Thoughts on the new housebuilding policy? Some may recall my dislike of the introduction of the so called grey belt by Labour. It is coming to fruition. Our green belt is down to a low 12.5% of our country. This will reduce as some of it becomes grey belt. On the face of it that doesnt sit well with me. I like the countryside. There are already whispers of land im my neck of the woods that will change designation. There are currently over 250k long term empty residential properties in the UK. Is there no mileage in targeting re-use of those. Then there are so many empty city centre buildings these days, what about re-purposing. Lets face it, the high street will never be as big as it once was. I do think housebuilding is needed, economically and socially, but this sole focus on new build seems an example of a lack of joined up thinking.
I'd bet there's a high percentage of people, who don't want new builds to spoil their view, have second homes in other people's countryside that stops locals buying them.
On the one hand, development is good for me. I don't want them slackening planning laws though. On the other hand, I don't want to see overdevelopment or the reduction of the greenbelt. Repurposing seems like a very sensible idea. With more remote working, office buildings could be repurchased. They've done that near me with a massive office building. The same could be done in town centres but I think its important that towns retain central places and that some kind of public space remains at the heart of towns.
We have some stunning old industrial buildings near us. Completey empty and going to waste. Protected by world heritage, as is a lot round where I live. It seems odd to me they are protected to such a level that they will ultimately crumble. Lets be smart and repurpose into young family flats whilst being sympathetic to the building. It might take a bit of thinking, but surely possible and an alternative to squeezing away more of the green belt.
I assume they have to get this voted through? I wonder if we see more Labour MPs lose the whip by voting against the party on this one too.
I've taken a wild guess at which buildings you mean based on what you've said about your geographical location previously. If I'm thinking about the ones you mean, then I believe that there are museums in some of them. Part of the problem with a change of use of buildings like that is that it removes their historical context. The whole point of protecting them is to preserve the information that they hold. Adapting them for residential erodes or removes that information. You can make changes, and I've worked on a project to get permission to change use of similar buildings recently, but it's usually to create museums or visitors centres to help the public understand what they were used for. Buildings that are WHS or Scheduled Monuments should be subject to a programme of care/maintenance though.
Derwent valley mills mate, Belper. There is a beatiful old Mill, still with water wheel and gates etc. There is a museum on the ground floor, but sadly it gets very little footfall. There must be 8 or 9 stories above, all going to ruin. Windows broken and derelict essentially. There is a suggestion it will lose world heritage status because of the state it is in. It is in an absolutely stunning location. Just seems a bit wasteful, but I do get your point.
That's what I guessed at! Sad that it's not visited. I get your point too. Buildings like that should be preserved and could be repurposed. Losing WH status might actually do them a favour as it would remove some of the barriers to doing different things with them. Based on the little I know about their designations, it would probably still require Scheduled Monument consent and listed building consent but those things are achievable.
Playing their own stupid voters like a fiddle and they’re too ignorant to admit it. Tax increases are incoming, the foundations have been laid.
It is a fabulous old building and there are incredible views from the top, I managed a visit on a pretext once. As a museum there's limited appeal in imagining people toiling away for 12 hours a day tbh. There's a similar building at Pleasley Vale near Mansfield, in a great position, that had to be turned into a business park. The cost of making it into habitation, and complying with safety regulations, etc, was prohibitive. Shame but the apartments would be so expensive the locals wouldn't be able to afford them.
I too have been to the top. Wonderful. They have completely renovated the next door river gardens, bandstand and cafe. It is a lovely little spot again.
Can you imagine if the Tories had done that, we would be on page 2000 now with the Labour luvvies going mental, not a f ucking dickie bird, talk about two faced hypocrites
No one in their right mind believed that, but I think all the Labour luvvies believed Starmer. How long has that lasted, 5/6 weeks, two faced twat.
I have a theory, and it is based on a lack of trust in politics in general. I think they mostly knew what they were going to inherit. I think they knew their manifesto was not affordable. I think the plan was to go early on the bad news, get it done while we all still just pleased they arent tory, then hope in 5 years we have forgotten they kidded us on. The whole no tax rises thing was always nonsense, and I like Reeves enough to believe she knew it to. It is probably a sign of the politics in this country that honesty is not a guarantee of winning elections.
