Livin Requested to Involve People More Fully
Dear Sir,
I wish to write and complain about the great assumptions which Livin seem to be making, in respect of how tenants feel concerning the proposed West Ward Regeneration proposals. Many tenants are NOT in favour of Option 3, we don’t want to leave our homes. Personally I moved here over two years ago to retire, I am now 72 and my wife 70 just the thought of moving again fills us with dread.
The physical thing of packing and loading into vans, then unpacking and fitting new carpets etc. the thought of it is awful. Two years ago we found it very stressful and exhausting, now the thought of doing it all again is not something my wife and I can contemplate.
Most people feel that not enough time and thought has been given to the alternatives, and there ARE real alternatives.
1. The Option 3 proposal, which Livin seem to be favouring, is a waste of resources. Houses which were only built in 1967-68 should not be demolished at the whim of planners and those who do not live in the area, unaware of the good points as well as the not so good. These are perfectly good houses that are comfortable and easy to heat. If they are carefully maintained and updated there is at least another 50 years left in them.
2. As for the layout of the estate, much of what Livin is planning in option 3 could be accomplished as the estate currently stands. Eg. The section of Williamfield Way that, under option 3, is to be passable by buses and emergency vehicles only; this could be accomplished in front of the Lindisfarne Care Home with the layout as it is now, with little reorganisation of systems.
3. The parking issue could also be addressed as the estate is currently, by marking out parking bays for those people without garages and identifying them for a particular house (as is already done in Hawkshead Place). Extra parking could be made available by extending the parking laybys at present in use in Kirkstone Place and Honister Place. The problem with vehicle access to a few properties is difficult but not insurmountable eg: Extending the ‘hammerhead’ in Honister place could provide vehicle access to the front of 40-44 Kirkstone Place.
4. The final point I wish to make is that there needs to be more, MUCH MORE, consultation before final decisions are made. It is not enough to knock on a few doors, leafleting the estate and then, as was the case a number of weeks ago, inviting people to call in and see the proposals drawn up with a take it or leave it attitude. People need to involved in the decision making process and not be faced with a situation where a decision has already been made by Livin saying, “Options 1 & 2 won’t work”, who says they won’t work? Who made that decision?
Livin must realise that this is the lives of people in 572 households we are talking about; it’s not just an exercise in town planning. Why have we not had public meetings with Livin decision makers, explaining to tenants and owners what is proposed? Why have the people living in the area not had a say in which of the three options was to go ahead? Why won’t Livin answer the questions put forward by GARA representatives? It is not good enough to say Livin won’t be in attendance at this meeting or that, WHY won’t Livin be in attendance?
I am concerned that I, along with every other resident in this area, are been ridden roughshod over by people who haven’t stopped to think about the full implications of their decisions on the lives of residents. If these plans go ahead residents could end up living on a building site for many years and for me, that could mean the rest of my life.
Please consider your proposals again, involve people more fully and think laterally about what it is you really need to accomplish.
Derick Sutton
Is Livin’s Aim to Divide and Conquer?
Dear Sir,
Many homeowners and tenants are worried about Livin’s plans for the Western Area, ie demolishing existing housing and building a new estate with fewer homes to rent, and executive housing in Whinlatter Place.
Livin is being very cagey about the details, and won’t attend meetings of the Residents’ Association or the Town Council, or even have information printed in the Newton News.
What they are doing? By all accounts, they are meeting tenants on an individual basis, thus avoiding public scrutiny. It seems they are suggesting that there may be a very attractive deal available to tenants. Just remember that anything sounding too good to be true might not be as good as it sounds.
Ask what guarantee they can give you now that you will be eligible for any scheme they talk about and ask them to spell out any new responsibilities you will need to take on, e.g. a contribution to housing repairs or safety checks.
Dave Catleugh (Livin Tenant)
3 Honister Place
