HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,322
But there is no room in urban areas for housing construction on the scale that is required.We need to have more housing development, but we need to largely preserve the countryside. The house building needs to mainly be in urban areas.
The number of housing units we are short is comparable to the number of housing units in Greater London, it may even be greater.
Hundreds of square kilometres of countryside will have to be developed to achieve the required level of housing construction, even with very high construction densities.
Demanding densification of existing urban areas won't help because demolition and reconstruction will take many decades and consume labour resources that simply don't exist.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Even insulation boosters suggest programmes consuming literally hundreds of thousands of workers for years, to achieve modest reductions in energy consumption.5th Save energy and costs to the whole UK by insulating (and probably educate people) - not subsidise the waste of expensive energy which does not produce long term results.
Without conscription there is no way to source anything like the labour required, and conscription would have massive deleterious impacts on the rest of the economy.
If decarbonisation is achieved, energy will be cheap and have very small or negligible environmental impacts.
Every labourer you send to insulate houses is one that cannot be working on a production line for energy production equipment.
I definitely think there needs to be a degree of coordination (at national, regional and local-levels) for this. Councils should be producing more frequent local plans to include infrastructure upgrades as part of new developments. Then so long as new housing is compliant with that local plan it will do the things you say. It's a weird balance - we need to reduce a lot of a the regulatory burden on housebuilding (to bring new providers into the market) while also making sure what is built is high quality housing that supports local infrastructure. Also a chance to think creatively - our local GP surgeries are full, so could you use a housing project to double the size of the surgery and fund that expansion by putting flats above?
Local government will never approve, or in any way enable, large scale housing construction - it is electoral suicide.
Localism is just another NIMBY tool to prevent anything being done.
The only way to practical get the housing we need in a reasonable timescale is to go full blown Milton Keynes/Brasilia.
Very large numbers of units will have to be laid out rapidly and in a manner that bests leverages available industrial capability.
People will recoil from the supposed un front cost from that, but fixing the insanity of the housing system will be worth hundreds of billions of pounds every year.
Tweaking individual housing estates to fit in a tiny number of new houses is not going to get anywhere.
We are short 10-15% of the entire housing stock!
Last edited: