Infill Development

[nightshade]

I was saddened by the loss of a very productive area near me
It was the garden of a large detached house with mature trees,
pond, Thrush attracting lawns,with a bottom garden collection
of shrubs hedging and plants from its origins as countryside
Because it was someones garden no one gave its conservation
value a second thought
It has disappeared now and there are two bungalows in its place
with tubs and decking
This is a get rich quick "`previously developed land scheme" from
this government of wildlife and countryside haters
Now local councils can sell parks public gardens and selfish people
can sell off their gardens for short term profit

[Wild-Woman]

Originally Posted by nightshade

I was saddened by the loss of a very productive area near me
It was the garden of a large detached house with mature trees,
pond, Thrush attracting lawns,with a bottom garden collection
of shrubs hedging and plants from its origins as countryside
Because it was someones garden no one gave its conservation
value a second thought
It has disappeared now and there are two bungalows in its place
with tubs and decking
This is a get rich quick "`previously developed land scheme" from
this government of wildlife and countryside haters
Now local councils can sell parks public gardens and selfish people
can sell off their gardens for short term profit

Know the feeling well Nightshade.Where my parents live, there was a lovely, little green which was covered in daffs in the spring and had the remains of an apple orchard-about a dozen, wizen trees, that the birds loved.

Now there are three houses crammed together. My Mum could see a sea of yellow from her window in the spring-now she looks at 30' of brick wall. Needless to say, the birds have moved on to.

[fbcpmike]

Originally Posted by nightshade

I was saddened by the loss of a very productive area near me
It was the garden of a large detached house with mature trees, pond, Thrush attracting lawns,with a bottom garden collection of shrubs hedging and plants from its origins as countryside. Because it was someones garden no one gave its conservation value a second thought It has disappeared now and there are two bungalows in its place with tubs and decking. This is a get rich quick "previously developed land scheme" from this government of wildlife and countryside haters. Now local councils can sell parks public gardens and selfish people can sell off their gardens for short term profit

I know what you mean, we are fightng our local County Council who own and want to sell for development two acres of land bordering our Wildlife Park (see the report link in the sig). It has wildlife species in common with the park and is a site of very suspect geology for housing but they are still pushing forward, developers heve even been to neighbouring residents seeking to sell so they can double the area to four acres, a possible 120 houses. 120 more cats in the park, 240 more cars on already crowded roads, Etc, Etc. Following publication of the report (below) and press articles we are now starting meetings with the Councils and Councillors and are hoping for community use for the site rather than housing. Our local councils are apparently already ahead of their housing allotment right up to 2011.

[wyevilla]

Sadly this is an increasing trend. I live in a relatively small town which over the last 10 years has seen the demolition of a number of large houses. in their place are built blocks of flats and appartments that increase the housing density. A by product is that, as Nightshade noted, old established gardens, often with relict flora and fauna, are replaced by a tarmac desert to cater for the increased numbers of infernal combustion engines. As well as losing individual habitat rich areas, we lose the corridors for wildlife provided by hedges, mature trees and old walls. Thus further impoverishing the total widlife able to brighten the lives of us town dwellers.

Is there anything that can be done? Can planning applications be successfully challenged on these grounds?

[Gill Catton]

No, unfortunately in order to meet national housing quotas for people that need homes, you actually stand a better chance of getting planning permission if you plan high density and/ or 'green' housing......

[Lou-D]

Sadly, if the Barker review of Dec 2006 is anything to go by, we will have even more of our green sites developed in the future - for business as well as housing, and all the roads and traffic that go with them! Here's a link to the Barker Review if you haven't already heard of, or seen it.

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/...port051206.pdf

If you can't be bothered to read it all (it is a very large report after all ), here it is in a nutshell:

Planning Disaster: What's happening to planning?

and

Help ensure new planning laws benefit wildlife and the environment - The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

I got the 2nd link from the RSPB website. Although our biggest nature reserves will not be under threat because they are protected under European legislation, other green sites may be at risk, especially as the report is recommending government compulsary purchasing!

I've signed!

[nightshade]

I will write ASAP,Ms Barker is dealing with figures not reality

[Gill Catton]

Originally Posted by Lou-D

Sadly, if the Barker review of Dec 2006 is anything to go by, we will have even more of our green sites developed in the future - for business as well as housing, and all the roads and traffic that go with them! !

See I just don't think you can decide a piece of land's value based on whether it's 'green' or 'brown' I really really think land has to assessed on a site by site basis. Many many brownfield sites are significantly more valuable than many 'green field' sites to wildlife and to protect the latter over the former purely because it's not been built on before is crazyness. I really hope this filters through to the general public soon. It scares me to death the perception that green is better than brown there are already tax incentives to develop the brown and if we're not careful this will result in the loss of so much of the wasteground along the Thames corridor which is often soooooo valuable to invertebrates and pretty much everything else purely because the land is not outwardly pretty...



Sorry dismounting soapbox now......
I'm just rather on the frontline of this subject and I care a lot about it. Development will happen and to me it's massively important that sites are assessed individually on their existing value both locally and nationally, not on how they outwardly look or what they were once used for.

If only wildllife trusts or Natural England would designate more brownfield sites............. any level of designation is better than none, although it may not prevent compulsory purchase but it definately give stronger grounding for really good mitigation or compensation design proposals.

It's also worth bearing in manid that development isn't automatically a bad thing - centreparcs is a prime example of how it can actually be beneficial.