Increasing densities in urban areas in theory makes sense. But reality is tough for local councils and residents on the ground. Proposals to increase density on a small, 6 unit residential site in The Close, Sandhurst are heavily criticised by neighbours and local leaders. Citing increased traffic, insufficient parking, impact on trees, overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing impacts on nearby homes, endorsed with a petition opposing the scheme starkly illustrate the conflicts densification will produce for local leaders. For neighbours on the spot, living with the results foist upon them, a fundamental physical change a door or so away, and realisation of a worrying precedent is threatening their immediate homily environment with a cold-blooded, pitiless reality of higher densities will explosively ignite the fears of established communities. This is democracy in action. But we need the houses: somewhere. The next generation, our children and grand-children need them. Thoughtlessly their parents continue to hang around for longer and longer, pushing their kids dream of their own home into a new permahope realty.
You can see the point. Difficulties with urban density will join hatred of houses in the rural countryside as toxic topics. After all, none of us are nimbies, but most of us are conservationists? Just take a look at climate change.
Is it time to take a deep breath? As well under 90% of England is undeveloped a rational response is a strategic plan to place most of the 300,000 houses needed each year in major new settlements in the countryside. Or on brownfield sites, of course. As developers do not want to build on brownfield sites, presumably for sound commercial reasons, councils who take control of their own future spatial housing policies can do so instead.
Otherwise new settlements in the open countryside can be planned; two generations ahead. Why is this contentious? Why is strategic planning rejected by Conservative governments? We know not to build: in the protected areas. There is plenty of unprotected land, even in popular locations like the Thames Valley. Doing so will stop haphazard, unexpected housing which angers so many. Thinking ahead, positioning ahead by shrewd council leaders makes sense.
For example, worried about congestion? Car drivers attracted to the new, cool settlements will be free to drive and compelled to pay the full cost of the pollution they produce and the space they use to drive and park. Public transport, public open space, community gardens, their upkeep and safety can be funded through a local congestion and car ownership charge. You, the car owner will have the choice. This too is democracy. This too is local control.
Ian Campbell
3rd November 2022
