Chieveley; are you thinking of moving there? Options

[GMR]

If you are looking for a nice quiet place to live where there is no anti social behaviour, no trouble and it is nice and quiet then Chieveley isn't the place for you.

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=14430

[JeffG]

Not sure what your point is. I don't see any change in demographic there, since they are planning to replace one estate with another with presumably better housing.

[GMR]

Not sure what your point is. I don't see any change in demographic there, since they are planning to replace one estate with another with presumably better housing.

My point was social housing and what you get with it. If you are saying that that was already there then what I said originally still stands.

[Jacklets]

Agree with JeffG and I don't understand what your point is either? As he rightly points out - they are simply looking to replace homes already there so the existing residents don't have to
leave the village.

Or are you saying that villages shouldn't have affordable or social housing?!

[ossy1]

Last time I went to Bardown the majority of it had already been flattened. The houses still standing were those that have been purchased by the occupiers over the years. They are just rebuilding an estate, so again I don't really see your point GMR?? Affordable housing does not always mean the place will end up like Turnpike. Key workers are entitled to affordable housing so what are you saying about them????

[On the edge]

Last time I went to Bardown the majority of it had already been flattened. The houses still standing were those that have been purchased by the occupiers over the years. They are just rebuilding an estate, so again I don't really see your point GMR?? Affordable housing does not always mean the place will end up like Turnpike. Key workers are entitled to affordable housing so what are you saying about them????

Odd isn't it - 'affordable housing' in rural communities 'council housing' in urban. What's wrong with Turnpike? Does the type of house you live in really determine your status? Probably needs another thread but Ihave a problem with 'affordable housing' if we paid people properly they wouldn't need it.

[ossy1]

Odd isn't it - 'affordable housing' in rural communities 'council housing' in urban. What's wrong with Turnpike? Does the type of house you live in really determine your status? Probably needs another thread but Ihave a problem with 'affordable housing' if we paid people properly they wouldn't need it.

I'm sure there really isnt much wrong with Turnpike but GMR makes it sound like its the bronx!! Therefore my reference to his post.

[GMR]

Agree with JeffG and I don't understand what your point is either? As he rightly points out - they are simply looking to replace homes already there so the existing residents don't have to
leave the village.

Or are you saying that villages shouldn't have affordable or social housing?!

That is not what I am saying at all. I am saying that social housing can devalue the area. Granted the majority of people who live in such houses are ok, but there are the few that spoil it for the rest. Sadly there is no means to solve this problem if that was the case.

[GMR]

Last time I went to Bardown the majority of it had already been flattened. The houses still standing were those that have been purchased by the occupiers over the years. They are just rebuilding an estate, so again I don't really see your point GMR?? Affordable housing does not always mean the place will end up like Turnpike. Key workers are entitled to affordable housing so what are you saying about them????

I agree with what you are saying. My point was though that if you get a troubled family in a social house it is very hard to removed them (if not impossible). It is the trouble makers that devalue the area and make it hard for those that live there already.

[GMR]

I'm sure there really isnt much wrong with Turnpike but GMR makes it sound like its the bronx!! Therefore my reference to his post.

No, that is true... there are good people in Turnpike and and some very nice areas. What concerns the majority though are those that don't abide by the rules. Police cars are always on Turnpike.

[ossy1]

No, that is true... there are good people in Turnpike and and some very nice areas. What concerns the majority though are those that don't abide by the rules. Police cars are always on Turnpike.

Really thought you never saw them

[GMR]

Really thought you never saw them

When one is having debates on such matters one never talks about the good ones. When you watch the news you very rarely hear good things. The reason for that is, is that it should be the norm. We only get annoyed and start discussing certain things if it affects our lives, or other peoples lives.

You are a police officer Ozzy1; when was the last time you were called out to a blissfully happy couple who have had no problems? You deal with and discuss the ones that give you, or the police, the most problems. If I was a fly on your wall I could easily say "Really thought you never saws them' the way that you talk.

[Strafin]

If you go and have a look round any estate you can clearly see which areas are the "council houses", they are generally occupied by people who don't work, and have little self respect or money. A mix which often leads to scruffy houses and gardens, antisocial behaviour, and no sense of "fitting in". However this is not the same for everyone, and as has already been mentioned there is (or was) already an estate there.

[GMR]

If you go and have a look round any estate you can clearly see which areas are the "council houses", they are generally occupied by people who don't work, and have little self respect or money. A mix which often leads to scruffy houses and gardens, antisocial behaviour, and no sense of "fitting in". However this is not the same for everyone, and as has already been mentioned there is (or was) already an estate there.

The question is; why is that? Why don't they want to fit in?

[Darren]

define "fitting in"

[Strafin]

They tend to not mix with people from the private houses, their social practices and interests tend to be very different. It is much the same both ways (private dwellers don't mix with the council dwellers), I'm not having a dig just stating an observation.

[user23]

It takes two sides to create a "them and us" culture and there seem to be a few people suggesting it's the "them" that are the problem when perhaps they themselves are also part of it, if you see what I mean.

[Strafin]

Exactly what I just said!

[GMR]

It takes two sides to create a "them and us" culture and there seem to be a few people suggesting it's the "them" that are the problem when perhaps they themselves are also part of it, if you see what I mean.

That is true, but only one side to not want to be part of the community.

When good kids are good and bad kids are bad what part do the good kids have in making the bad kids bad?

[Jacklets]

That is true, but only one side to not want to be part of the community.

When good kids are good and bad kids are bad what part do the good kids have in making the bad kids bad?

What evidence do you have state that "they" don't want to be part of the community, or that the bad kids only come from social housing?