Homes for everyone
​
With the revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) very much in the news it was no real surprise to get a call from Radio Berkshire to talk about house building in our area. I have had issues in the past with TV interviews being edited to present a particular point of view, but live radio tends to be a lot more open to hearing what it is the interviewee has to say about the topic. Today, 13th December, it was Katherine Bett and she wanted a response to the new National housing targets. (Starts around 07.00 and finishes around 07.15 if looking for it on catch up).
​
Wokingham are very much in the firing line for more houses for a very simple reason. Developers want to build here because houses can be sold in this area for a lot more than it costs to build them. The profits the developers make can reward shareholders in the business, and can also contribute towards more local infrastructure through things like Section 106 (S106) and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payments.
​
S106 payments are made to compensate for any loss or damage caused by the development, or to mitigate its wider impact. CIL is a charge that local authorities can impose on new developments in their area. The money raised from S106 and CIL is used to fund local infrastructure projects, such as: schools, health services, leisure, open spaces, and transport improvements. This is why Local Planning Authorities are so keen to work with the developers. They have no money for things like schools and roads, so they rely on new housing to fund them.
​
The question put to me during the radio interview was "What are your principle concerns regarding the new housing targets?" My reply was that housing targets will not solve the housing crisis. To put more detail into the complex issue of what WILL solve the housing crisis (and I fully acknowledge there IS a significant shortfall of new home availability across the country) I made several references to a new report published HERE. "Homes for Everyone".
​
The report makes clear that there are many options to be explored BEFORE we need to build on green field sites such as the Hall Farm/Loddon Valley Garden Village site. I wont repeat the propaganda about the affordable homes, the thriving communities, the wonderful green spaces that will be provided if we do build on green fields at Hall Farm, you can read this for yourself if you are interested by clicking the previous link. My point is: WE DO NOT NEED TO BUILD HERE AT ALL!
​​
I strongly recommend you read the full HOMES FOR EVERYONE report from the Community Planning Alliance for yourself as it contains a great deal of very pertinent argument against building on green field sites, but in summary the arguments are very simple:
​
-
1.5 million+ derelict homes could be renovated.
-
1 million+ unbuilt homes with existing planning permission, could be built.
-
1.2 million homes developed on brownfield sites, BEFORE we need to concrete over our greenfield sites.
-
26 million empty bedrooms could be incentivised for rental.
-
This will mean: Millions of homes left undisturbed for nature.
-
The Country’s entire carbon budget need not be used up.
-
Those of us who do not have the luxury and privilege of living in a protected area such as the Green Belt still get to enjoy what is left of our precious rural landscape.
​
There are good reasons why developers can afford to pay millions to local authorities in CIL and S106 payments, they are planning to build the most expensive houses they can get away with, in the most desirable locations they can get hold of, then carefully manage the supply of those houses so prices remain high.
​
Where possible they will avoid building any "affordable" houses as these provide the least profit. They will also only build the infrastructure needed to make these new houses viable AFTER they have sold enough of them to (hopefully) pay the bills. So a bridge over the M4 which would alleviate the traffic congestion which will be generated by putting 3,930 houses at Hall Farm is earmarked for phase 3 of the development. Up to 30 years after they start building and selling the houses, if ever!
​
The houses they would like to build will be 3 or 4 bedroom, semi detached, low density, commuter homes for people who can afford the half million pounds plus price tag for the "escape to the country" dream they are selling. This "country park" they are selling us will be a big part of that dream, but it will NOT SOLVE THE HOUSING CRISIS!
​
If we want to solve the housing crisis in this country we need many thousands more social houses. You would think a Labour Government would understand that, but no, a war is being stirred up between rural and urban areas, with housing targets for areas like London going down, while the targets for areas like Wokingham, with land OUTSIDE the restrictions of the green belt, are cranked ever higher. Wokingham will need to nearly double the number of houses built going forward, on top of the the thousands already built here.
​
And where are those houses being built? ​​​​​​Welcome to rural Berkshire!
​
