To hate Nimbys?

[AgaPanthers]

"A campaign group has started a petition calling on Guildford Borough Council to ditch a study which proposes building 800 new homes each year.

Guildford Greenbelt Guardians (GGG) claims the draft strategic housing market assessment (SHMA), which was prepared by consultants GL Hearn, is not fit for purpose"

I had a look at their website, which is here:

www.guildfordgreenbeltguardians.co.uk/contact/4581459303

The address in question is here:

maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=down+place,+hogs+back,+guildford&hl=en&ll=51.234918,-0.626478&spn=0.027892,0.052314&sll=51.241515,-0.565423&sspn=0.111121,0.209255&hq=down+place,+hogs+back,+guildford&t=h&z=15

accessed via this nice private road:

maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=down+place,+hogs+back,+guildford&hl=en&ll=51.228527,-0.618625&spn=0.006974,0.013078&sll=51.241515,-0.565423&sspn=0.111121,0.209255&hq=down+place,+hogs+back,+guildford&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=51.228527,-0.618625&panoid=TulwkXGRLLz76fMWXMOy1A&cbp=12,353.2,,0,0.66

As they say on their other website, savehogsback.co.uk (same address) this 'forms part of London's Green Belt'.

AIBU, or is it a but fucking hypocritical to complain about development on the green belt, when your own house is on the self-same sodding land?

If they lived in a flat in the middle of Guildford, and wanted to preserve the countryside for all, I would have a great deal more sympathy. But these people just want it all for themselves! 'No building on the green belt except for the buildings that we own.'

I would feel a bit sick if I signed up to this campaign and then realised it was just someone trying to preserve the value of their own house at the expense of hundreds of people needing homes.

[CFSKate]

Where is it going to end? Population grows, build more houses, so will population stop growing? I don't want to see this country concreted over.

[ShebaRabbit]

Infill housing should come before greenfield. but big developers don't like this because they cant cram so many units in as cheaply as the land is much more expensive.
If you think any houses built on that land will be affordable for young people/families currently overcrowded in flats then you are deluded. I've only ever heard developers speak as if building on greenfield sites is some sort of public service. Never heard a planner say it. Urban sprawl and ribbon development are inefficient and environmentally dubious ways to house people.
Even if that proposed estate was built to be affordable housing (very unlikely given the premium that address will bring)unless you have a car you'll be left standing in the rain with your kids waiting on an unreliable bus that may or may not show up to get anywhere. You'll have to rely on the increasingly expensive corner shop as your car-owning neighbours whizz past you to the out of town supermarket.

[RedToothBrush]

HS2 = bollocks.

It will save 30mins on a trip to Manchester. And will cost an extortionate amount for little gain and could be better spend. The House of Lords most recent comments about it back up that view.

NIMBYS = often hilarious

Google Lymm and Netto for comedy snobbishness. They approved a supermarket thinking they were getting a Waitrose or an M&S food and are getting a Netto. Cue outrage and petitions.

[straighttothepoint]

HS2 = bollocks - most expensive bollocks I have ever seen

I would hate to have a Netto or Tesco where I live, happy with Waitress and M&S. Nice areas have the latter, says it all.

[AlecTrevelyan006]

the country is NOT going to be concreted over. Not in my lifetime, nor that of my children of even my grandchildren.

There are around 25million homes in the UK and in total they only cover about 2% of the land. At the current rate of housebuilding the stock is increasing by about 0.4% per year. So, it's going take about 300 years to double the number of homes.

Three quarters of the homes that will exist in this country in 2115 have already been built.

[straighttothepoint]

but whereas towns were once separated by green, they are slowly merging together so town x merges straight into town b, and the fight for schools, roads, doctors, sewage systems, parking and so on gets worse and worse.

[Abraid2]

I don't give a damn about being called a Nimby and would do anything I can to stop my rural areaa bolt hole of many Londoners at weekends and Bank HOlidays for long walksbeing concreted over. Once the countryside has gone it has gone for good. Along with the wildlife and fresh air. My district is being urbanised and our population will more than double. Nobody was asked if we minded being turned into a suburb and we are just expected to put up and shut up. People are very upset about it and feel powerless. Every week another field is dug up and more houses pop up. Not affordable ones, either.

[AlecTrevelyan006]

and where are your children going to live?

[SoupDreggon]

and where are your children going to live?

Well, they don't need to live in a naice house with a garden and two bathrooms built on green belt land.

[DidoTheDodo]

I live in a village and developers (and the "local" town council, which is 10 miles away) want to build 1000 houses, thus increasing the size of the village by 50%.

Infrastructure? (Schools (already full to bursting and nothing for over 11s), drainage (whole estate and main road floods with sewage in rainy weather), supermarket (10 miles away) traffic management (just the one road through the village) Nope, none of that.

It's not surprising people can see trouble ahead and might prefer sensible development, rather than idiotic plans that will affect everyone.

[daisychain01]

"NIMBYs"

a label given to anyone who dares to question the decisions of faceless Government departments, challenge and highlight to citizens the appalling decisions made for reasons other than stated on the marketing blurb.

And it often makes no difference whatsoever.

HS2 is still going to happen despite the proven zilch benefits. I've moved away from the blighted area, I have nothing at stake in HS2 now, but I still fight it, because it's a travesty that should be scrapped and reconsidered in the light of new evidence.

Houses are built on flood plains to meet the short term career goals of politicians and councillors who just want to meet targets in their term of office.