Green Belt - what's it good for?

ukcarper

That is not an accurate representation and if it was where is that extra 1% needed not on the Kent coast.

Generali

ukcarper wrote: »

That is not an accurate representation and if it was where is that extra 1% needed not on the Kent coast.

Well, thanks to the green belt, there's loads of land available to be built on about 20 miles from Central London. No need to build in deepest, darkest Kent.

ukcarper

Not in the areas with good transport links. It's no good building in the Area you mentioned earlier without greatly improving the infrastructure in that area. You could improve the situation in the south east with some sort of overall strategy but building willy nilly on the green belt is not the solution.

CLAPTON

ukcarper wrote: »

Not in the areas with good transport links. It's no good building in the Area you mentioned earlier without greatly improving the infrastructure in that area. You could improve the situation in the south east with some sort of over all strategy but willy nilly on the green belt is not the solution.

there is plenty of green belt abutting existing good infrastructure although doubtless, with the relentless growth in population, we will need new schools, hospitals, roads etc anyway

overall 'strategy' means at least 10 -20 years of delay; billion spent on expensive public enquiries, several changes of government and politically motivated changes of direction.

willy nilly developments can happen now and provide the housing we need.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

ukcarper wrote: »

Not in the areas with good transport links. It's no good building in the Area you mentioned earlier without greatly improving the infrastructure in that area. You could improve the situation in the south east with some sort of overall strategy but building willy nilly on the green belt is not the solution.

Other countries seem to manage such basic tasks quickly and efficiently. Build 4 or 5 short new motorway spokes out to beyond the M25, build rail lines beside them, build out housing on either side. A radial version of Copenhagens green fingers, keeping large green-space wedges driving right into the city.

But of course, other countries aren't plagued by NIMBY's to the extent we sadly are.

The engineering and construction could be done in 5 years. The political game playing would drag it out for decades...

Generali

ukcarper wrote: »

Not in the areas with good transport links. It's no good building in the Area you mentioned earlier without greatly improving the infrastructure in that area. You could improve the situation in the south east with some sort of overall strategy but building willy nilly on the green belt is not the solution.

The area I mentioned earlier has the 8 lane M25, 2 very good train lines and the A21 (upgrade needed for the latter).

ukcarper

Generali wrote: »

The area I mentioned earlier has the 8 lane M25, 2 very good train lines and the A21 (upgrade needed for the latter).

Have you driven on that 8 lane M25 lately and it doesn't go into central London the trains are overcrowded at present. I accept that development is needed and green fields will need to be lost but just allowing building on greenbelt is not the answer. It would be possible to identify parts of the green belt and other green field sites where the impact would be minimal and built there but that is not what is happening. Also in the southeast there are large areas of empty commercial properties and town centre shopping areas that could be converted.


Near me there is a modern shopping mall built about 15 years ago standing completely empty and not far away is a medium size factory/office adjoining existing housing that has stood empty for 2 years.

CLAPTON

ukcarper wrote: »

Have you driven on that 8 lane M25 lately and it doesn't go into central London the trains are overcrowded at present. I accept that development is needed and green fields will need to be lost but just allowing building on greenbelt is not the answer. It would be possible to identify parts of the green belt and other green field sites where the impact would be minimal and built there but that is not what is happening. Also in the southeast there are large areas of empty commercial properties and town centre shopping areas that could be converted.


Near me there is a modern shopping mall built about 15 years ago standing completely empty and not far away is a medium size factory/office adjoining existing housing that has stood empty for 2 years.

is that a failure of the planning system in that they are not zoned for houses or a failure of the builders to build or a failure of buyers who would find the resulting costs too high to buy?

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

there is plenty of green belt abutting existing good infrastructure although doubtless, with the relentless growth in population, we will need new schools, hospitals, roads etc anyway

overall 'strategy' means at least 10 -20 years of delay; billion spent on expensive public enquiries, several changes of government and politically motivated changes of direction.

willy nilly developments can happen now and provide the housing we need.

We do but as you say you don't live in the south east and it is slowly grinding to a halt. Building 3000 homes adjacent to an already badly congested road is not the answer.

CLAPTON

ukcarper wrote: »

We do but as you say you don't live in the south east and it is slowly grinding to a halt. Building 3000 homes adjacent to an already badly congested road is not the answer.

I visit the SE regularly and travel on both roads and public transport.


Apart from having a grand plan for the whole of the SE, do you have any other 'solutions ' that could start to work this year?