Graham reports back from Friends of Scholes Park meeting
Cheadle and Gatley Liberal Democrats
Demand more Learn more
Graham reports back from Friends of Scholes Park meeting
Gatley's Lucy Boxes
Sign up for weekly emails
How much of Stockport is built on.
by Lib Dem team on 9 November, 2017
The BBC has a handy tool that allows you to look at any part of the UK and see how much of it is built on – and compare that to the national average.
As Stockport is mostly urban, it’s no surprise that we are more built-on than the average (which will include all the rural areas), nor that we have rather less farmland and natural land. Manchester, by comparison, is 67% built, while Cheshire East is just 8% built. (Cheshire East is mostly farmland – 83% – and has little more natural land than Stockport).
With Stockport planning housing for the next twenty years, Cllr Iain Roberts said “There is a huge amount of derelict, unused and under-used brownfield land, especially in Stockport itself. The challenge is to unlock it and make the finance stack up to bring forward development. It ranges from the mess that’s Knightbridge (between the Peel Centre and the motorway) to under-utililised land, like single storey workshops around the town centre. If we focus building around transport hubs we’ll also minimise the effects on the roads. It’s not easy though. The easier option is always to say ‘let’s build on those fields and worry about the cars and pollution later’, as Cheshire East have done.”
Killer fact from the Beeb: the amount of land covered by buildings in Britain is less than the amount of land revealed when the tide goes out!
7 Comments
Just so unfortunate, neah frustrating, that so much of the built-up areas are built-up with mediocrity!
Assuming the council is going to prioritise building social housing for rent (as it should), then building it near transport hubs is important. The poorest in our society are more dependent on public transport, than the more wealthy, for getting to employment, shopping, etc. .
What a narrow minded ignorant comment. You dont need to be wealthy to have a car. And also if you use public transport, it doesnt mean you,re poor either. Some people just dont want to drive regardless of if they can afford a car or not. Some people dont want to contribute to the congestion on the roads or the pollution caused by all the cars. And living in social housing doesnt mean you,re poor either.
“Narrow minded” maybe – that’s your call. “Ignorant” – ‘fraid not, Janet. Facts are facts – poorer people are generally more dependent on public transport.
You’d suggest building where, then?
You may be interested in this summary of academic research which makes a clear link between type of housing occupied and car ownership.
http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/projects/hvp/pdf/fd7.pdf
Google will find you other analysis. I always try to have researched the facts before I make statements on the internet, to which I’m putting my name.
Thank heavens for parks, like Bruntwood, for example. And just to think – in the 1980s, the council wanted to build a science park on its beautiful acres. Credit to the Lib Dems for stopping that one.
“There is a huge amount of derelict, unused and under-used brownfield land, especially in Stockport itself. The challenge is to unlock it and make the finance stack up to bring forward development”
So why did we build Red Rocks then??