we all agree on the need for more houses but just not here !!

[billysboy]

As title really , everyone seems to agree on the need for more houses regardless of type but doesnt want them here ,
Green belt is supposed to ring fence existing settlements , I like the idea mooted this morning about Wild Belts to encourage wildlife etc ,
I cannot see how this government or any other hopes to build there way out of a crisis where in a lot of places it seems to be 10 x income to get a foot on the ladder
Ultimately it would seem lower house prices would be good for everyone apart from those in negative equity or using housing as an investment rather than a place to call home and the only way to achieve this is to oversupply the market causing prices to remain static whilst wages / income catch up
I thinks its unreasonable how long planning can take on a small domestic extension let alone 300k + house s needed per annum so cannot see how Angela Raynor thinks she will achieve this

No easy answer on this one

My hatred of new builds are these reasons

Problem they build all these houses without increasing services and infrastructures.

The village I grew up in has doubled in size in 25 years. Yet it has only ONE primary school and villages with 500 less people have 2 schools.

Then you need a car to drive anywhere from these new builds. All the new builds built in the past 8 years here they are at least 40 mins walk from the shops to the start of the estate. There is one new build estate which I drive past once a month has no pavement between the estate entrance and the village entrance.

Then the new builds are not future proof. Adults are living with their parents for longer and need than just one car space for a four bedroom home. Increase the parking.

Sort out the empty houses. There's enough to house the entire populations of Birmingham and Liverpool combined.

Throw up 1000 houses on the edge of a town. Suddenly that's 1.5k extra cars on the road, or extra buses needed. Suddenly 2/3000 kids need school places. 5000 people need a dr/dentist.

It's not just the houses that people object to.

Net migration is 685k

Also: 19 per cent of the population is over 65 and nobody is having any children.

If you're worried about migration, don't. In 20 years we'll be desperate for it.

They can build as many houses as they want near me if I could just get a GP appt and not have to lie here in my bed dreading going to sit for 24hours in a/e just to try and get a neb.

The stress and worry will make them ill.

Heard of many times where an elderly person can't cope with looking after their large house they have been in there for 50 plus years, move into a care home and within a month, no longer with us.

old shops, office blocks and car showrooms are turning into flats in our city. I think that’s a great idea. We don’t need all these empty shops. It might over time free up some family houses - we shall see

This. 1m people per year is about two big cities like Sheffield or Liverpool. People have got to go somewhere. Plus, they need hospitals, schools and other essentials. This problem isn't going to go away.

There are plenty of houses, the problem is that most people can’t afford them and they’re used as an investment. That will be the case however many houses are built- it’s like roads: more roads don’t reduce congestion. However many houses there are, the prices will rise and they’ll be unaffordable. It’s the prices not the houses

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/dec/09/cost-of-buying-average-home-in-england-now-unaffordable-warns-ons#:~:text=It%20said%20it%20would%20take,the%20ratio%20recorded%20in%201999.

You might earn the same further north, but there just isn't the volume of work available that there is in London.
Plus, I'm sure I'm not the only one who just likes London. It's diverse, exciting, there's always something to do or see...
I'm fond of some other UK cities too, but not to the extent of wanting to live in them.

We need to stop building massive expensive houses that are out of the reach of most people and build lots more 2/3 bed houses with enough space - storage, room for a dining table, one bathroom and a downstairs loo! We could learn a lot from post war building. All the recently developments round here have been houses which are overly expensive and end up being under occupied. There’s plenty of brownfield space If its used properly. Build more flats, small, duplex type flat with some outside space so that people who don’t need a house but don’t want to move in to a block of flats, can, and free up some houses for people with families.

Unfortunately, the government and the house builders seem to lack any actual common sense.

I don’t want them to build on the beautiful land that borders my town.

My 20 something son lives with us as he can't afford a mortgage on own. He doesn't want to move too far from us , so moving miles away ' up north ' is out of the equation ( plus he works in London a few times a month, so he just couldn't do it easily, doesn't drive etc)
His future is a bit bleak tbh , especially as even flats are out of his income bracket on his own and many have other hidden costs too like maintenance costs etc.
He works full time
I'm sure he isn't alone , it's that generation I feel sorry for the most. Many have to rely on parents
Building new homes won't help his situation much.

That article doesn't say that there are plenty of houses. It says housing is becoming unaffordable.
There aren't a million empty properties, more houses need to be built.

Oh how I despise the framing of people NIMBYS, labour love to divide people into little groups to stamp all over them. They so love to set groups against each other to push through their badly thought out plans.

Let's fact it Starmer and his crew so far have declared war on the Old, Farmers, NIMBYS, Private Sector, ICE owners, Private Schools, Any one is is slightly right wing/dislikes illegal immigrants are Right-wing Thugs, ect ect.

A majority of the Greenfield sites, help capture our water supplies, grow our food, allow the growth of biodiversity that produces carbon capture and stores more carbon than the rainforests, they also keep areas of habitat for species that keep us alive and well, Provide areas to improve health and well being.

Rayner is about as educated as a gnat and understands nothing its all about our greenfield sites, she is busy trying to prove she is not think as mince and pushing through no matter what.

Building on so called grey field and greenfield sites requires, more infrastructure, doctors, waste disposal, water and sewerage, more power stations, more police, fire and hospitals doctors, shops, roads, leisure services ect in these areas also. I guess all this will take up no extra space either and be paid for by whom?

But that's the whole point! There isn't the volume of work YET...

Companies need to perhaps be encouraged to move up north too. Good jobs will then bring people and other cities will grow.

I like London but would never want to live there. I lived in Liverpool, and other than the constant drizzle it was quite a good city to live. I only ended up in the South East due to work.

Nailed it. Because it's because of any population explosion, is it?

Raynor hasn't a clue , I'm not a conservative and never have been , but she is dangerously out of her depth.
No wonder people are fed up

I know places like Salford and Leeds do benefit from companies moving their operations there, and yes, other places will grow, up to a point, but no other UK city will match London for size, density of interesting/historic/cultural attractions etc.
But, you know, just because I don't want to leave London doesn't mean plenty other people aren't happy to move to other places.

My street (16 3 bed semis) was built in 1965ish and many of the people living here bought these houses when they were brand new to raise their families in. Around 6 or 7 houses on the street are occupied by widows/widowers who live their alone now. We're one of the few families living here.
I've spoken to my neighbours who all say how nice it would be to downsize but they can't/won't because:

• it'll be stressful
• it'll be expensive
• they like their community, they're all friends having been neighbours for 60 odd years and like being able to pop into each others houses for a cuppa
• their houses have lovely memories of their families

One neighbour told me if they could get a giant scythe and slice all the houses down to bungalows then they'd be much happier.

I can imagine more families will eventually move in once the current crowd finally leave (like we did, the previous owners of our home died of old age), but I fully understand why the elderly widows/widowers would be reluctant to leave, especially now.

Boohoo to you. You’re literally one of the reasons we’re in this mess so I really couldn’t care less about any woe it causes you.

Londoners really do have a strange view of it.

Sorry, I don't know what you mean.

Londoners have a strange view of London

Again, not getting it; I have my view of London, from living here and liking it. Just like the pp who had her/their view of Liverpool from having lived there. Can you help me understand what you mean?

Spot on.
Do away with greedy stamp duty for second and third time purchasers.

I know of plenty of empty nesters who are in large Victorian properties, rattling about in three and four bedroom houses because moving us so expensive.

End most second houses, no more AirBnBs, repurpose empty commercial property such as empty shops especially in side streets. Have a better system of house sale and purchase in England and Wales so the process is shorter. Allow park homes that have been in existence for a long period of time (say 10 years) to be used for 12 months of the year, so that they can become permanent residences not holiday homes if wished.

You'd probably get about a third or more of the way there, so that many of the new builds without facilities or taking away fields would be less.