To feel really upset about the lack of scrutiny on new housing development in the countryside

[DazedAndConfused2024]

Please don’t call me a NIMBY, but I’m really upset about the likelihood of housing development in the countryside and the likely lack of scrutiny for inappropriate development.
I accept there are housing targets to be met. This isn’t the issue.

However, where I live there is a small group of local town councillors who are adamant that all housing will be placed in areas other than behind their homes. It’s not localism…it really is as is.

By way of example; one potential development site has been reviewed to be suitable for approx 100-120 dwellings, yet the town council have tried to push double that onto the site (going against the borough’s own landscape reports on site suitability).
It is very depressing.

Given the current political atmosphere and rampant desire for more development, I am really worried that there will be no possibility to sensibly and logically critique proposals for over development, such as these, especially when the 5 year land supply is not being met.
I am concerned that scrutiny will be forgotten in the mad rush to build.

I hate this. This has happened near us. Earmarked for 8 'starter homes' which everyone was happy with. Eventually got 4 x 5 bedroom 4 bathroom homes that won't sell. Twats

The village of Rackenford, in Devon were told they had to build 5 new houses. They were quite happy to do this, there were young families in the village who needed those homes, but they didn't want one of the big mass house builders just plonking new homes in a field.

By working together they ended up building 12 new homes, all within the village boundary.

The power of the people!

Fab 👌

Yes totally agree with climate emergency issue.. They are building on land here with deer and other wildlife.

Yet huge industrial sites are pretty much empty.

I agree with you. We are having similar problems where I live. It’s gotten to the point where we simply can’t keep on eating up countryside and farmland for housing, especially as there are so many empty buildings that could be refurbished or repurposed. But it’s all about money, not building homes fit for people to actually live in. It’s much cheaper to build loads of flimsy redbrick boxes on greenfield sites than renovate existing properties. The government could help allay that by removing VAT on property renovations, or charging VAT on new builds, to reduce the gap a little, but I don’t suppose they will. None of it will help to solve the housing shortage because the real issue isn’t supply, it’s affordability. The notion is, I suppose, that if they increase the supply of housing stock enough then house prices will fall, but that’s been tried and they rarely fall by much. Even the property market crash in the 90s didn’t last long, prices soon rocketed again. But the government are simply doing what so many governments have done before, trying to build their way out of recession. It isn’t NIMBYism to think about the long term consequences of these reckless planning decisions instead of short term economic gains for HM Treasury.

So it has been mentioned a few times that abandoned shops and offices should be utilised first as housing before building elsewhere. So hands up, how many of you want to sell up from your pretty villages and quiet areas to live in a converted high street in the middle of a town or city, or is it only ok for OTHER people to live in these places never designed for habitation, no gardens, straight off a high street. So is this attitude not a NIMBY way of thinking? redevelopment so people have to live in undesirable locations and in undesirable ways. But as long as it’s away from us it’s ok, THEY won’t mind living there, as long as we don’t have to have our lives changed. To be fair, I don’t particularly like a lot of the new build estate designs, but a lot offer help to buy schemes for young families to own their own place with a bit of garden in a nice area, something they might never be able to do before. But it’s greedy developers building them! Well yeah, has anything ever changed, they have always done that!

Pre war loads of the suburbs were built, with shops, pubs, doctors etc, the garden cities like Welwyn and later new towns like Milton Keynes. Amenities were needed because there were none, most people didn’t drive and didn’t leave their towns, went to the butchers, bakers and general store every day, we lived differently. The tacking on of new developments next to little villages can be done now, as we live differently to back then, many many more people drive now, to huge retail parks and supermarkets, we need more housing, places have to grow, which is fine I guess, as long as it doesn’t effect any of us by the sounds of most here. Just so you know, it’s happening where I live, my street was quiet, it’s now busy and we are arguing with the developers to get traffic calming measures put in, as they promised in their proposal, it’s hopeless it seems, but that’s life in a ever growing country, with an ever increasing population!

All the town developments near us have sold really well! First flat buyers often don't want to live in the countryside miles from anywhere.

Dd has just bought her first flat in the middle of a city, no way would ahe have wanted a country cottage! She can walk everywhere, its great.

not houses crammed in together

we need the housing to be higher density - more flats. It is the only sustainable way.

If people are homeless and desperate for homes then this is one answer though otherwise where does the building stop? Things can be changed/amended but use what is already there. If I was in temp accommodation I would absolutely take a permanent home offer

Trouble is some people aren't good at being considerate when living in flats and it's difficult with small children

In a village near me a company put in planning permission for housing on land that was known to flood. It was used as grazing for dairy cows rather than cereal crops because it was easy to move them away from any flooding.The week after permission was granted we had a huge amount of rain and someone put a picture of the land under about a foot of water on the village Facebook page commenting that as many local people had pointed out this was probably not the best place to build homes and they were accused of being a NIMBY.

Permission was also granted on the understanding that a good percentage of the properties would lower priced homes for local people.

Development went ahead but they came up with some excuse which meant that only a couple of properties were 'affordable' and there were a lot more houses crammed onto the plot than originally granted because it would not have been 'economically viable ' for the builder otherwise.

It's probably been there about five years now and has flooded twice. It has also caused other places in the village to flood were it has never flooded before and apparently the house insurance is very difficult to get and is eyewateringly expensive.

As a PP has said, something needs to be done about long term empty properties and repurposing brown field sites before we concrete over land which provides us all with food. Goodness knows what developers will be allowed to get away with now.

One of the biggest developments in my local area is being built on what was formerly farmland. The term countryside can be misleading as most developments are on former farmland. Until about 250 years ago the country had an agrarian economy, producing wheat, livestock and other commodities for ourselves and for export. But there isn’t much left of either farmland or countryside which, as I am sure you know, has impacts on our lives that go far beyond a bit of nice scenery. But developers want greenfield sites because they are much cheaper to build on and so much more profitable. It’s always about money. The new government has invented this new term ‘grey belt’ land. This term doesn’t really mean anything, but they are using it to suggest that much of our green belt has been miscategorized and is now brownfield land. It’s all weasely words to get around the law and public opinion regarding building on green belt land. I’m not sure how green belt land can magically transform into a brownfield, sorry I mean grey belt, land overnight! 🤔

The probably mean it had agricultural barns on it.

Big yellow taxi playing on sound of the 70s

Just about sums it up

If animals were being transported in the temperatures flats get up to there would be prosecutions. NO MORE SWEATBOXES

Far more people live in flats in Europe including Mediterranean countries where temperatures regularly exceed those of the uk.

Lack of scrutiny? Lack of scrutiny? Have you any idea how goddamn hard it is to build anything in this country?

JenniferBooth · 31/01/2024 00:05
On the continent they arent expected to dry clothes with osmosis or the power of prayer. so if more flats are to be built in the uk FFS BUILD THEM WITH LAUNDRY ROOMS in the building. I currently have clothes as well as bedsheets drying all over the flat because there is no other way of drying them No room for a tumble dryer in my too small kitchen in a one bedroom flat.
And there IS an assumption in the social housing model that if you dont have kids you dont need to wash wear and dry clothes.
Housing associations will often come out with comments like "its your lifestyle"

NO!!! the UK does not have homes especially flats unsuited to lifestyle. The flats here are unsuited to LIFE Thats why people in the UK dont like them!!!!!

Posted this back in Jan. Now in July i would like to point out we have black cladding. BLACK And a black roof. It soaks up the heat We have also had cavity wall insulation put in TWICE on the insistence of the HA which has caused mould and made it into even more of a sweatbox. Flats in other countries have laundry rooms and rubbish chutes. Ask for that here and you are called entitled and yet at the same time moaned at for causing mould by drying clothes when the mould is caused by the cavity wall insulation that shouldnt be there. Cavity wall gaps are there for a fucking reason.

Im half Italian My relatives live in a house in Italy built to repel heat not keep it in. Fuck me the disingenuousness and obfuscation is off the charts.

Then campaign for flats with laundry rooms, rubbish shoots, windows on more than one aspect to allow a breeze through… they are all building standards that should developed NOT an insistence on houses on arable land that will push up the price of food.

It's not hard at all if you are a huge building company sitting on swathes of land. I realise not all building companies are large.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/money-matters/4997046-flats-as-an-answer-to-housing-crisis?page=1

Not sure the point of this. You might not like flats but I presume you like food to eat?

I agree, but we live on a small island and need to be aware of that. We can’t simply magic up more land. I’m not saying go full Tokyo but we are in the same sort of situation. If the climate predictions are correct we will have less land, not more, by the end of this century. That said people aren’t always considerate of their neighbours in flats - my neighbour certainly isn’t. The other problem with flats is our feudal leasehold laws. The first problem could be solved by more resources to enforce antisocial behaviour regulations, which would in time also produce new cultural norms around higher density living. But the second will never be addressed while there’s so much money on the table. Our government needs to promote more creative architectural solutions, hopefully as some planning functions are being removed from local to central government control that will happen, but I won’t be holding my breath 🤣

Yes but it does seem to me those of us who are expected to live in flats are us who havent reproduced. See the post upthread about how we need flats because there are more single people.

Well built flats are the answer. I've lived in continental Europe - lovely, airy flats, big windows and balconies, with great amenities, well planned out services, playgrounds for the kids, raised beds, good transport. If they actually made decent flats in this country, people could be convinced. There are lots of advantages, especially if air conditioned, have garages/cellars, communal waste, etc. People who live in them long term as rent is controlled, rather than just blowing through.