Sardines

[calNgary]

1 hour ago, Toots said:

Cumbria, Northumberland, County Durham, a lot of Lancashire and Yorkshire, East Anglia and Herefordshire to name but a few of lovely unspoilt large areas of countryside.

There definately isnt as much unspoilt country in Lancashire and Gtr Manchester anymore, as for Greenbelt land ,'' never to be built on''... Bull poo.. i was horrified when i went back a few years ago , so many fields and greenbelt land now built on.  It was sad to see.

                     Cal x

[Toots]

35 minutes ago, calNgary said:

There definately isnt as much unspoilt country in Lancashire and Gtr Manchester anymore, as for Greenbelt land ,'' never to be built on''... Bull poo.. i was horrified when i went back a few years ago , so many fields and greenbelt land now built on.  It was sad to see.

                     Cal x

The west of Lancashire is still lovely.  The Ribble valley and the Forest of Bowland.  A friend and her family live on a farm near Ormskirk.  Very nice countryside.  Yes I agree that the areas around Manchester and Warrington are very built up.

[Marisawright]

12 hours ago, tea4too said:

It can sometimes feel that Britain and England in particular is over developed, however that's not borne out by official statistics.

It depends what statistics you're looking at.  I agree that Britain has large areas of lovely green space.  However the areas that are developed are incredibly densely populated compared to Australia. For instance, Greater Manchester has a population density of 2,800 people per square kilometre whereas Greater Melbourne is only 250 people per square kilometre. 

[tea4too]

6 hours ago, Marisawright said:

It depends what statistics you're looking at.  I agree that Britain has large areas of lovely green space.  However the areas that are developed are incredibly densely populated compared to Australia. For instance, Greater Manchester has a population density of 2,800 people per square kilometre whereas Greater Melbourne is only 250 people per square kilometre. 

 My earlier response was in reply to the view that half of England is built upon, but I agree that very densely populated areas can leave an impression of a population crammed into a country with little or no room to move. London is a good example, although also a bit of an exception, as while 40.6% of the wider area is developed, within the City of London that figure rockets to 93.5%. Other places with highly developed pockets include Liverpool, Manchester and Southampton but overall only 7%-10% of the region in those areas (and the rest of Britain) has been developed... leaving most of the country rural. T x

[Bob Jones]

On 10/06/2024 at 22:54, tea4too said:

It can sometimes feel that Britain and England in particular is over developed, however that's not borne out by official statistics. Unsurprisingly London had the highest proportion of developed land in 2022 but even then we're only talking 40%, although within that figure some local authority areas were clearly maxed out in terms of regeneration and development. The remaining English regions range between 7% and 10% developed, but again there will be pockets within those areas of intense development. Still, overall it seems that Britain is still pretty rural in land mass terms. T x

Yes, i should have said half the urban environment...anything built before 1965 when houses started having garages, of which there is an awful lot. 

The UK has oodles of space, if they looked at barely-used golf courses or the masses of private, unused land that have been removed from the people since 1066, the complaints about 'we're full' just do not stack up. They can't sort it out because the people who own it are the people that rule them. Viva la revolution.

 

Edited June 11 by Bob Jones