'Ouses, Greenbelt and stuff

Jezyboy

Given that's not really how development happens, or is perceived, that seems quite an unhelpful chart.

TheBigBean

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

They seem to have allowed 200 sq metres per home. Presumably that doesn't consider all the extra stuff such as roads.

The plot of a typical 4-bed townhouse with garden is roughly half that. Flats are way less, so 200 would probably allow for streets, etc.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

pblakeney

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

Not an attack but my gawd, what a horrible thought.
Either prospect tbh.

Jezyboy

pblakeney said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

Not an attack but my gawd, what a horrible thought.
Either prospect tbh.

Honestly I think MK gets a lot of unjustified hate.

It's interesting how many MKs you'd need to build if you were gonna build 4.5 million homes though!

pblakeney

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

Not an attack but my gawd, what a horrible thought.
Either prospect tbh.

Honestly I think MK gets a lot of unjustified hate.

It's interesting how many MKs you'd need to build if you were gonna build 4.5 million homes though!

36.5 from the figures given above.

TheBigBean

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

Not an attack but my gawd, what a horrible thought.
Either prospect tbh.

Honestly I think MK gets a lot of unjustified hate.

It's interesting how many MKs you'd need to build if you were gonna build 4.5 million homes though!

Tell me the positives about MK? I'm happy to list loads about the Barbican.

Jezyboy

TheBigBean said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

Not an attack but my gawd, what a horrible thought.
Either prospect tbh.

Honestly I think MK gets a lot of unjustified hate.

It's interesting how many MKs you'd need to build if you were gonna build 4.5 million homes though!

Tell me the positives about MK? I'm happy to list loads about the Barbican.

Modern(ish) housing stock with relatively thoughtful road planing that makes it relatively easy to get around compared to other towns I've visited of a similar size.

Probably too car centric though.

Jezyboy

Could you possibly generalise and say the Barbican lends itself to the sort of accomodation we'd require in Ricktopia, whereas MK is very much the sort of town you need if you're after the anti- Ricktopia world.

Although I think the cycle paths around MK are relatively good.

TheBigBean

Jezyboy said:

TheBigBean said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

Not an attack but my gawd, what a horrible thought.
Either prospect tbh.

Honestly I think MK gets a lot of unjustified hate.

It's interesting how many MKs you'd need to build if you were gonna build 4.5 million homes though!

Tell me the positives about MK? I'm happy to list loads about the Barbican.

Modern(ish) housing stock with relatively thoughtful road planing that makes it relatively easy to get around compared to other towns I've visited of a similar size.

Probably too car centric though.

I should probably have disclosed that in my view your second paragraph is the most important and means I don't appreciate any of the car positives.

It does have a bus system which has worked when I have used it and was reasonably priced. It also looked to have a big park full of sheep.

focuszing723

rjsterry said:

https://twitter.com/russellcurtis/status/1718890226884727063?t=z-AO2k6nV3zhN0s8-_RkHg&s=19

Do you think Labour will champion a house building boom?

It would be impressive if they walked the walk.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

MK has been designed with plenty of capacity for additional housing within the overall grid layout. It's not 'finished'. Actual house sizes are much the same as anywhere else.

rick_chasey

focuszing723 said:

Do you think Labour will champion a house building boom?

It would be impressive if they walked the walk.

It could not be more core to the average labour voter, so yes, I expect they will.

Why they are insisting on what style the houses are is beyond me.

Do you think the Georgians were pining after Tudor houses?!

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

MK has been designed with plenty of capacity for additional housing within the overall grid layout. It's not 'finished'. Actual house sizes are much the same as anywhere else.

Sounds like a good place for some more houses then.

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

focuszing723 said:

Do you think Labour will champion a house building boom?

It would be impressive if they walked the walk.

It could not be more core to the average labour voter, so yes, I expect they will.

Why they are insisting on what style the houses are is beyond me.

Do you think the Georgians were pining after Tudor houses?!

Look up Createstreets. It's just a rebrand of the Leon Krier guff that blighted Poundbury with fake villagey-ness.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

MK has been designed with plenty of capacity for additional housing within the overall grid layout. It's not 'finished'. Actual house sizes are much the same as anywhere else.

Sounds like a good place for some more houses then.

Indeed. Don't think anyone is arguing against it.

focuszing723

rick_chasey said:

focuszing723 said:

Do you think Labour will champion a house building boom?

It would be impressive if they walked the walk.

It could not be more core to the average labour voter, so yes, I expect they will.

Why they are insisting on what style the houses are is beyond me.

Do you think the Georgians were pining after Tudor houses?!

I get it in terms of homes people want to live in.

I would like to see houses with reasonable gardens for families. I can understand this wouldn't work in more densely populated areas. To my mind Towns and Cities should be redeveloped in the mold of Bath (mainly Georgian) in this respect, looks great, inspiring and somewhere you'd want to live.

I still can't believe many prefab homes had bigger gardens than most modern builds today and the poor sods have to pay through the neck for them too.

One concern though would be how would this impact homes to live in prices and would it cause negative equity?

Dorset_Boy

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

focuszing723 said:

Do you think Labour will champion a house building boom?

It would be impressive if they walked the walk.

It could not be more core to the average labour voter, so yes, I expect they will.

Why they are insisting on what style the houses are is beyond me.

Do you think the Georgians were pining after Tudor houses?!

Look up Createstreets. It's just a rebrand of the Leon Krier guff that blighted Poundbury with fake villagey-ness.

In what way has it blighted Pounbury?
Have you actually been there?

photonic69

focuszing723 said:

rick_chasey said:

focuszing723 said:

Do you think Labour will champion a house building boom?

It would be impressive if they walked the walk.

It could not be more core to the average labour voter, so yes, I expect they will.

Why they are insisting on what style the houses are is beyond me.

Do you think the Georgians were pining after Tudor houses?!

I get it in terms of homes people want to live in.

I would like to see houses with reasonable gardens for families. I can understand this wouldn't work in more densely populated areas. To my mind Towns and Cities should be redeveloped in the mold of Bath (mainly Georgian) in this respect, looks great, inspiring and somewhere you'd want to live.

I still can't believe many prefab homes had bigger gardens than most modern builds today and the poor sods have to pay through the neck for them too.

One concern though would be how would this impact homes to live in prices and would it cause negative equity?

Most, if not all of Bath is developed as Terraced housing. Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian. It is the most efficent use of space and building materials and are far more energy efficient than detached/semi's as you only have front and rear walls requiring insulation. We live in an early Edwardian terrace. It's a grat house. Love it. Garden could be bigger but overall it is fine. My idea of Hell is living in a detached, new-build, shoebox of a home, squeezed onto a tiny plot of land in some featureless bland suburbia with no shops, schools, pubs or facilites. God knows why they insist on building this sh!te?

First.Aspect

I actually quite like MK. It has not got a lot of character, but it'd be an easy place to live. Plenty of green space, some nice cycling in the surrounding countryside and villages.

Am surprised RJST has not been advocating a team system along all those nice wide roads.

rjsterry

Dorset_Boy said:

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

focuszing723 said:

Do you think Labour will champion a house building boom?

It would be impressive if they walked the walk.

It could not be more core to the average labour voter, so yes, I expect they will.

Why they are insisting on what style the houses are is beyond me.

Do you think the Georgians were pining after Tudor houses?!

Look up Createstreets. It's just a rebrand of the Leon Krier guff that blighted Poundbury with fake villagey-ness.

In what way has it blighted Pounbury?
Have you actually been there?

Yes.

It has utterly failed to integrate car ownership with its fake Georgian and Victorian terraces and for a newly planned development there is really very little green open space.

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

I actually quite like MK. It has not got a lot of character, but it'd be an easy place to live. Plenty of green space, some nice cycling in the surrounding countryside and villages.

Am surprised RJST has not been advocating a team system along all those nice wife roads.

A what now?

Yes, am also a bit of a fan of MK.

One for @Pross, I have heard that the main grid roads were originally supposed to have signal controlled crossroads junctions, which would have kept traffic at relatively low speeds. Someone worked out that roundabouts were cheaper, but meant that the traffic speeds increased so that at grade pedestrian crossings are much more difficult, which in turn has had quite an effect on the character of the place.

First.Aspect

They are racetracks, and in places fairly elevated. When I was there last, 2010 maybe, I recall wondering whether they might create noise problems for residents.

Not as bad as the ideas they had for Glasgow of roads on top of apartment buildings (which didn't happen) or a ring or motorways around the city centre, cutting it off from the rest of the city) which did happen).

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

They are racetracks, and in places fairly elevated. When I was there last, 2010 maybe, I recall wondering whether they might create noise problems for residents.

Not as bad as the ideas they had for Glasgow of roads on top of apartment buildings (which didn't happen) or a ring or motorways around the city centre, cutting it off from the rest of the city) which did happen).

See also every city ring road, which cut off the centre.

Dorset_Boy

rjsterry said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

focuszing723 said:

Do you think Labour will champion a house building boom?

It would be impressive if they walked the walk.

It could not be more core to the average labour voter, so yes, I expect they will.

Why they are insisting on what style the houses are is beyond me.

Do you think the Georgians were pining after Tudor houses?!

Look up Createstreets. It's just a rebrand of the Leon Krier guff that blighted Poundbury with fake villagey-ness.

In what way has it blighted Pounbury?
Have you actually been there?

Yes.

It has utterly failed to integrate car ownership with its fake Georgian and Victorian terraces and for a newly planned development there is really very little green open space.

To a degree that may be true for the orginal phase, but I disagree on all the subsequent phases.

focuszing723

photonic69 said:

focuszing723 said:

rick_chasey said:

focuszing723 said:

Do you think Labour will champion a house building boom?

It would be impressive if they walked the walk.

It could not be more core to the average labour voter, so yes, I expect they will.

Why they are insisting on what style the houses are is beyond me.

Do you think the Georgians were pining after Tudor houses?!

I get it in terms of homes people want to live in.

I would like to see houses with reasonable gardens for families. I can understand this wouldn't work in more densely populated areas. To my mind Towns and Cities should be redeveloped in the mold of Bath (mainly Georgian) in this respect, looks great, inspiring and somewhere you'd want to live.

I still can't believe many prefab homes had bigger gardens than most modern builds today and the poor sods have to pay through the neck for them too.

One concern though would be how would this impact homes to live in prices and would it cause negative equity?

Most, if not all of Bath is developed as Terraced housing. Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian. It is the most efficent use of space and building materials and are far more energy efficient than detached/semi's as you only have front and rear walls requiring insulation. We live in an early Edwardian terrace. It's a grat house. Love it. Garden could be bigger but overall it is fine. My idea of Hell is living in a detached, new-build, shoebox of a home, squeezed onto a tiny plot of land in some featureless bland suburbia with no shops, schools, pubs or facilites. God knows why they insist on building this sh!te?

Yeah, so they can pack as many in as possible on the limited development sites they have I guess.

Jezyboy

TheBigBean said:

Jezyboy said:

TheBigBean said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

Not an attack but my gawd, what a horrible thought.
Either prospect tbh.

Honestly I think MK gets a lot of unjustified hate.

It's interesting how many MKs you'd need to build if you were gonna build 4.5 million homes though!

Tell me the positives about MK? I'm happy to list loads about the Barbican.

Modern(ish) housing stock with relatively thoughtful road planing that makes it relatively easy to get around compared to other towns I've visited of a similar size.

Probably too car centric though.

I should probably have disclosed that in my view your second paragraph is the most important and means I don't appreciate any of the car positives.

It does have a bus system which has worked when I have used it and was reasonably priced. It also looked to have a big park full of sheep.

That feels slightly unfair, given we live in a car centric country, places should be recognised for working well for a car centric lifestyle.

Many traditional towns seem to work poorly for cars, but have few other good alternatives.

TheBigBean

Jezyboy said:

TheBigBean said:

Jezyboy said:

TheBigBean said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Apparently Milton Keynes is 89 sq km with 123,264 houses. That's 722 sq. metres per house.

There's a LOT of empty space in MK. Which is kind of the point.

But the people who want more houses built imagine something like Milton Keynes. They're not thinking of the Barbican.

Not an attack but my gawd, what a horrible thought.
Either prospect tbh.

Honestly I think MK gets a lot of unjustified hate.

It's interesting how many MKs you'd need to build if you were gonna build 4.5 million homes though!

Tell me the positives about MK? I'm happy to list loads about the Barbican.

Modern(ish) housing stock with relatively thoughtful road planing that makes it relatively easy to get around compared to other towns I've visited of a similar size.

Probably too car centric though.

I should probably have disclosed that in my view your second paragraph is the most important and means I don't appreciate any of the car positives.

It does have a bus system which has worked when I have used it and was reasonably priced. It also looked to have a big park full of sheep.

That feels slightly unfair, given we live in a car centric country, places should be recognised for working well for a car centric lifestyle.

Many traditional towns seem to work poorly for cars, but have few other good alternatives.

A lot of North America is very well designed for cars. I'm not really a fan, but plenty of people are. Some of the towns in the UK that don't work well for cars tend to be a bit prettier and have more soul, but again, that's just my perspective. Isn't the suicide rate higher in new towns?