we all agree on the need for more houses but just not here !!

Planning is not the bottleneck. Large builders are sitting on land with pp for estates.

Raynor wants new builds but also wants private sector to pay. Private sector only builds what/when/where they get the best price. They aren't interested in social/affordable housing.

Everyone blames planning. Most of the planning backlog comes from small private requests like house extensions etc.

Raynor hates newts. But why is she trying to build on green sites when jobs are in cities? Because middle classes/WFH/rich retirees like rural. Big builders build houses the MC want.

Building on green fields has nothing to do with the housing crisis

I think that Government should focus more in building social housing along with infrastructure to support it.

If there was more social housing, of all types, available not just to low income, but also average income households, it would take the heat out of the private rental sector. However, they should not be on lifetime tenancies. It should be possible to ensure fluidity between housing types so that you live in a lifestage appropriate property up and downsizing as necessary.

It could give people breathing space and time to save for deposits. A lack of demand for private rental could also release a lot of housing for sale.

All the new housing could be highly insulated with all the latest energy saving tech in so would have minimal running costs, enabling occupants to save more money.

I don't really understand why we can't have a cross Party approach to the housing situation. Other countries manage it. Housing shouldn't be politicised, it's a basic human need. The big housebuilders have far too much influence over Government.

BBC article about this new development in Sittingbourne is interesting. The campaigner is saying that it already has one of the worst GP to patient ratios in the country. I think if they are going to approve these mega developments they need to be ensuring that the infrastructure is putt in place first before any of the houses go up. That would focus the developers’ minds.

I also think we are currently overlooking the elephant in the room of unaffordable building costs relative to social rents. There’s no business case for RSLs for building social rentals at the moment in areas where these are most needed

We are an over populated island with unaffordable houses in a lot of areas , yet the ones in charge probably live in naice areas with second homes and hardly any of the problems we have to deal with.
I really despair

Reducing demand would seem like a better idea. Crazy to try to build the equivalent of Sheffield plus Liverpool every year.

I live in an overpopulated part of Surrey. They are trying to release agricultural green belt land for housing, but the local roads, GPs, hospitals, schools, already cannot cope. Once that green land is built on, it is lost forever. I think it is wrong to put housing above nature. We have gone too far in that direction already.

They are finally redeveloping in town, in the center on brownfield and by the station. High rise flats, but in the town, access to everything. They are also building lots of student accommodations, which in theory should free up family homes which have been hmo's.

We have to start building up in city centers. Everywhere else in the world does.

we have a couple of houses that we rent out. I'd love to get rid of them but the capital gains tax we will have to pay is putting us off, especially as it might take us into higher tax brackets

Large reductions in property prices also affect those that have already bought that will one day look to expand into bigger houses, eg one of my children will at some point move to a house rather than their tiny flat (when they start a family). If the prices plummet they wont be able to do that

Already we cant get a dentist/doctor's appointment, drive anywhere without traffic jams. This would just get worse

In a town of endless brownfield sites they built on our farmland

In a town in dire need of affordable housing they built expensive non affordable housing

In a town where you NEED a car they built expensive housing with no parking spaces nowhere near a bus stop

I could go on but I won't bore you

It's not necessarily just not wanting the houses/people there. I live in a rural village that is growing rapidly by stealth - the same developer buying up small parcels of land and building small developments rather than one big one - thus keeping the amount they have to contribute to the community to minimum. Our school just isn't big enough and can't expand due to space. Our roads are already too busy, and we don't have shops, post office etc here to support a large community, nor suitable places for these amenities. Public transport is nonexistent. The developers have been inconsiderate and insensitive to the community in their approach, at every turn. More houses just isn't reasonable without some attention to these things.

I'm definitely not moving !
Mine is a semi so nothing fancy, but would suit a young family.
I'd like a detached home, but the costs involved would be eye watering so I'm not going anywhere. I know I'm part of the problem, but you can only think of yourself sometimes and we need a home we can actually afford to heat ( another thought with bigger homes too)
Lots of people in the same boat I would imagine !

This is a huge part of the problem. Most people can’t afford to move up without family help. Ditto older people who would like to downsize.

Affordable new builds around here are £400,000 for a tiny 3 bed with no garage and tiny garden. I don’t personally call that affordable.

I have to care for a relative like this. She sucks the absolute life out of me complaining about the new builds going up down the road. The house she lives in is ex council (but a bloody big one, 3 beds, 3 baths, 2 receptions and a sun room) which she was given to for nothing by her parents after they bought it for 8k in the 80’s. It’s actually ended up being built into a gated community that she benefits from. She’s never had children, never worked a day in her life as supported by her husband, who unfortunately passed away sooner than expected but left her a stonking great army pension. And she slags off the working class (she considers herself middle) after getting everything handed to her on a silver platter. She regularly tries to start campaigns to stop local housing developments

In our small street there are 3 x over 85s living on their own in townhouses. Unable to climb the stairs safely and they are living in 3/4 bedroom houses.

It would be so stressful for them to move now but I assume the cost put them off moving before. They might be able to get a smaller house in the area but by the time they pay taxes and moving etc it really wouldn't be worth their time financially.

And yes wouldn’t it be amazing if houses cost only a small multiple of the average salary in that area (say 3 or 4 times) like they used to - but can’t see how that would ever happen in London

But if circa 1 million people keep coming into the country every year, it will be impossible to keep building enough houses for them all no matter where they are. And I suspect most of these houses won’t have all the additional school places, gps and hospitals to go with them either

People are also sitting on their assets because moving is so expensive and the next one up the ladder is so much more money than it used to be. If prices were not as silly , then maybe more people would move home and free up the more affordable homes at the lower end of the market
These so called ' affordable' homes arnt that affordable because it's much more to build them too. It is a vicious circle

As much as I eye roll about the NIMBYs, I kind of get where they’re coming from. They move to a particular place because of its particular characteristics and then they announce another 1000 houses stuck to the side of it, that have the potential to totally change the character of the place they paid to move to.

Brownfield is obviously part of the solution but those sites aren’t usually in particularly nice areas, don’t have existing infrastructure, or at high rise blocks (and not everyone wants a flat).

In an absolutely ideal world i'd love the government to bring the cost of homes down for everyone so it's on an equal footing .. completely undoable and wouldn't EVER happen, but in my head it would sort out so many problems ( although I'm sure people will now tell me that it wouldn't !)
Building over green belt land doesn't seem to be the answer either. I live in an overpopulated part of Essex and it will just make things worse with more and more homes going up everywhere. I agree , it's an impossible situation though and what can they do ?
I Hope people may have more sensible ideas soon ..