To think that places forced to build houses should build them for the local community?

[BathFullOfEels]

I’m probably going to sound really thick here as I don’t understand how this stuff works at all. If I am being thick then please be kind.

I live in a beautiful part of the country. It is also an area with high unemployment, low wages and the biggest employer is tourism. The council area I live in, like many places in the country, have been told they have to build x amount of houses in the next few years. So there’s currently plans to build what would equate to about a 15% increase in population if these houses were filled.

But the 3 primary schools are already full and people are driving to outlying villages to get their kids in there, they then get priority as they have siblings there so people in those villages are then having to drive their kids to even further away to get them to school. The secondary school has said that in 3 years they will have to turn local pupils away as there won’t be enough space for them. The next nearest secondary school is a half hour drive in winter, easily doubled as soon as tourists start arriving from Easter time. This other secondary school has also stated it will be full.

There were 3 GP surgeries in town, one recently closed due to lack of staff and people registered at the other 2 surgeries. It’s pretty much impossible to get an appointment unless your heads hanging off, people are driving an hour to the nearest A and E as there is no other way to see a doctor (I don’t do this or condone this btw!).

The building plans for this housing estate suggests giving a whopping £500 towards new play equipment for the local playground. Nothing for schools, doctors, anything else. The council has approved it as, apparently, it will be housing that will be attractive as second homes. 5% will be set aside as affordable housing (don’t know if this means council housing or not).

Surely the purpose of forcing councils to build estates over beautiful areas of the countryside is to provide much needed housing? Is there anything that says anywhere it has to be for, not necessarily locals who have lived here all their life, people who will actually be living locally and are in need of housing?

For the first time in my life I’m so cross I want to write a letter to my MP. But I don’t know what to say without sounding like a NIMBY. I have to say I much prefer the field and woodlands that are there at the moment but I do understand that affordable housing is needed. To me though it just sounds like they’re building a massive holiday park and if they’re not then they need contributions towards local schools and doctors.

I understand the position especially in coastal or rural areas that are popular with tourism. A month or so ago i had a week in Devon near Bideford. All the houses near the coast were rented out as holiday lets. I was in one of them. I checked the house prices and they were clearly high due to tourism. How do locals manage? Well they dont.

But nimbyism can be applied to so many areas of life.

For example in Lancashire the locals complain about fracking. Why not frack down south in ruralshire?

In Manchester parts of the city have been rammed full of "asylum seekers" rather than distributing them evenly across the country.

I didnt see any people that i perceived to be asylum seekers in devon or rural somerset.

I think the problem is that services will always follow demand rather than leading ins privatised economy where new schools must be academies, health services need to centralise and so on.
Re school places, many councils now prioritise catchment children over siblings out of catchment to avoid the problem you describe. I'm surprised there are still councils doing it the other way still.
Tourism / second homes grrr. The tax on these needs to be lots higher imo.