Wow… for once the truth is *worse* than the headline makes out:
> The planning inspector’s decision, which the government has backed, suggests that **the “upper floors of the buildings” would be the dominant view from nearby sites, including “the bridges over the M25 and the M25 itself.”**
Heaven forbid someone driving around the M25 sees a… building…
Why does a data center need to be built in the green belt?
If we are talking about HFT servers, they would need to be in the City/Canary Wharf, so its not that. Its a data center, almost no one needs to see or be near it.
Plenty of places up North that could do with a bit of investment with a new data center instead.
But of course, Tories == bad, so demolishing green belt == good.
Absolutely deranged choice. We will not be a leading technological country if we don’t build the infrastructure required for us to become one
It never ceases to amaze me how little the government think motorways, roads & dual carriageways impact the countryside. As if they don’t utterly dominate the surrounding area and cut-off wildlife (and lead to wildlife death when they do reluctantly attempt crossings).
Just want to add some info. The reason why data centres are normally built around big industrial sites such as airports is because of the power requirements.
Data centres need massive amounts of power and high voltages. That infrastructure already exists around airports.
The harm caused by Britain’s “planning” system is immense. This could have been a major investment, helping to drive technological innovation and economic growth. But it’s been blocked because you could see it from the bridge over the motorway, and it would have ruined the character of the disused landfill it replaced.
We talk a lot about the harm NIMBYism inflicts when it comes to housebuilding, but this is a prime example of the harm it inflicts to business and innovation as well.
Interesting buildings on motorways are cool. I always loved seeing the RAC building near Bristol when my dad took us upcountry to see family
No doubt if it was coal powered and built with a “victorian aesthetic” conservatives would have given planning the green light.
Green Belt enablers continue to strangle the country to death so they can enjoy living in an Enid Blyton novel at the expense of everyone else. Many such cases!
But wait…….I see a butt load of buildings from the motorway when I approach the Greys/Thurrock DC so what’s the fecking difference?
““It is clear to me that whilst the appeal site does suffer from being a damaged landscape due to its history of quarrying and landfill its current appearance and character is not untypical of landscape in this character area,” the inspector wrote.”
So the area is a mess of scrubland and by keeping it like that you won’t spoil the views of the other ugly scrubland.
“The local council, which initially rejected the plans, did acknowledge there “is an urgent need for increased data centre capacity, but only up to 2027” but said “the demand for data centres after 2026 cannot be predicted.””
I’m guessing that if re-elected the current government might have us back in the Stone Age.
I know where this is being proposed and this decision is everything wrong with both the planning process and the “green belt” as currently constructed and defined.
Government allows water and electricity hungry DC to be built, “think of the climate”.
Government disallows a new DC, “morons keeping us in the stone age”.
​
They can’t win…
They know it’s a deranged choice. They’re doing it on purpose so they can reduce laws surrounding green belt land .
They probably think cars are wildlife and tbh they’re not far off!
14 comments
Wow… for once the truth is *worse* than the headline makes out:
> The planning inspector’s decision, which the government has backed, suggests that **the “upper floors of the buildings” would be the dominant view from nearby sites, including “the bridges over the M25 and the M25 itself.”**
Heaven forbid someone driving around the M25 sees a… building…
Why does a data center need to be built in the green belt?
If we are talking about HFT servers, they would need to be in the City/Canary Wharf, so its not that. Its a data center, almost no one needs to see or be near it.
Plenty of places up North that could do with a bit of investment with a new data center instead.
But of course, Tories == bad, so demolishing green belt == good.
Absolutely deranged choice. We will not be a leading technological country if we don’t build the infrastructure required for us to become one
It never ceases to amaze me how little the government think motorways, roads & dual carriageways impact the countryside. As if they don’t utterly dominate the surrounding area and cut-off wildlife (and lead to wildlife death when they do reluctantly attempt crossings).
Just want to add some info. The reason why data centres are normally built around big industrial sites such as airports is because of the power requirements.
Data centres need massive amounts of power and high voltages. That infrastructure already exists around airports.
The harm caused by Britain’s “planning” system is immense. This could have been a major investment, helping to drive technological innovation and economic growth. But it’s been blocked because you could see it from the bridge over the motorway, and it would have ruined the character of the disused landfill it replaced.
We talk a lot about the harm NIMBYism inflicts when it comes to housebuilding, but this is a prime example of the harm it inflicts to business and innovation as well.
Interesting buildings on motorways are cool. I always loved seeing the RAC building near Bristol when my dad took us upcountry to see family
No doubt if it was coal powered and built with a “victorian aesthetic” conservatives would have given planning the green light.
Green Belt enablers continue to strangle the country to death so they can enjoy living in an Enid Blyton novel at the expense of everyone else. Many such cases!
But wait…….I see a butt load of buildings from the motorway when I approach the Greys/Thurrock DC so what’s the fecking difference?
““It is clear to me that whilst the appeal site does suffer from being a damaged landscape due to its history of quarrying and landfill its current appearance and character is not untypical of landscape in this character area,” the inspector wrote.”
So the area is a mess of scrubland and by keeping it like that you won’t spoil the views of the other ugly scrubland.
“The local council, which initially rejected the plans, did acknowledge there “is an urgent need for increased data centre capacity, but only up to 2027” but said “the demand for data centres after 2026 cannot be predicted.””
I’m guessing that if re-elected the current government might have us back in the Stone Age.
I know where this is being proposed and this decision is everything wrong with both the planning process and the “green belt” as currently constructed and defined.
Government allows water and electricity hungry DC to be built, “think of the climate”.
Government disallows a new DC, “morons keeping us in the stone age”.
​
They can’t win…
They know it’s a deranged choice. They’re doing it on purpose so they can reduce laws surrounding green belt land .
They probably think cars are wildlife and tbh they’re not far off!