Do We Hate High Density Housing?

[Hypognosis]

I've been waiting for an excuse to start a thread about this for some time and found just the thing I needed

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1302400-3.html

emmie wrote:-
//from figures elicited some time ago to the same sort of thread, 70 percent on UK is farmland, so suggest we start getting rid of much of it and build more houses, because that is what we will have to do, and i reiterate i was not just talking of London, where the majority of you don't live, and it has never been as cosmopolitan as it is now. //

Why pave over yet more fields? Goodness knows with the world's population heading for 11 billion by 2050, we're going to need all the growing capacity we've got AND continue to import vast quantities from overseas.

Don't forget that, in WWII, farmers were pretty much ordered (by the Ministry) to bring all their scrubland, marshy and semi-useless marginal farmland into producing some crop or other. Even though the population, then, was less than it is now, we were still heavily dependent on imported food.

To my mind, we became overpopulated in the first place because we had the empire and had the collective wealth to support large families all round.

I think the mistake Britain made was to build tower blocks and put the poor people into them, whilst the middle class retained their ideal of own-house-with-garden.

In America, they had the sense to build apartment blocks for the wealthy and make a packet in the process.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/29/realestate/a-sellers-market-for-manhattans-new-luxury-condos.html?adxnnl=1&;adxnnlx=1388241201-dVG0uSYZxh1ZC4Rt/e3fQg

I'd welcome your thoughts. I wasnted to ask "Why do we hate high density housing" but let's first establish whether we do or we don't, eh?

[emmie]

too old, and i need the services of the local doctors, hospitals,
i can't get around too well now, and knowing some distant relatives and friends who live out in the sticks, the public transport system are rubbish.
The Garden of England would be Kent, property prices there as high as here perhaps...

[Zacs-Master]

Ah, I see. Regarding building on farming land, this would be suicide as per my original comment regarding feeding an ever growing population. We need to tackle the amount of food being wasted before even considering building housing on farmland.

[emmie]

we need to control population, for every reason that has already been suggested. Waste should be dealt with a supermarket level, as much of their food waste is criminal.

[EDDIE51]

This is a small part of a much larger problem. The worlds population is increasing and there is only limited amount of space on the planet.
The increasing population need land for housing and to grow food you can't have both.
I have though for a while now that we are getting near the critical point where there is simply not enough room on the Earth for housing , industry and farming.
Within 50 years or so I can forsee wars over land and water supplies.
Remember 2/3rd of the Earths surface is covered in water and a lot of the rest is desert, ice sheet, or otherwise unusable for housing or food production.

[Hypognosis]

Public Transport in the countryside has been all but gutted.

One of the supposed benefits of nationalisation was that the profitable inner-city routes would help to subsidise the, frankly, economically unviable rural routes. 'A public service' in the literal sense of the words.

Where do the people in 'the sticks' want to travel to? All the shopping facilities and culture/entertainment venues which only towns and cities can make financially viable.

I live so far from London that I have no clue what a West-End theatre ticket costs - because the starting price is close to a three figure sum and, if the event finishes much later than 11pm, I'd need a hotel room on top.

See, you don't even have to live in London to hate how expensive it is.

Anyway, privatisation did away with subsidised transport and didn't the cities thrive, despite the loss of rural customers?

Has the phrase "I'm just going up to London this weekend, is there anything you want, while I'm there" died yet?

[emmie]

indeed, and the Chinese have tried, though it's failed miserably, of having one child per family, which has just created an imbalance in their population. The ethos of having many children however should stop, they do so in the hope their children will look after them in old age, and work to keep the families together, a system that is in operation in many countries across the globe.
Also with modernisation of many of these once third world countries, like India, China, they are building homes, businesses on good farmlands, this policy will be disastrous if continues unabated.

[emmie]

it has, but i suppose that think that they all drive, so why supply a good bus network. Sadly this is deluded thinking, as many elderly either have to stop driving, or cannot afford to. cut the buses they don't go out or far.

[Zacs-Master]

//there is only limited amount of space on the planet//
That is true Eddie but technology is slowly turning previously un farmable land into intense food production areas. Spain has a great example which as you can see, isn't without controversy
http://www.greenguidespain.com/andalucia/2008/12/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/
Also greenhouses in Kent the size of 80 football pitches have been built which also act as mini power stations:
http://www.thanetearth.com/how-we-grow.html

[emmie]

people who live in the sticks still want a life, it doesn't mean going to the capital its getting to their local shops, or a nearby town.

[emmie]

over sixties get a free pass don't they? my mother has one and can use it any place. sadly its ruled out often by the very infrequent, erratic bus services. and she can only use it after 9.30am i think... so if you have an early appointment up in town, or at a distant hospital you are stuffed.

[Hypognosis]

After the Lecture he did on the BBC, I am a lot less concerned about excessive population growth than I used to be. No matter what local poverty levels are like, almost as soon as their education standards are brought close to what we enjoy, they start having fewer children.

For those who didn't get to see it, try

http://www.gapminder.org/

Also, it is only a matter of technology to get the land in the devloping countries to become as productive as ours is. India's space programme is entirely justifiable in terms of satellite imagery for land management, for example.

On a different tack, what with all the problems we're having with flooding, why don't we build greenfield housing on hills?

[Zacs-Master]

We don't build on hills because of increased infrastructure & construction costs however this is just a market related cost. You will know yourself that the steep sided valleys around Bradford are home to many terraced streets which were built for low income factory workers in the 19thC.

[emmie]

when it rains it will comed own the hillside.... or get so boggy then start a landslide. The Highlands of Scotland are beautiful, but you can't build there i don't think... biggest problem of all is work, if there is no industry, in the village, town, city, what's the point of putting more housing, people in them
friends who live in darkest Sussex have seen their sleepy little villages being turned into massive housing estate - without firstly having decent road, rail infrastructure to get there, and no businesses nearby - daft.

[emmie]

i suppose you could build on hillside, but perhaps these are now part of some national park?

[Zacs-Master]

Emmie, you can build anywhere:
http://weburbanist.com/2008/07/25/7-cliff-and-mountain-houses-and-homes/
It's just a matter of economics.

[emmie]

can't put many people in those buildings. -

[Zacs-Master]

True. But I was hoping that it made a point.

[emmie]

none in UK though, health and safety would have a fit.

[emmie]

population control, not importation of more people, at least until our economy, infrastructure is much more robust

[ladybirder]

In Hebden Bridge they have one house on top of the other, it works very well.