Green Belt - what's it good for?

ukcarper

cells wrote: »

Alsp lets try to list this impossible infrastructure since so many say its a possible concern yet use auch a bland word

so

electricity. ...privately paid so not your concern
water....same
Natural gas....same
shops....same
industrial units.....same
commercial units....same
airports....same
Sea ports...same

as you can see virtually all infrastructure is privately built and funded so you cant even think of them and link them to new homes


Roads within a development. ...provided by the developer

roads from development to existing roads....developers can and will build close to exostong links so this isnt a cost

so what have we left infrastructure wise....

well just
schools. Hospitals. Fire and police buildings.
but guess what that is mostly paid for by general taxation.
even if not these buildings cost a fraction of thr running cost so their overall cost over time is tiny. Im sire the council tax from the new homes would many many tomea over pay for these


so stop citing infrastructure as some.sort of unachievable stopper and concern. It isn't

Developers are happy to plonk big developments where existing roads are bad and do nothing about it. Of coarse the other things are funded by general taxation but they are not being funded council tax is a small proportion of local government funding.

ukcarper

lvader wrote: »

I was thinking about this the other day while working in Italy. I was in the Tuscany hills, the views where beautiful, but it wasn't exactly unpopulated. No matter where you looked you could see houses, churches etc. To me these buildings perfectly complimented the land around them, it made it more interesting. There has to be a middle ground between no development and cement city, other countries seem to be able to get the right mix.

The same happens in this country people seem to think the green belt is not already built on it is.

CLAPTON

ukcarper wrote: »

Developers are happy to plonk big developments where existing roads are bad and do nothing about it. Of coarse the other things are funded by general taxation but they are not being funded council tax is a small proportion of local government funding.

so is it better to have no new housing than new housing with slightly inadequate roads?

cells

ukcarper wrote: »

You can look a googlemaps but it doesn't tell the whole story come on show me somewhere with good existing transports links.

only my smartphone here I cant draaw you a map.

But as I've noted some 700km2 inside the m25 is very empty. Also as you know inside the M25 is very close to london. You dont need to build a 300 mile six lane motorway

Also in this hypothetical 5km by 5km borough there will be lots of internal roads. You just need roads to and from that hypothetical borough to adjoining ones. That can be done by either having this hypothetical borough adjoining another or have it linked to the m25

ukcarper

cells wrote: »

only my smartphone here I cant draaw you a map.

But as I've noted some 700km2 inside the m25 is very empty. Also as you know inside the M25 is very close to london. You dont need to build a 300 mile six lane motorway

Also in this hypothetical 5km by 5km borough there will be lots of internal roads. You just need roads to and from that hypothetical borough to adjoining ones. That can be done by either having this hypothetical borough adjoining another or have it linked to the m25

Have you ever tried to get into London in the rush hour either by car or public transport. It's easy to keep saying how much land is very empty but that doesn't mean it is suitable. All you have to do is tell me between which 2 existing towns you would put a 5km x 5km borough I would particularly like you to show me some where west or south west of London.

CLAPTON

ukcarper wrote: »

Have you ever tried to get into London in the rush hour either by car or public transport. It's easy to keep saying how much land is very empty but that doesn't mean it is suitable. All you have to do is tell me between which 2 existing towns you would put a 5km x 5km borough I would particularly like you to show me some where west or south west of London.

yes millions do it every single day

in general is much much better than it was 20 years ago

further transports improvement are needed of course

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

so is it better to have no new housing than new housing with slightly inadequate roads?

No we need both, it's no good building new developments if its going to take someone the best part of an hour to drive 10 miles to work. You and cells seem to think that you can build a big development and the infrastructure will take care of itself but that is not what happens.

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

yes millions do it every single day

in general is much much better than it was 20 years ago

further transports improvement are needed of course

Do you think so as someone who has driven into London for work and regularly drives on M3 M4 and M25 I can tell you it would not take much more traffic to go into gridlock. As for trains you are lucky to get a seat anywhere inside the M25.

CLAPTON

ukcarper wrote: »

No we need both, it's no good building new developments if its going to take someone the best part of an hour to drive 10 miles to work. You and cells seem to think that you can build a big development and the infrastructure will take care of itself but that is not what happens.

no, of course I don't think one can endlessly stretch the existing infrastructure

however the infrastructure is continually being improved
and I consider it a proper use of taxpayers money to improve said infrastructure rather than expect FTBs of new housing to pay directly via higher house prices.

cross rail isn't being funded by new build house buyer

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

no, of course I don't think one can endlessly stretch the existing infrastructure

however the infrastructure is continually being improved
and I consider it a proper use of taxpayers money to improve said infrastructure rather than expect FTBs of new housing to pay directly via higher house prices.

cross rail isn't being funded by new build house buyer

I would also consider it a good use of taxpayers money but the problem is it's just not happening. As people are asking for property to be built on greenbelt and green field sites I can't see why some of the increase in value planning permission would give to that land should not be used to benefit the local community.