Over development
Discussion
I've never been a NIMBY and generally take the opposing views of those who adopt such a stance but even I'm beginning to feel that housing development needs some added level of scrutiny.
I live in mid Essex in a village of around 1,700 homes. We're six miles from the nearest train station and served by a single bus route. Most of the people who live here are either retired, work from home or work locally. Planning has just been approved for an additional 250 houses and there's another application going through for a further 99 homes. Nearby is the town of Maldon which has seen 4,000 homes added over the past three or four years. We're on one on the main routes to get to Maldon so traffic has increased considerably and with these new developments, will increase further yet there are not plans whatsoever to address this.
I fully accept that we need more homes but we're told there remain many new-build homes in the area that have remained unsold for some time so surely it would be better to build them where there's demand.
I can't be the only one in this position. Would be interested if anyone has successfully pushed back on these types of developments and how!
I live in mid Essex in a village of around 1,700 homes. We're six miles from the nearest train station and served by a single bus route. Most of the people who live here are either retired, work from home or work locally. Planning has just been approved for an additional 250 houses and there's another application going through for a further 99 homes. Nearby is the town of Maldon which has seen 4,000 homes added over the past three or four years. We're on one on the main routes to get to Maldon so traffic has increased considerably and with these new developments, will increase further yet there are not plans whatsoever to address this.
I fully accept that we need more homes but we're told there remain many new-build homes in the area that have remained unsold for some time so surely it would be better to build them where there's demand.
I can't be the only one in this position. Would be interested if anyone has successfully pushed back on these types of developments and how!
Turn7 said:
Do we really need these houses tho ?
All I hear is no one can save the deposit up to get on the ladder , and house prices are insane .
Who IS buying all these houses?
Houses a product of supply and demand, the fact they are expensive should tell you that YES we do need more houses! All I hear is no one can save the deposit up to get on the ladder , and house prices are insane .
Who IS buying all these houses?
The more we build, the more reasonably priced they should be, the more people can afford them.
UK housebuilding has been below it's need/target for years, decades now, going back to Cameron era governments. From memory even Blair had a report produced on how to get the UK to build more houses, as we were not building enough then, that was 25 years ago.
Condi said:
Houses a product of supply and demand, the fact they are expensive should tell you that YES we do need more houses!
The more we build, the more reasonably priced they should be, the more people can afford them.
Clearly it’ll depend where you are, but I’d argue that houses are expensive because they’re expensive to build. A three bedroom house costs about £200k to build. £200k three bed houses are available across most of the country. The more we build, the more reasonably priced they should be, the more people can afford them.
I’m not sure increasing supply is going to knock the price down that much.
They keep putting up new build estates around us and, as I’m sure is the case almost everywhere, there is zero infrastructure built to support them. Everything is a drive; shops, pub, doctors, schools, leisure - I pity anyone who has to commute at rush hour. So you’ve got a government trying to push us out of cars while at the same time building houses that absolutely necessitate having a car. Brilliant.
With those numbers your village is becoming closer to a town anyway.
It sounds a large percentage increase in housing though.
The short answer to your q ,it is possible to fight and win individual battles and perhaps stave off development but you will at some point ultimately lose a war you cannot win. If your Council is Labour this will not help the situation.
We live in a village with now about 1000 residents and over the years there have been been multiple applications on green areas ranging from so called infill to edge of village.
Developments of 5 or less get passed relatively easily irrespective of complaints , larger depends.
One has just been passed for around 7 but nothing affordable and all £million + behind some existing houses. Planners threw it out and then it went to appeal where HMG inspectorate overturned the refusal.
Land close to us has over the years been applied for ranging from 27 to much less and until now has been turned down but only because it just isn’t suitable. I don’t doubt that at some point someone will get permission.
The usual reasons given in complaint letters cite lack of any facilities ,closed school numbers , impossible GP access , Flooding and then many discuss the dangers to the greater crested newt .
Every application seems to come with 50 page reports by external consultants saying there are no reasons to decline it.
A lot of Councils have recently made it impossible to read other comments made so ringleaders of complaints are pretty much on their own unless they get together with others first.
A lot depends on whether it’s your forever home and how much hassle and worry you want to put up with too.
It sounds a large percentage increase in housing though.
The short answer to your q ,it is possible to fight and win individual battles and perhaps stave off development but you will at some point ultimately lose a war you cannot win. If your Council is Labour this will not help the situation.
We live in a village with now about 1000 residents and over the years there have been been multiple applications on green areas ranging from so called infill to edge of village.
Developments of 5 or less get passed relatively easily irrespective of complaints , larger depends.
One has just been passed for around 7 but nothing affordable and all £million + behind some existing houses. Planners threw it out and then it went to appeal where HMG inspectorate overturned the refusal.
Land close to us has over the years been applied for ranging from 27 to much less and until now has been turned down but only because it just isn’t suitable. I don’t doubt that at some point someone will get permission.
The usual reasons given in complaint letters cite lack of any facilities ,closed school numbers , impossible GP access , Flooding and then many discuss the dangers to the greater crested newt .
Every application seems to come with 50 page reports by external consultants saying there are no reasons to decline it.
A lot of Councils have recently made it impossible to read other comments made so ringleaders of complaints are pretty much on their own unless they get together with others first.
A lot depends on whether it’s your forever home and how much hassle and worry you want to put up with too.
The only reason we need more housing is because the UK population is rising year on year. Simple as that. Fix this and we fix the housing crisis.
It will only get worse as our population grows to 100 million.
Where I am there are new estates going up everywhere, 100's of new builds, all on green fields, local villages are now joined together, it will eventually be one huge conurbation. No new roads, no new schools etc. Water and sewerage is already an issue, but they keep building.
It will only get worse as our population grows to 100 million.
Where I am there are new estates going up everywhere, 100's of new builds, all on green fields, local villages are now joined together, it will eventually be one huge conurbation. No new roads, no new schools etc. Water and sewerage is already an issue, but they keep building.
megaphone said:
The only reason we need more housing is because the UK population is rising year on year. Simple as that. Fix this and we fix the housing crisis.
Why is a rising population a problem to be "fixed"? The population of the country has been increasing ever since the first humans set up camp on this island, you can't simply stop building things and announce you're done. There are plenty of places in the world with a much higher population density than the UK. megaphone said:
Where I am there are new estates going up everywhere, 100's of new builds, all on green fields, local villages are now joined together,
Such as it ever was. What you know as London was once small villages. We are building fewer houses today than we did in the 1950's, 60's and 70's. Take off your rose tinted specs. Edited by Condi on Friday 18th September 08:13
I live in a small to medium town, so my opinions probably slightly different to yours.
I look to nearby slightly larger towns and think, I wish we had xyz in my town, and my hope is with an increasing population we'd get those sorts of shops etc.
I appreciate the traffic will increase, but we are well served by trains and schools for example are undersubscribed.
What does irritate me, is the only development is on a plot of land at the end of the town, furthest from the station where traffic is worst. A large office complex sits derelict on the other side of town, that has a roundabout straight onto the dual carriageway (15 minutes to m25), and a two minute walk to the main station. A developer owns it, but it's not progressed.
I appreciate developments take time to get going, and ownership, funding, planning all takes time and changes frequently. But it would be nice if there was a way of more joined up development. 'You can't build on that field whilst this large brownfield site is unused'.
I look to nearby slightly larger towns and think, I wish we had xyz in my town, and my hope is with an increasing population we'd get those sorts of shops etc.
I appreciate the traffic will increase, but we are well served by trains and schools for example are undersubscribed.
What does irritate me, is the only development is on a plot of land at the end of the town, furthest from the station where traffic is worst. A large office complex sits derelict on the other side of town, that has a roundabout straight onto the dual carriageway (15 minutes to m25), and a two minute walk to the main station. A developer owns it, but it's not progressed.
I appreciate developments take time to get going, and ownership, funding, planning all takes time and changes frequently. But it would be nice if there was a way of more joined up development. 'You can't build on that field whilst this large brownfield site is unused'.
Condi said:
megaphone said:
The only reason we need more housing is because the UK population is rising year on year. Simple as that. Fix this and we fix the housing crisis.
Why is a rising population a problem to be "fixed"? The population of the country has been increasing ever since the first humans set up camp on this island, you can't simply stop building things and announce you're done. There are plenty of places in the world with a much higher population density than the UK. megaphone said:
Where I am there are new estates going up everywhere, 100's of new builds, all on green fields, local villages are now joined together,
Such as it ever was. What you know as London was once small villages. We are building fewer houses today than we did in the 1950's, 60's and 70's. Take off your rose tinted specs. Edited by Condi on Friday 18th September 08:13
cml24 said:
I live in a small to medium town, so my opinions probably slightly different to yours.
I look to nearby slightly larger towns and think, I wish we had xyz in my town, and my hope is with an increasing population we'd get those sorts of shops etc.
I appreciate the traffic will increase, but we are well served by trains and schools for example are undersubscribed.
What does irritate me, is the only development is on a plot of land at the end of the town, furthest from the station where traffic is worst. A large office complex sits derelict on the other side of town, that has a roundabout straight onto the dual carriageway (15 minutes to m25), and a two minute walk to the main station. A developer owns it, but it's not progressed.
I appreciate developments take time to get going, and ownership, funding, planning all takes time and changes frequently. But it would be nice if there was a way of more joined up development. 'You can't build on that field whilst this large brownfield site is unused'.
Problem is the houses get built and the infrastructure never keeps up. I live in a small town of 9000 people, there are plans to build a further 11,000 homes (one 7000 development and one 4000 home development) on the outskirts. The traffic is already unbearable with an old one-way system and a narrow bridge being the only crossing over the river. Adding a further 122% to the number of homes is frankly ridiculous.I look to nearby slightly larger towns and think, I wish we had xyz in my town, and my hope is with an increasing population we'd get those sorts of shops etc.
I appreciate the traffic will increase, but we are well served by trains and schools for example are undersubscribed.
What does irritate me, is the only development is on a plot of land at the end of the town, furthest from the station where traffic is worst. A large office complex sits derelict on the other side of town, that has a roundabout straight onto the dual carriageway (15 minutes to m25), and a two minute walk to the main station. A developer owns it, but it's not progressed.
I appreciate developments take time to get going, and ownership, funding, planning all takes time and changes frequently. But it would be nice if there was a way of more joined up development. 'You can't build on that field whilst this large brownfield site is unused'.
The last housing development in the area was promised a community centre and a doctor's surgery, guess what, over a decade later and neither have been built.
megaphone said:
The only reason we need more housing is because the UK population is rising year on year. Simple as that. Fix this and we fix the housing crisis.
It will only get worse as our population grows to 100 million.
Where I am there are new estates going up everywhere, 100's of new builds, all on green fields, local villages are now joined together, it will eventually be one huge conurbation. No new roads, no new schools etc. Water and sewerage is already an issue, but they keep building.
The UK population is forecast to peak at around 76m over the next 50 years, before slowly declining, so 100m is way off.It will only get worse as our population grows to 100 million.
Where I am there are new estates going up everywhere, 100's of new builds, all on green fields, local villages are now joined together, it will eventually be one huge conurbation. No new roads, no new schools etc. Water and sewerage is already an issue, but they keep building.
I agree the building companies need to be held to account for infrastructure though, considering the profit they make and the bonuses their execs get paid.
Personally I think the senior execs should be made to live on one of their new or partially completed developments for 6 months before becoming eligible for any bonus so they can feel the effects of their penny pinching firsthand.
I live near the Taunton area - you should look up the current developments - its insane. We moved last year out to a small village. We were near Comytrowe , well, on the road between that and the M5 J26. The step up in traffic is mad, and the estate is only partly built. There are several other huge ones going up.
Market town turning into a city, without the cathedral, or uni. Its not great.
We are holed up in but f
k nowhere and pray it'll serve us well for a while.
Market town turning into a city, without the cathedral, or uni. Its not great.
We are holed up in but f
k nowhere and pray it'll serve us well for a while.Crudeoink said:
The last housing development in the area was promised a community centre and a doctor's surgery, guess what, over a decade later and neither have been built.
Social Value - something that is conditional when application is approved but common for nothing to be built and instead the money the developer allocated to it is passed to the local Parish Council so they can use it it build whatever was planned. Problem is that the money is seldom close to what is actually needed. My view is that these things should be built and completed to a working order before any house is built.
StevieBee said:
Social Value - something that is conditional when application is approved but common for nothing to be built and instead the money the developer allocated to it is passed to the local Parish Council so they can use it it build whatever was planned. Problem is that the money is seldom close to what is actually needed.
My view is that these things should be built and completed to a working order before any house is built.
That rarely if ever happens. My view is that these things should be built and completed to a working order before any house is built.
We have seen on various of the smaller developments the PC being given money to spend on community areas like children's playgrounds and indeed it’s often used in the application letter.
In fairness to the PC they still appear to give their view irrespective although I doubt the planners take much if any heed of their comments anyway.
I’m sure on some developments in villages if the developers concentrated on perhaps getting a bus service ( we have I think about 2 buses a day to somewhere ) started it would help.
Equally genuinely trying to build more affordable homes ( at least 25% according to certain application rules ? ) rather than just going for a lot more profit may also help communities.
Ultimately it's for the government (of all colours) to manage population, housing, road building and infrastructure policy.
If they've outsourced that side of things to house building companies it still doesn't remove the obligation for it to be provided. If these things are agreed as part of the planning permission and then it's not provided then there needs to be fines/consequences.
I live a mile outside the town centre in an 80's estate which used to be fields. Excellent transport connections, schools, shops, doctors, pub. Can walk to most places you need to go. As with everywhere, house prices have gone up to ridiculous levels, great for me, not so great for my kids. It's noticeable that generally the large family houses are now owned mainly by late middle age people and in a lot of cases single pensioners rattling around in 4/5 bedroom houses. The young families squeezed into 2/2.5 bedroom starter homes - not helped by working from home ironically.
I think they need to make it easier/cheaper/an incentive for some of these people to downsize.
Two young families here squeezed into a tiny house I know have recently moved to new build family houses in what used to be villages (now becoming towns) as they wanted more space and couldn't afford to get the same thing on our estate. They're now 5/6 miles from the town centre. Also have the corresponding village facilities and now pretty much have to drive everywhere as hardly any bus service or facilities.
Another family moved even further out. Cynically the builders had planning permission for a large empty field close by for some small quiet industrial units. Literally within a month of them moving in and the last house being completed, it was announced that the planning permission had been changed to build some large Amazon type distribution centre running 24/7.
Also the town centre brownfield sites are I would guess 75% new build student flats, which have proliferated over the last 10 years. I know the council have being approving these as they're trying to free up student HMOs and the associated problems such as parking/rubbish to become family homes again. The student market is changing though and I think at some point there will be empty blocks, more students are staying at home and commuting/studying online so don't need a room for 8 months and the associated payments.
If they've outsourced that side of things to house building companies it still doesn't remove the obligation for it to be provided. If these things are agreed as part of the planning permission and then it's not provided then there needs to be fines/consequences.
I live a mile outside the town centre in an 80's estate which used to be fields. Excellent transport connections, schools, shops, doctors, pub. Can walk to most places you need to go. As with everywhere, house prices have gone up to ridiculous levels, great for me, not so great for my kids. It's noticeable that generally the large family houses are now owned mainly by late middle age people and in a lot of cases single pensioners rattling around in 4/5 bedroom houses. The young families squeezed into 2/2.5 bedroom starter homes - not helped by working from home ironically.
I think they need to make it easier/cheaper/an incentive for some of these people to downsize.
Two young families here squeezed into a tiny house I know have recently moved to new build family houses in what used to be villages (now becoming towns) as they wanted more space and couldn't afford to get the same thing on our estate. They're now 5/6 miles from the town centre. Also have the corresponding village facilities and now pretty much have to drive everywhere as hardly any bus service or facilities.
Another family moved even further out. Cynically the builders had planning permission for a large empty field close by for some small quiet industrial units. Literally within a month of them moving in and the last house being completed, it was announced that the planning permission had been changed to build some large Amazon type distribution centre running 24/7.
Also the town centre brownfield sites are I would guess 75% new build student flats, which have proliferated over the last 10 years. I know the council have being approving these as they're trying to free up student HMOs and the associated problems such as parking/rubbish to become family homes again. The student market is changing though and I think at some point there will be empty blocks, more students are staying at home and commuting/studying online so don't need a room for 8 months and the associated payments.
Crudeoink said:
cml24 said:
I live in a small to medium town, so my opinions probably slightly different to yours.
I look to nearby slightly larger towns and think, I wish we had xyz in my town, and my hope is with an increasing population we'd get those sorts of shops etc.
I appreciate the traffic will increase, but we are well served by trains and schools for example are undersubscribed.
What does irritate me, is the only development is on a plot of land at the end of the town, furthest from the station where traffic is worst. A large office complex sits derelict on the other side of town, that has a roundabout straight onto the dual carriageway (15 minutes to m25), and a two minute walk to the main station. A developer owns it, but it's not progressed.
I appreciate developments take time to get going, and ownership, funding, planning all takes time and changes frequently. But it would be nice if there was a way of more joined up development. 'You can't build on that field whilst this large brownfield site is unused'.
Problem is the houses get built and the infrastructure never keeps up. I live in a small town of 9000 people, there are plans to build a further 11,000 homes (one 7000 development and one 4000 home development) on the outskirts. The traffic is already unbearable with an old one-way system and a narrow bridge being the only crossing over the river. Adding a further 122% to the number of homes is frankly ridiculous.I look to nearby slightly larger towns and think, I wish we had xyz in my town, and my hope is with an increasing population we'd get those sorts of shops etc.
I appreciate the traffic will increase, but we are well served by trains and schools for example are undersubscribed.
What does irritate me, is the only development is on a plot of land at the end of the town, furthest from the station where traffic is worst. A large office complex sits derelict on the other side of town, that has a roundabout straight onto the dual carriageway (15 minutes to m25), and a two minute walk to the main station. A developer owns it, but it's not progressed.
I appreciate developments take time to get going, and ownership, funding, planning all takes time and changes frequently. But it would be nice if there was a way of more joined up development. 'You can't build on that field whilst this large brownfield site is unused'.
The last housing development in the area was promised a community centre and a doctor's surgery, guess what, over a decade later and neither have been built.
AngryYorkshireman said:
I think they need to make it easier/cheaper/an incentive for some of these people to downsize.
Agreed. A few years ago my parents (retired) moved out of their 4 bed semi into.... a 4 bed detached. Lots of valid reasons why, but if there had been a proper financial incentive then I suspect they would have had more motivation to find something smaller.Zetec-S said:
AngryYorkshireman said:
I think they need to make it easier/cheaper/an incentive for some of these people to downsize.
Agreed. A few years ago my parents (retired) moved out of their 4 bed semi into.... a 4 bed detached. Lots of valid reasons why, but if there had been a proper financial incentive then I suspect they would have had more motivation to find something smaller.You can guarantee as soon as something like that was announced the Daily Mail et al would be up in arms about pensioners being taxed for simply living in their own homes, totally ignoring the fact they bought them for pennies back in the day, have made £1m in capital appreciation and the only person left living in a 5 bed house in Surry is a 90 year old lady who can barely get up the stairs...
There are lots of other good reasons to scrap stamp duty - it hinders mobility in general, stops people moving for work, slows down the housing market, all sorts of things - but I think scrapping it and charging an ongoing tax would be progressive.
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff