More myths. Concreting over the countryside. Urban sprawl. Emotive terms used by the large landowners, to keep you hemmed up in a tight urban communities. The implications are that we do not have any land. As only 7.5% is settled we can't sprawl anywhere. If all towns and cities were twice the size that is still only 15% of the land used.Originally Posted by pablo42
About two thirds of all new housing is built within existing urban areas with the remainder mainly built on the edge of urban areas. Very little is built on open countryside.
Land reform must mesh with decent relaxed planning laws that allow the population to build on all land. Laws passed relating to land are rendered sterile if relaxed planning laws are not implemented. Areas of natural beauty, SSSI's, national parks, industrial and commercial sectors, etc, of course should have restrictions, which still leaves a vast amount of subsidised field Britain to build on.
Building on a larger mass of land will eliminate the unappealing high density, high impact developer estates; the sort that make people shudder, with many having to buy as they have Hobson?s choice. Many against building on the countryside envisage high density, high impact developer estates. The vision of these estates stirs negative emotions. That clearly would not occur if the people are allowed to spread out on the land. With cheaper land, people would build larger houses on larger plots for less money. Having the large developers curtailed will result in a mixed assortment of higher quality homes.
"We are living in crowded and dense cities,
not a crowded and urbanised country"
"Planners have created a system
that has led not only to higher
house prices but also a highly
volatile housing market?
Best read the links I give. It will become clearer.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks