To think that people who object to planning applications for new homes are selfish

[LauderSyme]

My aim is not to be goady or induce a bunfight (though I well understand some of you might think that), but rather to try to understand a different point of view without judging it.
I live in a generally well-heeled and very "civilised" area; most of the properties are immaculately kept, many are sizable with large gardens, the public realm is well-maintained and crime rates are relatively low. It is amongst the top retirement hotspots in the UK. It is a lovely place to live and I appreciate our quality of life.
I am a tenant who has never owned a property. I work full-time but have a low household income, partly due to being a single parent. My flat is one of the ahem less desirable properties in my area. I would dearly like to have a secure home and a garden for my dc, but the only way I am likely to achieve this is if I am lucky enough to inherit.
The exorbitant cost of housing is mainly driven by an acute shortage of stock. Developers frequently put forward planning applications to build new homes in my area, but without fail, residents form protest groups to fight the proposals tooth and nail. Many applications are ultimately refused or watered down due to local opposition.
AIBU to think that this is selfish? Most of the protesters are fortunate enough to own their own home in a nice area, and it seems that they wish to deny this privilege to other people. Do they just not care that other people's lives are blighted by the housing crisis, as long as they are not inconvenienced? I feel that they are motivated purely by self-interest; does anyone have any other convincing arguments?

if schools couldn't cope I daresay they would enlarge the school or send some pupils to a different one

Enlarge it into where exactly or where are these mythical schools that can take the over flow from other schools.

I know why don't we build houses in the Scottish highlands then we can get a high speed rail link installed to get people where they need to be

it makes me sad that the term 'village' will cease to exist the way things are going

Not sure about the 'stop older people under occupying' line. If older people all downsize, unless they move onto developments for the elderly as my parents did, will just be putting even more pressure on the 2 bed accommodation.
Most developers builds lot of four bed houses so families have the options if they can afford it which is usually the issue.

You can't have it every way. We need to build homes.

You can't seem to connect the two thoughts.

Well at least I answered your question. All I've seen from you is a percentage and some platitudes. Since you claimed a certain percentage was built on I asked how much would be an acceptable percentage in your view, it's a simple question that you refuse to answer and yet I apparently "can't link two thoughts".

BTW OP Many applications are ultimately refused or watered down due to local opposition.

Not around here they aren't. Local groups can in any case only get planners to turn something down on the basis of valid criteria such as flooding or sustainability, so it's not just " we don't like/want it" as such objections carry zero weight.

We were the first to live in our first flat in a huge new build estate the farmer who sold the land is rumoured to have gone to the Bahamas to retire on the proceeds. The estate includes a day nursery, a primary school, three children's playgrounds, a GP surgery, dentist, vet's, pub, chip shop and small supermarket. Also a network of cycle paths and several areas protected for wildlife.

That's by far the exception, though. The developments proposed locally more recently have had absolutely ludicrous plans with wholly inadequate parking (less than one space per property!) and insufficient infrastructure.

I'll also add that you can object to a proposal all you like, but the planning department should only take into account objections on certain very specific grounds. If proposed developments are being refused, the objections are likely sound.

I agree strongly with pp (can't find the post now) who pointed out the discrepancy of charging 20% VAT on redevelopment and 0% on new build. Genuine brownfield redevelopment ought to have the same low tax rate as current new build, and new build on green belt taxed at 20% minimum. The government can and should make it financially attractive to redevelop empty/crumbling property.

New build round here is awful. Pointless bathroom per bedroom so you can barely walk round the bed, and no loft space or cupboard under the stairs. If you need five bedrooms then the chances are that you also own a vacuum cleaner and a few boxes of Christmas decorations in need of a home.

Since you claimed a certain percentage was built on I asked how much would be an acceptable percentage in your view

That's a hugely complicated question (as i'm sure you know) and one that I don't have the means or information to put an actual number on. I doubt anyone on this thread does.

My point is simply that 14% is not a huge amount, that posters claiming the UK is 'full' are grossly exaggerating and that we can go beyond 14% without great detriment.

Cross posted. Said five-bed houses don't sell until the developers drop the price by 25% at least, which also immediately devalues every other house on the estate.

I don't know what makes me despair more: the abject failure of local authorities to manage development sensibly and therefore address the concerns that are raised with some justification in a few places; the naked, insidious NIMBYism which pervades everywhere else; or the utter crapness of far too many new builds.

Parking has been rightly mentioned upthread as a serious issue, but I just want a family home with a dining room and some storage space!

LaurieMarlow

Your (and others) repeated calling of "Nimby" does your argument no favours.

It is just a way to try and goad people and shutdown the discussion.

My friend doesn't want the houses built next to her because it is a flood plain, it not only directly affects her and her neighbours but anyone stupid enough to buy the houses it is a stupid place to build houses. But that makes her a nimby

I would like to see new builds but want to see the infrastructure in place, decent quality builds, and the the developers forced to stick to the plans, but this apparently makes me a nimby.

when I owned my house we had a private clean water and sewerage system, a builder wanted to build a house that could only have water and sewerage by connecting to private water lines, we blocked the build, because of the legal ramifications to us if the system went down to a house that had no legal reason to be on our system. Yet nimby for wanting to protect our legal rights.

In short
New builds yes.
But do it properly.

My point is simply that 14% is not a huge amount, that posters claiming the UK is 'full' are grossly exaggerating and that we can go beyond 14% without great detriment.

In my humble opinion, referring to percentages as "proof" we aren't full without being prepared to go on and say what percentage would constitute full renders the percentage argument meaningless, that's all.

I think we're all agreed that we need to satisfy rising demand for housing - the means of doing that are contentious and I don't accept that OPs claim that any objections to particular plans are automatically selfish.

stubbornstains completely agree.

To all those who moan about people who object to planning applications - you can actively support development as well - if you feel that development should go ahead then write in and say why, you can just click on the link on the council website for comments.

Of course objectors will want to instruct lawyers to try and defeat an application- they are up against a developer and a LA who will be very well represented, and they - unlike developers have little scope for appeal if they lose. In addition instructing a lawyer isn't a magic bullet - if you have no case then you are not likely to succeed- and if your QC does manage to bamboozle a planning committee or an inspector then the developer has a further right of appeal.

It depends on the context.

if schools couldn't cope I daresay they would enlarge the school or send some pupils to a different one
That attitude is part of the problem ...how long do you think it takes to get a school built - find suitable land, get planning permission, get the money together, actually build it and then staff it, get it up and running
Even if you just extend current schools - assuming there is space in the grounds - for a year plus the children are going to be working in/next to a building site...with all the issues that go with that (including child protection ones).
And of course any extra land near a school is likely to be the school's playing fields - so no/reduced outside space for the children to do sport etc - and next we will be talking about the obesity crisis and getting children to exercise more.
And building extra class rooms won't increase dining room or hall space - whole school assembly? forget it - not possible..how long should lunch be spread out - 3 or more sittings?

And that is ignoring the fact that you need more teaching staff - for both options - we currently have a shortage - how long does it take to train a teacher? Would anyone like their DC to be in a school staff with only newly qualified, not experienced teachers?
The housing crisis is not just a shortage of actual places for people to live, a lot is about people wanting to buy their own home - which is fine and understandable but then you have to also look at where they are currently living - in rental property - so look at the buy to let market...and tenancy rules. There are not thousands upon thousands upon thousands of homeless people - most are living somewhere...
(And the children are already in a school somewhere ...so when they relocate a couple of spaces will free up in several schools - not enough to get rid of a whole class -whilst another school will be deluged)
And as someone mentioned up thread - immigration comes into the housing crisis (and the NHS under crisis and school place shortages) - our population has been rapidly increasing for the last 10+ years through immigration. With no control on the numbers, there was no ability to forward plan...possibly, depending on the terms of Brexit and the outcome, demand will decrease or at least the increase in demand should slow...
We might end up with lots of empty houses ...probably not the new builds on green belt- as prices plummet they will be come more affordable ...just lots of empty derelict urban houses...(a bit like the terraces in Manchester/Salford - where they couldn't give them away) and lots of people in negative equity... and no green space and not enough agricultural land left to feed the people left...

The same people who shout about needing infrastructure are also the same people who oppose said infrastructure. Near my parents there is an ongoing battle opposing a new road around the outside of the village which would seriously ease the congestion through the village. It will likely get passed eventually because traffic is an utter nightmare but when they're out with their petitions their main points to oppose it seem to be house prices and it spoiling the view. Classic NIMBYism.

Our village school is a listed Victorian one. The only place to enlarge would be onto the children's playing field. No thanks.

Well if they are opposing a new road because of a view and house prices then they won't succeed will they? But we do live in a democracy with a planning system that allows residents views to be heard so they have every right to put their case.

The same people who shout about needing infrastructure are also the same people who oppose said infrastructure.

Not always, I'd be happier about the 4000 houses being built around here if there was even a cursory nod to any road or public transport improvements.

Instead the local authority makes the developer give each house a wanky leaflet detailing which of the infrequent inconvenient and expensive buses the new residents will not use. Great use of resources.

Infastructure doesn't just come in the form of widening a road.

It comes in the form of cycle paths, that join you to local amenities, schools - so people living in the new houses don't have to get in cars to travel to a distance school. Shops, doctors, etc

Along with railways & buses

YANBU

People without homes don't get a say in the system which is awful.

People keep saying we are short of houses but if so why are there empty houses and always plenty for sale? I think it's more to do with high prices than actual shortage of buildings, building more won't change this as they will be expensive too, new houses tend to be more expensive than older houses. I feel sad that our fields and infrastructure are being destroyed for what gain?

Back in the 60s I went to a brand new school. A developer had built a big estate with little 2 bed semis to 5 bed detached. A small shopping area and a school.

They got snapped up by mainly young married couples who immediately fell pregnant 4 years the school had an influx of new children. the school couldn't cope.

In my class we had years J1 & j2 (years 3&4) put together and split into 3 classes and the same for J3 &J4 (years 5&6) in my class we had 56 pupils. The register was taken by shouting out your number. The school did try to expand but ran out of portakabins.

Over crowding in schools is not a new thing

In the town I live in,over 16 years we have had thousands of new builds go up. The road outside my home is hell, it's a 40 limit but because it's close to the A46 cars come off and speed into town. The surrounding roads are slow and always jammed. The road noise is so bad and traffic starts to build up from 5.30am until 11.30pm. What once was a nice quiet neighbourhood with relatively quite roads is now almost intolerable. Our schools are overflowing our hospital is on it's last legs and our Police station isn't manned at night . Now we find out there are plans to build more homes. We are lucky most of us have huge gardens but a lot of our neighbours are selling the land and building 4 or 5 homes. At this rate we won't have any green spaces left

ethelb of course people without homes get a say. You can actively support development; you can get involved with your councils local plan and lobby for more affordable housing; you can get involved with the parish and town councils neighbourhood plan.

Ultimately you can use your vote to vote at local and national level for whoever you think best represents your interests. It's very easy to moan about nimbys and the system but far more worthwhile to try and actually do something.