John Wright Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 20 minutes ago, CallMeCurious said: When they built Tescos, I beleive they had to make a concrete raft with dozens of individual piles to get a stable foundation. Heard the plans described as a hairbrush, there were that many. That's because, apparently, the land there is metres deep of silt and sediment before it gets to bedrock. But I could be wrong. That’s why it’s called Lake Road 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollag Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 (edited) On 2/16/2024 at 7:37 PM, Kopek said: The problem with opposite Tesco is '[how to shore up' the riverbank and how to do it cheaply to not affect home prices???? Similar to the Milest0ne/sports centre, it worked well there Edited February 17 by mollag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Poppins Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 (edited) Going back to the original topic of the old Newson's building, I don't understand why they don't just back a digger into it late one Saturday night/Sunday morning when there's nobody around (granted have to be done after the Saddle closed). It works in other parts of the world. Planning and Building Control won't have the balls to make them rebuild it. Edited February 18 by Hairy Poppins 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyDave Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 2 hours ago, CallMeCurious said: Doesn't seem to be a problem for a developer in Ramsey on the Sulby river. Has that been passed then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Peters Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 On 2/16/2024 at 7:29 PM, daisy said: There are more than enough homes - developers are controlling their own stock to THEIR advantage not to the advantage of the Manx FTB or any average buyer. You continually spout nonsense that because not all the green has been built on it's OK to keep building on it. Its absolutely NOT OK. Once OUR - not YOUR green fields have gone - they've gone. Please do not assume the position of being Manx nor assume to speak for all Manx people. If anything is immoral it is the practice adopted by developers ..which you should be familiar with. When Manx families with history going back to the Vikings decide to sell ‘your’ land to developers, it’s the fault of people not born here? It’s always amused me that people blame the developers for their ‘greed’ and not those who sell their bit of your precious Island to them! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 2 hours ago, Hairy Poppins said: Going back to the optional topic of the old Newson's building, I don't understand why they don't just back a digger into it late one Saturday night/Sunday morning when there's nobody around (granted have to be done after the Saddle closed). It works in other parts of the world. Planning and Building Control won't have the balls to make them rebuild it. Probably because there would be a high probability of death, wrecked digger, prison. Or worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 6 hours ago, Stu Peters said: There are more than enough homes - developers are controlling their own stock to THEIR advantage not to the advantage of the Manx FTB or any average buyer. You continually spout nonsense that because not all the green has been built on it's OK to keep building on it. Its absolutely NOT OK. Once OUR - not YOUR green fields have gone - they've gone. Please do not assume the position of being Manx nor assume to speak for all Manx people. If anything is immoral it is the practice adopted by developers ..which you should be familiar with. 6 hours ago, Stu Peters said: When Manx families with history going back to the Vikings decide to sell ‘your’ land to developers, it’s the fault of people not born here? It’s always amused me that people blame the developers for their ‘greed’ and not those who sell their bit of your precious Island to them! I find myself in some agreement with both of the above. Planning and zoning, together with political will, should be the control required to prevent wholesale development of the countryside. When we came here many years ago it was like moving (for us) to live in a national park and the countryside was a big driver in the decision to relocate. Over the years planning and zoning have become, shall we say malleable, and developers acquire land knowing that, this is the case. Political will is needed if Government wish to stop further erosion of this beautiful land. Developers purchase land and then lobby hard for zoning to be altered. We all know that there are a number of factors in play here, not least the parlous state of the islands finances and the contribution to treasury, that the building industry provides. It seems if you are a developer all you need is to get a dimwitted MHK on board, and you can trash wholesale swathes of scenery and green land with no thought for public services at all nor the effect on the islands desirability as a whole. Developers here have become a powerful lobby in politics ! One of the few things the island has left which are attractive is safety and scenery, let's be honest, people aren't going to want to come here for the weather or the NHS or in many cases even for low personal taxation. If we carry on as we are, the island will end up looking like a dormitory town in the UK surrounded by sea ! I am not anti developer but the dog must wag the tail not the other way around. We will end up looking like whatever our elected decide they want us to look like ! 2 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 2 hours ago, asitis said: Planning and zoning, together with political will, should be the control required to prevent wholesale development of the countryside. When we came here many years ago it was like moving (for us) to live in a national park and the countryside was a big driver in the decision to relocate. Over the years planning and zoning have become, shall we say malleable, and developers acquire land knowing that, this is the case. Political will is needed if Government wish to stop further erosion of this beautiful land. Developers purchase land and then lobby hard for zoning to be altered. So to paraphrase - because you came here many years ago and bought a house then (for much less than current prices), they should pull up the drawbridge, stop building houses & let prices inflate further driving away any chance of young families buying and/or settling (as you did)? The planning & zoning system does do what you've said and it's just been through various area plans. Obviously you will never get something that everyone agrees on but it does try to balance housing need with existing settlement boundaries. Yes if you bought a house in the 1980s on the edge of a village/town when the population was 65000 (and larger households), you will no doubt have felt encroached upon from new development. But the context of the Island is still by far majority countryside and there's no real threat to that from predicted housing. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyDave Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 3 hours ago, asitis said: We all know that there are a number of factors in play here, not least the parlous state of the islands finances and the contribution to treasury, that the building industry provides. It seems if you are a developer all you need is to get a dimwitted MHK on board, and you can trash wholesale swathes of scenery and green land with no thought for public services at all nor the effect on the islands desirability as a whole. Like where? Where has this happened in the last 20 years or is it just nonsense posted for the sake of it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 11 minutes ago, CrazyDave said: Like where? Where has this happened in the last 20 years or is it just nonsense posted for the sake of it? Ballasalla 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyDave Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 12 minutes ago, asitis said: Ballasalla That land has been zoned for development for decades. Try again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 1 hour ago, Mercenary said: So to paraphrase - because you came here many years ago and bought a house then (for much less than current prices), they should pull up the drawbridge, stop building houses & let prices inflate further driving away any chance of young families buying and/or settling (as you did)? The planning & zoning system does do what you've said and it's just been through various area plans. Obviously you will never get something that everyone agrees on but it does try to balance housing need with existing settlement boundaries. Yes if you bought a house in the 1980s on the edge of a village/town when the population was 65000 (and larger households), you will no doubt have felt encroached upon from new development. But the context of the Island is still by far majority countryside and there's no real threat to that from predicted housing. Absolutely not pull up the drawbridge, however , imo the island needs to control what it has to offer. Developers will of course prefer to build on green fields, it is bay far the cheapest and most profitable build. That does not mean however that it is the most desirable and current development is doing little to nothing for first time buyers. It is however lining the pockets of developers both through purchase and rentals. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyDave Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 1 minute ago, asitis said: Absolutely not pull up the drawbridge, however , imo the island needs to control what it has to offer. Developers will of course prefer to build on green fields, it is bay far the cheapest and most profitable build. That does not mean however that it is the most desirable and current development is doing little to nothing for first time buyers. It is however lining the pockets of developers both through purchase and rentals. How is building new homes not doing anything f for first time buyers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 9 minutes ago, CrazyDave said: That land has been zoned for development for decades. Try again Pity the schools and Doctors were not zoned for development too ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyDave Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 New intakes at schools have been reducing for years, with four years from 2023 looking like the lowest for decades. It’s not an issue. Drs and dentists are an issue all over Britain and not a reason to stop developing the island. The buildings are fine but we could do with more drs same as the UK. New houses for them to live in and a bigger list of patients surely makes ballasalla a more attractive place for a GP to consider relocating to than it was ten years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.