Building on greenbelt

Phirefly

No doubt we've all heard the reports in todays news regarding the supposed necessity to build on greenbelt land to meet the number of new homes targets set by the government.

I've had a heavy week and my reason isn't as sharp as usual. Why do we need so many new homes? Do we need them now or are we predicted to need them due to rising population and immigration? Would building the number of homes to meet these targets REALLY help bring prices down and facilitate FTBs as is claimed? I don't really get it... I'm not making a particular point with this post, I'm just genuinely in the dark about why so many new homes are needed.

Opinions?

adr0ck

rising population (mainly due to immagration - though birth rate has also started to rise for the first time in decades)

people living longer

also we live differently now (i.e. less people per household etc)

yes we need them now and in the future (we simply don't build enough houses) though in reality and this is only my opinion we really need to build council houses...come on labour (or is that con-labour) build some council houses

and supply & demand

adr0ck

personally though i don't think we should build on greenbelt land we should instead continue to build on flood plains as thats much more sustainable

Phirefly

But to me the supply and demand argument is too simplistic. Are there REALLY not enough roofs for the number of people? Or is that down to our insular preoccupation with the view that that renting is the second rate option?

adr0ck

yes it is too simplistic but its still "right"

and yes a lot of it has to do with the british viewpoint that you must own a house (in my opinion we will slowly start to become much more like Germany)

i.e. only the very rich will own a home and everyone else will rent

Phirefly

Forgive me for sounding argumentative (I'm really trying not to be!!), but is it that there are not enough homes for the current population? Or just not enough homes for the current population to buy?

adr0ck

ummmm

good question

don't know the answer to that one, i would say not enough for people to buy

or not enough to buy in the right location

adr0ck

the problem is that the number of people wanting to buy a house is increasing year on year and the number of homes being built is not keeping up with this increase year on year

lynzpower

Phirefly wrote: »

Forgive me for sounding argumentative (I'm really trying not to be!!), but is it that there are not enough homes for the current population? Or just not enough homes for the current population to buy?

there in the main are enough homes for people. IMVHO

However, there is a degree of overcrowding in some areas - generally those inner cities and famil;ies all sharing one room in a b&B. this isnt acceptable.

However, saying that there are numeous flats ( sorry, I mean apartments) sat empty. Im sure most MSErs can think of a development near them that the developers are struggling to get shot of.

in this case, there are plnety of accomodation, but not at a price that the people who need them ( ie those on benefits, low paid working families) can afford.

I would personally like to see a huge compulsorym purchase of all vacant NBs and secure them as accomodation for those who from thatchers flogging off of council homes now have few accomodation options open to them.

Actually, I heard ( many times as it goes) there are more people leaving the UK permanently than coming into the UK permanently.

Guy_Montag

Phirefly wrote: »

Forgive me for sounding argumentative (I'm really trying not to be!!), but is it that there are not enough homes for the current population? Or just not enough homes for the current population to buy?

I think it's the latter, there has been no substantial increase in rents while house prices have been rising - which suggests there is no shortage of accomodation. This mainly being due to too many people buying more than one place (the second home-owners, the btl brigade, the ltb brigade - PIMPs (property is my pension)) on the self-fulfilling assumption that house prices only go up.

If I had more rights as a tenant - security of tenure & minimum standards, I would be happy to rent indefinitely (at current costs).

Personally I am happy to sacrifice some greenbelt in exchange for decent housing for everyone, not just the richest, but we need to move people out of the south-east.

Phirefly

So basically, there ARE enough homes, they're just not realistically priced? So how will building a whole shedload of new homes on greenbelt land solve the problem?