Another yard closure

[criso]

Inflation + recession + yard closures
.

Except round Herts/Essex that's not what's happening. The yards are running successfully but the landowner is choosing to sell the land from under the business. It's been going on for years well before the current financial situation.

Within easy reach of London but in the countryside so perfect for luxury housing.

 

[maya2008]

I have many fond memories of competing there when we lived out that way. Poor people having to find places for their horses to go - that’s an awful lot of horses who need to find livery spaces!

 

[sport horse]

What we need is legislation that prevents any land that has been used for recreational sporting purposes from being allowed to be used for housing/commercial development.

I assume you are not one of the thousands of young people struggling to get into the housing market in and around London?

 

[cauda equina]

Near me an awful lot of houses being built are not intended for young people struggling to get into the housing market but are 'executive homes' going for £500k+

 

[Rainey75]

Near me an awful lot of houses being built are not intended for young people struggling to get into the housing market but are 'executive homes' going for £500k+

Id second that - where I live this is happening these are not "affordable homes" and pay lip service to the affordable and social housing needs of those who need homes or attempting to get on the housing ladder

 

[Widgeon]

Near me an awful lot of houses being built are not intended for young people struggling to get into the housing market but are 'executive homes' going for £500k+

Absolutely. Obviously I don't know for sure, but I'd be very surprised if any of the homes built on that site will be typical two bed first time buyer homes. Or at least, any more than the absolute minimum proportion required by the terms of the permissions.

 

[criso]

I assume you are not one of the thousands of young people struggling to get into the housing market in and around London?

The ones built on previous yards have been around the million mark, I don't think they're aiming for the young people, entry level housing. Think luxury, gated community with prices higher than the average in the area

 

[TheresaW]

One yard I was on that got sold for development, Teddy Sheringham had a house a just down the road.

 

[sport horse]

The ones built on previous yards have been around the million mark, I don't think they're aiming for the young people, entry level housing. Think luxury, gated community with prices higher than the average in the area

Yes but they will be bought by 2nd and 3rd time buyers, releasing properties down the housing ladder. Sadly the London area is under huge pressure to build more housing. I fail to see how you can properly expect a private landowner (Church of England is private not state) not to cash in and to retain the land for not very profitable livery.

 

[cauda equina]

Or the houses further down the ladder will be bought by buy to let landlords
I don't see how the difficulties of first time buyers will be solved without compelling developers to build many more affordable/cheap/less expensive houses

 

[marmalade76]

What we need is legislation that prevents any land that has been used for recreational sporting purposes from being allowed to be used for housing/commercial development.

And to prevent stables being converted into anything else!

 

[Snowfilly]

Different sport, but locally, we’ve lost 5 football clubs in the past 2 seasons to housing, and the cricket club in my village. Probably a few others, but I follow the football.

None of them have made any difference to local or affordable housing, and it’s made a hugely damaging impact on the sports infrastructure. Sports facilities - and that includes places like East of England showgroun d and this yard - need to be protected. They can’t be replaced.

 

[Lexi 123]

I assume you are not one of the thousands of young people struggling to get into the housing market in and around London?

Housing is not affordable for normal young people you have to be earning a lot of money and be very wealthy to have your own house nowadays . Rents is the only affordable option nowadays. yards turning into houses development will destroy the equine industry and kill the sport because not everyone is rich enough to buy a load of land. Anybody who isn’t born into a horsy family won’t be able to learn because there be no ridding schools . Anybody who works won’t be able to have their own horse because there is no full livery. It’s a bigger problem than you realise.

 

[criso]

Yes but they will be bought by 2nd and 3rd time buyers, releasing properties down the housing ladder. Sadly the London area is under huge pressure to build more housing. I fail to see how you can properly expect a private landowner (Church of England is private not state) not to cash in and to retain the land for not very profitable livery.

The entry level ones in London are being bought by buy to let landlords and overseas investors and they're not that affordable They are selling new build 2 bed flats near me (zone 3 and the sort of area estate agents describe as vibrant or lively) for £600k.

We don't know that it wasn't profitable however nothing can compete with the millions you can make with luxury housing.

 

[ester]

The new developments here are noticeably more expensive than anything around them (albeit some on shared ownership). Some prices for one of the ‘new towns’ have just been released and puts 1 bed flats at 300k.

 

[FestiveG]

What we need is legislation that prevents any land that has been used for recreational sporting purposes from being allowed to be used for housing/commercial development.

That's one way to ensure that no one diversifies into livery in the future

 

[SEL]

Id second that - where I live this is happening these are not "affordable homes" and pay lip service to the affordable and social housing needs of those who need homes or attempting to get on the housing ladder

The "affordable homes" round here are priced at a % of the rest of the development. So about £600k for the estate round the back of me.

 

[mariew]

The ones built on previous yards have been around the million mark, I don't think they're aiming for the young people, entry level housing. Think luxury, gated community with prices higher than the average in the area

And some.. 1.3 m and up in Essex

 

[PinkvSantaboots]

One yard I was on that got sold for development, Teddy Sheringham had a house a just down the road.

I know where that is we rented a flat just down the corridor from him

 

[MNMyShiningStars]

I am a livery at HPF and we are all so sad that this has happened, it will be the end of an era, having been there myself since I was a kid. We are all very worried about how we will find new homes for our horses by the end of March.

So if anyone knows of any DIY/assisted DIY yards within the vicinity of Harlow please let me know. Would also be interested in taking on a sole use yard if one came up.

 

[Gloi]

In my youth I kept my pony 2 miles from home. I haven't moved but I've gradually had to move further and further away as land has been built on. At 13 miles now.

 

[ycbm]

What we need is legislation that prevents any land that has been used for recreational sporting purposes from being allowed to be used for housing/commercial development.

I don't really get the argument that people who choose to spend thousands a year on keeping a horse should have that safeguarded by law when there are people who want to spend thousands a year on a mortgage to live in a nice home in a rural or semi rural area. I suspect you can keep more people in "executive" houses on an acre than horses, so if more people get the benefit then I'm not sure why it shouldn't happen.
.

 

[ycbm]

That's one way to ensure that no one diversifies into livery in the future

Good point!

Law of unintended consequences, and all that.
.
.

 

[Caol Ila]

It's complicated (isn't everything). There are measurable health benefits to having green, open space around towns and cities and not swallowing up every square inch of space with housing developments. There are even more measurable benefits to most of your population having access to that green space. Not necessarily (or only) riding stables, but any kind of recreational space. Soccer fields, hiking trails, parks, anything. Which means not having it a gazillion miles out of town, only accessible by car.

The population is growing, and the need for more middle to low income housing is obvious. As discussed, most of these developments are aimed where the money's at - high income.

And when they build largescale developments spilling out of urban areas into the countryside, they rarely support it with the infrastructure it should have. Schools, hospitals, railway stations, daycare centres, that sort of thing. It just puts more pressure on the existing services.

Urban/suburban planning is a mess.

And as we get more extreme weather, the effects of developing large housing estates in flood plains and rerouting rivers will become increasingly problematic. I coincidentally read this article immediately after writing this post and thought, "That too." https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/04/...te=1&user_id=eb42076628ef7403324896a3e59f28b3

 

[Abacus]

I don't really get the argument that people who choose to spend thousands a year on keeping a horse should have that safeguarded by law when there are people who want to spend thousands a year on a mortgage to live in a nice home in a rural or semi rural area. I suspect you can keep more people in "executive" houses on an acre than horses, so if more people get the benefit then I'm not sure why it shouldn't happen.
.

Totally agree with this. I think you would struggle to explain to house hunters / developers / landowners that it's in any way for the greater good that land is safeguarded for a niche leisure activity. Playing fields for kids, green spaces and so on - I can understand - but not the use of many acres for a relatively small number of people. Frankly I don't see why people shouldn't make money from their land anyway, as long as they aren't destroying SSIs or ruining villages (this does happen of course), and that planning permission is properly obtained and considered.

Except round Herts/Essex that's not what's happening. The yards are running successfully but the landowner is choosing to sell the land from under the business. It's been going on for years well before the current financial situation.

Within easy reach of London but in the countryside so perfect for luxury housing.

But the yards are not running successfully - compared with the money that could be made from development.

 

[sbloom]

I used to live around that part of Essex, once pp rules were made easier to convert farm buildings to housing, I think about 5 yards near me were closed due to housing developments. I'd be surprised if it was anything else

I thought that was about genuine agricultural buildings, used as such in the last 10 years (ie Class Q or whatever it's called now) which wouldn't cover equestrian buildings?

Or the houses further down the ladder will be bought by buy to let landlords
I don't see how the difficulties of first time buyers will be solved without compelling developers to build many more affordable/cheap/less expensive houses

Build council houses and barely anything else. Trickle UP housing.

 

[L&M]

Every time I read posts like this I thank my lucky stars for our scruffy stables and couple of muddy acres - it is not perfect but at least no one can take it away from us.

We live in mid wales, and housing development is as bad here as down south. We live on the outskirts of a small town and when we bought the property 7 years ago we were surrounded by fields. We now have 2 developments next door to us, with another plot of land a stones throw away that has pp on it.

These new developments are all for the larger executive type homes, and although the plans stipulate permission granted if an affordable home is included on the development, these never seem to get built.

I appreciate people need somewhere to live, but at some stage surely we will not have enough land left to grow the crops/sustain livestock that people need to survive?

 

[PeterNatt]

I assume you are not one of the thousands of young people struggling to get into the housing market in and around London?

There needs to be a sensibel balance between housing and recreational facilities. I would suggets that the houses that will be built on many of these developments are not for first time buyers. One of the ways to make housing more affordable in this country is to prevent foreign investors buying property within the U.K.

 

[Art Nouveau]

Totally agree with this. I think you would struggle to explain to house hunters / developers / landowners that it's in any way for the greater good that land is safeguarded for a niche leisure activity. Playing fields for kids, green spaces and so on - I can understand - but not the use of many acres for a relatively small number of people

Interestingly I was part of a small council -led discussion group a couple of years ago as to whether playing fields were an adequate alternative provision after closing down a local riding stables for housing. The argument centred around the fact that riding schools are predominantly a female activity, and playing fields a male one. So replacing a riding school with playing fields removes one of the very few outdoor exercise options popular with girls,and replaces it with an option for boys.
Note that this is a potential arguement for keeping a riding school though, it doesn't apply so well to a livery yard. And I don't know how successful we were as the application got pulled for other reasons

 

[Abacus]

Interestingly I was part of a small council -led discussion group a couple of years ago as to whether playing fields were an adequate alternative provision after closing down a local riding stables for housing. The argument centred around the fact that riding schools are predominantly a female activity, and playing fields a male one. So replacing a riding school with playing fields removes one of the very few outdoor exercise options popular with girls,and replaces it with an option for boys.
Note that this is a potential arguement for keeping a riding school though, it doesn't apply so well to a livery yard. And I don't know how successful we were as the application got pulled for other reasons

Really interesting and I rather like the consideration of how different spaces affect different groups. It would probably be a stronger argument if the female-focussed activity were something more accessible/affordable/popular. I don't have any girls and struggling to think of examples but there must be some.