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?

As others have said, you see new housing estates marooned in dug-over fields on the edges of Edinburgh. The volume builders, who throw these shoddy estates up, have no interest in building communities, just build and run. That’s why you will have no schools, shops, medical centres, recreation facilities. It must be a dreadful way to live. Housing policy throughout the UK is woeful. It involves profligate use of land and on so many levels is environmentally disastrous.
As to turning empty shops in to homes, in most cases they aren’t suitable. The premises tend to be long so large parts of the space will be gloomy and lack natural light. And empty office blocks, well, offices and spaces for living are very different things.

What a nasty nasty thread.

Why should people who buy houses and pay them off then get old be obligated to sell them to young couples who "need it more"!?

Disagree with that outlook and always have. My parents live in my childhood home. 5 bedroom for 2 people. Grandkids stay often and every room is used and they love their home. Why should they have to move because some entitled person thinks they deserve it more?
Sorry not how it works.

I have no objections to new homes but do get annoyed about the lack of roads to keep up with an increasing population. I live in a village with three exits. Two go towards the town centre and are congested because they join the same road and have to pass a busy private school to get to town (30-50mins to town during term time, 10 minutes outside of school hours). The other goes in the opposite direction and doesn't have a turning for several miles so no long easy route to town. I'm dreading the 500 houses planned here. The village isn't huge so there's a good chance that even though I go in the opposite direction to get to work, I won't be able to get onto the high street because of congestion.

So you are saying that they should downsize to benefit someone else not because they want to?

Is that what you would do then?

I'm not surprised it turned into a blazing row.

I live on one of the new housing estates - built on green land, which I do feel guilty about, but it was previously owned by a farmer who I think just can't exist any more and is selling up, I can't blame them for getting the most they can for their land. It's kind of in a spare bit between two established urban areas, which eases my guilt somewhat. Our first new build, though, was on a brown field site that the builders got cheap, and they were subsidised so we got a little 2 bed starter home for next to nothing (25 years ago, before house prices went stratospheric) and a neat housing estate was built on what was previously a muddy, unsafe, eyesore. Wish this was done more now, it got us onto the housing ladder, and a lot of the homes were bought by older people downsizing.

I also dont think its true to say there is a housing shortage, there is an affordable housing shortage.

I wonder if there were NIMBYs back in the 1930s when most of the outer London suburbs sprung up, along with their tube stations and new schools.
YANBU that we need more housing and have to accept it goes where it is needed even if locals don’t love it.
YABU to say older people need to move out to smaller properties. There are no bungalows where we live and service charges are £3K+/year.

agree with this , there does need to be much more thought and care put into the design of new estates . in romford my hometown ,havent lived there now in 19 years everyones up in arms about a huge new development on the site of the old ice rink , the blueprint design looks lovely , but theres just one hospital serving a very large town that will now have to cope with even more people using it once these houses and flats are built, more demand on the schools and doctors .
i can kinda see why people are pissed about it , as you have said its all very well new huge builds that can house hundreds of people , but it needs more things put in place to support it , and yes sometimes the designs look awful , houses all identical and flats that look like they have all the space of a shoebox

my main issue is its never the right kind of housing , accross the country councils are spending millions putting homeless families in temp accomadation where they wait for months to be allocated either a housing assciation property or a council one , both of which are in short supply , these are normally families who are low income , cannot afford private rentals and in many cases cant get one anyway because if you have to claim housing benefit landlords dont want to touch you , we need more social housing built , yet all these new develepments up and down the country never are

If the new houses were attractive with big gardens full of trees then I wouldn’t object. When houses were built in the early 20th century they tended to have very large gardens and they’re mostly full of trees and great for nature. In fact they’re much better for nature than a field of wheat for example. Those gardens add up to a huge area and if animals can get through fences they’ve got a large habitat.

All the new houses/flats being built have tiny gardens - just little squares which are often paved or have fake grass….they leave absolutely no room for nature. My solution would be to spread houses out and create natural areas in between. It wouldn’t work because there’d be no land left for farming but I’m not a town planner so I don’t have any say anyway🙂

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

Good, glad we do!
It's not as simple as some people on here seem to think. I am now one person in a four bedroom house with a massive garden in a village, I would like to downsize but there is little on the market at the moment other than rabbit hutches for much the same price I would get for the house. I would prefer to stay put and employ help for the house and garden than move at the moment.

I don't know where I stand to be honest. We live in a 4bed detached 20 year old house that was build on former farmland towards the edge of a town. The area next to it was pretty deprived. Because of the new housing, the local school was upgraded, a new playpark built, the parent council was boosted by people who had access to resources and circles that the council estate didn't and raised enormous amounts for extra school equipment, the local shopping parade which was closing down bit by bit has been rejuvenated with new customers. there are new scout and guide groups, football field and coaching etc etc. It's really boosted the area for all children. The high school has gone up in the rankings. I come from a very rough council estate as does DH, we'd have been delighted when we were kids if "incomers" had brought these extra facilities etc.

On the other hand, our DC are currently in Uni and in the next few years we would want to downsize, and in theory a 2 bed would be fine. However there are things I have that I'd be reluctant to give up such as utility room, downstairs loo and in looking to the future, we might want the ability to have a downstairs bedroom and shower. Dh wants a dog when we retire and he doesn't want a small one so you need enough space in the house so we aren't tripping over it and then a garden of reasonable size, we'd like a new build so that the insulation is good and maintenance low....and once you start getting to that list you end up needing either a decent sized bungalow or at least a 3 bed semi....and once you reach that conclusion you wonder if it's worth moving.

im not sure thats what the op quite meant though , it must be annoying to listen to a privilaged older couple living in comfort in a house thats bigger than they need moaning about new housing ,
i think she was just trying to make a point to them that whilst they are having that much space in their home they shouldnt be moaning about others needing housing and shes right .

Before forcing people to downsize maybe second homes and holidays let’s should be better regulated. In my local town there is few houses to rent long term but over 100 air b&bs. No point building more homes if they are not going to be lived in full time.

NewHouseNewMe, the houses being built in the thirties were generally lovely - substantial, decent sized rooms, well built, proper gardens, proper boundaries between them (in fact we lived in one about twenty years ago and it was the nicest house we've ever owned). There was also thought given to the infrastructure round the houses, so parks and recreational land, community centres, shops, sports clubs etc.

I have no problem with people living in homes that some may consider "to big" for them. What I do have an issue with is people objecting to new homes being built on fields, when, not 5 years ago their house was also was also built on green fields....yes leader of the Local Residents Action Group I'm looking at you and all your hypocritical minions.

Be sensible - everyone's a nimby if it is their life/ their children's wellbeing/ the volume of traffic noise/ airplanes flying over them.
People are magnanimous and welcoming and not nimbies because the new project is not really affecting their lives. Or more traffic, bigger school classes etc is not something they care about.

And just because it doesn't bother you to have 400 new homes along the road. The elderly person who has been there for decades and values the beautiful country walk they did every day is entitled to complain.

Criticising planners is pointless - they abide by the planning rules, (though everyone in my area claims they take back handers which I don't really believe) the developers know how to weasel their way round them - hence all the 4-5 bed homes.

One problem is they build a lot of flats , but a lot of older people don't want flats as they are concerned about noise issues etc- flats need to be built to much higher specs on sound proofing, rubbish shutes, lifts etc. And be well looked after. The ones built here in Copenhagen are so much better quality .

There are some really good part buys specifically for over 55s though that are very good quality , giving them communal facilities, releasing cash and in nice areas- I was looking st this for my FIL. But obviously you have to be prepared to move areas to where they are- a lot are south coast.

I had 2 maps of my suburb in 1929 and 1939, the period in which most housing sprung up.
In 1929, there are fields, a primary and a church, with very little else.
In 1939, there are roads and roads of houses and two tube stops, and not much else. The infrastructure came a bit later. Quite fascinating really.

I agree that the houses were superior by today’s standards, even if Mumsnet hates them!

Absolutely this. Trying to move to a bungalow is difficult and they are disproportionately expensive given they require a proportionally bigger plot and due to short supply.
I had to move due to divorce and did find a dormer bungalow. But if we had not divorced we would have stayed put..why? Because our very large 4 bed house had space enough downstairs to make a downstairs bedroom and toilet if needed at some point in the future. My DB still lives in his big family home for precisely the same reason- he and dsil have it all figured out how to convert downstairs into a bedroom and bathroom if and when needed.
modern smaller 4 bed houses don’t have space for that. Bungalows will mean they have to spend over the odds and the cost of moving.

until there is decent housing stock to allow “ageing in place” at sensible prices and at sufficient supply then older folks most certainly will stay put. Why the hell would they move to a 2 bed property with only bedrooms being upstairs and no space downstairs to convert if needed. It just doesn’t make any sense.

The ops point is nonsensical. There is a shortage and a need for affordable housing which means smaller family homes in thr right areas. There is no shortage of large homes. Telling people to move out doesn’t mean they become affordable for others. They don’t. It just puts pressure on the cheaper houses as more folks compete for them.

thr op clearly has issues, she says it “drives her mad” and she’s repeatedly telling people to leave their family homes. Envy? Lack of understanding of the housing market? Something is causing it, because who runs around telling folks to leave their homes?

I am over 55 and moved to bungalow’s . I did not look at flats. I would absolutely avoid flats. Stairs are a major issue for elderly people and one’s of reasons people have falls or go to live in nursing homes. Sure, flats may have lifts but what if there is a power cut or worse still a fire, or maintenance issues? You then become stuck and isolated . Jeez, it would scare the bejesus out of me.
it is fine that OP homes have flats as part of their buildings- they have help on hand and emergency generators. Not true in most privately owned flats
plus a flat means no garden in most cases. Why would you sell a home with nice access to outdoor space for one with space maybe 1 or 2 floors below you have to go onto a balcony to see, especially as these are folks that will be spending increasingly large proportion of time stuck at home.

As you've no problem with new developments, you're not one of the cohort OP is complaining about. You seem to understand that people making decisions like yours has consequences and to accept them, which is fine. I think her point is more about people who aren't doing that.

When these older couples bought their lovely big houses in pretty villages and paid a premium for them they probably thought they were safe in the knowledge that nothing would ever be built on the farmland around spoiling the view.

It seems nowhere is safe. If this were me and I had a wonderful view from my living room window for years and then a housing estate was built in the field next to me blocking the one thing I loved and wiping out my privacy I would be pissed off as well.

I see it happening all around where we live now. My daughter has a house on one of these estates. It is a lovely house and perfect. I would love to downsize from my home (not in a village) and buy a house on her estate but I can't afford it. The cost of these houses is crazy and they are all very close together with not much in the way of a garden.
She can't get my grandson into the village school because the housing estate is 0.9 miles away from the school and the catchment area is 0.5 miles.
She will have to take him to school in an area where they do not live. The estate is built on farmers fields but there is still a levy to pay on the council tax for the village even though she won't be able to send him to the school.

There is nowhere for children to kick a football around on this estate and as of yet - no shops or amenities.
It seems to me that this has not been properly thought through and the building plans rushed.
I wonder who considers the people when they build the new houses? What about the existing residents in the big houses? What about building bungalows for them to downsize to if they want to stay in their postcode?
Why would they even want to when social housing is a part of the scheme?
It's all mad.

.

I understand your point but how do you know a 3 bed would do. What if they have regular visitors, or both work from home so use two rooms as studies. Life isn’t just about squeezing into the smallest possible space available.

Everyone should have the opportunity to have a comfortable space to live.

I also agree with the criticisms of new estates. We have several friends living on them. The roads are narrow, parking insufficient, there are no new schools, shops, pubs, doctors, etc etc. Just houses plonked in fields. There should be thought out community planning and the expectations should be legislated for.