Angela Rayner and building more houses.

[upinaballoon]

I believe she's going to make a statement today or soon, about plans for house-building.

What would you like her to take into consideration as she makes these plans and implements them?

Would you send her an e-mail to say what you think about it all?

[email protected]
[email protected]

Thank you for that advice.

I don't think I can go back and change my first post, to advise telling your own MP and asking him/her to push it on to Angela Rayner.

Dear Angela,

1. please make building inspection / functional tests for all new builds a fundamental part of house building.

2. please also require all new builds to carry some solar generation

How many storeys high? 5,6,7?

Dear Angela

Please ensure that all flats whether private or social, have access to a private outside space either a balcony or terrace. Also could you make it so that more 1 bed houses are built in the social sector. I'm sure I'm not the only one who would give up my 2 bed house for a 1 bed with a private outside space but will absolutely not entertain the idea of being cooped up in a pokey 1 bed flat.

Yes @upinaballoon the poshest parts of London are the most densely populated - Kensington’s nd Chelsea, Knightsbridge etc. All those 6/7 storey mansion blocks can fit in a lot of people, yet they’re definitely not undesirable! I think they could work further out in zone 2/3 too, IF (and it is a big if) well designed for families etc.

Please accept that for a lot of people living in semi-rural locations that feature smaller market towns, there is very little public transport and the road network to the cities is already gridlocked. Building more housing without improving the road network or public transport is simply going to add to the misery and massively increase pollution. And that's before we even get to other infrastructure needed to support all these new developments, such as schools, GP surgeries, etc.

Planning needs to be planned nationally. Setting local targets based on land availability is not the right approach on its own. Chepstow in south Wales is a great example of this, where a significant proportion of the residents in west Gloucestershire travel through it to get to Bristol and where the planning department there won't care because Chepstow is outside their boundaries.

Planning needs to be focused on expansion along already well-served routes/rail networks.

All political parties know we need much more housing - social and affordable/close to work places so that ultimately our economy can grow.
Its ironic that the Conservatives are the party of wealth creation but it’s their members kyboshing housing developments which are needed for this aim.

I would like to see more thought put into whether the infrastructure can cope with the new builds. Two hideous tower blocks are being built near me but nothing is being done re: doctors, dentists etc.

It also worries me that they will allow building on flood plains. There's a piece of land near hear that floods frequently. Idiots have applied for planning permission on multiple occasions but it's always been rejected. There's enough building on flood plains as it is, please don't make it easier!

Please stop building on high quality farmland in a dry area of the country. There's enough water for the crops. There won't be enough for millions of extra people.

Stop making every estate a huge cul-de-sac: put a few links roads through to reduce the pressure on the existing road network.

Make sure there are enough GPs, schools etc for all the thousands of new people currently appearing in rural England and wondering why the locals are a bit pissed off.

Edited to add:
And more social housing, with preference being given to local young people.

All new homes should have downstairs loos so older people avoid needing residential care.

I love their big mansion blocks

If (when lol) I win the lottery right there, in one of those, is where I would re locate but in reality I live on a South London Housing Estate.
One can dream though.

You mean electricity supply, water treatment, broadband infrastructre investment
plus all the usual school places, GP per recommended ratio population[1], Hospital places, maternity, dentistry facilities.

And can they all be really well insulated homes too with a big enough garden for people to enjoy outdoor space in case we're ever locked down again.

Can they all be rental too? At sensible rents. To make working worthwhile.

[1]In comparison to other nations, England has a very low proportion of doctors relative to the population. The average number of doctors per 1,000 people in OECD EU nations is 3.7, but England has just 2.9 ref

Audit all social housing.

Make sure there are no social tenants who have property abroad. Many do and even let it out while occupiying council housing here. That's not right.

Others don't even live in the allocated social housing in the UK and sublet it.

None of this should be happening but it does and no one cares about it. It's all about building.

And make sure there are parks, playgrounds and dog walking alleys. Otherwise everybody is going to suffer with MH issues.

I’d say be very careful building houses in a hurry.

Don’t build them unless there are school places/doctors available for the inhabitants.

Don't build them unless there are sufficient transport systems for workers to commute to where the jobs are.

Have massive fines as a deterrent to shoddy workmanship. Lots of new builds are blighted with problems. Lots of people involved in the actual building don’t have the required skills and the new inhabitants will suffer as a result. This is already happening and building on a mega scale will exacerbate it. Where are the builders who will do all this building? Our existing builders already have jobs don’t they?

Listen to the local community before destroying it.

Hi OP. What's your view on the subject?

They need to look at who needs housing, what sort of housing they need, and where it needs to be. They also have to look at local infrastructure (roads, schools, doctors etc) and if they embark on large projects, then they have to improve the infrastructre as well.

I also hope that they build on brownfield sites, and allow only those developments which are not 4+bedroomed executive homes. I'm sick of the sight of thousands of them round here. We don't need more of them.

Round here (the very outer limits of commuterland), house prices are astronomical and local wages aren't. For people who grew up here and work locally, they find it almost impossible to find anything affordable. Buy-to-let landlords being 99.9% responsible for that.

I think they should build good old-fashioned council housing and flats for people who can't afford to either get on the property ladder or pay sky-high private rent. I also think they should stop right to buy. The properties need to have covenants on them to prevent right-to-buy landlords getting their hands on them. Only those who actually live in the property as their main home should be allowed to buy it.

Yes No more sweat boxes

Tighten up the rules on how many affordable homes must be built by developers. I thought it was 50% but someone on here said it’s as little as 3% on some developments.

Infrastructure infrastructure infrastructure is what I would be saying which is why none of this will work without significant investment. I’m not in Uk but since leaving I’m in a country in which every new development is planned accordingly with new schools, shops and public transport. It’s not about building more houses it’s about place making and you will get none of it past the NIMBYs in UK especially in affluent areas who can afford their own KCs who will drag and delay developments through the courts

No. Every development must fund high quality public and active travel links.

• Please include good infrastructure - don't just build houses, build GP surgeries, schools, shops and bus routes.
• Build good quality houses with decent size gardens.
• Stop right to buy until we have enough social housing - the policy only works if social housing is replaced.

That’s not an attractive proposition: please come and live here, but no car.

Give the public a realistic timeframe. These houses are not going to be built within the next 5 years. People should be informed of the process and how long it takes. Long term goals are fine. Just be honest about it.

< hollow laugh >