Controversial Hagley homes plan gets the go-ahead (From Stourbridge News)

Voices Of Reason says...
12:24pm Tue 8 Jan 13

Quote from one of the councillors who voted to approve.... "I do not look forward to driving on this island.... it will I am sure become known as 'Hell Island'.... a child will inevitably be injured.... stressed drivers will run the amber lights... I approve"!!

Just about sums up the amount of common sense applied to this decision

Report this post »

Respectable says...
1:31pm Tue 8 Jan 13

I live in a neighbouring village having grown up in Hagley. I commute using the local roads and motorways and will no doubt at some point experience the delights of the "Hell Island"

That said.. For Gawd sake what makes Hagley SO special ?

Housing developments are planned all over the place and the infrastructures adjust and cope. The sheer amount of noise over this one is reaching ridiculous levels.
Ok. Nobody likes change, but this really does feel like NIMBYism in it's purest form.

If they built these homes in Blakedown, Kidderminster, Bromsgrove, Pedmore, Clent etc the effect would probably be same in terms of pass through traffic. Get over it folks. I'm sure your property values won't be as severely affected as you fear.
The "good of the village arguments" are fooling nobody.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
3:54pm Tue 8 Jan 13

The only crumb of comfort in any of this is that the people of Hagley will see their house prices rise and a surge in demand for them.

If you live in a neighbouring village (clent, belbroughton, blakedown, romsley, churchill) currently within Haybridge catchment, and you own your own home, wait and watch. You are effectively out of catchment now.
It's value will plummet.

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
6:44pm Tue 8 Jan 13

Well said Voices of Reason,

What a fiasco !

Respectable

I shall be selling my house of forty years
at an enormous profit, as people realise, the only way to educate their children in Hagley, is to live there.
I shall then buy a much cheaper one in your village, as your house prices will plummet, and live a life of luxery.

Report this post »

Respectable says...
7:28pm Tue 8 Jan 13

You'll be made very welcome. So long as you don't bring mean spirited NIMBY antics with you.

Report this post »

The Villan says...
7:58pm Tue 8 Jan 13

Although I don't agree with the location of this development due to the transport infrastructure. I also don't agree with the rhetoric of Hagley residents who make disparaging remarks about neighbouring villages.

That is snobbery in it's worst form and does nothing to gain support. As for prices plummeting in neighbouring villages, that too is wishful thinking and highly unlikely.

Please stick to the facts and not what might be, and be nice.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
8:05pm Tue 8 Jan 13

These are not intended as disparaging remarks about neighbouring villages, they are intended to show the damage to them from this development and lack of consideration for the wider community that relies on Hagley - that's the point - they will be affected far more severely than Hagley itself.

If you thought otherwise then I am sorry for the mis-representation.

Report this post »

Respectable says...
8:22pm Tue 8 Jan 13

Contrary to the apparant belief here, the whole immediate area doesn,t rely on Hagley.. Jeez get over yourselves.
As for the school's comment have a look at Stourport High School, North and South Bromsgrove High Schools. All highly rated and performing well. In fact both of my children have gone through Uni having attended one of these. Seems to me there is a world outside the Hagley parish boundaries.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
8:23pm Tue 8 Jan 13

Well put Respectable and Villian ! I have been putting these points across to the protestors well before the outcome was made and have presented facts and evidence but the "good of the village" attitude was the order of the day and they failed to produce adequate reasoning evidence and facts to support any of their points. I agree change is not always welcome but needed. As for NIMBY I have said it before and still maintain that this is exactly what was being demonstrated!

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
8:38pm Tue 8 Jan 13

Of course you are correct, there is a world outside of Hagley parish boudaries.

But if you paid a premium to benefit from what's within the boundaries in terms of attending feeder schools into Haybridge or whatever it might be as many have in the surronding villages, then rightly or wrongly - it's a problem for people in those villages who feed into Hagley services.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
5:37am Wed 9 Jan 13

It appears the protestors with their 4000 signed petition, Nimby ranting and narrow mindedness has fizzled well and truly out! Good luck to those in support of the build and the future prosperity it will bring to the local area and wider communities! A brief message to those who spent all their time decrying my points, the evidence and facts prior to the decision, I wouldn't like to say "I told you so" but............I did tell you so, if only you would have listened!
Thanx for the memories guys! you know who you are..

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
8:43am Wed 9 Jan 13

Thankyou No To Cala for explaining that I was not being disparaging, merely pointing out that local villages will be affected more than Hagley. I have many friends, and relatives in our local villages, who initially bought their houses as they were in catchment for Haybridge, many of whom, I met nearly 30 years ago when my daughter attended Haybridge. I am saddened by the thought that these villages will be excluded. Over the years our children have integrated, bringing our communities closer together, for the benefit of all.
I SHALL be moving out of Hagley where I have lived all my life, due entirely to traffic chaos, pollution and over development.

Report this post »

dudley old boy says...
9:40am Wed 9 Jan 13

At least the membership at the country club will increase

Report this post »

Respectable says...
10:15am Wed 9 Jan 13

carolynw1946 wrote:
Thankyou No To Cala for explaining that I was not being disparaging, merely pointing out that local villages will be affected more than Hagley. I have many friends, and relatives in our local villages, who initially bought their houses as they were in catchment for Haybridge, many of whom, I met nearly 30 years ago when my daughter attended Haybridge. I am saddened by the thought that these villages will be excluded. Over the years our children have integrated, bringing our communities closer together, for the benefit of all.
I SHALL be moving out of Hagley where I have lived all my life, due entirely to traffic chaos, pollution and over development.

I wish you the very best of luck as you search for a new utopia free from change and / or progress.

As a thought. How many people remember Round Oak before it became Merry Hill Shopping Centre and Rover Longbridge before the collapse of Rover Group ? Funny how communities and environments stabilise over time. Look before you leap !

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
3:51pm Wed 9 Jan 13

Both excellent examples of regeneration and positive planning to benefit the local communities.

This is development is not.

In fact there are regeneration opportunities in Hagley which have been ignored in favour this most unsuitable location.

One being the Old Prince of Wales site which could have been developed years ago and still it lays to waste after it's compulsorily purchase.

This site is ideally located to minimise the impact on the Island with two access points which would allow traffic flow in 3 directions without the need to use of the main Hagley Island.

Hagley Hall Mews remains long term empty, how great it would be if this could be turned into affordable housing.

Report this post »

frandroid says...
4:37pm Wed 9 Jan 13

I think the issue at hand for residents of Hagley and neighbouring villages is the fact that planning system is so flawed and the way planning meetings are run is truly alarming and unprofessional.

A lot of the evidence at this planning meeting was mumbled, incoherent and unintelligent and flawed. I can cite hundreds of examples from the grainy, flawed pictorial evidence to the hostile, patronising remarks of some council representatives and councillors. Only Councillor Baxter and Councillor Jones have any dignity and intelligence in my eyes for raising salient planning points and not using garbled rhetoric. They are brave, dignified and have earnt their constituents respect. I'm not even sure who the other councillors were as they weren't named and the council unfortunately has neglected to keep a record. I think they should have to say who they are, what their position is and their credentials before they make decisions of this importance. Then the public could keep track of what they were up to and lobby them accordingly. They are our public servants but some act like demi-gods as though they have the right to do as they like. The council are as bad - they ignored flawed evidence and flouted regulations such as the EU regulations that they should have provided an air quality action plan. Many residents' health is suffering as a result of the main road pollution and they are trying to build a six arm roundabout with walkways and cycleways across and encourage more pedestrians through an area where there are already worrying levels of Nitrogen Dioxide and who knows how many times above the legal limit of Particulate Matter. The UK's leading expert on environmental health Professor Frank Kelly states that this site should not go ahead as it is next to an AQMA which is not being managed properly. An action plan has not been presented and levels are still rising. If you live nearby and you aren't worried you should be as increased pollution due to the stopping and starting of cars at the signalised roundabout will cause pollution to increase exponentially. If you don't care about people's health, particularly that of young children who are the most at risk then there is nothing more I can say, your ears must be as deaf as the 10 council members who had already made up their minds to act out a lengthy pathetic piece of theatre and pretend it was democracy.

I think the issue at hand for residents of Hagley and neighbouring villages is the fact that planning system is so flawed and the way planning meetings are run is truly alarming and unprofessional. A lot of the evidence at this planning meeting was mumbled, incoherent and unintelligent and flawed. I can cite hundreds of examples from the grainy, flawed pictorial evidence to the hostile, patronising remarks of some council representatives and councillors. Only Councillor Baxter and Councillor Jones have any dignity and intelligence in my eyes for raising salient planning points and not using garbled rhetoric. They are brave, dignified and have earnt their constituents respect. I'm not even sure who the other councillors were as they weren't named and the council unfortunately has neglected to keep a record. I think they should have to say who they are, what their position is and their credentials before they make decisions of this importance. Then the public could keep track of what they were up to and lobby them accordingly. They are our public servants but some act like demi-gods as though they have the right to do as they like. The council are as bad - they ignored flawed evidence and flouted regulations such as the EU regulations that they should have provided an air quality action plan. Many residents' health is suffering as a result of the main road pollution and they are trying to build a six arm roundabout with walkways and cycleways across and encourage more pedestrians through an area where there are already worrying levels of Nitrogen Dioxide and who knows how many times above the legal limit of Particulate Matter. The UK's leading expert on environmental health Professor Frank Kelly states that this site should not go ahead as it is next to an AQMA which is not being managed properly. An action plan has not been presented and levels are still rising. If you live nearby and you aren't worried you should be as increased pollution due to the stopping and starting of cars at the signalised roundabout will cause pollution to increase exponentially. If you don't care about people's health, particularly that of young children who are the most at risk then there is nothing more I can say, your ears must be as deaf as the 10 council members who had already made up their minds to act out a lengthy pathetic piece of theatre and pretend it was democracy. frandroid

Report this post »

davidj91 says...
4:39pm Wed 9 Jan 13

Some of the NIMBY attitudes that have been displayed recently because of this has got completely over the top and out of control. Hagley isn't an isolated little paradise, it's always grown and changed and will continue to change, why shouldn't it? Many Hagley residents have shown themselves to be complete and utter snobs as well. Yes this scheme isn't perfect but the NIMBY's have failed to look at any of the positives! I wonder how these Hagley NIMBYs would react to Hagley being absorbed into Dudley Borough, something I wouldn't actually have a problem with. Come on people, Hagley will always continue to change!

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
5:03pm Wed 9 Jan 13

There are other much more suitable locations that could be developed in Hagley.

How is that resisting change and NIMBY?

Not all change is good and it shouldn't be blindly embraced as if it is.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
5:20pm Wed 9 Jan 13

As a matter of interest readers:
Newfield Road is currently grid locked for it's entire length and last night it was the same for 1.5 hours around the whole village.

Enjoy your commute through Hagley, at least we are all in it together.

I wonder why it doesn't occur to people to ask why we have congestion anywhere if the planners always get it so right and their forecasting is so reliable.

Report this post »

frandroid says...
5:27pm Wed 9 Jan 13

Carry on with the name calling if you don't have enough intelligence or knowledge to comment on the relevant facts and respond to them appropriately - go and troll somewhere else please.

I welcome discussion but only as long as people stick to the facts and can add useful knowledge or viewpoints. Calling people snobs is not really useful is it? It's quite hurtful and irritating to people that you don't actually know and may be very kind and caring for all you know about them. 5,000 or so people live in Hagley do you mean to insult us all and tar us with the same brush? I have gone door to door round the majority of areas now and as in all areas, some people are friendly and nice and some are inconsiderate and rude. We seem to luckily have a large proportion of nice community minded people but yes there are the odd ones out who are selfish and don't care about people landscape or animals and I don't wish to represent them.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
5:56pm Wed 9 Jan 13

I wouldn't worry about being called a NIMBY - it's a cheap shot.

While one group are calling others NIMBY, it's usually a good indicator that it's not in their backyard and they want to keep it that way!

Report this post »

frandroid says...
6:18pm Wed 9 Jan 13

No to cala you are right definitely a cheap shot, showing lack of imagination

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
6:57pm Wed 9 Jan 13

Thanks for letting me know Newfield Road is gridlocked, as it is every night.
I live in off Western Road and my only way out is the A491 top of Western Road, or A456 bottom of Newfield Road.
On many, many, occasions I have failed to exit onto either road, given up and gone home, I feel like a prisoner, is it any wonder I feel like moving away from this chaos.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
8:17pm Wed 9 Jan 13

Frandroid, Carolyn1946,No to cala the decision has been made you will need to embrace the changes it will bring. By the way the term NIMBY is used to describe the attitudes and behaviours of an individual or group who feel they do not have to adapt and hide behind empty rhetoric to avoid change and facilitate the greater social need usually as fear reaction to unknown facts and clearly assumptive notions of superiority. NIMBY is therfore the most accurate current term used to describe the behaviours and attitudes demonstrated here. It is not a cheap shot but an adjective, if however the term is found to be hitting a nerve perhaps its accuracy is well placed.

Report this post »

davidj91 says...
9:15pm Wed 9 Jan 13

Well said ozpat! The NIMBYs are now simply throwing their toys out of the pram because they failed to stop this getting approved, time to move on people! If you take offence at being called a NIMBY or a snob, then I say this...the truth hurts.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
9:23pm Wed 9 Jan 13

What a joke, reinventing yourself and badly at that - the sentence structure and wording is exactly the same on all your insults. Pathetic.

Report this post »

F Fish says...
12:17am Thu 10 Jan 13

The planning process with Bromsgrove DC is as flawed as it was with Wyre Forest DC when the Blakedown nurseries site was or wasn't about to become a Travellers/Gypsy site and then lo and behold Barratts get to build what some see as an inappropriate and high density mix of housing encroaching into Green Belt on an ADR.
We had lots of ignorant yawning Councillors too - apart from one local who suddenly jumped ship and supported it!
Some similarities to Hagley albeit smaller scale, but I did not see many letters from Hagley Residents about this - perhaps we failed to publicise our concerns properly.
And yet I have been canvassed on my doorstep by HR about their own issues - so perhaps they are NIMBYs, but what is wrong with trying to protect their lifestyle, views, travel, etc?
Tou can only not be a NIMBY if you are not directly affected by soomething?
This site in Hagley along with others being or to be developed will affect wider communities.
I've remained silent on this for several weeks, but Ozpat - go and put a fire out or open a tinny mate - its like a cracked record
What's been done in Hagley and Blakedown has happened - I'm sure we'll all get over it - I hope the various Councillors can look their constituents in the face, and about time Bromsgrove DC sorted its planning Department out - only a few years ago there was a moratorium on any new development, now they seem to have not planned anything so its a free for all

Report this post »

F Fish says...
12:28am Thu 10 Jan 13

and before my grammar or sentence structure is criticised I'd like to offer mitigation that this website browser isn't the easiest to cope with.
So in my post above
Tou = You for example. Otherwise all written as meant I hope.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
3:23am Thu 10 Jan 13

Tut Tut, No to cala, perhaps you could change your username to "yes to cala" now that it is going ahead! you having nothing else to whinge about now do you! or perhaps you could direct all that pent up energy into something positive for a change, who knows you may even like it!

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
7:54am Thu 10 Jan 13

Ozpat
You know nothing about Hagley. We have two more major developments in planning to object to, and as you put it, whinge about. In fact the name calling on your part makes us stronger, so please carry on with your insulting rhetoric.

The Conservatives promised us democracy and localism, empty words, as usual. Sajid Javid stood outside Hagley Primary School, pre election promising us more say in what happens in our local area, why did we believe him !. Through the first few months of our campaign he sat on the fence, he then weakly supported our objections, more to do with loss of votes, than true support.
The Cobham's have always been staunch supporters of the Coservative Party. Sajid has been spotted coming out of Hagley Hall on several occasions.
The planning committee was made up of mainly conservatives, the majority were incoherent old men. One admitted his head was spinning, one suggested pedestrian footbridges over the roads, and another said he was not looking forward to driving around the island, which would become known as 'Hell Island' and children would be injured as frustrated drivers jumped the lights, and in the same breath said, I approve. The word sadist springs to mind. When the first fatality happens on, or near that island, and happen it will, I hope those who passed these plans will be happy in the knowledge they were instrumental in the death.

Report this post »

Respectable says...
8:30am Thu 10 Jan 13

Wow ! You must really have a crystal ball to be able to confirm that a fatality will definitely happen !
The emotion attached to the last post ignores the fact that councillors , the country over, have a duty to "Risk Assess" applications and make difficult decisions that may sometimes be unpalatable.
This does not necessarily mean they are incompetent. It suggests to me that by and large decisions are made that consider broader issues and groups.

Report this post »

frandroid says...
10:20am Thu 10 Jan 13

F Fish you make some valid points - I am sorry you feel Blakedown did not receive any support from Hagley but if you didn't publicise or come round to our houses to talk to us about it how would we have known. This makes me realise we have to find a way for unselfish people who care about their communities to come together.

Perhaps you will find this letter of interest or not I don't know but I would like to share it as its how I feel and raises points that you and Carolyn have made.

Dear Sajid,

I am writing to you to express my disappointment at the Hagley Homes decision last night – I expected democracy but the whole thing was just a farce.

The committee was reminded before voting took place to discount the volume of protesters and to proceed on planning guidelines only. This makes a mockery of the system for 2 reasons.

1. Every time anyone representing us mentioned a planning or highways ‘guideline’ they were told it was just a guideline and not set in stone! There are so many long winded and outdated policies that they were referring to that only a complete planning jobs worth would be able to follow – it was apparent there is no clear plan in place by the government that we can refer to for local important decisions to be made clearly and fairly.

2. The localism bill was completely discounted and not given any weighting by any of the planning committee – we brought it up on several occasions only to have it completely ignored.

Please can you outline to be once and for all what the localism bill actually means. I voted for your party because I am passionate about local issues and being able to influence the things that matter to me – my community, my kids schools, our local health and safety. If this bill is not being taken seriously by planning councillors then who is it being taken seriously by?

I feel completely betrayed because this was the only policy quite frankly I understood and believed in out of all the pre-election hufflepuff – this is what stood out. You stood outside my son’s primary school and were giving out flyers about this very issue. I know you believe you have supported us but an open letter to the local press is not enough to win Hagley voters onto your side.

In fact we are very upset by the fact that Lord Cobham a noted Conservative supporter in our village has used his sway to garner media coverage and judging by the events of yesterday he has used his longstanding influence and contacts upon the planning committee too. One of the councillors for my ward Mrs Boswell (Furlongs) even admitted that she had family/friends amongst the Cobhams and therefore couldn’t make her personal feelings known to her constituents or represent them fully on this issue because of it. She has not declared this and continued to attend planning meetings we believe – And whilst we realise that Councillor Sherry as a member of the planning committee couldn’t make her personal feelings known we believe she should have stood by her constituents and declared herself off the committee and instead stood by them. Or else what is the point in having a councillor if they don’t represent public opinion (at least 90% of the people in her ward!)

They did not come into the meeting with open minds – one councillor admitted freely that this 6 arm roundabout with a walkway across would be labelled the ‘island of hell’ and children may well be killed or injured – at which point Hagley cheered – BUT then he voted in favour of it?!! Once councillor who voted appeared to be so old/deaf/incompetent or on medication that he didn’t seem to know what was even going on but he got his vote!

There were many inconsistencies on Cala’s side that were not pointed out – their air quality figures for instance would not stand up to the scrutiny of an independent expert. Dr Frank Kelly, environment health expert King’s college London pointed out that they should not allow this to go through on the basis that we are in an AQMA area and no action plan has been presented to bring the figures down.

We have put together a survey of residents that shows that out of the 130 people so far surveyed in the AQMA (air quality management area) over 50% have possible symptoms of air pollution ranging from constant coughs and chest pains to bronchitis and emphysema. We are not medical experts and can’t prove by ourselves that this is linked to the main road so we would like an independent expert to help us – can you help us with this in anyway?

The issue of schools was not dealt with satisfactorily either – I think they just mentioned something about extra chairs could be fitted in classrooms or something along those lines.. the schools are already at capacity – Ruth Bamford, head of planning for Bromsgrove was supposed to allay our fears on this but I could not hear her mumbled comment on this issue. Ditto the medical services – she did not mention that the land they plan to expand on is currently the only children’s playing field in Hagley and belongs to the Parish Council who are not likely to give permission for it to be changed into a carpark/consulting rooms.

We have doorstopped and campaigned through village groups, at school gates, through the media and we know we have huge support and have got the majority of people on board with this – people are getting disheartened though and don’t believe anything can get done – what can a group of residents made up of working parents, single mums, elderly people do against developers and Lords with millions of pounds and legal fees at their disposal.

The Hagley Action Group alongside our Parish Council has spent hundreds of hours informing ourselves, our residents, going round personally and getting opinions, surveying, attending meetings etc to be kicked in the teeth by local ‘democracy’.

We believe our only recourse is to take this campaign and make it national now – we have several groups that are interested in joining with us from all over the country. If we combine to set up LocalMotion an action group for residents at a national level perhaps our combined resources will have greater sway with the media – as you can see I have copied in several news correspondents whom I can only hope haven’t taken pity on Lord Cobham and his leaky roof to such an extent they will deny residents all over Britain the chance to be heard!

Please offer us your advise and support - it would have made a difference I believe if you had actually attended the planning meeting last night – as you didn’t I feel you owe us the duty of advising us what we can do next and how to make a difference at planning level – we can’t allow this kind of behaviour to go on. If this had been televised and been able to play back the appalling bumbling, petty minded and patronising views of the planning people who gave this the go ahead, there would be a massive outcry for their heads on the block (in the political sense rather than literal sense) quite frankly! Many of them are your Conservative representatives over whom I am sure you have some sway.

We would appreciate a prompt response – people are looking for answers as to how this situation has come about and what we can do next – as you know 4,000 people signed our petition, over 1300 wrote to the council many with lengthy, sound objections and we want a fair hearing.

Yours sincerely

Francesca Evans, Hagley Residents Action Group
www.hagleyresidents.
co.uk
07811178576

F Fish you make some valid points - I am sorry you feel Blakedown did not receive any support from Hagley but if you didn't publicise or come round to our houses to talk to us about it how would we have known. This makes me realise we have to find a way for unselfish people who care about their communities to come together. Perhaps you will find this letter of interest or not I don't know but I would like to share it as its how I feel and raises points that you and Carolyn have made. Dear Sajid, I am writing to you to express my disappointment at the Hagley Homes decision last night – I expected democracy but the whole thing was just a farce. The committee was reminded before voting took place to discount the volume of protesters and to proceed on planning guidelines only. This makes a mockery of the system for 2 reasons. 1. Every time anyone representing us mentioned a planning or highways ‘guideline’ they were told it was just a guideline and not set in stone! There are so many long winded and outdated policies that they were referring to that only a complete planning jobs worth would be able to follow – it was apparent there is no clear plan in place by the government that we can refer to for local important decisions to be made clearly and fairly. 2. The localism bill was completely discounted and not given any weighting by any of the planning committee – we brought it up on several occasions only to have it completely ignored. Please can you outline to be once and for all what the localism bill actually means. I voted for your party because I am passionate about local issues and being able to influence the things that matter to me – my community, my kids schools, our local health and safety. If this bill is not being taken seriously by planning councillors then who is it being taken seriously by? I feel completely betrayed because this was the only policy quite frankly I understood and believed in out of all the pre-election hufflepuff – this is what stood out. You stood outside my son’s primary school and were giving out flyers about this very issue. I know you believe you have supported us but an open letter to the local press is not enough to win Hagley voters onto your side. In fact we are very upset by the fact that Lord Cobham a noted Conservative supporter in our village has used his sway to garner media coverage and judging by the events of yesterday he has used his longstanding influence and contacts upon the planning committee too. One of the councillors for my ward Mrs Boswell (Furlongs) even admitted that she had family/friends amongst the Cobhams and therefore couldn’t make her personal feelings known to her constituents or represent them fully on this issue because of it. She has not declared this and continued to attend planning meetings we believe – And whilst we realise that Councillor Sherry as a member of the planning committee couldn’t make her personal feelings known we believe she should have stood by her constituents and declared herself off the committee and instead stood by them. Or else what is the point in having a councillor if they don’t represent public opinion (at least 90% of the people in her ward!) They did not come into the meeting with open minds – one councillor admitted freely that this 6 arm roundabout with a walkway across would be labelled the ‘island of hell’ and children may well be killed or injured – at which point Hagley cheered – BUT then he voted in favour of it?!! Once councillor who voted appeared to be so old/deaf/incompetent or on medication that he didn’t seem to know what was even going on but he got his vote! There were many inconsistencies on Cala’s side that were not pointed out – their air quality figures for instance would not stand up to the scrutiny of an independent expert. Dr Frank Kelly, environment health expert King’s college London pointed out that they should not allow this to go through on the basis that we are in an AQMA area and no action plan has been presented to bring the figures down. We have put together a survey of residents that shows that out of the 130 people so far surveyed in the AQMA (air quality management area) over 50% have possible symptoms of air pollution ranging from constant coughs and chest pains to bronchitis and emphysema. We are not medical experts and can’t prove by ourselves that this is linked to the main road so we would like an independent expert to help us – can you help us with this in anyway? The issue of schools was not dealt with satisfactorily either – I think they just mentioned something about extra chairs could be fitted in classrooms or something along those lines.. the schools are already at capacity – Ruth Bamford, head of planning for Bromsgrove was supposed to allay our fears on this but I could not hear her mumbled comment on this issue. Ditto the medical services – she did not mention that the land they plan to expand on is currently the only children’s playing field in Hagley and belongs to the Parish Council who are not likely to give permission for it to be changed into a carpark/consulting rooms. We have doorstopped and campaigned through village groups, at school gates, through the media and we know we have huge support and have got the majority of people on board with this – people are getting disheartened though and don’t believe anything can get done – what can a group of residents made up of working parents, single mums, elderly people do against developers and Lords with millions of pounds and legal fees at their disposal. The Hagley Action Group alongside our Parish Council has spent hundreds of hours informing ourselves, our residents, going round personally and getting opinions, surveying, attending meetings etc to be kicked in the teeth by local ‘democracy’. We believe our only recourse is to take this campaign and make it national now – we have several groups that are interested in joining with us from all over the country. If we combine to set up LocalMotion an action group for residents at a national level perhaps our combined resources will have greater sway with the media – as you can see I have copied in several news correspondents whom I can only hope haven’t taken pity on Lord Cobham and his leaky roof to such an extent they will deny residents all over Britain the chance to be heard! Please offer us your advise and support - it would have made a difference I believe if you had actually attended the planning meeting last night – as you didn’t I feel you owe us the duty of advising us what we can do next and how to make a difference at planning level – we can’t allow this kind of behaviour to go on. If this had been televised and been able to play back the appalling bumbling, petty minded and patronising views of the planning people who gave this the go ahead, there would be a massive outcry for their heads on the block (in the political sense rather than literal sense) quite frankly! Many of them are your Conservative representatives over whom I am sure you have some sway. We would appreciate a prompt response – people are looking for answers as to how this situation has come about and what we can do next – as you know 4,000 people signed our petition, over 1300 wrote to the council many with lengthy, sound objections and we want a fair hearing. Yours sincerely Francesca Evans, Hagley Residents Action Group www.hagleyresidents. co.uk 07811178576 frandroid

Report this post »

ozpat says...
11:34am Thu 10 Jan 13

Frandroid, the democratic process was followed and the outcome has been determined. Despite the ranting and a 4000 signed petition the decision has be made in favour of the build. The hearing was a fair and equitable one and due process has been followed. You are asking what went wrong? why did this happen? well the answer is fairly simple really, the counter argument had no substance, evidence or factual basis. In the absence of these factors how could the result be anything different! You are getting a larger improved village whats the problem now!

Report this post »

frandroid says...
12:15pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Ozpat pick up the phone if you want to have your input. If you aren't breathing the polluted air of Bromsgrove Districts main roads, walking your children to school along dangerous routes with no safe crossings, or sending your kids to the cramped overcrowded schools in the district along dangerous routes, or worried your kids don't have a decent local play area or if you don't pay tax even in this country then zip it. You must obviously stand to gain by this in some material way because the only people who support it are the ones who stand to benefit financially in some way or for the sake of their job or who have family/friendship/bu
siness connections with Cala or the Cobhams or are stupid enough to be sucked in by a few false promises on a flyer.

Report this post »

Respectable says...
2:21pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Seems like "Ozpat" really has a knack for winding you guys up.

He or She must chuckle into their Fosters every time you take the bait.

With regards to the comment in an earlier post regarding the Prince Of Wales site and it's compulsory purchase. Wasn't this so that a Hagley By Pass could be built about 20 years ago. I seem to recall that someone even purchased a number of the properties around that pub so they could benefit from the planned compulsory purchase orders.
As I recall, this road would have been tunnelled through Wycbury Hill and would have taken all of the traffic away from the A456 round the back of Blakedown and Churchill. Now I fully accept I may not have all of my facts straight here and will happily stand corrected should anyone's Grey Matter be more efficient than my own.

The point is. When you campaign for things not to happen, consider the future not just the here and now.
Why ? Because "Hell Island" would not even be a consideration now if that road had gone ahead.

Report this post »

frandroid says...
2:47pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Respectable I didn't campaign about the bypass. I want a traffic solution that will separate polluting lorries and commuters from school routes and cycle paths!

Even if hell island goes ahead I am trying to say to the council take time to consider safety implications more fully, investigate and reassure residents before you get bulldozers in and inform us why we have to have over 3 times the amount of development which would be fair. Then if you have to build consider giving us something back that we want/need. Its because this message isn't getting through that people are getting angry. If everyone just stopped shouting and throwing accusations at us they might admit there was a little bit of common sense. I don't believe in true Nimbyism - take for example those councillors that block developments on their doorstep and shunt them onto someone else. I am not trying to shunt developments onto people who don't want them, I am just saying please answer some of the important issues that residents are raising first and engage in some proper communication. Do you all honestly blindly trust and put faith in all the local councillors to represent your needs without questioning them?

Report this post »

frandroid says...
2:47pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Respectable I didn't campaign about the bypass. I want a traffic solution that will separate polluting lorries and commuters from school routes and cycle paths!

Even if hell island goes ahead I am trying to say to the council take time to consider safety implications more fully, investigate and reassure residents before you get bulldozers in and inform us why we have to have over 3 times the amount of development which would be fair. Then if you have to build consider giving us something back that we want/need. Its because this message isn't getting through that people are getting angry. If everyone just stopped shouting and throwing accusations at us they might admit there was a little bit of common sense. I don't believe in true Nimbyism - take for example those councillors that block developments on their doorstep and shunt them onto someone else. I am not trying to shunt developments onto people who don't want them, I am just saying please answer some of the important issues that residents are raising first and engage in some proper communication. Do you all honestly blindly trust and put faith in all the local councillors to represent your needs without questioning them?

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
4:09pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Why didn't the by-pass go ahead?

Was it community pressure based upon planning objections or that the local authority didn't have the funds to proceed?

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
4:34pm Thu 10 Jan 13

In November 1996, following the Department of Transport’s review “Managing the Trunk Road Programme,” the KBH Bypass was listed as one of 110 road schemes that were withdrawn from the trunk roads programme. The plug was pulled by the then Secretary of State.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
6:42pm Thu 10 Jan 13

One other observation which nobody seems to have made is why there is an appeals process for most public decision making processes?

If the decision making is without question fair, equitable and correct. What is the point and why are some appeals upheld?

Bet Richard Branson's glad he challenged the Department of Transport West Coast Rail award to FirstGroup. How about that for a good example of due process mis-management in public decision making. £40million cost to the tax payer. Who'd have thought it?

Plenty of knockers around saying it was sour grapes.
All these decisions are made behind closed doors with other agenda's.

We could see that plainly on Monday night.

Report this post »

frandroid says...
8:00pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Very true No to Cala. Point well made.

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
8:19pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Respectable

'That road' did not go ahead because the government refused funding, nothing to do with local objections.
The site in question was deemed suitable for future development when the by-pass was being planned. When the by-pass was shelved, this site should have been returned to green belt. Furthermore when the A491 (Bromsgrove Road) was built this land was to act as a buffer for pollution to the properties beyond, in West Hagley. Promises, promises!

Report this post »

Respectable says...
10:05pm Thu 10 Jan 13

As i said. Happy to be corrected on the Bypass history.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
10:20pm Thu 10 Jan 13

There is no real benefit to point scoring or sniping. But it is important to have a good open debate. And Respectable, if we agree with each other or not, at least the conversation is thought provoking on both sides.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
10:28pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Respectable, I spilt so much Fosters laughing at these people that it is no longer funny mate. These people get wound up because they know they are a bunch of self serving NIMBY's yet fail to accept it. They would have us all believe they are a suffering conurbation without space or infrastructure to accommodate the need for future housing and will try to convince all those with any opinion that they are doing this protest for the "good" of the village when the reality is they do not want anything that puts their sense of post code superiority at risk. They are so blinkered in their opinion that it lacks any social conscious and resist the need for future housing and infrastructure at the cost to surrounding areas whom they feel should have the housing but not us in our backyard. I have maintained this as their greatest weakness for sometime now and stood on this subject pointing this out to them. They will not accept the reality of the situation because finally the Hagley conurbation has to accept it does have space for housing where surrounding suburbs have been saturated for decades in terms of housing traffic etc. I think this attitude is selfish and indeed NIMBY and has for too long served as a slap in the face to the surrounding suburbs who have no choice but deal with population growth, so why not bloody Hagley!
PS Frandroid you are still making assumptions about my taxpaying status ! step down gracefully eh you have already made a spectacle of yourself so I suggest you get some facts first eh! oh yeah you have already proven you can not do that!

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
9:16am Fri 11 Jan 13

Ozpat

Hagley is my birthplace, my 87 year old mother lives here, as do my daughter and two grandchildren. I understand we have to have growth, and over the years we have had growth, but everywhere reaches saturation point, and I, and many others believe that time has come for Hagley.
I attended Hagley school in 1950, it was idylic, there were less than 80 of us. On the exact same site, that figure has grown to now almost 700, and no space to expand further. Our doctor's surgery is full, with no space to extend, as this would encroach on the only green space our children have to run around freely, which statistically, is less green space per person than it should be already. It is very doubtful the trustees of the land, owned by the parish council, would agree to allowing this.
The only improvement to Hagley,( being paid for by Cala), is a gold standard bus shelter, and gold standard cycle rack at the station, and signs telling people how to get there, costing £25,000, both of which will probably remain unused as residents will undoubtedly use their cars.
I can assure you, I am not a NIMBY
I really believe this development will have a devastating effect on Hagley, I I am very proud of my birthplace, and I want to remain so.

Report this post »

frandroid says...
9:25am Fri 11 Jan 13

Carolyn you are right about the bus shelter and cycle rack. It is a joke.

We definitely need more green space for our kids that are exposed to polluted air all through the week on the school run. I currently drive to Sanders Park in Bromsgrove on weekends for somewhere with a cycle path to take the kids when they get fed up riding through all the dog excrement in Hagley playing field! I'm not going to take them on a bike ride along the main road that's for sure...!

Report this post »

dudley old boy says...
10:20am Fri 11 Jan 13

frandroid so it's Ok for you to drive to Sanders Park to avoid the pollution while polluting Bromsgrove

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
10:33am Fri 11 Jan 13

The figures are interesting:

Revenues
£1 million+ central govt. incentive for approval can be claimed by BDC
£10million Lord Cobham
30% clear profit is the minimum a house builder will work on.
(I know this as I have a friend in Evehsam who has sold land to a Taylor Wimpey for 600 homes)
£30million profit to CALA estimated conservatively.

Infrastructure Expenditure
25K Bus Shelter & Cycle Racks
1 million on creating access including signalising the Island & creating pedestrian and cylcle routes.
750K Section 106 money (Worcester Education say themselves in a meeting I attended that the whole mount unlikely to be ever received due to builders exploiting loop holes by building just short of the full quota to make the full S106 payable and then they can take up to 10 years to cough up aswell.) They have no powers to enforce.

Report this post »

frandroid says...
11:14am Fri 11 Jan 13

Dudley Old Boy
If services aren't available in our region then yes we will drive elsewhere I confess I'm not a martyr. And it is quicker for me to drive to Kidderminster and Bromsgrove where there is a clear drive and easy/safe parking than to head through Hagley village towards Stourbridge on the weekends when its at gridlock. And I'm sure you aren't suggesting that just because I live in Hagley I shouldn't be allowed out surely?!!

Report this post »

ozpat says...
1:11pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Frandroid, I appreciate your historical attachment to the area, however you do have space for expansion and the outcome from the planning decision has shown that. Many children outside of Hagley have had to tolerate overcrowding in the classroom, locals having to accommodate traffic increases and population expansion. The problem is they do not have space for more and the fact is you do. To object so vehemently against the project is NIMBY, the very definition is just that. You should be proud of your birthplace as I am mine, but surrounding areas have it hard for so long that they unable to physically take any more and your area can so why not Hagley!

Report this post »

ozpat says...
1:28pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Wait a moment!

No to Cala has supplied one of his "facts"
"(I know this as I have a friend in Evehsam who has sold land to a Taylor Wimpey for 600 homes)
£30million profit to CALA estimated conservatively."
well that must be right then if your friend says so eh! and I wonder why your protest failed with "facts" like that! I shall give you a hint for your future appeal, base your facts on actual evidence and not assumptive hearsay, validity helps, you can have that one for free, give a try some time.

Report this post »

DAVID1875 says...
1:31pm Fri 11 Jan 13

So Ozpat says "The hearing was a fair and equitable one". So Ozpat was there? Because only if you were at the meeting itself can you give such an opinion.
Dudley Old Boy, Frandroid is perfectly entitled to go where she feels she has to to use community facilities - Sanders Park, of course, is not an AQMA, whereas Hagley is.

Report this post »

frandroid says...
5:08pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Ozpat please can you provide some added facts about these residents you speak of I am interested. Are they in Wythall and Catshill perchance which is also getting the glut of Bromsgrove's over-zealous housing targets?

I am not just about trying to improve things for our village but also want to help others who want to improve their local areas and build up community relationships. But I am taking small steps and starting with our village - I have already built up links with several other towns nationwide from Dundee to outer London though I just don't post about that as this is a local site for local people or hadn't you realised?

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
6:57pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Frandroid

Well said, a LOCAL site for LOCAL people.
I've decided to send Ozpat to Coventry, he's not worth my time or energy. Nothing he says makes sense, rather like the majority of the planning councillors on Monday.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
6:59pm Fri 11 Jan 13

sue baxter says:
January 8, 2013 at 6:44 pm
At last night’s planning committee meeting I had several concerns that I listed with regards the Hagley application. These were highways issues, air pollution, the piecemeal way in which applications have been submitted for the Hagley ADR and my confusion over the legal comments that we received with reference planning policy. These were my concerns but the one factor that I could not support was the access to the site off the roundabout, with an additional spur (making 6 in total) with traffic light control including pedestrian crossings. This is already one of the busiest junctions in Worcestershire, air quality is already an issue, which I feel will be exacerbated by additional stopping and starting of traffic. I considered the proposed changes to the roundabout to support the development to be potentially dangerous for pedestrians, particularly school children, and could not support it. Needless to say Worcestershire Highways did not have an issue with it.
Cllr Sue Baxter

Source:http://www.wy
thall.org/hagley-1-c
ala-homes-1

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
7:25pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Although the wider housing market has remained relatively stable, CALA has reported a strong financial and operating performance for the year ended 30 June 2012. Increased private home sales and improved gross margins all contributed to a substantial increase in profit before tax after exceptional items at £11.4m, up nearly six fold on 2011.

In addition to this, the Group has made excellent progress during the year in developing the length and quality of its landbank which currently stands at 9,600 owned and contracted plots with a potential gross development value of £3.0bn, 92% of which comprises higher gross margin land unaffected by, or contracted after, the housing market downturn. During the financial year, the Group contracted 31 new sites in premium locations which are projected to deliver 1,397 homes with an estimated gross development value of £473m.

You'd think CALA could manage a bit more than a bus shelter wouldn't you? Gold Standard or not.

Report this post »

frandroid says...
7:53pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Correct me if I'm wrong but I am pretty sure they didn't get that much profit by providing 'affordable housing' for single parents, low income families with kids on the breadline etc.. which is this kind of housing Shelter and similar organisations are crying out for and what Councils need to be addressing as well as providing the school places, transport links and medical facilities that go hand in hand.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
8:00pm Fri 11 Jan 13

The figures speak for themselves.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
8:16pm Fri 11 Jan 13

I've been looking into my crystal ball.

Cala will build some social housing first.
Wait for Billingham & Kite to sell their houses at 500K a pop (current prices).

It give's CALA time to build a bit of demand - from people wanting to move in from outlying villages to be certain of school places.

Hey presto house prices have gone up with demand - 500K 4- 5 bed detached exec. (56% of the build) will be 550K or more.

Nice work if you can get it.
Bus Shelter - Cycle Racks - Traffic Lights?

Everyone's fave estate agent rubbing his hands for the re-sale no doubt. Lord Cobs best mate.

Who's got their eyes wide shut here?

Report this post »

desmodave says...
8:17pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Very pleased to note the provsion of a new bus shelter and signage.
In a recent survey of transport provision within Hagley, there were many requests for a Bus shelter with seating and improved signage to assist those who use public transport.
Good to see recognition of provision for those unable to use or access cars, a concern for an increasing number of elderly people in the area.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
8:23pm Fri 11 Jan 13

The planners forgot to ask for a bus though so it might be a long wait.

That must be why they specified Gold Standard.

Report this post »

desmodave says...
8:53pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Why would people ask for a shelter if there weren't buses. I agree it would be nice if there were more..

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
9:16pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Perhaps Lord Cobs asked for it as a gift to the village, but didn't realise the bus service has been withdrawn.

Anyway - they're putting it on Park Lane so it won't make any difference 'cause we don't have a Park Lane in Hagley.

It's very well thought out and joined up approach here you know.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
10:30pm Fri 11 Jan 13

David1875, so what you are saying is you had to be actually at the meeting to appreciate how the due process was executed, really your "logic" belies belief! I do believe the whole process was a democratically appointed one, held openly for clarity and equity, and the outcome was determined and your "strong" petitioning and shouting amounted to nothing. How do you assume that I was not actually there at the meeting to witness the decision? I do not have to live in the area to attend a public meeting, may I remind you how many times you and your supporters on this site ridiculed everything I said yet despite the overwhelming attacks I can tell you that I was right, was I not.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
10:39pm Fri 11 Jan 13

No - it just means you are as stupid as they are that's all.

Glad to see you are being yourself again.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
10:40pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Enjoy the fishing too....

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
10:41pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Don't spill your fosters....

Report this post »

frandroid says...
12:20am Sat 12 Jan 13

Ozpat are you pro-housing in every village, where do you stand on Belbroughton, Clent, Romsley, Catshill say?

Regarding the bus situation I feel sorry for those poor people who use it will be always waiting because the buses keep getting stuck along that road as it is and the traffic situation is so dire and erratic you can't guarantee how long it takes to get anywhere in Hagley. A journey to my house back from school which should take under 5 minutes when its a clear took 45 one day in December at 3.30 and can quite often take 20-30mins on a Thurs or Friday even when parked in the village to go 1/2 mile.

Report this post »

frandroid says...
12:20am Sat 12 Jan 13

Ozpat are you pro-housing in every village, where do you stand on Belbroughton, Clent, Romsley, Catshill say?

Regarding the bus situation I feel sorry for those poor people who use it will be always waiting because the buses keep getting stuck along that road as it is and the traffic situation is so dire and erratic you can't guarantee how long it takes to get anywhere in Hagley. A journey to my house back from school which should take under 5 minutes when its a clear took 45 one day in December at 3.30 and can quite often take 20-30mins on a Thurs or Friday even when parked in the village to go 1/2 mile.

Report this post »

DAVID1875 says...
3:49am Sat 12 Jan 13

Either Ozpat was at the actual committee meeting or he wasn't? It is a simple question. If you were not at the meeting you would not have seen the misleading photos shown to the committee of the roads around the proposed site, by the case officer, which laughably showed only 1 or 2 cars when there are 400 000 vehicle journeys per week, or the misleading advice given to committee by the head of planning on the expansion of the medical facilities, or the mislaeding advice given by another officer to ignore the huge number of objections despite it being significant under the Localism Act.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
4:54am Sat 12 Jan 13

Frandroid, I am in favour of housing when it is so clearly needed regardless of where it is, especially if an area has space for it and additionally it improves the area. you clearly are not.

No to Cala - "stupid" enough to have proven you and the ranting hoards of Hagley NIMBY's how wrong you are! the decision was as I recall a landslide victory for common sense!

David 1875 - You claim the committee was "misled" as you put it, this is your opinion, again no facts, it is the facts that so overwhelmingly led to the outcome. I have maintained that every point the protestors made has been assumptive with none or very little evidence to support them. I shall leave you to assume whether I was in attendance or not, you are appear to know my whereabouts and business better than I!

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
10:12am Sat 12 Jan 13

Statistics 2012
There are 710,000 empty houses in uk
72,289 of those in West Midlands.
Does anyone know how many of those are in Bromsgrove district?

Report this post »

frandroid says...
10:22am Sat 12 Jan 13

The difference between us is transparency and honesty- people know who I am and what I stand for, you are currently just a troll on a website hiding your identity casting illogical aspersions at people and avoiding answering direct questions just like a politician. Do you think that if that meeting had been broadcast on TV for example that the experts, the council and the planning meeting as a whole conducted themselves in a dignified, intelligent and professional way.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
10:26am Sat 12 Jan 13

Not just stupid, really stupid.

They are getting £1 million plus kick back out of it.

Bad planning in Hagley just cause it's in Hagley to support petty resentments won't help your old area which coincidently I moved here from too. We could even have lived next door at some stage. (I would probably have recognised the stupidity though since you hide it so badly).

But unlike you, I didn't sod off to Australia (which is where you live, but don't seem to realise).

I still live, work in and spend my money in the local area and understand that any problems with the strategic road network which offers the black country a gateway to their markets is bad for all.

I also prefer Bathams and don't spill it.

Report this post »

fugitive says...
11:53am Sat 12 Jan 13

Well i have read some rubbish in my time, the homes were always going to be built, the only reason is that they are needed, common sense would have told you all that, there has always been traffic in hagley, maybe because its on route to the M5/M6, "I don't know", all i can say is, i'm looking forward to moving into my new house, oh, thats when its been built, thank you Lord Cobb.

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
3:02pm Sat 12 Jan 13

Fugative

I'd rather you, than me, I live half a mile from 'Hell Island', and the AQMA, and that is too close for me. I certainly wouldn't want to live on it !!!

Report this post »

DAVID1875 says...
3:39pm Sat 12 Jan 13

So Ozpat still will not say if he was at the meeting or not. My point remains only the 150 people present can give an opinion on whether or not the hearing was fair!

Report this post »

charliecro says...
5:24pm Sat 12 Jan 13

Omg! Will you people just get over yourselves! As people have said houses are being built because they are needed!

Ozpat may not live in the area at the moment but has links to the area and is entitled to his opinion as are the rest of you so wht if he lives the otheside of the world its called freedom of speech! There has always been traffic threw hagley due to its location and proximity to the motorway so is prime commuting ground!

As for the school being jam packed isnt tht the case in most areas as the rate of child birth has risin but the expansion and creation of schools hasnt changed to accomodate this!

If u want to live in an area surrounded by trees where theres no traffic or pollution thn yo live in the countryside where u have to travel an hour to school or your nearest shopping centre or supermarket! If not face facts you live in the suburbs where traffic will always b a problem!!!

Report this post »

frandroid says...
8:20pm Sat 12 Jan 13

So if you think somethings wrong in your area, you just suggest moving do you? We'd all still be living in the great smog if you had your way if you don't believe in improving living conditions and people should just put up and shut up. We can't just uproot kids from school and leave jobs/family commitments just like that to go and live in the fresh air you ridiculous person.

I really can't make this any clearer - you don't seem to be understanding? We are not averse to houses being built in the right way, with the right planning. This is a very specific objection to a specific batch of houses. 6 arm roundabout at intersection of 2 of busiest roads in Worcestershire with walkways across??! . Just because we have chosen to live in easy access of motorway doesn't mean we have signed up to dangerous traffic implementations which will all worsen air quality exponentially.

If the countryside is being built on all over the UK where would you suggest? Only rich people with a private income, people who work from home or farmers can really live in the countryside.

I can see that if you didn't really know the site you might not realise what our particular issues were but if you had walked around it recently especially during rush hour/as a parent taking their child to school you would understand. Please take off your Hagley bashing hats and just trying to understand we are sticking up for our local families and the community. I can't speak for other schools as I only send my kids to one school. But if the quality of their school life suffers then I think I have the right to have some input about the problem. The fact another developer has applied for some flats next to the school on land which was previously the middle school is another big beef. That land could have been used for badly needed educational purposes and parking. If you don't have kids you can't appreciate the problems getting them to and from school safely. And if you do, they aren't going to learn much from your over-simplistic school of reasoning.....

So if you think somethings wrong in your area, you just suggest moving do you? We'd all still be living in the great smog if you had your way if you don't believe in improving living conditions and people should just put up and shut up. We can't just uproot kids from school and leave jobs/family commitments just like that to go and live in the fresh air you ridiculous person. I really can't make this any clearer - you don't seem to be understanding? We are not averse to houses being built in the right way, with the right planning. This is a very specific objection to a specific batch of houses. 6 arm roundabout at intersection of 2 of busiest roads in Worcestershire with walkways across??! . Just because we have chosen to live in easy access of motorway doesn't mean we have signed up to dangerous traffic implementations which will all worsen air quality exponentially. If the countryside is being built on all over the UK where would you suggest? Only rich people with a private income, people who work from home or farmers can really live in the countryside. I can see that if you didn't really know the site you might not realise what our particular issues were but if you had walked around it recently especially during rush hour/as a parent taking their child to school you would understand. Please take off your Hagley bashing hats and just trying to understand we are sticking up for our local families and the community. I can't speak for other schools as I only send my kids to one school. But if the quality of their school life suffers then I think I have the right to have some input about the problem. The fact another developer has applied for some flats next to the school on land which was previously the middle school is another big beef. That land could have been used for badly needed educational purposes and parking. If you don't have kids you can't appreciate the problems getting them to and from school safely. And if you do, they aren't going to learn much from your over-simplistic school of reasoning..... frandroid

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
10:05pm Sat 12 Jan 13

Charli Cro - Russel Crow - OMG it's ozpat's revenge. Get real with the suburbs man. WTF?
Stupider an stupider.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
10:10pm Sat 12 Jan 13

Ozpat you are really making it easy.
You have won - the decision went your way. Same for you Fugitive, Dudley Old Boy. etc. Good luck to you if you really believe this was a good decision for all. If I ever move into the second hand car sales game from metal bashing, I hope I come across chumps like you.

Report this post »

charliecro says...
12:16am Sun 13 Jan 13

Frandroid how dare you call me a ridiculous person for voicing my opinion! I never said to take your children out of school and up root! Im simply trying to make you realise that choosing to live where you live there is always going to be pollution and traffic!!!

No to calanice name calling shows your intelligence! what would you call hagley the if its not a suburb???

Theres a bigger world outside of hagley

Build a bridge and get over it!

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
12:23am Sun 13 Jan 13

Russel crow/ozzy ozpat - you seem to have lost your text speak - WTF?

You're keeping Oz time and I've got more intelligence than you clearly.

Hagley is a villlage unless you've deserted and gone down under.
Ridiculous? You?

Report this post »

ozpat says...
7:51am Sun 13 Jan 13

Careful now, Not to Cala it looks as though you about to blow a sphincter! Could you please clarify your last comment , something to do with time and or text speak??? as I am clearly unable to follow the tangents at which your "cognitive processing" takes (if any). I would not like to question your intelligence, but I do fear you may well be punching above your weight with me my friend. Now unless you happened to attend one of the two most prestigious academic establishments in the UK (and I did), I do believe you should do as I advised one of your fellow followers, please stop embarrassing yourself so publicly (which as you demonstrate a level stupidity beyond stupid (and NIMBY) and so are clearly afflicted, you will obviously not cease). What is abundantly clear is that you have nothing left but pedantry remarks like so many of those left sobbing into their beer \ chablis (delete as appropriate) following the outcome. David 1875 please just ignore me it helps not having to deal with your empty assumptive remarks, I expected better, more fool me eh!

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
8:27am Sun 13 Jan 13

Ozpat was there on Monday !!!

He was either the incoherent cllr., spouting about the six arm roundabout, which no one, not even the chairman understood.
The bumbling old fool who suggested building pedestrian footbridges over all the roads. (As if anyone is going to walk anywhere from that development)
The sadist who said he was not looking forward to driving around that island, which will become known as Hell Island, and that children will be injured ,as stressed drivers jump the lights.' I approve.'
I think he was the cllr. who freely admitted his head was spinning with all the information. Probably brought on by the long flight from OZ.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
8:39am Sun 13 Jan 13

You have a high opinion of yourself - but which self would that be?

If you are the best that our very best academic establishments can churn out - well I don't know what to say.

I have a suggestion for your next self - Walter Mitty.

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
8:40am Sun 13 Jan 13

Desmodave

To clarify, the 'gold standard' bus shelter is going to be placed near to Hell Island,
not in the village. These elderly residents you mention, will have to walk up the hill on Park Road to get there. They will then be able to use the bus shelter, if they haven't collapsed on the way, to wait for the 2 hourly bus.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
8:42am Sun 13 Jan 13

Caolyn1946,

I was? or was I? Oooooh that mysterious Ozpat! Keep guessing, keep assuming, alas if nothing else but consistent, (chuckling into my "Fosters")!!!

Report this post »

ozpat says...
8:47am Sun 13 Jan 13

No to Cala, a simple explanation was all I required, again alas like your "facts and evidence" non existent. For all that is holy man what are you drivelling on about!

Meanwhile in the real world.............

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
9:44am Sun 13 Jan 13

Well Ozpat/davidj91/charl
icro/russel crow or whoever you are.

Your solid education has failed you and unfortunately you have been unable to fully understand the insult that was intended.

Since we are way off point now I will make this my last post.
Farewell to you Walter Mitty.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
11:21am Sun 13 Jan 13

Farewell No To Cala - enjoy your new neighbours!

Report this post »

Respectable says...
8:38am Mon 14 Jan 13

It's no wonder the Anti Development Lobby Group have not been taken seriously.
To allow themselves to be drawn into such petty Tit For Tat exchanges, that stray wildly off subject is nothing short of ridiculous.
Maybe if the energy had been channelled correctly they would have had a little more success.
The very personal and derogatory nature of the responses (Whether you started it or not) from the people of the parish could only ever be seen as self serving and arrogant.
You've allowed yourselves to be rattled by comments from people that are not relevant to the situation (No offence intended, we are all entitled to an opinion) and responded in such a way that suggests nobody other than yourselves have a right to comment.
A great distraction for Lord C and Cala to hide behind. Whilst you've been distracted by this , they've ploughed on regardless and won.

Report this post »

No to CALA says...
10:14am Mon 14 Jan 13

Respectable, just to clarify. I am not part of any Anti Development Lobby Group - I am a resident and nothing more.

I am sorry if you feel my posts are self serving an arrogant - this was not my intention.

Report this post »

fugitive says...
10:58am Mon 14 Jan 13

Ozpat, i could'nt have put it better myself, "good on ya blue"

Report this post »

Respectable says...
11:25am Mon 14 Jan 13

No To Cala.. Thats not what I said.

The point I'm making is that by allowing yourselves to be dragged into a long running slagging contest / conflict has APPEARED to devalue your argument / standpoint as the points scoring drifts so far left of centre, the housing devlopment almost becomes incidental.

Report this post »

Respectable says...
12:41pm Mon 14 Jan 13

On a final note (from myself)

Hagley residents may want to stop a take a look at Hartlebury 5 miles down the road.

They are getting a £120m waste incinerator which one of the local councillors has stated in the press

"A LEADING Worcestershire politician has admitted he can understand campaigners’ anger over proposals for a £120 million incinerator in Hartlebury.

Conservative county councillor John Smith said he “would not want it” in his own back yard"

To be labelled a NIMBY isn't quite a wounding as you may think.

It's human nature to resist change that you see as no direct benefit to yourself.

Report this post »

Controversial Hagley homes plan gets the go-ahead (From Stourbridge News)

News RSS Feed

Controversial Hagley homes plan gets the go-ahead

click2find

Jobs

Dating

Homes

Cars

About cookies