Ros Coward is right that developers have the upper hand in our planning system (The government’s relentless push for development is destroying rural England, 17 February), but it’s not only because they chase big profits on large houses. Here in mid-Suffolk, the government’s algorithm forces us to accept over two-and-a-half new homes for each new household in the district over the next 15 years, in the misguided view that houses are like potatoes: a glut means a lower price.
There’s no way to make the developers build, so they do it very slowly, so that the market can “absorb” these houses and keep the prices high. If they build slowly, the council won’t meet its targets for housing growth, so will have to grant even more planning consents – thus ballooning the value of the developers’ landholdings. It’s a win-win situation for developers, and councils can do nothing about it except hope that the next general election will bring in a government ready to reform the planning system.
Helen Geake
Woolpit, Suffolk
• Halting the projects referred to by Ros Coward is just one of the radical changes needed to address climate change and stop biodiversity collapse. But if you believe that progress is achieved through development and economic growth, then you will indeed shrug as centuries-old trees are cut down. The Tory party is clearly the party of shruggers, not huggers. Behind it are ranks of big and small businesses addicted to endless development. Sadly, behind them are millions of voters who still believe that this wrecking-ball government cares about them and their quality of life. Endless development at huge environmental cost might well make a bigger national cake with bigger crumbs for the masses. But the real winners will be construction firms.
Britain will host Cop26 this autumn, Boris Johnson’s big chance to project himself as a world leader. Meanwhile, at home, we have a government hit squad of housing and planning ministers overriding environmental concerns and ridiculing local democracy, and Tory donors laughing all the way to the bank. The CPRE and others must broadcast what is happening internationally, to shame the government as it prepares for Cop26.
Christopher Tanner
Llandovery, Carmarthenshire
• Ros Coward draws attention to the serious problem of over-urbanisation. Manchester is possibly the densest urban area in the UK, with too few accessible green spaces, especially for low-income groups living nearer to the city centre. It is easier to find a park in London. What is required is local input together with a detailed regional classification of the existing urban density. In addition, the proposed increase in road-building is not only unsustainable in itself, but each new road will induce corridor development such as that which has obliterated Ashton Moss on the edge of the Pennines since the opening of the eastern part of the M60.
Evan Bayton
Warrington, Cheshire
• In Mortlake, we have been campaigning for more than 10 years for a community-led and sustainable development on the old Watney’s brewery site. Our site borders the River Thames at the finish of the Boat Race as it becomes a green and arcadian place to visit in contrast to the high-rise blocks in central London.
We are faced with a similar risk to many rural spots as the Greater London authority considers a vast scheme that will urbanise an area of beauty and wildlife enjoyed by all Londoners. We believe that the mayor’s office has recognised this and is working with the developers to provide a higher proportion of social housing in a design that also recognises the constrained, suburban setting. Only time will tell whether the mayor will have a less destructive impact on London’s suburbs than the government’s destruction of rural England.
Francine Bates
Co-chair, Mortlake Brewery Community Group
