Not far from my house, perhaps half a kilometre from the edge of our leafy Chilterns town, is an old farm. It has a wide range of buildings: some ancient and tumbledown, others modern and imposing. It seems to have seen better days.
When out walking recently, I remarked to my wife that the site seemed ripe for redevelopment.
Surrounded by lovely countryside, a short walk to local amenities, it could become a modern-day hamlet – perhaps even big enough to support a small shop of its own.
In my mind’s eye, there might be a central strip of terraced houses, looking onto a village pond; then round the corner, a few semi-detached homes and the odd detached villa – each with a garden to suit the size of the dwelling.
There would be green spaces, with existing trees preserved and new ones planted; and, in the middle of it all, the aforementioned store, selling essentials and trading gossip.
This sounds like a nostalgist’s dream, but design needn’t be mock Edwardian – I can envisage innovation just as easily as 18th-century pastoralism.
But either way, this settlement of my imagination would be aesthetically delightful, a beautiful rebuke to Messrs Taylor, Wimpey, and Barratt. It would be a place that people would want to grow up and grow old in.
Housebuilding is high on the Government’s priority list. And the Prime Minister must have been thrilled at a new survey, which suggests that – contrary to popular perception – only one in four of us are Nimbys [an acronym for not in my backyard] when it comes to new homes. (Certainly, that will have pleased him more than the finding that just 21 per cent of respondents think Labour are doing a good job on housing policy.)
However, just because someone is a Yimby [yes in my backyard] in principle, that shouldn’t be taken by ministers or by housebuilders as a green light for any and all development.
If most of us are perfectly prepared to accept that Britain needs more homes, it isn’t unreasonable to ask questions about what kind of houses we want, as well as what level of services are required to go with them.
We’ve all seen the large, identikit schemes that have tended to dominate the new housing landscape in recent years.
At least there might be some variety in brick colour these days, and the odd bit of greenery, but too often, new developments are dismal-looking.
What’s more, they rarely include truly adequate services, putting additional pressure on already hard-pressed local infrastructure. Even if a new health centre or school is thrown up, the impact on traffic in existing towns and villages can be disastrous.
Reforms set to be announced this week by Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, are expected to give a boost to small and medium-sized construction firms, which in turn may lead to more diverse building schemes.
That’s well and good, provided that diversity equates to beauty. After all, while basic shelter may be a human right, living somewhere lovely that makes people feel good is surely not an expectation that should be beyond the sixth-largest global economy.
It might even help to tackle our mental health epidemic and go some way to boosting Britain’s sluggish productivity.
There are some examples of innovative and aesthetically pleasing housing developments.
Go and visit newer parts of south-west Cambridge, for instance, where smart, modern design has been brought to bear effectively on a city steeped in history.
And while there may be challenges associated with building eye-catching houses at low cost, it is hard to believe those are completely unsurmountable – even in a profit-driven industry.
As for the farm near my house, it appears I must be some sort of planning Nostradamus because I now discover the site is indeed set to be turned over to housing.
A proposal to build 86 dwellings was originally rejected by the council, but it has recently given the go-ahead to a revised plan which includes 59 homes – a mix of terraced, semi-detached and detached, as well as some apartments.
I don’t see a village pond in the plan drawings, nor evidence of a local shop. But the developer claims it “will create and inspire a vibrant community, through a sensitively designed scheme that includes new and affordable homes for local residents, barn-inspired structures and open green spaces.”
It all sounds very pleasant indeed; the kind of place Angela Rayner might visit as inspiration for (or evidence of) her reforms.
The kind of place that could be beautiful, and that might even soften the hearts of resolute Nimbys – if, of course, the reality of the development lives up to its billing.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( I’m a YIMBY – but only if the new houses are beautiful )
Also on site :
- This Is the 1 Way To Accentuate Your Waist Over 50, According to Celebrity Stylists
- 'Sex and the City’ Star, 60, Admits To Doing This To Prepare For Her New Role
- Israel announces major expansion of illegal West Bank settlements