Jerusalem

I have been meaning to take this shot for some time showing the relentless encroachment of developers' housing into the countryside coupled with industrialised horticulture, with the irony of Blake's words ringing in my ears: "...till we have built Jerusalem in England's green and pleasant land."

I don't think Blake was referring literally to building houses or estates though.

No, Defragged, it was an idealistic dream of replacing the hell of the industrial revolution, but sadly the reality has been hijacked by bureaucrats and planners who pass on the responsibility of realising their policies to developers who are by definition ill-equipped to do so.

Does anyone remember the spoof (maybe Not the Nine o'clock News?) which contained the memorable line "And even worse, they've closed the dark satanic mills..."?

It's the same here. What was once rolling fields is now houses. They even have turfed a farmer out of his home that he's lived in all his life and are planning on turning the fields into a large freight centre for the airport

I agree with you RobL. It's generally referred to as 'civic vandalism'. Sadly, far too may of our town & county councils are run by uneducated plebs, or even the more dangerous pseudo educated plebs, often there on a personal or political bent and with no real interest on serving and protecting the interests of those who entrusted them to office, they are easy meat and abdicate their responsibilities to nimby mercenary developers bearing greenbacks.

End of rant.....

People have to live somewhere.

When Blake wrote Jerusalem (c1804) the Enclosure Acts were in full swing, with cheery (??) peasants tending their strips of common land being ejected in favour of enclosed fields and labourers employed (or not) at the whim of the landowner. The land might have been green, but it wasn't pleasant for those who tried to scrape a living as agricultural labourers, lived in insanitary conditions and whose children mainly died young (or very young). Perhaps Blake didn't notice that... As Gwyn says, people have to live somewhere. And thank goodness the houses of today are so vastly better than the rural squalor that many of my ancestors had to put up with. Modern houses may not be much to look at, but without the rose-tinted spectacles of an idealised past, neither are thatched cottages... .

Steve

The problem with housing developments is their overriding priority is to reward their shareholders which means getting the most return per hectare, not create communities nor respond to the most pressing housing needs. Estate agents determine the type and style which sell for most profit, I.e. land hungry detached houses. Housing is the only building type which is self-regulated for building standards, paying its own inspectors who just check random samples and only needing to meet the limited 10 year NHBC warranty. Obligatory minimum space standards were abolished by Margaret Thatcher in the belief that market demand would set its own standards, which it turns out have declined since. Added to this toxic mix is the need to accommodate cars to meet the local County Council standards, cars being necessary as large edge of town developments are remote from schools, shops, medical facilities and work places. The result is 70% of a site is dedicated to the motor car, a huge waste of the available land which could otherwise be used for food production. When housing was actually in the local councils’ hands it responded far better to these factors and interestingly after decades a few are starting new and imaginative schemes.