Gardens are too big

zar

I think its really sad that gardens have been designated as brownfield sites and so are easy to get planning permission on, at the expense of "greenfield" sterile bits of countryside. - I'm talking about improved grassland and cereal plains. This isn't just a city vs countryside thing either, gardens in villages are being developed rather than letting the village grow outwards in a sustainable manner as well as in cities surrounded by green belt.

The problem is one of misplaced green intentions by policy-makers and mixing up the CPRE (Campaign to Protect Rural England) with the green/environmental lobby.

I am in no way advocating "concreting over the countryside" in our need for more homes. I'm someone with a deep interest in nature, rural life and farming (my OH worked in farming for a few years). I just think well-planned sustainable development including plenty of green space is a much better option than cramming everyone into a tiny space so we can have a few more acres of winter wheat.

For wildlife and biodiversity, gardens are much better than the vast majority of farmland, especially if they are sprayed with the minimum amount of chemicals. People who leave the bottom of their big garden to do its own thing are actually creating valuable habitats for all sorts of creatures.

For the wider environment gardens are good too - especially if people use them to grow their own fruit and veg, you can't get fewer food miles than that! I also think that in the near future as micro-generation of electricity becomes more important big gardens make sense, as micro-wind turbines, solar panels etc. can be sited more flexibly. There is an increasing feeling among biologists that microbes in healthy soil are very important in the carbon equation and might possibly be an important carbon sink.

Gardens help the micro-environment too, as the soil can absorb rain naturally so decreasing the risk of flooding in storms if the environment is totally built-up. They also help modify local temperatures which may be very helpful with the challenges of adapting our lifestyles to climate change. Trees and other vegetation filter out a lot of local pollution from the air we breathe.

Perhaps most importantly but far too neglected, is that gardens help people's well-being and happiness. People feel better when they can get out in the fresh air and when they are in a pleasant environment. Its hard to put a price on, but the social and health importance of gardens (and public green space in towns) shouldn't be underestimated.

Whether you're an office worker looking out of a high-rise block, or a chiffchaff migrating back for the summer from Africa, would you rather be looking at a sea of green or of concrete in the near distance (followed by horrible unnaturally green fields with no insects to eat beyond)?

arthur_dent_2

Absolutly completely agree. Extremely well put and intelligent comment.

I vote for more gardens not less.

needmoney

Mine's pretty big and I love it.

prudryden

If you don't want the nicer things in life, then you don't have to work so hard to be satisfied. You can join up with the other 95% of the population. That is why there is no competition at the top.

pennineman

freebird65 wrote:

Roll on a 30s semi with a decent garden!!!

We live in just such a house.

Not a huge garden but was to us, coming from terraced houses with no gardens.

And it's not overlooked, with great views over the hills - so we've stayed put for 30 years.

In summer we spend most of our time outside - weather permitting of course!

Gorgeous_George

I get more pleasure from my garden than I get from the countryside.

I'd love a larger garden as I'd be able to grow my own veg and perhaps keep a few chickens. If we all grew our own veg, we wouldn't need so many fields and farmers. We could reduce all those stupid subsidies and wouldn't need to send so much food by HGV. Bliss - except for the digging.



GG

Mrs_Optimist

We have a large garden now, and a large garden was a must have whilst househunting. Luckily we found the perfect 30's semi with a large garden so we are well happy. It is smoething we would not be prepared to compromise on, and actulasyy rules out some lovely houses that are on the market because of the size of the garden, or the fact that they were overlooked.

amyandoli

no such thing as a too big garden for me!

h_roberts

Looks like the gardens have it!
Therefore, in general terms you should only look for an older house that was almost guaranteed to sit on a sensible sized plot. As a major plus – when compared to today’s new build – you get a reasonably well-constructed house. I’ve seen quite a bit of the ‘modern’ stuff (mostly from ‘national’ named builders) and they are without exception absolutely dreadful.
In the past an argument for new against old was “you don’t need to worry about repairs in a new…” Huh! I’ve been called to assist a friend in a ‘newie’ more in two years than I’ve needed to mend my ‘oldie’ in more than twenty. The quality of materials and construction today is beyond belief, and still they charge an arm and a leg. Fighting with the neighbours has driven my friend spare, over the complete lack of understanding by the developer that people might actually own cars!
And, to get back to gardens, she has valiantly tried to create a ‘garden’ from her pocket handkerchief of subsoil mud-over-rubble only to find the drains overflowing all over it ‘cos the builder didn’t lay them properly. Oops, wrong fertilizer.
However, I have another friend who will only consider new because she doesn’t want to move into a house where “someone else has sat on the toilet!” Paranoid? Yes!
My own ideal – which is going to be very difficult to find as we’re downsizing from a fantastic country cottage in about a half-acre– is a small cottage (old, natch) in a nice plot on a hillside at least a mile from the nearest neighbour! Anybody got a suggestion (provided it’s not a rude one!)?

dougk_2

Greed - following your point then surely Tescos and other out of town shopping centres take up too much land with car parks? Sureley they could be built under the store..... or indeed roads take up to much land... if we got rid of all the roads look how many other rabbit hutches (whoops i mean houses) could we build there?

Sorry the main reason for the cost of houses is demand and the increasing number of people who live in smaller family groups (eg a lot of single people own houses compared to a couple of decades back where people lived with others)