Do any of these large new builds on brownfield sites end up quite rough?
Posted by WearingMarcus@reddit | AskUK | View on Reddit | 51 comments
Whilst one of the answers for a housing issue is to...build more houses.
I see these new builds pop up, here is a link below to the one in Nottingham.
Do they often house unsavoury families in these new builds?
Are they often poorly designed, quantity over quality therefore not learning from the past mistakes (i.e rat runs, lack of local amenities, poor space i.e gardens etc), i.e are we building potential slums for the future just to lower/stagnate the house prices.
Or are must success stories filled with successful working families and professionals who improve the overall quality of the town, city or village?
https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/local-news/key-update-3000-home-estate-10921872
My-Imperfect-House@reddit
I doubt they end up rough compared to areas like St Anns, The Meadows & top valley.
WearingMarcus@reddit (OP)
I could be wrong, the the "new" meadows, the 1970s bit was meant to gentrify it, but the design was good for drug dealing etc, and thus became more troublesome than the old part of the meadows.
I would argue the Old part of the Meadows has less crime issues than the new part (built in the 70s)
Ok-Cold3937@reddit
The problem with a lot of the seventies designs were that they’d not factored in the social decline that was going off in the background at the time, so the breakdown of the family unit and drug’s becoming commonplace. What seemed like an idyllic passageway under a road or a communal area for people to socialise just became somewhere you could piss or inject heroin.
My-Imperfect-House@reddit
Yes indeed. They built these places in times of great hope. Places to hang out, little squares, tree lined path ways away from the road to walk through... all quite nice if the people were nice. But in reality people aren't always that nice.
It's a shame really because some of the estates they built back then are actually quite nice to walk around.
Now in contrast they design them back like they used to, nowhere to "hang out". If they put a park in, people campaign to have it removed because of anti social bahaviour. So you end up with a whole estate where there is nowhere to go, nowhere to be.
Ok-Cold3937@reddit
The issue is you have to change the mentality of the people you are putting in the houses. You could put in all the features you like if someone’s mentality is ‘I’ve done with that mattress I’ll just chuck it outside and someone will sort it for me’ then you are on a hiding to nothing.
Think_Money_6919@reddit
Some parts are dedicated to social housing which can be a bit rough from experience.
EyeAware3519@reddit
Yep, the theory is if they house them in nice areas they should have a bit more pride in their house While this works to an extent the reality is a small section of HA tennants continue to behave like the scum that they are.
Wonderful_Nerve_8308@reddit
The usual philosophy is that you build new houses with good qualities to attract current homeowners to move into, and their current homes become vacant for people with lower income to buy and move in. Builders can't build low quality house on purpose because of building reg and council planning.
I'm more inclined to say that whether a place turn into a slum or not is down to the people who lives in it. I can't imagine anyone design and build a slum on purpose lol.
PodcastListener1234@reddit
it is often cheaper. for instance, cramming lots of units in a given square footage and using cheaper material / finishes on the housing is more cost-efficient but gives a less premium aspect to the estate. It's broken windows theory from there.
Wonderful_Nerve_8308@reddit
Yes I get the idea that there are a plethora of materials and builders absolutely can pick the cheapest in every aspect. I'm trying to say that even so there is minimum requirements from building regs, and the minimum is still an improvement for most people - high U value insulations, ventilation etc.
BillyJoeDubuluw@reddit
I’ve known of a number in my hometown and wider region to fail to sell… A portion of the estate is usually reserved to social housing but in a number of cases the saleable properties have flopped…
They’re often very basic given the money wanted, generally built on somewhat questionable land and I think people just think to themselves “if I can theoretically potentially get one of these houses at the result of a claim then why chain myself to a mortgage and live on jam sandwiches to afford the privilege?”…
So there is a degree of snobbery, yes, but I think there’s also a much wider issue that affordable homes just aren’t managed properly… They’re rarely “affordable enough” for a lot of the working poor and ultimately overpriced given the property spec and location etc.
Yes, I have known of a few to “end up rough” but, again, it’s a symptom of a bigger set of problems in how we actually provide affordable homes to buy and social housing stock in the UK… They aren’t the same thing but get lumped in to one and so ultimately we have shitty first time homes, a waiting list of about ten years for social housing in many districts and neither of the two different groups of people needing housing is actually dealt with appropriately.
WearingMarcus@reddit (OP)
interesting insight, thanks
Academic-Jackfruit-2@reddit
On new build estates they have to put a certain portion of dole scroungers that ruin the lives of surrounding hard working home owners on every estate. Not sure why they give away new houses to lazy people but it’s the modern world. The bigger ones tend to be reserved only for people who can afford them.
Effective_Topic_4728@reddit
But the housing estates where a lot of homes are social housing aren't going to be desirable. The nicer homes are always built on the estates with the minimum "affordable" housing quota.
Effective_Topic_4728@reddit
I know one that was completed fairly recently. Clearly cheap houses with little to no thought about design or aesthetics. It's just so incredibly bland.
simont410@reddit
The undertones of classism in this post is... interesting
Harrry-Otter@reddit
I thought it was pretty well established that antisocial behaviour tracks against property prices.
Redditreallyannoysme@reddit
The overtones of uk reddit being separated from reality are... Interesting
Icy_Exercise_9162@reddit
Who wants to live on a rough estate ridden with crime, drugs and litter?
Dry_Yogurt2458@reddit
I was brought up on a council estate. I recently moved out of a block on new build flats that was 5 stories high. The top 3 floors were private owned the bottom 2 were housing association. Guess where all of the problems came from ? Guess who absolutely wrecked the stairways to those two floors? Guess where the police were visiting every week ? And guess which floors were strewn with litter and had the smell of weed hanging in the air ?
I often get called classist for pointing out those facts.
The truth is screaming "classist" when somebody points out the anti social behaviour is really just enable-ism. Bad behaviour is not excused by class. If peoples behaviour is wrecking an otherwise good community then why not say it for what it is, and if those people all come from a certain class then fix those issues, but lets not cry "classism" and let the behaviour continue
WearingMarcus@reddit (OP)
Apologies if this comes across. :(
continentaldreams@reddit
It's not that it's coming across that way - it's right there in your face
WearingMarcus@reddit (OP)
Well the undertones were genuinely not intended, hence the editing and apologies.
My main objective was get peoples insights on these large scale new builds and are they often a positive or a negative, have the builds been thought out to benefit the town, village or city etc.
h4baine@reddit
Asking that question makes you unsavoury. My god.
WearingMarcus@reddit (OP)
Sorry if I came across as Unsavoury.
My aim was to see if any new builds are poorly thought out for future generations.
pineapplewin@reddit
I don't think what you're talking about can be designed out from this standpoint.
I could have a number of 'executive homes' that end up being the most violent horrendous drug-ridden community. Coke is expensive. I could have a bunch of very inexpensive social houses put up to have a lovely, supportive caring community
Antisocial behaviour stems from a number of things, but if you're looking at it from a city playing and architecture standpoint, what you're going to want is less the houses themselves. Once you've met the basic things that you're usually covered by law here, like adequate kitchen bathroom bedroom, A larger determining factor would be access to education, employment, decent transport including public transport, services for the area and things like that. Some new build estates provide that well. Many do not.
As far as future proofing, you'll need the services in place, but then you'll also need to look at the price of these houses. If you build an estate purely made out of high priced homes you run a greater risk in future of those houses being difficult to sell or losing value. Their price point far exceeds the average income. If the average salary is 39k, that's good for a 190k mortgage on face..... Average house price is 275k. New builds averaging 313k. If things are more expensive, there's less leeway for problems down the road. At a time where unemployment figures are rising. That's not a comfortable position to be in, especially when there will be fewer people able to purchase your home should you need to downsize, and you may find yourself upside down on the mortgage. People with less disposable income have less ability to afford upkeep on their home, and areas with poor upkeep trends to have higher antisocial behaviour reported.
If you want to fix antisocial behaviour, get decent employment opportunities for people paying wages that allow for a good standard of living. Support community centres and programs that get people out together building a sense of community.
h4baine@reddit
It's crazy how simply meeting the needs of a population improves life for everyone.
h4baine@reddit
Referring to families as unsavoury is classist as hell.
WearingMarcus@reddit (OP)
I have edited, poor wording, what can I say but sorry :(
ClimbsNFlysThings@reddit
OK, I'll bite,
Families which have a disproportionate interface with crime, policing, social services and welfare.
Families that have alot of problems, the nexus of which has fallout beyond the family unit and an impact on others,especially where people live.
(families that I knew on a first name basis when I worked in the public sector)
Fuzzy_Cantaloupe6353@reddit
Unsavoury families 🤨
All the new housing estates are poorly designed and built it's a well known running joke.
Most go in to locations that are already struggling with access the resources but they get passed on the promise of building said resources.
Building get half way through and say yeah we're not doing that now. Decided no local need. The council just shrug and move on.
The whole house building push is a debacle.
TheBrassDancer@reddit
These are all valid reasons to lodge objections to new developments. Having sprawling housing estates where the people who move there have to rely on cars is terrible for anyone that are not the developers, or the automobile and fossil fuel industries.
Honestly it's deplorable that new developments are allowed to go ahead without any consideration for the need for new amenities which people who live there need, or that any promise of such can just be dropped as they please.
Fuzzy_Cantaloupe6353@reddit
You don't think we do?
There's a whole committee of people set up to work on it. So far we've actually managed to push any back except the 3 we have.
They aren't intrusive and we're built on existing abandoned sites which is awesome.
Just wish people did a bit more research on where they're moving but can't have everything.
The next village over is not so lucky. 4 massive estates going up simultaneously currently.
A school was promised last year they held that to Ransome to get more houses pushed through.
They're meant to be affordable and for the community.
At least one housing estates was meant to be all that 200+ homes
10% are HA or 2-3 bed homes the rest are big 4-6 bed homes that sit empty for ages. The original estate is still not full some 10 years later!
It's ok though because they're building a Lidl 🤦
WearingMarcus@reddit (OP)
I meant problem families that often get re housed.
Was not meant to come across as it did :(
Fuzzy_Cantaloupe6353@reddit
No you knew what you were doing.
WearingMarcus@reddit (OP)
I Really don't tbh, hence the acknowledged poor word choicing, I have edited it.
Apolgies if caused offence
Fuzzy_Cantaloupe6353@reddit
Fair enough. Sorry, guess I'm used to used to dealing with the idiots on Reddit and forgot to give the benefit of the doubt x
Bacon4Lyf@reddit
My parents bought a new build on a new build estate in 2006, it’s a bit older than what you’re discussing, but they still look the same.
Overall, the estates very nice, lots of play parks which I liked growing up, they built a coop and a couple other retail shops like a fish and chip shop and a dentist as well. I think it’s also assisted by the fact that it isn’t in the middle of nowhere or disconnected from anything, it’s just like the existing town has expanded out a little bit more. Gardens are small sure but we live on the coast so people are on the beach instead of their garden.
When it was built you had to have a certain number of council houses, but it wasn’t dictated where, so they all got built in one corner and that corner was pretty rough. We all went to the same school obviously so I knew the kids and they were problems. Nowadays I think they try and curb that by having it mandated that they’re spread throughout the estate instead of in one spot.
Overall, I liked it growing up, the houses were fine, gardens small but close to enough open nature that you don’t really mind. It makes me suspicious of how much Reddit hates modern new builds, as what they describe hasn’t been my experience growing up in one, but at the same time it was built 20 years ago so a lot has probably changed
-aLonelyImpulse@reddit
Christ I'm old.
ukslim@reddit
I don't think there's a causal link from brownfield to "rough".
Any new build project over a certain size is required to have some "affordable housing" component to it, as part of negotiations with the planners.
To make them "affordable" they'll be smaller houses build to lower specs. And obviously, statistically, cheaper homes are lived in by lower-income families, "rough" families are more generally more likely to be low-income (you don't get well paid jobs by being a knuckle-dragger).
I think those streets are seen as a bit of a drain by the builders and management companies, so once they've built them and got their signoff from the council, they neglect them. There's new-build estates near me, and you can clearly tell the affordable-housing bits, because they've allowed trees and bushes to die, they're doing the bare minimum to maintain the landscaping, while neighbouring posher streets are being looked after fine.
These are greenfield developments, but I don't think brownfield is any different.
Ok-Cold3937@reddit
If you’ve paid a metric shit ton in a mortgage and saved up you generally give a shit and keep the place good. If you’ve the mindset that it’s not yours so why not leave an old mattress outside then they tend to just leave the place a mess.
WearingMarcus@reddit (OP)
interesting, thanks for insight
continentaldreams@reddit
Interesting choice to remove the 'unsavoury' part of your question. Unbelievably rude.
ImmediatePiano6690@reddit
What makes you think brownfield sites are unique, how a new build ends up being depends entirely in the developer.
Seems like a bit of a loaded question really.
Ok-Cold3937@reddit
If you are looking at these developments, make sure you are as far away as physically possible from the social houses. 90% of the people in them will be fairly decent but the 10% will make your life a misery leaving shit all over the place.
ClimbsNFlysThings@reddit
Answering the question, it depends alot more on the overall context of the place than the ratios of "unsavoury" types.
They can be horrible places without being rough
WearingMarcus@reddit (OP)
very true
OldAdhesiveness570@reddit
Yes, there is one near me built about 15 years ago. Typical modern estate , far too many properties crammed in, not enough parking, postage stamp gardens. It’s a university town so half of them are student lets , mostly foreign students and a lot of immigrants in shared houses. It looked quite nice when it was new but it’s a slum now. Some people there just throw their rubbish bags in the street and leave them for someone else to deal with.
CyclingBrit@reddit
if the local one around here is anything to go by, they're filled with people who never seem to leave the house (or maybe they have to work so many hours to pay the mortgage, theyre never at home). We have a huge one where prices start a £350k upto over a mill. They have lovely outside community spaces and whatnot - and when you walk through them, you literally never see a single soul outside.
This is one where its been finished and all the houses are sold too.
PodcastListener1234@reddit
They are often poorly built both in the sense of poor craftsmanship (with bathrooms, windows, cupboards etc that look nice and trendy but start breaking down in 6 months) and that they maximise the number of flats (low ceiling, tiny rooms, etc). Both things are to extract maximum profit, of course.
This is because of the business model of developers, who are only interested in the price of first sale but not in the resale value of the flats, or in the ongoing maintenance costs.
About unsavoury families, I do not know. Usually new builds are expensive. I think that a certain number of flats in a new build must be destined to affordable housing, but sometimes developers can get away with paying a certain sum to the council instead, or building the affordable housing elsewhere.
AutoModerator@reddit
Please help keep AskUK welcoming!
When replying to submission/post please make genuine efforts to answer the question given. Please no jokes, judgements, etc. If a post is marked 'Serious Answers Only' you may receive a ban for violating this rule.
Don't be a dick to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on.
This is a strictly no-politics subreddit!
Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.