Planning Reform
Discussion
Seems like Labour want to skip local scrutiny and enable building wherever they fancy.
Surely we need to get a grip on planning and looking at the bigger picture? The lazy blame game of flooding being due to climate change needs to stop and looking at our environment instead such as dredging and drain cleaning. Planning causes major issues. I live on the corner of 3 county boundaries and so we have building dropped on us by the different authorities, the latest one is yet another for over 100 houses on a flood plan, the site of which was under water during the floods a couple of weeks ago.
We then have uber council with people putting down plastic "lawns" so concreting even more, surely this can be banned?
Also, when everyone bangs on about the climate change and energy, why is it not mandatory for any new house in the UK to be fitted with solar? Surely if every new build is as self sufficient as possible all the better?
Finally is it not time to look at our population (not just immigration)? Stop building to accommodate. Stop adding to the non contributory tax takers.
Surely we need to get a grip on planning and looking at the bigger picture? The lazy blame game of flooding being due to climate change needs to stop and looking at our environment instead such as dredging and drain cleaning. Planning causes major issues. I live on the corner of 3 county boundaries and so we have building dropped on us by the different authorities, the latest one is yet another for over 100 houses on a flood plan, the site of which was under water during the floods a couple of weeks ago.
We then have uber council with people putting down plastic "lawns" so concreting even more, surely this can be banned?
Also, when everyone bangs on about the climate change and energy, why is it not mandatory for any new house in the UK to be fitted with solar? Surely if every new build is as self sufficient as possible all the better?
Finally is it not time to look at our population (not just immigration)? Stop building to accommodate. Stop adding to the non contributory tax takers.
This has been long overdue.
I think we all need to be honest with ourselves. Few people want new houses built in their Village, Town or even City, it's just more bodies (and cars) to use already stretched public services, taking away pretty views and if we're really honest, potentially eroding wealth we've built up because we were born in a more fortunate time than our kids.
'Local Objections' are NIMBY objections really. We've tried building on brownfield sites and all we got was millions of BTL flats no one wants.
I've always thought the best solution was to pick a decently long stretch between two motorway junctions, add a new junction, build a town, put in local roads behind to the next town / village, build a school, some shops etc, but then I'm not an urban planner and I'm sure whichever village / town it lands on or near as going to be screaming about local objections and greenbelts. I would hate it too.
Immigration. To be honest and frank, I'm a left-of-centre type, I voted remain and believed in freedom of moment within the EU when we were part of it, but it wasn't people and families moving from France / Germany / Poland or whatever to work / live here that caused issues. I have to concede immigration is very unpopular and with 60% of our population growth being driven by immigration, things do need to change. It's a lazy phrase, but the housing crisis shows that we really are 'full'. Lots of Countries have very strict rules around immigration and it doesn't mean having to cheer for Farage goose stepping up and down the cliffs of Dover to implement them.
I think we all need to be honest with ourselves. Few people want new houses built in their Village, Town or even City, it's just more bodies (and cars) to use already stretched public services, taking away pretty views and if we're really honest, potentially eroding wealth we've built up because we were born in a more fortunate time than our kids.
'Local Objections' are NIMBY objections really. We've tried building on brownfield sites and all we got was millions of BTL flats no one wants.
I've always thought the best solution was to pick a decently long stretch between two motorway junctions, add a new junction, build a town, put in local roads behind to the next town / village, build a school, some shops etc, but then I'm not an urban planner and I'm sure whichever village / town it lands on or near as going to be screaming about local objections and greenbelts. I would hate it too.
Immigration. To be honest and frank, I'm a left-of-centre type, I voted remain and believed in freedom of moment within the EU when we were part of it, but it wasn't people and families moving from France / Germany / Poland or whatever to work / live here that caused issues. I have to concede immigration is very unpopular and with 60% of our population growth being driven by immigration, things do need to change. It's a lazy phrase, but the housing crisis shows that we really are 'full'. Lots of Countries have very strict rules around immigration and it doesn't mean having to cheer for Farage goose stepping up and down the cliffs of Dover to implement them.
P-Jay said:
This has been long overdue. Immigration. To be honest and frank, I'm a left-of-centre type, I voted remain and believed in freedom of moment within the EU when we were part of it, but it wasn't people and families moving from France / Germany / Poland or whatever to work / live here that caused issues. I have to concede immigration is very unpopular and with 60% of our population growth being driven by immigration, things do need to change. It's a lazy phrase, but the housing crisis shows that we really are 'full'. Lots of Countries have very strict rules around immigration and it doesn't mean having to cheer for Farage goose stepping up and down the cliffs of Dover to implement them.
I agree with you, and the solution seems to be to increase minimum wage so that our workshy workforce are tempted to do these jobs that the immigrants currently do. It may end up with higher prices all round, but if that means that we need to import fewer people (and thus cause a strain on housing and services) then that is what we need to do. I suspect the reason we've had so much immigration post brexit is to keep wage costs lower for business.
eldar said:
s1962a said:
The NIMBYism needs to be controlled, and about time too.
Indeed. They've had too much influence for far too long. Should result in more affordable housing, at least in the longer term.I'll give an example of a development that caught my attention. It's in South London and the redevelopment of an old Homebase site. The main objections seem to be regarding the view and it looking ugly. This is prime concrete jungle real estate in a relatively run down part of London - why is the view so important?
https://nowoodgatetower.site
Stuff has to be built and it’s not just housing.
Power stations, bridges, railways, roads, etc are all mired in costly and lengthy planning processes that take years and costs millions before a spade hits the ground. That’s just insane. Just look at the new Lower Thames crossing, £300m spent producing over 350,000 pages of planning documents and not an inch of ground has yet been broken. The HS2 leg in the Chilterns has to put underground mainly to satisfy nimbyism at a cost of nearly £1bn on top of its already astronomical cost.
Yes, you have to listen to local concerns but sometimes you just have to say, tough, it’s for the nations good and it’s been built and then compensate accordingly.
With housing, simply saying use brownfield sites simply leads to squeezing in as many tower blocks as possible consisting of tiny flats that are no good for families. Pointless building estates full of houses (especially in places like London) as they’ll be too expensive to buy so family homes have to be built outside of major conurbations where land is cheap enough to warrant house building to sell at a price that is still remotely attainable.
People are always supportive for building projects as long as it’s nowhere near them. Yes, they want motorways and railways but heaven forbid, not in their backyard. Well, that attitude is why we have the the crap planning system we have and that has to change.
Power stations, bridges, railways, roads, etc are all mired in costly and lengthy planning processes that take years and costs millions before a spade hits the ground. That’s just insane. Just look at the new Lower Thames crossing, £300m spent producing over 350,000 pages of planning documents and not an inch of ground has yet been broken. The HS2 leg in the Chilterns has to put underground mainly to satisfy nimbyism at a cost of nearly £1bn on top of its already astronomical cost.
Yes, you have to listen to local concerns but sometimes you just have to say, tough, it’s for the nations good and it’s been built and then compensate accordingly.
With housing, simply saying use brownfield sites simply leads to squeezing in as many tower blocks as possible consisting of tiny flats that are no good for families. Pointless building estates full of houses (especially in places like London) as they’ll be too expensive to buy so family homes have to be built outside of major conurbations where land is cheap enough to warrant house building to sell at a price that is still remotely attainable.
People are always supportive for building projects as long as it’s nowhere near them. Yes, they want motorways and railways but heaven forbid, not in their backyard. Well, that attitude is why we have the the crap planning system we have and that has to change.
BikeBikeBIke said:
s1962a said:
The NIMBYism needs to be controlled, and about time too.
Surely Nimby-ism is good? If we all protect our own areas then the country will be kept in the best shape possible to hand on to future generations.BikeBikeBIke said:
s1962a said:
The NIMBYism needs to be controlled, and about time too.
Surely Nimby-ism is good? If we all protect our own areas then the country will be kept in the best shape possible to hand on to future generations.There is a balance to be struck, but there is a good deal of nimbyism which is just resistance to change.
Probably 10 years or so ago there were proposals to get a bridge built where a load of locals were unhappy about it.
Bridge goes ahead, job completed and everyone who was grumbling about it and putting in objections is now happy about how much handier the new bridge is.
Probably 10 years or so ago there were proposals to get a bridge built where a load of locals were unhappy about it.
Bridge goes ahead, job completed and everyone who was grumbling about it and putting in objections is now happy about how much handier the new bridge is.
s1962a said:
P-Jay said:
This has been long overdue. Immigration. To be honest and frank, I'm a left-of-centre type, I voted remain and believed in freedom of moment within the EU when we were part of it, but it wasn't people and families moving from France / Germany / Poland or whatever to work / live here that caused issues. I have to concede immigration is very unpopular and with 60% of our population growth being driven by immigration, things do need to change. It's a lazy phrase, but the housing crisis shows that we really are 'full'. Lots of Countries have very strict rules around immigration and it doesn't mean having to cheer for Farage goose stepping up and down the cliffs of Dover to implement them.
I agree with you, and the solution seems to be to increase minimum wage so that our workshy workforce are tempted to do these jobs that the immigrants currently do. It may end up with higher prices all round, but if that means that we need to import fewer people (and thus cause a strain on housing and services) then that is what we need to do. I suspect the reason we've had so much immigration post brexit is to keep wage costs lower for business.
t than work. With an aging population, and in some cases a skills shortage, we do need some immigration, in the same why Countries like Canada, Australia and New Zealand do. The US is different, they have the same regs, but also, they're happy to pretend they want to keep Mexicans out, but their economy relies on an undocumented sub-class to do the dirty work. maybe like you say we do to.
Personally, I'd prefer they remove some of the permitted development rights and restrict the amount by which any property can be extended - if you need to go from a 2 bed semi to a 4 bed, then move to a bigger house!
The issue in our area is that pretty much all the smaller properties have been extended and are now out of reach of any first/second time buyer, so people aren't able to stay in the area. There's also a shortage of smaller places for those who want to downsize - my mum, for example, is now on her own in a large 3 bed detached house as there isn't anywhere in the village for her to move to. She doesn't drive and all her friends live here, so doesn't want to move away.
But there are 6 new build (well new 4 years ago) £750k+ properties sitting empty, unsold.. Would have been far better to build 10 or 12 smaller ones.
The issue in our area is that pretty much all the smaller properties have been extended and are now out of reach of any first/second time buyer, so people aren't able to stay in the area. There's also a shortage of smaller places for those who want to downsize - my mum, for example, is now on her own in a large 3 bed detached house as there isn't anywhere in the village for her to move to. She doesn't drive and all her friends live here, so doesn't want to move away.
But there are 6 new build (well new 4 years ago) £750k+ properties sitting empty, unsold.. Would have been far better to build 10 or 12 smaller ones.
It's badly needed. The trouble is I highly doubt a climate change obsessed class warrior is going to instigate the type of reforms needed. The kind which actually allows people to build houses they want to live in. What I suspect we will get is a bunch of grand schemes by large corporations and dumping "affordable housing" in rural seats that might otherwise vote wrong.
oyster said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
s1962a said:
The NIMBYism needs to be controlled, and about time too.
Surely Nimby-ism is good? If we all protect our own areas then the country will be kept in the best shape possible to hand on to future generations.A case in point being a neighbour who bought an absolute shed of a bungalow. Previous incumbents must have lived there 50 years without any modernisation. It was on a huge plot and basically, the chap bought the plot to build himself a nice, big detached house, which is pretty much what had happened next door about 15 year prior. There was no real development, just a knock-down and build back better, but it took him 2 years in planning.
It is no wonder there's little small scale private building going on, because on those timelines, it is simply unviable.
NIMBYism, in thoery at least, doesn't have an outcome on the planning decision.
Supporting/Opposing comments, or input from the PC do not have to be considered as part of the planning process.
I'm all for more houses being built providing the supporting infrastructure is in place before they are completed, and more importantly that constraints and requirments are enforced properly.
We're far too half-arsed at planning from a permissions, (speed of decision being awful) and from an enforcement perspective.
Supporting/Opposing comments, or input from the PC do not have to be considered as part of the planning process.
I'm all for more houses being built providing the supporting infrastructure is in place before they are completed, and more importantly that constraints and requirments are enforced properly.
We're far too half-arsed at planning from a permissions, (speed of decision being awful) and from an enforcement perspective.
RedWhiteMonkey said:
In terms of pure housebuilding targets it is largely irrelevant how many planning permissions are granted, volume housebuilders cannot be forced to build and prefer to control their market and therefore the housing prices.
It's important for the many and various smaller sites which, on aggregate, can add a good number of new builds. We have far, far fewer small builders now than in the 80's and one reason is planning. There are a host of others, but planning is significant.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff