Monday, April 21, 2008
Scrap the Green Belts and sack the Planners
Forget Eco-towns - Let's follow the example of Britain's Gypsies
Green Belts have stopped the proper growth of housing, or so it seems. The Planners and those bods in City Hall are just so out of touch with what "normal" pepole want, even the Gypsies are getting in on the Act. However it may not be the traditional Romanies, more like the Free-Spirits of the 60's getting older and wanting to settle down. "Since the 1969 Skeffington Report planning decisions also rest heavily on local views - giving "not in my back yard"-ers a veto on new homes. " etc.
Posted by fahrenheit451 @ 11:20 AM (692 views)
3 thoughts on “Scrap the Green Belts and sack the Planners”
Add a comment
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
uncle tom says:
The whole planning process needs to be turned on it’s head.
Stop the Stalinist top-down planning dictats and delegate the job to the lowest level. Reward communities that find space for new housing, and moderately penalise those that prefer to stay as they are. Let local communities discuss their housing needs without the fear of being swamped with 1000 houses when they only wanted a dozen – give them real incentives to welcome new development, but also an absolute veto, should they not like a proposed development.
Gekkoa says:
Its not possible to drive from Boston, USA to Washington without seeing houses. Known as Boswash it’s a suburban sprawl covering 500 miles. It’s ghastly. Although not all is right with the UK planning laws at least it keeps development like this in check.
Boynamedsue says:
Ideologically motivated free-market nonsense of the kind that got the economy into this mess in the first place. Green belts are a useful tool for keeping land use under democratic control and out of the hands of the wealthy few who can afford to buy land. They’re not perfect but they are better than a free for all.