Shaping Staney Hill housing

[admin]

www.shapingstaneyhill.com
 
Opinions to be sought on new Staney Hill houses (Shetland Times)

 

A chance to help ‘Shaping Staney Hill’ (Shetland News)

 

Between 250 and 400 new houses proposed. What's your views?

[Capeesh]

I was lucky enough to qualify for a shared ownership Hjatland house with my partner after years of renting privately when I was younger, it was a fantastic help and after seeing the recent rental market it makes me count my blessings, I would never have been able to afford to rent privately at todays prices.

I now own a different property which will border the Staney hill development and have already had a letter through the door asking if we have any objections.

Me and the wife had a chat about it and although the development will almost certainly have a detrimental effect on our house we decided it would be wrong to pull the ladder up behind us and put in any sort of objection and deny somebody else the opportunity we had.

[Ghostrider]

Dey'll gyt da wind aboot dem!

 

Personally i'd say its a hellish place for hooses. Fine on a fine day, bit whaur's no....an godless on ony idder kind. I'd rather live just about anyplace else than on top of a hill that catches the full blast of everything nature has to throw at you from the SE to the NE, but in the absence of there being many other potential sites within the surrounding area, and if there are enough folk willing to live there just so they can be toonies, and the neighbours can live with it, crash on. I widna worry too much about how its laid out or what it looks like, as those who live in it will spend a hell of a lot more time dodging for cover from the weather and trying their best to ignore it, than "enjoying" their surroundings

Edited May 14, 2016 by Ghostrider

[Colin]

I would not worry to much about the folk that would be living there..  Current trends suggest that there will be quite a number of "druggies", "alkies", "sundry misfits", "petty criminals", "baby farms" and "socially disadvantaged" among the number.  Probably "imported" from other areas of Shetland/Mainland.  Best place for them would be in the face of a decent "breeze".

 

Question is : would any decent/sane(?) person want to live there?

 

Downside is that it will impact on things like the town bus service which, as it already covers Hoofields, may(?) have to be extended to cover the new scheme.

[paulb]

depend if you have a choice.

[Davie P]

I would not worry to much about the folk that would be living there..  Current trends suggest that there will be quite a number of "druggies", "alkies", "sundry misfits", "petty criminals", "baby farms" and "socially disadvantaged" among the number.  Probably "imported" from other areas of Shetland/Mainland.  Best place for them would be in the face of a decent "breeze".

 

Question is : would any decent/sane(?) person want to live there?

 

Downside is that it will impact on things like the town bus service which, as it already covers Hoofields, may(?) have to be extended to cover the new scheme.

 

There's 100s of people on housing waiting lists who will welcome the chance of securing a house at Staneyhill. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a social housing development to be some sort of Utopia but to question whether "decent/sane" people would want to live there is extremely naive.

 

I think Hjatland's consultation should be welcomed and I hope folk contribute positively (rather than condemn the development and it's potential residents before a block has been laid).

[Ghostrider]

 ......but to question whether "decent/sane" people would want to live there is extremely naive.

 

Is it? You'd best tell SIC Housing that then, seeing as they seem to think its a perfectly acceptable and routine thing to do to make a judgement call on the latter concerning their tenants. They then do their damndest to try and get you persuaded to go along with them, giving the impression that they at least prefer, if not consider it essential if their tenants are considered insane.

 

God knows, just dealing with them is enough to wreck a lot of folk's sanity in any case.

Edited May 14, 2016 by Ghostrider

[Colin]

 

There's 100s of people on housing waiting lists who will welcome the chance of securing a house at Staneyhill. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a social housing development to be some sort of Utopia but to question whether "decent/sane" people would want to live there is extremely naive.

 

I think Hjatland's consultation should be welcomed and I hope folk contribute positively (rather than condemn the development and it's potential residents before a block has been laid).

 

Yes, and 100's of people will remain on waiting lists simply because those with 'points' will be considered first..

 

I have no problem with the consultation but, I stand by my comment that no decent/sane person would want to live on the top of a (very) wind swept hill surrounded by what some may consider to be "undesireable" neighbours.

[Davie P]

Yes, and 100's of people will remain on waiting lists simply because those with 'points' will be considered first..

 

 

I have no problem with the consultation but, I stand by my comment that no decent/sane person would want to live on the top of a (very) wind swept hill surrounded by what some may consider to be "undesireable" neighbours.

 

I expect there will always be people on the waiting list, so what's your point?

 

I know a few folk who are living happily in the existing developments at the north of the Staneyhill - cosy modern houses whether the wind is blowing or not, and I haven't heard them complaining about their neighbours. To imply these folk are neither decent nor sane would be insulting if I wasn't aware of your appetite for negativity.

Edited May 14, 2016 by Davie P

[Capeesh]

I also know people at Quoys (another exposed hill) and the East Voe of Scalloway who are more than happy with their modern, well insulated houses.

They work, have children and don't have drug/alcohol addictions either, as far as I'm aware.

I think the Hjatland developments so far have been done well but at 400 houses this development is much bigger than anything they've done before.

The need is obvious, but is concentrating so many houses in one area a good idea?

It supports the idea that Lerwick is becoming a black hole, sucking investment towards itself, with 400 extra houses they'll need more money invested in the health centre, primary schools etc etc

They could have stuck to what they are good at and built smaller developments and spread them around Shetland.

[Colin]

 

Yes, and 100's of people will remain on waiting lists simply because those with 'points' will be considered first..

 

 

I have no problem with the consultation but, I stand by my comment that no decent/sane person would want to live on the top of a (very) wind swept hill surrounded by what some may consider to be "undesireable" neighbours.

 

I expect there will always be people on the waiting list, so what's your point?

 

I thought that I made my point very clearly...

[Colin]

I also know people at Quoys (another exposed hill) and the East Voe of Scalloway who are more than happy with their modern, well insulated houses.

They work, have children and don't have drug/alcohol addictions either, as far as I'm aware.

I think the Hjatland developments so far have been done well but at 400 houses this development is much bigger than anything they've done before.

The need is obvious, but is concentrating so many houses in one area a good idea?

It supports the idea that Lerwick is becoming a black hole, sucking investment towards itself, with 400 extra houses they'll need more money invested in the health centre, primary schools etc etc

They could have stuck to what they are good at and built smaller developments and spread them around Shetland.

I too know people who live at Quoys/East Voe and, I would agree that most are decent, hard working folk.  I also know more than a few others who DO have addictions of one sort or another.   I just do not see why they should be allocated a nice new house when they are already living somewhere else.  Is it just because their substance abuse is easier/cheaper in Lerwick?

If the scheme gets built then, imho, it should be allocated to those who contribute, not those that suck up resources..

As you pointed out, there would have to be considerable investments in infrastructure to accommodate the residents.  The last thing that would be needed are "high maintenance" individuals draining limited resources.

[Davie P]

The need is obvious, but is concentrating so many houses in one area a good idea?

It supports the idea that Lerwick is becoming a black hole, sucking investment towards itself, with 400 extra houses they'll need more money invested in the health centre, primary schools etc etc

They could have stuck to what they are good at and built smaller developments and spread them around Shetland.

 

I agree Capeesh, and it's a fundamental point. Hjatland have indeed been very successful in building smaller developments in more rural areas which have given the communities a much needed boost.

 

The Shetland Local Development Plan lists several key areas throughout Shetland arleady defined as 'Areas of Best Fit' for housing development - page 39 http://www.shetland.gov.uk/planning/documents/ShetlandLocalDevelopmentPlanAdopted26_09_2014.pdf and maps http://www.shetland.gov.uk/planning/documents/CombinedAOBFA4Maps_000.pdf - and access to ammenities and resources is a key factor, so I expect that's one of the main reasons such a large development is proposed as near as possible to the main centre of resources (i.e. Lerwick). I also expect demand for houses in town is a factor too.

 

However, it would seem to be a self fulfilling prophecy. The more amenities that are concentrated in Lerwick > the more demand for houses > the more resources required to support the residents......

 

Most folk I've discussed housing developments in Shetland with seem to agree that several smaller mixed size developments around Shetland is preferable to (more) large concentrations in Lerwick. It's certainly a point I'll raise during this consultation.

Edited May 15, 2016 by Davie P

[Urabug]

What makes most sense.

 

1---Create long term employment in an area then build houses for those that require them.

 

2---Take a gamble build houses in an area then try to create jobs,in the hope of finding tenants for these houses.

[Guest tiodylb17]

They should build some at the Ness of Sound , did they not buy a big bit of land there years ago for millions ???