New homes yes, countryside no
We all know that the country has a housing crisis.
There is a disgraceful rise in homelessness in consequence.
Yet, at the last count, there were 930,000 empty properties across the country.
There are also thousands of brownfield sites which could be developed for social and private housing.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Sunday, May 26 2013
Of course, it is affordable social housing which we desperately need, especially for young families, seniors and single people.
A sizeable and sustained injection of Government funding is needed now.
This would be a positive move for both the economy in general and the construction industry.
So, I am all for building, converting and refurbishing as many properties as possible.
What I am against is dumping thousands of houses on green land and swamping neighbouring communities.
Therefore, I was astonished to find that the Conservative cabinet at Charnwood Council has given the go-ahead for 4,500 houses adjoining our village of Thurmaston.
Ours is a community of about 3,200 houses.
The figures speak for themselves.
Our roads, schools and other facilities will not cope.
Our identity will be lost, as will that of our neighbouring village, Barkby.
Kate Knaggs, Thurmaston.
With regards to the letter from Wayne Manship ("Wonderful? Not if you live near it!" Mercury Mailbox, September 28), surely those living near to the new Summit building in the city centre should expect that there will be this kind of development in the area.
City centres are always being regenerated, so don't live so close if you are not prepared to accept change.
Besides, the students that bring Leicester such diversity and wealth have got to live somewhere.
Student, Leicester.
Comments
by Peter20101
Tuesday, October 02 2012, 5:30PM
“Kate you letter highlights some intersting points, but the current government is contradicting it self, at present, in what it wants.
Localism was a key point in their election pledges, where decisions would be made in the community to upport what the community wanted - but they continue more than ever with top-down demands on housing
The want to promote affordable housing, but are in the process of removing the need for developers to include this in developments. Why?
Well "Social/Affordable" housing is required to be of a higher standard than a usual new build by a developer for private houses. This also causes a problem in preventing housing associations "adopting" housing already built.
So it is more profitable for developers not to have affordable housing, but the requirement is for this, yet the Government are also trying to promote the "presumption" of approval to developers, irrespective of local communities & local council (Parish & District) views
As you have said, we should be encouraging that existing housing is used, development already built be put into use, planning applications already granted should be completed and then we view brownfield sites and sites for re-development, all before we consider greenfield/farmland locations
But this is where Councils have to work, as they are not the easy options and require them to work harder to make these happen - but they can be done with the right will.”