To wonder why so many people are hypocrites when it comes to housing?

[WestminsterCrabby]

Got into quite a heated row discussion last night with some relatives. 🍷

They are Fuming (capital F intended) about all the new housing estates popping up in their leafy village. Apparently its ruined the views, ruined their dog walks yaddah yaddah.

These are couples in their late 50s early 60s whose children are long gone but still live in their large 4 bed detached homes. When I pointed out that perhaps so many new homes wouldnt need to be built (or smaller ones that took up less space) if people only took up the amount of space they needed rather than felt entitled to, they thought I was being very very unreasonable. I disagree!

I appreciate that people living in houses bigger than there needs is not the cause of the housing shortage HOWEVER surely you cant complain about other people needing to be housed while you yourself have 2 bedrooms per person?!?

Drives me mad and it's not the first time I've had conversations like this with people in a similar circumstances.

It makes me sad to see the countryside being converted over as well but people have got to live somewhere.

Aibu here?

Yabu. They are complaining about the housing estates,not the people moving in. You can't objectively say these estates are pretty. It doesn't negate the fact that there is a need for housing.

We have this round our way. The NIMBYs are completely oblivious to the declining birth rate and that a certain amount of development is needed if they want to keep the village school, bus and other amenities going (we’ve already lost a shop).

They are all getting on a bit and are now outraged that carers wont drive from the nearest town (5miles away) and back again, for a quick visit, when fuel is north of £1.60 a litre. Bloody idiots who get what they deserve.

Yes but theyve got too bloody much for too long and thats why they are how they are

I'm on our local community council, we review planning applications, one of the main issues we have is that developers don't want to build two bed bungalows which our village really needs, because they make more money from 4/5 executive homes. It's a nice place to live so local well heeled oldies carry on living in their large houses to stay part of the community.

I agree OP- we at the moment are having huge campaigns in our local area (v popular suburb of a city) to prevent much needed housing being built on some wasteland that is privately owned and they want to sell. The land is mainly used by dog walkers as it’s not safe for children and it’s by a huge park with 2 kids play areas and loads of room for dogs etc. Very NIMBY- ‘there’s too many people here already’ ‘the roads are too busy’ ‘we want to maintain the messy and dangerous area as it is. Whenever they ask me to sign it I politely refuse. We live here because it’s lovely- is it such a surprise others want to live here? You can’t protect prime real estate location for the odd dog Walker. Aaaargh!!

I think the issue I would have is with the size and density of the estates and the fact that there is rarely any new infrastructure to cope with the additional people.

Town I live in has an estate of 600 new properties going up on the edge of town. It's a mixture of everything from 5 bed detached to 2 bed social housing flats, but the roads are so narrow that it's like running a slalom to drive through - no-one uses their garages to park cars because the garages aren't big enough (and many of the properties don't have garages anyway). The houses are far too close together so there's already been neighbour disputes. There has been no allowance for the numbers of children who will be attending local schools (the estate is aimed at families - imagine the number of additional children), no increase in GP provision, the road onto the estate is causing traffic problems on the main road.

Edinburgh is becoming encircled by massive new housing estates, I'm sure every single house will be someone's beloved family home, but they are soulless, heartless estates. Again, houses built too close together, no shops/cafes/amenities, no thought to schooling, medical provision, congestion.

Far more thought needs to be put into building new homes, but it won't happen, because the developers won't make enough billions.

I always wonder how many town planners, people who sit on planning boards etc live on one of these estates? My guess is none.

People probably complained when their properties were being built 50-100 years ago! It's the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude prevalent in certain people that I must admit winds me right up!
I refuse to rattle round in a large family home once my children fly the nest, I'm selling up and getting a small 2 bedroom property so I have a spare room for people to stay but no more.
On a separate note, I always laugh when an older couple goes on one of those property purchasing shows on TV, they allegedly want to downsize but it turns out they 'need' 6 bedrooms so the family can stay over a Christmas.......its one sodding day 🤣

Completely agree.
And I'm in my 50s living in a large house (three secondary school children at home though) in a pretty village. The people occupying new houses have every bit as much right to be in the world as they do and need somewhere to live. Plus, I bet not one of them would turn it down if a developer offered them millions to chop their garden in half and build ten new houses.

People are hypocrites about alot of things.

With housing I much prefer old stock being made good rather than building more. Or building on waste land rather than green.

It drives me mad the way people live in big houses that are unsuitable for their needs and then moan.

Also, TBH, there are many families with one or two children who live in 5/6 bed houses when a 3 bed would do....

NIMBYs, particularly of the boomer generation, drive me mad.

Next time show them a recent BBC article which outlines that in fact 0.1% of the UK is 'heavily built on'.

Presumably these people are happy for a surge in homelessness?!

I had this exact conversation the other day. The biggest issue in my view isn’t the building of affordable housing. It’s the lack of building of bungalows.

I live in a small village that has an aging population. Because of our location we are hugely targeted by developers, and there’s 3 building developments that have either been in construction or planning permission adding approx 1,000 homes to the village - increasing the population by 80%. But they are all three/four/five bed homes. Not a single bungalow.

the result is the elderly people living in the 4 bed houses and want to stay in the village have no where to downsize to. So they stay until they can’t physically live there any longer and end up moving into the care system far quicker than if they were able to stay living independently at home. You would think councils would be able to see this fucking obvious link, especially with such an adult social care crisis

On a separate note, I always laugh when an older couple goes on one of those property purchasing shows on TV, they allegedly want to downsize but it turns out they 'need' 6 bedrooms so the family can stay over a Christmas.......its one sodding day 🤣

And they still need an enormous kitchen they can entertain in.

Oh what a surprise another BOOMER bashing thread 😴

Bungalows tend to have a larger footprint though, you can get fewer of them into the same space.

Absolutely @CounsellorTroi. Along with a garden that could comfortably house a herd of cattle, just so it's big enough for the grand kids to play in when they visit twice a year.....

It would perhaps be sensible for local authorities to pin planning permission to developers building some bungalows, in the same way they sometimes (not enough) have to build some social housing or affordable (!) housing provision to obtain planning approval.

NIMBYs

They have no problem with people living in shiny new builds, housing being built, people living in bigger houses than they need, they just don't want it in their view.

Not In My Back Yard.

They are a bit hypocritical but it's not really an objection to the housing being built, just that it's messing up their view (and possibly their house price).

Makes me think of my IL's. They got all huffy about the nice lad across the street being given a tenancy for his childhood home (LA rented) after his mum and sisters eventually moved away. He'd been privately renting a 2 bed house nearby with his GF and 2 kids when his mum was moving out of his childhood home. The family approached the LA and they agreed to it. That's fine. Houses aren't in huge demand here and the LA do try to work well with the villagers. Lad also pays double rent when he is able so he builds up a massive financial cushion so he's a desirable tenant.

Apparently my IL's decided that you shouldn't be allowed to do that. That it should be taken back and made available for needy families! (Note, this lad has a fiancée and 2 kids) And he had indeed been on the housing list with the LA.
IL's also like to make up little stories in their head about what must obviously been happening in other people's lives. And then they get bloody mad about it.
Apparently, the lad in question must have cheated the system. His mum will have lied. They'll be on all sorts of benefits and all his working would be cash in hand (ridiculous as he works for a big company and there's no way they would be doing that).

IL's were raging about it. So... I asked them when they would be moving. They asked why on Earth would they do that? I said, "Well you say these are family homes, meant for families who need them. So you're moving to one of the new build 1 or 2 bed places nearby right? As it's just the two of you and you're taking up a much needed 3 bed semi?"
To make it worse, they're benefit cheats (not that they would ever see it in that way). MIL and FIL have been working PT, cash in hand for a good 20 years, whilst having their rent fully paid by benefits. They have about £40K in cash hidden at home.

My issue is building round my way and there aren't enough doctors or dentists as it is.

I forgot to add, the spare bedrooms in My IL's have been used maybe three times since my husband moved out 20yr ago. And one of those times was our wedding day when DH stayed over in his old room to leave from there as we gave up our house to out of town family. ILs don't have any of their 5 grandkids for sleepovers.

We would love to move to a smaller place but need land for our animals. Every bungalow with land is immediately made bigger and of no use whatsoever to us.

Councils are charged with providing a certain number of new properties though. My local council has to provide 26,000 over a certain period of time. They have to be built somewhere. Obviously, developers are going to attempt to maximise their profit and building certain types of house does that. Bungalows aren’t so cost effective.

I see this on here quite often, it’s very odd, people objecting to folks living in their own family homes that they bought and paid for and for some bizarre reason thinking they should move out to a smaller cheaper property, I really don’t see how that helps anyone, well apart from making some folks not feel envious I guess. It’s not like they will knock it down and build three little ones in it’s place.

envy is unpleasant and Illogical I guess.