Adlington: ‘Our tiny village can’t handle 10,000 new homes’
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0ezv1yplzxo
Posted by insomnimax_99
Adlington: ‘Our tiny village can’t handle 10,000 new homes’
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0ezv1yplzxo
Posted by insomnimax_99
30 Comments
Its on a rail line and has a station, so the rest will follow. Looks like she will be getting a bus service and street lights after all.
If Crawley and all the other new towns can cope, then you can. Nimby’s.
Yes it can, if Woodford got a whole new village.
She can put up with a few diggers next door
Much more likely to get the necessary infrastructure along with it if the housing is added as a ‘new town’ than if it was just a series of additional developments over time which all got approved despite local opposition because of inadequate housing provision in the area.
“Our tiny village can’t handle 10,000 new homes”
Don’t worry, it’ll get bigger as they build
As long as they’re building the required infrastructure for 10k new homes then it should be absolutely fine.
I have more sympathy when it’s just projects to tack a load of houses onto an existing town with no additional amenities provided.
“Tiny village” “6000 residents”
My local village has under 200 people, has a village hall and a tiny church which opens once a month. No shops no transport links.
That’s a village.
You live in a very small town which is expanding to a small to medium town. As houses get built infrastructure will. You’ll get supermarkets, shops offices. Why because there’s homes with people in to sell stuff to.
Shut up
People are being very judgemental here. I completely understand why we need new housing but I can completely understand why people living in a small quaint country village don’t suddenly want it to turn into a town. There’s a good chance they live there to get away from urban areas and don’t want the infrastructure needed to turn their quaint village into an urban area.
Of course local people don’t want more housing built as how does it help them? They already have housing.
Housing is for the people who don’t live there yet.
And after it’s all built if you did a vote for “should this housing have been built” the answer would be an overwhelming yes.
Everyone on here parroting the same thing but she has a very valid point. The town where my parents are based has expanded massively over the past ten years or so but the infrastructure hasn’t whatsoever. The roads are just almost standstill traffic all day every day, good luck getting a doctors appointment etc. they continue to build more and more houses with nothing to support the additional thousands upon thousands of people
All the people in this thread complaining about NIMBYs and refusing to see why they’re pissed off.
Yes, we need more housing. This is primarily because of population growth, which is only happening because of mass immigration, which people have voted against at every single opportunity given.
So yes, people are going to get pissed off when their area turns from being a nice semi-rural small town to a collection of housing estates, purely to accommodate political choices they didn’t want to begin with.
Nothing pisses me off seeing old boomers with gardens the size of football pitches with “no new homes” posters in their gardens . Also as a gardener I met these people daily. There are many people of a certain age who will literally just appose anything. Even if it’s converting existing unused buildings into housing. ‘We’ve got enough “.
“We don’t have street lights, but we don’t want street lights.”
This might be the funniest NIMBY quote.
Say goodbye to your nice quiet village and hello to your new bustling city! Filled with 10000 upstanding citizens no doubt
…but 10,000 new homes will be able to handle Adlington!
Might get bigger but the infrastructure doesn’t
Glossop is a perfect example
Yeah because the large towns we have now only came into existence because there was a load of pre-existing infrasturcture that was just magically there somehow 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
It’s actually perfectly reasonable people don’t want their entire community and places completely transformed with bad developments.
Once again, hard to see this not connected to immigration, which is entirely to blame for population increase.
Lower immigration, and solve the housing crisis and transformation of towns and villages with bad developments.
I’m not a NIMBY and I welcome new homes where I live because there’s lots of empty land.
BUT, the homes that have been built have not been managed well at all, and it’s massively hurt the local community. And it’s a massive problem with private housing development.
This has happened a few times in the medium sized village where I live, it’s close to a big city, but only accessible via the motorway nearby.
Lots of people have moved in, in thinking maybe double even triple the amount of people that used to live here. There’s one post office, one Co-Op and one doctor’s surgery. Ok
Each plot of land sold to these private developers have been told they can build, say, 100 houses. Ok cool. But the developers have said over time, actually we can make 120. Ok good, more house better.
But they build it on the original plot of land that was designed for much less.
So a 5 minutes down the road from me, there used to be a field. Now it’s a cluster of cramped houses and cars litterered all over the roads. Despite having so much empty space all around it.
The people on this estate want a quiet life, so they only want ONE. ONE road in and out, despite being so close to other roads. So every single morning and evening, all of these cars that can barely park where they live all have to filter out of this tiny little village road causing a big blockage.
Because it’s so far from anything everyone needs a car, because the bus route is virtually non-existant. They technically increased the bus availability. But they essentially spread out the current bus force over a larger area with no increase in staff or fleet, so it’s actually hurt the pensioners and vulnerable people who used to rely on it. I used to be one of those people and I just said forget it and got a car.
Not a single one of the people who have moved in work or do anything in the area. So every single person who works lines up on what used to be a small village road trying to filter onto the motorway. So every morning, there’s a line of cars that can take sometimes up to an hour to get through.
Because of the area being nice and quiet. Everyone who moved in has a nice big range Rover or 5 series. And because each house is owned by a couple. A house with one car park space for a small car. No has two big saloon/4*4 cars instead. These houses are completely unaffordable for any of people who currently live in the area.
The area simply cannot cope with all of the people that moved in. It can, if it’s managed correctly.
That means improving the bus routes, so people don’t have to drive everywhere just to get some milk or bread.
Increasing services so people can walk to these places, the closest coop is over a 20 minute walk away and the next Aldi 45 minutes walk away in a nearby town.
Improve infrastructure, the roads nearby simply cannot cope with the amount of cars we have now. And increasing the number of through roads through these estates. I really cannot fathom why have a cluster of houses with only one way in or out.
Services as whole needs increasing, doctors, hospitals.
But this obviously doesn’t concern bellway or who ever built these new builds. Because they then move on to the next site, and build another plot of houses. Without any consideration for the people that live or who will be living there. We need managed building of houses by councils who can regenerate areas and wealth by building houses to help existing communities. That are connected and served sensibly
I have yet to meet a person who genuinely wants more houses in the fields surrounding them. I have seen loads of people complain about NIMBYs, but never anyone saying “they should build here, in the field right next to my house instead”
You will take your coast to coast new build estate Britain and enjoy it, who needs green space anyway.
500 houses and flats have just been built behind where I live and because it got permission ( council objected but government over ruled) there are now more developments at the other side of the village being built on many hectares that were productive farmland.
The builders of the 500 house development were meant to build a new primary school on the site but it turns out they are only providing a plot and that plot is not where it was originally to be sited but one which is not as flat and smaller, the local authority will somehow have to fund the building of the school, no planning as yet. Will it ever be built?
The houses are built on fields that acted as a flood plain and flat agricultural land as we have several rivers in the area. Last year the roads on the new development flooded ( as did our gardens for the first time ever). The developers are crowing about how they have benefited the community by widening a main road at the turning into the new estate ( which they needed to do to access their build) and widening and “repairing”a public footpath ( which they dug up for pipework and widened for vehicular access during the build, closing it to the public for a year and half, not the 3 months originally stated) which is a shortcut to the local train station.
The local primary school was already oversubscribed before the build. The outstanding local secondary serves all the surrounding villages (which have no secondary school) as ours was the hub one for them, not anymore. The streets around the train station and high street where aprking was free are now totally over crowded with cars parking up for the day, so we will likely see a permit scheme ( which will cost) being introduced and charges for parking on the high street. Many other issues not listed… no extra GP provision, there is no local dentist anyway, they connected all the sewage from the estate to smaller bore pipes on a local street near the station, not the main road as planned- so that will likely be a S**t show to come. The social housing provision was assigned to a London based Housing Association, not a local one. Many blocks of housing have also been sold to private rent only providers- all against the planning information locals were assured about in the many meetings about the development.
My hometown currently has 8-9k people, developers want to build an extra 770 homes, but the main concern is facilities.
Our primary and secondary schools have been oversubscribed for years, the 1 doctors surgery hasn’t been taking new patients since around Covid bc of capacity, and the dentist is well beyond being overstretched. The services cannot cope with more people, they’re struggling already as they are.
The developers say there’ll be space for a new primary school and a doctors surgery, but won’t commit to building it and it’ll just become more houses. Oh and those houses are going to be built on a flood plain, bc that’s a swell idea…
If the facilities are to be provided by the private sector developers then they won’t be built on grounds of declining profits, part way through the build. What should happen is either the state builds them out of taxation or as is the case now the new house buyers pay a premium. My preference would be for the developers to provide a bond for those facilities which can be called in when they try to worm out of them.
My parents’ village has this issue. The developer said they’ll contribute x amount of money to the council for schools and other things, but there’s still lots that need additional help. The building development area is also right near a busy dul carriageway of which the nearest entrance is basically a T road entrance onto the dual carriageway; the sliproad is about 2 car lengths long.
Yet politicians want us to have more babies and increase the population
[We want to make it easier to have children – Farage](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yx062pvlvo)
This is fine but infrastructure needs to go in first. Not as an afterthought.
> Resident Mike Cummings said he supported the potential plans for Adlington.
> Mike Cummings says the area needs new houses
> He said: “We’re pretty open-minded on the fact that we need to have increased housing – we’ve got five kids and nine grandchildren, where are they going to live?
> …
> “It’s a beautiful area and they’ll enjoy living over there.”
Mike Cummings would plant a tree whose shade he would never personally experience. What a guy.
It needs to be enshrined in law that X amount of dwellings, means Y amount of the following:
Hell, the list is endless.
Primary schools
Secondary schools
Doctors surgerys
Hospitals
Village halls
Shops
Parks
Opticians
Churches
Places of worship
Pubs
Community hubs
Libraries
You can’t just dump 10,000 houses on a village and expect it to work.
It doesn’t.
Another village/community in the UK being ruined by building. It’s so sad we’re gradually losing our local and cultural heritage