Bristol Live readers have been voicing their opinions on the contentious approval of a housing strategy by South Gloucestershire Council. The scheme, which sets out plans for building thousands of homes over the next 15 years, has sparked debate due to potential threats to local green spaces and infrastructure.
Demonstrators armed with signs have accused South Gloucestershire Council of initiating the “wanton destruction of the greenbelt” around Bristol following the sanctioning of a comprehensive 15-year housing plan for the region. This comes as the councillor responsible for the Local Plan, which designates areas for housing and employment from 2026-41 and incorporates 48 policies governing planning decisions, confessed that she had shed tears over some of the tough choices required to comply with national housing quotas.
The campaign group Save Our Green Spaces (SOGS) has lambasted the decision to earmark vast stretches of greenbelt land for development, following the approval given by the local authority at a cabinet meeting. This move precedes further steps including a full council vote, more public debates, and a government planning inspectors’ inquiry slated for next year.
Past iterations of this masterplan have been rejected by these inspectors.
Controversy flared when opposition Conservative group leader Councillor Sam Bromiley accused council leaders of “lies” on behalf of residents during the Monday, February 3 meeting. The allegations were vehemently refuted by the Lib Dem/Labour administration, which demanded evidence that Cllr Bromiley did not provide.
One reader, Evening believes: “SGC are awful, kids won’t have any green land to enjoy, its becoming one big housing estate. All for profit.” While Bruceleee replies: “Nothing wrong with profit.”
J00e thinks: “It’s all well and good building houses but what about the infrastructure? There are no NHS dentist in a 10 mile radius and it takes 3 weeks to book a doctors appointment. When will the council address these issues? All this does is add more people to these waiting lists. The roads can not take any more traffic, it I’d already back to back traffic to get to work on the Ringroad. How many houses will be affordable to locals in the area and how many will be provided to new people coming to the area without a home currently? They claim to want to provide houses for locals but locals don’t get first pick on the houses it’s whoever pays the highest.”
Brother Johnny feels: “We can all be a NIMBY if we want , but people need homes to live in. The plan seems fair enough to me.”
Capigij comments: “Another shameful attack on nature.”
Kingswoodbiffo asks: “Question! Where are we going to find the skilled workers who will build these homes?”
Thecookedsock joins in with: “Great to see what a change in local and national administration can achieve. Building homes in a housing crisis!”
Grockel1 answers: “Excuse me? Filton airfield, Lyde Green, Berwick Green and other sites have been developed over the past ten years and are expanding. This local plan states ‘no major infrastructure improvements’ for many of the new houses yet the roads (A38, B4055, Hortham Lane and Trench Lane) are already over used without all the extra residents of then unaffordable houses.”
Archwell comments: “Down our way we are fighting the liveable neighbourhood project both areas should unite and stop this destruction of our city in the words words of Thomas Mensforth – ‘We will never give up, there be no surrender’.”
Upsetter writes: “I look at those people protesting and wonder what was originally on the land where their homes were built. They seem to be able to live with their consciences and blot out any sense of concern for their fellow man.”
Antionetta says: “As always this was happening anyway as every thing changed on the old site in oldland trading post only houses being built, totally different to proposed Doctor’s surgery, cafe, assisted living etc, utter waste of time unfortunately!”
Is building homes to cope with demand, the right thing to do? Join in the conversation in the comments below or HERE.