 08/01552/REM by comparison with the original application 06/01155/REM. The &#8220;Schedule Of Accommodation&#8221; on the new application does not include all housing so distorts the overall numbers. At first glance the numbers seem OK. However, if you sit down with the old and new plans and count the actual houses you will see that on the Persimmon B1 site originally 27 houses and 9 apartments (25%) were &#8220;social&#8221; but under the new proposals this increases to 47 houses and 9 apartments (40%). Low cost housing remains at 7 houses.</p>
<p>This is a significant increase and despite postings protesting prejudice etc we have to acknowledge there are problems &#8211; stone throwing at passing cars, property damage, abusive language &#8211; from a minority of the nearby social housing children. No, I&#8217;m not mistaken as I have challenged these children and walked them, or watched them, go back to their homes. Neighbours report the same and worse incidents. Yes, this is reported to the Housing Association (who have taken action) but the end result is some, prejudiced by experience, private householders have no desire for any increase in the social housing.</p>
<p>Please submit any objections, quoting the planning reference,  to Gloucester City Council, Development Control, 4th Flr, Herbert Warehouse, The Docks, Gloucester, GL1 2EQ. </p>
<p>I understand the deadline for objections is 2 April 2009.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baz_k</title>
		<link>http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/news/urgent-next-phase/#comment-1290</link>
		<dc:creator>Baz_k</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Mar 2009 18:09:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kingsway-villagers.co.uk/?p=1267#comment-1290</guid>
		<description>On the assumption that we are looking at application 08/01552/REM then Julian&#039;s Social housing figures are inaccurate.  The total number of houses is 82.  60 of these are for open market and 20 are for social housing.  Its been a while since I was at school, but I&#039;m pretty sure 20 is not 50% of 82.

However, there does not seem to be as much parking as there could be.  But there is more than what is currently in the village.  

Julian does raise a good point, we do need to keep an eye on these applications and whilst the website isn&#039;t the easiest to look at, most of the Kingsway applications can be found to have an ending of /REM and thus makes it easier to search.  And you can comment online.  

My overall view is that the proposals are no worse than was already applied for, and nowhere near as bad as made out in the original post, however, please do look and see for yourself, I could be looking at the wrong application (hence why I have cited my references).  Or it could just be election time soon.....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On the assumption that we are looking at application 08/01552/REM then Julian&#8217;s Social housing figures are inaccurate.  The total number of houses is 82.  60 of these are for open market and 20 are for social housing.  Its been a while since I was at school, but I&#8217;m pretty sure 20 is not 50% of 82.</p>
<p>However, there does not seem to be as much parking as there could be.  But there is more than what is currently in the village.  </p>
<p>Julian does raise a good point, we do need to keep an eye on these applications and whilst the website isn&#8217;t the easiest to look at, most of the Kingsway applications can be found to have an ending of /REM and thus makes it easier to search.  And you can comment online.  </p>
<p>My overall view is that the proposals are no worse than was already applied for, and nowhere near as bad as made out in the original post, however, please do look and see for yourself, I could be looking at the wrong application (hence why I have cited my references).  Or it could just be election time soon&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.524 seconds -->

