06-21-2021, 11:46 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-21-2021, 11:47 AM by Borin' Baggie.)
My solution is to first focus on the direct issue that is artificially restricting supply of houses at the moment yet is completely ignored in the legislation (probably because it would hurt the pockets of Tory donors). There's loads of land in the UK that has planning permission or has been provisionally granted/recommended it that isn't being built on as the land is just a means for land banking. I'd make it financially punitive to land bank, if you have land with planning permission then you get taxed on it. If it's costing you money, you're not going to sit on it and will instead do something with it, whether that be build on it or sell it to someone who wants to build on it.
I'd also encourage new railway developments by reopening old lines and encouraging new stations to be built on those lines or on existing lines and transfer land over to the railway development companies adjacent to the new stations so that they can develop the land around the new stations, which worked brilliantly before in the UK and has also been a huge success in Japan. Cambridge-Oxford would have been the pilot for this had the Tories not blocked it during the coalition, and the bonuses are that it provides new infrastructure for people already living there to utilise and it will make private sector investment into the construction of the railways economically feasible.
Then I'd just expand the devolved regional areas to cover more of the countryside (e.g. Staffs, Worcs, Warks in the WMCA) and let the devolved regional governments develop local plans as it will enable housing and commercial needs to be allocated based on regional requirements with direct input and reduce the impact of frivolous appeals to block planning permission, on top of loosening planning guidance to what it used to be where justification was based around "are there any reasons not to" instead of the current "are there any reasons we should" which is line with the loosening of guidance (the only good thing about the bill going through currently) and enabling regional cooperation.
As for "democratic control of development ultimately results in zero development", how come all the Lib Dem-run authorities up and down the country regularly exceed housing development targets?
I'd also encourage new railway developments by reopening old lines and encouraging new stations to be built on those lines or on existing lines and transfer land over to the railway development companies adjacent to the new stations so that they can develop the land around the new stations, which worked brilliantly before in the UK and has also been a huge success in Japan. Cambridge-Oxford would have been the pilot for this had the Tories not blocked it during the coalition, and the bonuses are that it provides new infrastructure for people already living there to utilise and it will make private sector investment into the construction of the railways economically feasible.
Then I'd just expand the devolved regional areas to cover more of the countryside (e.g. Staffs, Worcs, Warks in the WMCA) and let the devolved regional governments develop local plans as it will enable housing and commercial needs to be allocated based on regional requirements with direct input and reduce the impact of frivolous appeals to block planning permission, on top of loosening planning guidance to what it used to be where justification was based around "are there any reasons not to" instead of the current "are there any reasons we should" which is line with the loosening of guidance (the only good thing about the bill going through currently) and enabling regional cooperation.
As for "democratic control of development ultimately results in zero development", how come all the Lib Dem-run authorities up and down the country regularly exceed housing development targets?