What Will Happen Once We've Concreted Over the Land?

[itsnotmeitsu]

I can't sleep because of the noisy rumbling of construction, and it's nearly one in the morning. I'm slightly set back from the road, so god knows what it's like for those directly on the road.

I live in a house that's bordered by an ex-school playing field which has around 143 properties being built on it and, on the other side, an area which previously housed a bungalow now has nine properties being built on it.

We will never be able to get the original environment back that the developers are being allowed to build on. I just hope the wildlife I sustain will be able to survive. I'll miss them very much if they go.

@cloudtree

Having said that I think it’s a massive shame that we are pushing everyone back into offices. A better way to keep cities vibrant would be to turn the endless office space into living accommodation.

I'm not sure there's a big market for homes in places that used to be offices, especially if people are no longer working in offices themselves and so they wouldn't be purchasing them to minimize their commute?

It’s completely disingenuous to say that only a tiny amount of land in the U.K. is built on as that includes large areas like the Cairngorms and Welsh mountains etc. If you live where I do, in a former rural county in the south, we are deliberately being turned into a dormitory, with huge loss of habitat and huge loss of quality of life. For years people have struggled to get to work through all the construction sites causing the arrival of temporary traffic lights. We have a big strain on doctors and schools. Beautiful landscapes have been changed for ever. It’s not just middle-class nimbys who really hate it—it’s the people who worked on the land too. And the people who come here for walks and quiet time.

Depends on how they’re done. Obviously retro fitting has its limitations but using the plot for housing enables features like roof gardens to be built in.

Yes absolutely every new development in the UK suffers flooding

I guess that means that people need to have fewer spare rooms. Share rooms. More people per house or more houses or kill off people

If you try to fix it through no immigration and lower birth rates , that will take a few decades and exacerbate the staff shortages problem

@cloudtree

Having said that I think it’s a massive shame that we are pushing everyone back into offices. A better way to keep cities vibrant would be to turn the endless office space into living accommodation.

It's works the other way. Our town used to have lots of offices. At lunch time the workers came out, did their shopping, got lunch, and used the town. Gradually they've pretty much all turned into flats-where the owners drive out of town to work and pick up their shopping from the out of town places on the way back.

We have a whole new village being proposed here in herts. No significant plans for additional schools (esp special schools) hospitals or dr surgeries. Plus there are lots of houses for sale in our town. Really doesnt make sense.

@oneglassandpuzzled

It’s completely disingenuous to say that only a tiny amount of land in the U.K. is built on as that includes large areas like the Cairngorms and Welsh mountains etc. If you live where I do, in a former rural county in the south, we are deliberately being turned into a dormitory, with huge loss of habitat and huge loss of quality of life. For years people have struggled to get to work through all the construction sites causing the arrival of temporary traffic lights. We have a big strain on doctors and schools. Beautiful landscapes have been changed for ever. It’s not just middle-class nimbys who really hate it—it’s the people who worked on the land too. And the people who come here for walks and quiet time.

Yep in the North, we have tons of houses being built, that no one in the area can afford to buy of course. Average salary is £25,000. Even if you times that by two for a couple, you've only got £200,000 for a mortgage. That will get you a small house, sure, but if you're a family? You're fucked unless you're happy sharing with your kids forever. A new build (which isn't environmentally friendly by a long shot) is upwards of £275,000.

Are they building a bigger hospital? Nope. Are they building bigger roads? Nope. Are we getting more schools? Nope (our schools are actually rated the worst in Scotland, probably the UK too). Are we getting more GPs? Not a chance. Is our high street basically a never ending charity shop? Yep. Do we have anything to keep children entertained? Nope not really, unless you count the weed dealers I guess.

Welcome to the snp government. That's your future Scotland. A council that only thinks to line its pockets, nothing about the citizens.

What we need is:

• significant controls over properties being used as second homes, holiday cottages, or AirBnBs. Housing stock needs to be used as housing stock, not for holidays. There are millions of properties in these categories.

• in a similar fashion in places like London, significant controls over the amount of properties foreign individuals and companies can own. No mass off-plan buying of flats before they're ever available to the general public.

• repair and conversion of current buildings into housing. There are a surprising amount of old derelict houses around the country.

• the use of brownfield sites in priority to greenfield.

• where there is new development it should be of proper quality and size. No cheaply thrown up identikit estates which are so tiny and cramped as to be of no use to anyone except couples and which will be falling apart in 10 years. A good range of sizes and types of property should be planned for, including bungalows and flats as well as these "4-bed executive homes" (which really are 2-bed homes but they've halved the size of the rooms).

• also where there is new development then proper infrastructure should be considered and provided for. People need doctors surgeries and hospitals, schools, shops, sufficient road capacity etc. You can't keep cramming thousands more people into the same area without making sure you have the facilities to accommodate them.

Then, and only then, should we be building on virgin greenfield sites.

Our green spaces and countryside are essential for our wildlife, our health and wellbeing, for our food, and yes for controlling flooding too.

I agree with @Lockheart, we have plenty of property but it's used for investments so we have a shortage of housing.

@Lockheart

What we need is:

• significant controls over properties being used as second homes, holiday cottages, or AirBnBs. Housing stock needs to be used as housing stock, not for holidays. There are millions of properties in these categories.

• in a similar fashion in places like London, significant controls over the amount of properties foreign individuals and companies can own. No mass off-plan buying of flats before they're ever available to the general public.

• repair and conversion of current buildings into housing. There are a surprising amount of old derelict houses around the country.

• the use of brownfield sites in priority to greenfield.

• where there is new development it should be of proper quality and size. No cheaply thrown up identikit estates which are so tiny and cramped as to be of no use to anyone except couples and which will be falling apart in 10 years. A good range of sizes and types of property should be planned for, including bungalows and flats as well as these "4-bed executive homes" (which really are 2-bed homes but they've halved the size of the rooms).

• also where there is new development then proper infrastructure should be considered and provided for. People need doctors surgeries and hospitals, schools, shops, sufficient road capacity etc. You can't keep cramming thousands more people into the same area without making sure you have the facilities to accommodate them.

Then, and only then, should we be building on virgin greenfield sites.

Our green spaces and countryside are essential for our wildlife, our health and wellbeing, for our food, and yes for controlling flooding too.

Aren't we being told that people should stop flying around the world for their holidays. If people listen to that message they will be wanting to holiday at home in the UK so we will need more holiday homes not less.

I do agree that we should make owning a second home far more costly if they are just being left empty for the owners own personal use a few times a year and it would be a good idea to stop foreign investors just buying up properties as somewhere to park their money.

If you try to fix it through no immigration and lower birth rates , that will take a few decades and exacerbate the staff shortages problem

birth rates have been declining for years hence why we have an ageing population. Population growth more recently has been a result of people living longer & immigration.

Aren't we being told that people should stop flying around the world for their holidays. If people listen to that message they will be wanting to holiday at home in the UK so we will need more holiday homes not less.

Then we holiday less as a country, we stay in hotels or on campsites, do houseswaps, do day trips, take the train or the ferry to Europe. It's possible to go on holiday without screwing over the planet or those who need housing.

We do not need more holiday homes, we just need more homes.

Are hotels not built on land too...?

@Hardbackwriter

Are hotels not built on land too...?

We already have hotels. No need to build more en masse.

You can still holiday in the UK very easily without using someone's air bnb

I'm my town we have buildings falling apart and housing being built on greenbelt land

Brownfield sites being bought by overseas "investors" and being left to rot

Shops owned by overseas investors with high prices (so they are not rentable almost London prices when we are in the arse end of nowhere) these shops are rotting and can be used as housing

Then we have the housing where a shop HAS been converted £750 pcm for a one bed studio no parking no garden for context I'm paying just over £400 for a three bed house and garden

There are ways to solve the housing crisis that are not being looked at because it costs more to preserve nature

@Lockheart

Aren't we being told that people should stop flying around the world for their holidays. If people listen to that message they will be wanting to holiday at home in the UK so we will need more holiday homes not less.

Then we holiday less as a country, we stay in hotels or on campsites, do houseswaps, do day trips, take the train or the ferry to Europe. It's possible to go on holiday without screwing over the planet or those who need housing.

We do not need more holiday homes, we just need more homes.

That won't be enough accommodation. Look at how covid affected holidays bookings when people weren't able to travel easily abroad. Shortage of accommodation and high costs.

Telling people to holiday less won't work. If they can't find accommodation here they will use it as the reason they have to go abroad.

I'm baffled that so many think ever increasing house prices are a good thing. For the vast majority they aren't.

That won't be enough accommodation. Look at how covid affected holidays bookings when people weren't able to travel easily abroad. Shortage of accommodation and high costs.

But during covid people as you say weren't able to travel easily abroad.

*That won't be enough accommodation. Look at how covid affected holidays bookings when people weren't able to travel easily abroad. Shortage of accommodation and high costs.

Telling people to holiday less won't work. If they can't find accommodation here they will use it as the reason they have to go abroad.*

Well unfortunately for people we can't have whatever we want whenever we want and as often as we want anymore, despite the fact we'd like to and we've been very lucky to do so the last couple of decades, and we're going to have to come around to that sooner or later. People will adapt.

The shortage of accomodation and high costs you've mentioned above have exacerbated the problem and meant local people can't afford to stay in the areas where they live and work. Personally if I was in government I would prioritise housing people over their holidays.

Where the hell do you expect people to live?

They could start by building on derelict land rather than green space.

I'm not sure there's a big market for homes in places that used to be offices

So, it's not actually about providing housing, only housing built on green space is acceptable.

I'm not sure there's a big market for homes in places that used to be offices

Would you want to live in housing that used to be an office block? I have a garden & a park at the end of my road & not much traffic, I can't judge others for wanting similar.

You could offer to give up your house and live in a tent? Then that's one less house needed and you'll be able to go and live anywhere green you can find.

Lockheart, you make some excellent points.