Jump to content

Recommended Posts

oldermum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am not sure but I think that it isa proposal for

> building on the green space on the existing

> estate. I think that it isn't the actual Brenchley

> gardens.


This is correct. Southwark building on a lot of 'infill' sites, removing green space in and around Estates. Pretty shoddy when seen in the context of their mass sell off (at a loss) or huge swathes of land and social housing in the South of the Borough.

Grass please

London is already over developed and we need green spaces to provide mental wellbeing and lungs for the city.


Trying to accommodate everyone who wants to live in London is like squeezing your size 16 body into a size 8 dress, eventually it will pop at the seams (if the gusset of infrastructures doesn't collapse first)


Whilst it's not ideal, encouraging people not to move to London by moving jobs out of the capital and to areas where work is badly needed will give London a chance.


The reality is that the more Homes that are built, the more people will want to live here, but like any supply and demand situation, if there's no supply, then the demand will look elsewhere.


Sorry but building on green spaces isn't going to solve Londons overcrowding problem, but it possibly will make it worse.


Anyway I thought everyone was going to work remotely from towns and cities outside London 🙃

This may be the wrong approach but I would be interested to know the solutions to the housing crisis. There are some bigger issues, second homers, overseas purchasing of new developments and then leaving them unoccupied, those living in places far too large for their needs (including so many extensions going up at present) and how the letting market is distorted by Air BnB. I'd be interested in views.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • TBH if people don't see what is sectarian in the materials linked to above when they read about them, then I don't think me going on about it will help. They speak for themselves.  I don't know how the Greens can justify promising to be a strong voice for one particular religion. Will that pledge hold when it comes to campaigning in East Dulwich (which is majority atheist)? https://censusdata.uk/e02000836-east-dulwich/ts030-religion
    • Saying one thing so everyone can understand, and something different that only select people can understand is not inclusive, it’s dangerous.  
    • I'm not deliberately swerving anything. What exactly have they said in their communications in languages other than English that you object to? Why would they put those communications in other languages when the whole point was to connect with a specific group of people? Apologies if I've missed your point.
    • The point (which you're swerving) is not that the Greens spread their message in a language other than English - it's what they have said, and why they're shy about saying the same thing in other languages, including English. If a party in Northern Ireland circulates leaflets in Ulster Scots only that tells voters to elect them so they can be a strong Protestant voice, and has videos in Ulster Scots only that seek to discredit the First Minister by showing (a propos of nothing) images of them meeting the Pope - is that inclusivity or sectarianism?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...