To find the extent of planned housebuilding terrifying?

[IRememberWhenThisWasFields]

NM for this as I don't want my previous posts to be too outing of where I live. Hope that's okay.

The background is that I live in a semi-rural area in England, in a village of approximately 2,000 people. It doesn't even have a shop. Our nearest town is about 10-15 mins walk away, population already around 20k. In recent years the town has increasingly encroached on our village.

Currently, the local council is having a consultation of where future housebuilding should take place, and I'm honestly so shocked at the amount of land that has been offered up.

Farmland on what feels like all directions has been earmarked for largescale future development. I know that we have a housing crisis in this country, but I feel like I could cry.

Many of the areas are where I've spent countless happy hours walking and where I regularly see owls, hares, deer and foxes. It's well known that access to nature and green spaces is hugely beneficial to one's mental health, and to think that these wonderful quiet, peaceful, green areas could be lost for more houses, traffic, pollution, noise, likely crime...it's just so sad.

And of course, it all comes from the national government and their target of wanting to build over one million more houses this government, no matter where they're placed, and seemingly with very little thought for infrastructure or how small communities are changing almost beyond all recognition. How people who've lived in these communities for generations are increasingly turning to anti-immigration rhetoric from parties like Reform, in part due to their areas changing so rapidly.

All anyone can say is "we need more houses"...yes, but is the only solution the increased destruction of our countryside? When will it end?

I know people currently searching for a house or who are used to living in built up areas will have no sympathy with this. I know I'll already get the predictable response of "well, your house probably used to be a field", ignoring the simple fact that we now have far less space than we did 50 or 100 years ago.

But AIBU, or does anyone else feel a similar way to me?

Whereabouts is this, without giving too much away, if you’re able to give some more details without outing yourself that is?! Sounds interesting and successful.

But, as I say, I don't expect everyone (and particularly those who've always lived in an urban area) to understand this

I don't understand why you think people in urban areas aren't impacted by more houses/building, crime, change in community?

Before huge changes in immigration policy is hardly relaxant is it?

Because if you live in a city of a population of, say, over 550k people (using the example of my nearest big city), another 2,000 or 5,000 houses is barely noticeable. I suspect you're already accustomed to city life and all the negative aspects of it already.

But when you live in a village of 2,000, and the population more than doubles, and crime and antisocial behaviour increase, it's significantly more noticeable.

Not sure why that's so hard to understand.

Yes, but unfortunately the other required infrastructure - hospitals, schools, roads, social services, doctors & dentists, public transport, employment, social housing etc are already at full stretch, and the development plans are neglecting that side of things. The are also taking no account of the fact that all the land they want to use for development is either productive agricultural land growing our food, or is in low-lying areas either on or very close to flood plains.

I also don't agree that these developments are in the right places. Our town has had so much green belt concreted over. Our town's population is not needing the houses. It's a case of building and they will come.... From the big urban sprawl to the north, to a nicer and more rural small town to the south.

Eventually everything will just be a suburb or a big city. If I'd wanted to live in urban sprawl I'd have moved there originally.

It already takes 30 mins to get out of town to get to work. No dentists. Tiny hospital on its knees.

It's not the way to do this. We need proper planning and services.

The people benefitting are housing developers and incomers.

We also need to be mindful of food security. We can't keep losing food growing land.

Our town is so crazy...they've built on green belt then knocked down a huge area in the town centre to build.... A park! Absolute nuts.

There are already half a dozen nice parks here.

Why would the people moving into those homes be any more likely to commit crime or antisocial behaviour than the people who already live there? I’m not sure I understand your point or why new people would be criminals.

And there should be no agricultural land used for solar farms until every municipal building has solar panels on the roof, every new build home/factory/office block/retail outlet/warehouse has solar panels on the roof, and every suitablemotorway/rail embankment has solar panels.

Oh, come on.

I think you know that the bigger a place becomes, naturally the level of crime increases with it. I'm not saying there's no crime at all here, but do you really think it's crazy to suggest that if the population of an area more than doubles, that crime won't also increase significantly too?!

Crime is just on example. I could've said litter, or traffic, or noise...it doesn't matter. The more people there are, the more of it there will be. And while it may make me sound like a very selfish person, I personally like where I live and don't wish to see it become a worse place to live.

Oh we still have many "that's another dog walk spoiled" lot.

It's how you look at these things that changes your position not geography.

Do we really have a "housing crisis"? There are a lot of houses for sale and sitting empty?

If we do we could:

Cut immigration very significantly. Absolutely must unless you have an in demand job. Cut befetots/ encourage people into work, so we need fewer migrants for positions that could be filled by people already living here.

Enforce that people have to move out of under occupied council and housing association homes (with no excuses or exceptions).

Build more retirement village style complexes for housing association/ council/ affordable living options.

Build up rather than out but make them communities , with an allotment, field, play space, trees.

Also, I don't know how one fixes this, but we need fewer families living separately. Lots of children by different partner type set ups. I don't know that that can be addressed but its a factor in needing more houses.

Only 431k. Oh well, no problem then. All is good.

Because if you live in a city of a population of, say, over 550k people (using the example of my nearest big city), another 2,000 or 5,000 houses is barely noticeable. I suspect you're already accustomed to city life and all the negative aspects of it already.

But most people live in pockets of a city with a local community comprised of local schools, GPs, etc. I'm a Londoner & would of course notice if 5000 houses were built in the area I live in.

Not sure why that's hard to understand?

@Welliesandtweed Build up rather than out
Do you live in a small flat?
Will you be moving out of your house to live in one of said new flats?
Or is it just other families who need to live in them?

400k is a very small percentage of the UK’s population. I’m not the one hugely inflating figures to back up my pov.

Will you be moving out of your house to live in one of said new flats?

Nope

Or is it just other families who need to live in them?

Yes

Basically

Yep! Even if you assume 4 people to a property, that is still over 100k new properties needed each year just to accommodate the net annual immigration.

That’s irrelevant when we are talking about the number of properties needed to house them.

This is why the government is writing and consulting on a "land use framework".

And herein lies the problem. There are people in this country that think 430k net immigration is no big deal.

Oh dear, we are f’d.

431k in a single year? Even more the year before, and the year before that? Not really about percentages is it? Not small either, it's another city of people, annually.

It should be more spread out imho. Bit built there, bit there. Villages around mine are essentially being merged by numerous spread out developments. But then another area has none ot very little.
Spreading bit by bit would allow to keep some land around to not completely lose it and the ecosystems. It would allow for better traffic than just that 1 main road to city being fucked.
And ffs, proper infrastructure.

We desperately need houses. The housing crisis has generations on their knees right now.

I also believe that rebuilding some city centre areas which have fallen apart deserted would be great solution. It would also bring people back into cities to live. Some amazing projects have already been done just needs more

You’re on Mumsnet, where people breed. YABU.