Building New Homes.

[Andrewcook]

I don't think the Broads Authority planning committee won't be very happy with the Government of the Day saying the Building can be built around the Broads it could ruin the character of it.

[dnks34]

🙄

[marshman]

I don't think it will make much difference - as discussed in another post the BA actually has a smallish executive area and I doubt it has hardly any areas where large scale building could take place, so its impact on BA thinking will be minimal  - or that would be my guess!

In any case you can only sell houses to people who want to buy them, and my guess would be that the new build market is pretty sluggish at the moment!!!!!

[Smoggy]

Anything much more than a metre above sea level is back in the realm of reality and saner councils control.

[LizG]

A lot of housing developments were on hold due to concerns about the pollution effect these would have on the environment / water bodies without mitigation.

The government has simply decided to abandon the rules so that the house builders can start building again - needless to say the shares of many of those companies involved went up yesterday. 

There is a need for more housing or at least affordable housing - I suspect many of these developments contain little or no affordable housing and will be just another blot on the landscape.  For example where I live, the previous council just decided to remove a large area of land from the greenbelt so that a massive housing estate could be built with no supporting infrastructure, limited water supply and an already overloaded local sewage system............ the local elections proved what support the local electorate had for their plans...........

Edited August 30, 2023 by grendel
OP request to change avoidable to affordable.

[MauriceMynah]

Fact of life. People keep breeding.  2 options. More houses or more homeless. Take your pick.

[grendel]

many developments were put on hold due to changes in planning regulations, we were still getting the requests for quotes, but then the developers went on hold as they had to completely redesign some of their projects to meet the new regulations.

Yes anothe big holdup is infrastructure, most places in the Broads Authority area will suffer from this- after all, if they cant get the charging infrastructure in place for boats, then there is not enough infrastructure for houses either.

 

[marshman]

Its not the breeding thats the problem - its the divorce rate!!!!  Such action requires two houses rather than one

[Bikertov]

1 hour ago, LizG said:

There is a need for more housing or at least avoidable housing - I suspect many of these developments contain little or no avoidable housing and will be just another blot on the landscape.  For example where I live, the previous council just decided to remove a large area of land from the greenbelt so that a massive housing estate could be built with no supporting infrastructure, limited water supply and an already overloaded local sewage system............ the local elections proved what support the local electorate had for their plans...........

Presumably you mean affordable housing, not avoidable ??

[Andrewcook]

Marshman, you are not far wrong There is more housing for His and Hers Going their separate ways and finding a Boat with separate cabins with Double beds all to ourselves. 

[LizG]

1 hour ago, Bikertov said:

Presumably you mean affordable housing, not avoidable ??

Yes maybe the mods could actually correct my typo? and edit to say that?

[Bikertov]

According to Wikipedia, the UK population has increased from around 50m in 1951 to nearly 70m in 2021, an increase of over 40% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom

Just in the last 20 years, it has gone up from 55m, an increase of 14%

Add to that the increase of single households (eg being older before coupling up, divorce etc) and you can see that a massive increase in housing and the accompanying infrastructure (power, water, waste, health, schooling etc) is needed.

[Mouldy]

5 hours ago, Bikertov said:

 . . . . . . . . . . and the accompanying infrastructure (power, water, waste, health, schooling etc) is needed.

And I won’t be holding my breath for any of that to happen.  Using profits to pay for improvements in infrastructure seems an alien concept to UK companies.  A lack of investment in so many areas in which we used to excel, has resulted in the death of most industries which will never return.  We’ll just wait for foreign investment to build power stations, car manufacturing plants, wind farms etc that we need and rely on Victorian sewage systems to deal (or not) with ever increasing levels of waste.

I fear for the UK that my grandchildren are growing up to live in.

[grendel]

well I know for a fact that the energy regulator was constantly blocking the supply companies attempts to future proof their networks, if you requested a 500kW supply, then all the supplier was allowed to install was a 500kW substation many a time it was known that an estate would get another phase, so you would want to put in an extra large substation, or use thicker cables- no - blocked, by the energy regulator- under the excuse that you might lump the charges on this existing customer.

No, the only people responsible for thelack of investment was the energy regulators- the very same ones that allowed the energy companies to hike the prices off when they took away the price restrictions way too late- now that revenue was supposed to pay for the new infrastructure that the regulator had been blocking for so long, but by this time the supply companies were very wary of investing due to the regulators previous behaviour.