Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Gups]

They won again last night, by some distace. They were, well, emperious and you coudl tell that they had really trained.

They've stopped doing the colleg/name shouting and I'd forgotten that they ever did!

[Sheilbh]

Saw people sharing an article in the Oxford Mail on local opposition two a development in the city of a five storey life sciences lab - plus some retail, a gym, community garden etc on the ground floor. The proposal looks like this:


Which is very standard looking for new-ish commercial buildings.

Among the complaints, that it would "ruin the architectural skyline" and "The existing buildings are not an eyesore. What's proposed is not in keeping with the area. I really object to tearing down our city even more and replacing it with designs that do not fit or match the face of what's left of our city."

The existing skyline/"not an eyesore":




This also comes after a new film studio in Maidenhead/Windsor area was rejected for planning. The thing here is both of these are areas where actually the UK is relatively successful (life sciences, film and TV). They're both arguably areas the UK has a really successful program of industrial policy in relation to subsidies and tax bungs and all the rest. But both are being hit by the inability to build things - I often think about that article on the bilions of pounds in life science investment that is not happening because there is not enough physical lab space.

Meanwhile even the Daily Mail is turning - I think NIMBYism may be (God willing) going to go the way of "health and safety gone mad" in terms of attitudes to it. In particular ongoing large opposition to a proposal by the King to extend a village (about 2,500 homes) in a busy area of Kent that needs housing. It's all very King Charles' style: mixed density, pastiche, nice public spaces and infrastructure. But I feel if people are complaining about this swallowing up the area into an "urban mass", we're just fucked

[Josquius]

Oh. This is poundbury 2? I need to write to the king. I do think there's the perfect place for it up here. Though not sure what styles would work here and can't see him going for them.

To be fair on Oxford the current building doesnt look so bad. Wonder why they're replacing it. Though yeah. Clearly shows how nimbys are weaponising false concerns. Like when far right guys decide to say the left is racist.

[Sheilbh]

To be fair on Oxford the current building doesnt look so bad. Wonder why they're replacing it. Though yeah. Clearly shows how nimbys are weaponising false concerns. Like when far right guys decide to say the left is racist.

My guess is it's not lab space and it's smaller. It's pretty generic office of its day - I think apparently it used to be the Blackwell's HQ.

[Admiral Yi]

NIMBYism is the dark side of being a hobbit.

[Sheilbh]

NIMBYism is the dark side of being a hobbit.

I do have a terrible vision that what finally turns middle England against the monarchy is the King trying to build people somewhere to live.

A win, but at what cost

Edit: Seems plausibly possible we'd be the only country to ever abolish the monarchy in a pique of reaction

[PJL]

Tolkien was the original nimbyist.

[Jacob]

Was he though?

I mean, he was against a bunch of modern progress and all that but a NIMBY is someone who organizes politically around stopping development where they live. Did Tolkien organize politically, or did he just express his likes and dislikes in his writing?

[Josquius]

Was he though?

I mean, he was against a bunch of modern progress and all that but a NIMBY is someone who organizes politically around stopping development where they live. Did Tolkien organize politically, or did he just express his likes and dislikes in his writing?

 Are you still a socialist /conservative/whatever if you aren't actually out going to door and merely sitting at home moaning?
You could argue Tolkien did a lot more active campaigning than most people with his writing.

[Sheilbh]

Are you still a socialist /conservative/whatever if you aren't actually out going to door and merely sitting at home moaning?

It's the basis of a lot of the internet you're attacking here

[Gups]

There's nothing wrong with Nimbys except that they have an outsized power on decision making. Planning is a quasi-judicial process and should be taken out of the hand of local politicians if (as seems to be the case in too many places) they can't perform their function objectively.

So many examples, of planning officers and council lawyers telling planning committees that if they refuse a policy compliant application it will be granted on appeal and the Council will have to pay hundreds of thousands of costs but Councillors would rather play to the peanut gallery.

[Sheilbh]

Although I think zoning maybe could help

I think more broadly, the thing that's telling about NIMBYs is the power of a small group willing to organise and make themselves felt politically in a democratic society. It's people who really care and tend to care because they oppose, compared with people who support who are maybe a bit more passive - I think this is maybe a wider problem. But also the people who can do that are people with time on their hands to submit responses to consultations, to send letters etc.

I think it's true in other areas of policy too. There was a piece in the Economist about Britain accidentally becoming  nation of immigrants and it noted that basically people who are anti-immigration are very animated by that, people who are broadly pro or indifferent it tends not to be a priority - it's sort of ambient suport.

But it's why I think the estate votes are interesting where you have a vote on redevelopment of estates and generally people overwhelmingly support them. So a form of actual local democracy isn't very NIMBY, but representative democracy with councillors voting is unusually responsive to the loud, organised opposition. Similarly the Tories went big on low traffic neighbourhoods based on very vocal local campaigns that are really angry about them. They then commissioned representative polls, expecting that to be reflected which they could then use to beat up councils and attack Labour - but it turns out every area they did representative polling over 60% supported LTNs

[Tamas]

I think it must be a pattern of human behaviour. Like, the religious nuts a tiny loud minority in your village going on about the wrath of the gods and you go "meh can't be bothered to argue" next thing you know you are forced at swordpoint to grovel on the ground at the gods a few times a day.

[Josquius]

Although I think zoning maybe could help

I think more broadly, the thing that's telling about NIMBYs is the power of a small group willing to organise and make themselves felt politically in a democratic society. It's people who really care and tend to care because they oppose, compared with people who support who are maybe a bit more passive - I think this is maybe a wider problem. But also the people who can do that are people with time on their hands to submit responses to consultations, to send letters etc.

I think it's true in other areas of policy too. There was a piece in the Economist about Britain accidentally becoming  nation of immigrants and it noted that basically people who are anti-immigration are very animated by that, people who are broadly pro or indifferent it tends not to be a priority - it's sort of ambient suport.

But it's why I think the estate votes are interesting where you have a vote on redevelopment of estates and generally people overwhelmingly support them. So a form of actual local democracy isn't very NIMBY, but representative democracy with councillors voting is unusually responsive to the loud, organised opposition. Similarly the Tories went big on low traffic neighbourhoods based on very vocal local campaigns that are really angry about them. They then commissioned representative polls, expecting that to be reflected which they could then use to beat up councils and attack Labour - but it turns out every area they did representative polling over 60% supported LTNs

Yep. This is definitely the big problem.
Most people in a given town really won't care that much about a new housing estate. They will probably even be moderately in favour.
But those two dozen people who don't want to lose the patch of wasteland where their dog does its business, or have their view of the abandoned warehouse blighted by housing.... They care a lot. And they'll throw everything at getting it stopped.

I have heard from (IIRC America based) planners in the past that this is accounted for in the process and that one or two positive comments are absolute gold as they can carry them forward in their report... But it certainly doesn't seem to work that way here. Or maybe we just don't have enough YIMBYs standing up against this stuff.
The design of council planning sites really doesn't help- if I could clearly see a nice neatly organised list of proposals I'd be willing to do half an hour a week going through them and saying they're fine.

I wonder whether a solution might lie in requiring a certain percentage of locals with views...but have to get the balance where something seems real enough. And of course you do get genuinely terrible developments sometimes; I know you disagree but I very much don't want us to embrace the Japanese course and just let people do whatever, that's a sure race to the bottom.

Zoning...I have heard it has been discussed in the past to have zonal zones around London? I do think it could work within limited areas like so- Japan's free for all works well for central Tokyo, its just as you get further out that it screws everything up.

[garbon]

Although I think zoning maybe could help

I think more broadly, the thing that's telling about NIMBYs is the power of a small group willing to organise and make themselves felt politically in a democratic society. It's people who really care and tend to care because they oppose, compared with people who support who are maybe a bit more passive - I think this is maybe a wider problem. But also the people who can do that are people with time on their hands to submit responses to consultations, to send letters etc.

I think it's true in other areas of policy too. There was a piece in the Economist about Britain accidentally becoming  nation of immigrants and it noted that basically people who are anti-immigration are very animated by that, people who are broadly pro or indifferent it tends not to be a priority - it's sort of ambient suport.

But it's why I think the estate votes are interesting where you have a vote on redevelopment of estates and generally people overwhelmingly support them. So a form of actual local democracy isn't very NIMBY, but representative democracy with councillors voting is unusually responsive to the loud, organised opposition. Similarly the Tories went big on low traffic neighbourhoods based on very vocal local campaigns that are really angry about them. They then commissioned representative polls, expecting that to be reflected which they could then use to beat up councils and attack Labour - but it turns out every area they did representative polling over 60% supported LTNs

Yep. This is definitely the big problem.
Most people in a given town really won't care that much about a new housing estate. They will probably even be moderately in favour.
But those two dozen people who don't want to lose the patch of wasteland where their dog does its business, or have their view of the abandoned warehouse blighted by housing.... They care a lot. And they'll throw everything at getting it stopped.

I have heard from (IIRC America based) planners in the past that this is accounted for in the process and that one or two positive comments are absolute gold as they can carry them forward in their report... But it certainly doesn't seem to work that way here. Or maybe we just don't have enough YIMBYs standing up against this stuff.
The design of council planning sites really doesn't help- if I could clearly see a nice neatly organised list of proposals I'd be willing to do half an hour a week going through them and saying they're fine.

I wonder whether a solution might lie in requiring a certain percentage of locals with views...but have to get the balance where something seems real enough. And of course you do get genuinely terrible developments sometimes; I know you disagree but I very much don't want us to embrace the Japanese course and just let people do whatever, that's a sure race to the bottom.

Zoning...I have heard it has been discussed in the past to have zonal zones around London? I do think it could work within limited areas like so- Japan's free for all works well for central Tokyo, its just as you get further out that it screws everything up.

The UK is listed as an exception to zoning on the Wikipedia page for Zoning. Is the UK too special for it to work?