Likely Location of New Housing Over Next 20 Years (W of E)

[Kid in the Riot]

West of England Joint Spatial Plan draft strategy published today, as follows:

Bristol 12,000

Bath 300

Weston 1,000

North and east fringes (S Glos) 1,300

Nailsea / Backwell 3,600 (ouch!)

M5 to A38 Transport Corridor 5,600 (Banwell/Weston way)

Thornbury 600

Charfield 1,000

Buckover garden village (nr Thornbury) 2,200

SE Bristol Whitchurch 3,500

North and east Keynsham 1,100

Yate/Chipping Sodbury 2,600

Coalpit Heath 1,500 (ouch!)

SW Bristol part of Ashton Vale that lies within city boundary and inside new Link Road 400

 

Thoughts?

[Fiale]

How does Bristol that is so restricted in land have to provide such huge numbers, S.Glos however that has lot's of land and controls the North of Bristol has to provide hardly anything ?

[cidercity1987]

About time they built a tram network then.

 

First line Yate to Weston

Another line Thornbury to Bath

Both via Central Bristol 

[Kid in the Riot]

3 hours ago, Fiale said:

How does Bristol that is so restricted in land have to provide such huge numbers, S.Glos however that has lot's of land and controls the North of Bristol has to provide hardly anything ?

Bristol has lots of brownfield land available to build on and there are obvious preferences from a sustainability point of view to build on these before we plaster fields with housing. Bristol has got away lightly with its housing numbers in the past 20 years or so, with South Glos and N Somerset picking up the slack.

South Glos, as you may have noticed, already has a hell of a lot of houses being built particularly at Yate, Emerson Green and Charlton Hayes (and soon the airfield).

So in short, Bristol does have plenty of land available for housing (and schemes will be high density) and South Glos is already supplying an awful lot of housing and if many more were proposed then there would be a danger of the market in that area being flooded.

[Maesknoll Red]

Trying to get into central Bristol from SE Bristol/Whitchurch now is a joke, the Dr's surgeries have the worst ratings, it's virtually impossible to get an appointment, really looking forward to another 10-12,000 people in the area - allowing 3-4 per household.  Can't see where there are brownfield sites to fit that many in either, so goodbye green spaces and farmland.

[Nibor]

54 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Bristol has lots of brownfield land available to build on and there are obvious preferences from a sustainability point of view to build on these before we plaster fields with housing. Bristol has got away lightly with its housing numbers in the past 20 years or so, with South Glos and N Somerset picking up the slack.

South Glos, as you may have noticed, already has a hell of a lot of houses being built particularly at Yate, Emerson Green and Charlton Hayes (and soon the airfield).

So in short, Bristol does have plenty of land available for housing (and schemes will be high density) and South Glos is already supplying an awful lot of housing and if many more were proposed then there would be a danger of the market in that area being flooded.

Just what we don't need, higher population density.  We need to stop bolting more houses onto already overstretched infrastructure and instead build some new towns.  Yes it costs a bit more but it's a better quality of life for everyone and if that's not worth spending money on nothing is.  ******* planners have nothing on their minds but brown paper bags, honestly if you think football is crooked try local government.

[Erithacus]

The aspect of where the houses are going to be built is highlighted by the belief that Bristol, Keynsham and Bath are likely to be continuous by 2050, with no green gaps.

[Fiale]

9 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Bristol has lots of brownfield land available to build on and there are obvious preferences from a sustainability point of view to build on these before we plaster fields with housing. Bristol has got away lightly with its housing numbers in the past 20 years or so, with South Glos and N Somerset picking up the slack.

South Glos, as you may have noticed, already has a hell of a lot of houses being built particularly at Yate, Emerson Green and Charlton Hayes (and soon the airfield).

So in short, Bristol does have plenty of land available for housing (and schemes will be high density) and South Glos is already supplying an awful lot of housing and if many more were proposed then there would be a danger of the market in that area being flooded.

 

That's the issue though isn't it, a lot of those sites that S.Glos are building on should be land under Bristol's control, instead S.Glos just keep dumping houses on the outskirts of Bristol making the city bigger and bigger. Bristol gets no real benefit from it, still has to find homes itself creating even denser housing as well as having to deal with a more congested city. Those Brown Field sites are usually the only spaces in the City. There used to be small greens, huts, pubs set back from the street all over Bristol, now a lot have been turned into a single house / flat to maybe a small row of 4-5 houses here and there. All those little spaces and greens just disappearing for no real reason to provide hte odd house. In the meantime only around 3% of the UK is actually built on.

[Barrs Court Red]

I'm surprised that land around Oldland and Wick isn't being built on, it was certainly one of the options.

I'll be glad if this means a stop of development along the ring road.

[Kid in the Riot]

10 hours ago, Nibor said:

Just what we don't need, higher population density.  We need to stop bolting more houses onto already overstretched infrastructure and instead build some new towns.  Yes it costs a bit more but it's a better quality of life for everyone and if that's not worth spending money on nothing is.  ******* planners have nothing on their minds but brown paper bags, honestly if you think football is crooked try local government.

That's funny - someone's been watching too much Midsomer Murders.

1 hour ago, Fiale said:

That's the issue though isn't it, a lot of those sites that S.Glos are building on should be land under Bristol's control, instead S.Glos just keep dumping houses on the outskirts of Bristol making the city bigger and bigger. Bristol gets no real benefit from it, still has to find homes itself creating even denser housing as well as having to deal with a more congested city. Those Brown Field sites are usually the only spaces in the City. There used to be small greens, huts, pubs set back from the street all over Bristol, now a lot have been turned into a single house / flat to maybe a small row of 4-5 houses here and there. All those little spaces and greens just disappearing for no real reason to provide hte odd house. In the meantime only around 3% of the UK is actually built on.

What has actually happened over the past 20 years is that Bristol CC has resisted building houses within its boundaries and South Glos/N Somerset/BANES have been forced to pick up the slack. It hasn't been their choice to 'dump' houses on the outskirts of Bristol. It wouldn't be in their interests to do so, as the vast majority of people commute into Bristol to work.

FWIW I think there needs to be a mixture of new towns/villages and consolidation of housing in urban areas, which is broadly the government's vision.

[Lanterne Rouge]

Brown field sites are never going to be attractive to developers due to the costs of cleaning up the contamination from the industries that often used to be there. Much cheaper to just build in a farmer`s field.

[Spoons]

On 29 September 2016 at 16:32, Kid in the Riot said:

West of England Joint Spatial Plan draft strategy published today, as follows:

Bristol 12,000

Bath 300

Weston 1,000

North and east fringes (S Glos) 1,300

Nailsea / Backwell 3,600 (ouch!)

M5 to A38 Transport Corridor 5,600 (Banwell/Weston way)

Thornbury 600

Charfield 1,000

Buckover garden village (nr Thornbury) 2,200

SE Bristol Whitchurch 3,500

North and east Keynsham 1,100

Yate/Chipping Sodbury 2,600

Coalpit Heath 1,500 (ouch!)

SW Bristol part of Ashton Vale that lies within city boundary and inside new Link Road 400

 

Thoughts?

No chance 3,600 in nailsea be lucky to build 36!

[Guest]

Glad they've left Portishead out.. think the 40'000 odd rise in population is enough just now..

[Spoons]

1 hour ago, Tomarse said:

Glad they've left Portishead out.. think the 40'000 odd rise in population is enough just now..

Biggest growing town in Europe I believe ? 

One way in one way out is the only problem!

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Spoons said:

Biggest growing town in Europe I believe ? 

One way in one way out is the only problem!

It's the in off the M5 that's now the problem. They desperately need a deprecate junction but given the landscape it's pretty impossible 

[Cotham Brow Red]

I've heard there are plans for another junction on the m5 near to Yate / Sodbury which could see Pucklechurch / Westerleigh swallowed up. TBH Yate dies,badly need that junction. As for Bristol its safe to say Filton airfield will be gone soon.

[Barrs Court Red]

7 hours ago, Cotham Brow Red said:

I've heard there are plans for another junction on the m5 near to Yate / Sodbury which could see Pucklechurch / Westerleigh swallowed up. TBH Yate dies,badly need that junction. As for Bristol its safe to say Filton airfield will be gone soon.

They can join the ******* queue! M4 Junction at Lyde Green must be a priority 

[RedM]

It's amazing how many gardens are being built on now, where there was once people's green spaces are now houses or flats, squeezed into the tiniest of spaces. And I've recently seen seemingly perfectly good houses totally demolished and rebuilt as flats to get the most value for sale or rental.

Its all well and good building housing, but you got to have the infrastructure and services in place too. I remember Bradley Stoke being built and for years they didn't have a health centre or schools. The priority is to build and sell houses, but people need shops, schools, services, transport and jobs, as well as healthcare and leisure. Some of these things are more profitable than others so don't get priority,  putting pressure on other areas as people are forced to look where they can to meet their needs.

 

[Dollymarie]

6 minutes ago, RedM said:

It's amazing how many gardens are being built on now, where there was once people's green spaces are now houses or flats, squeezed into the tiniest of spaces. And I've recently seen seemingly perfectly good houses totally demolished and rebuilt as flats to get the most value for sale or rental.

 

My parents (before they separated and have both now moved) built a 2 bedroomed bungalow on the site on the left of this image. It was meant to be a retirement investment. Rented it out and initially covered the mortgage twice over, then sold it at over £100k more than it cost to build. It's mad. One day google images will update and show how it looks now. 

[RedM]

@Dollymarie I know someone who lived in a semi detached house. Their adjoining neighbour got permission to build another tiny property onto the side of their house. They then were not semi detached but a block of three. My friends house was then an 'end of terrace' as far as value was concerned, losing their semi status cost them a lot of money when they tried to sell. 

[cidercity1987]

17 hours ago, Barrs Court Red said:

They can join the ******* queue! M4 Junction at Lyde Green must be a priority 

I imagine you are talking about the same thing, as the M5 goes no where near Westerleigh.

[Kid in the Riot]

On 02/10/2016 at 07:51, Cotham Brow Red said:

I've heard there are plans for another junction on the m5 near to Yate / Sodbury which could see Pucklechurch / Westerleigh swallowed up. TBH Yate dies,badly need that junction. As for Bristol its safe to say Filton airfield will be gone soon.

Yep, new junction on the M4 by the B4465 will come eventually to serve expansion at Emersons Green/east Bristol and Pucklechurch.