Less than 0.1% of Stamford / SKDC is concreted over ... Should we build on more of it?

Well, the fallout from the recent Budget is still continuing. I was chatting to a Stamford couple the other day, when one said, “There isn’t enough land to build all these 300,000 houses Philip Hammond wants to build each year”.  

60 years ago the first satellite (Sputnik) was launched. All the superpowers have used them to take high definition pictures of each other for decades, but now satellites and their high-powered cameras are being used for more peaceful purposes. The European Environment Agency (EEA) have been taking HD pictures of the UK from outer-space to give us a focussed picture of what every corner of the country really looks like.

If you are a Stamford landlord or homeowner, this knowledge will enable you to make a more considered opinion on your direction and future in the Stamford property market. Like every aspect of all economic life, it’s all about ‘supply and demand’, because over the last 20 or so years, there has been an imbalance in the British housing market, with demand outstripping supply, meaning the average value of a property in the South Kesteven District area has risen by 319.58%, taking an average value from £48,500 in 1995 to £203,500 today.

Using the information from the EEA and data crunched by Sheffield University with their Corine-Land Cover project, I posed them a few questions about the local area;

1. What proportion of the whole of South Kesteven is built on?

3.47%

That surprised you, didn’t it? In the study, land classified as ‘urban fabric’ has land which has between 50% - 100% of the land surface built on, (meaning up to a half might be gardens or small parks, but the majority is built on).

2. How much land is intensively built on locally?

Of that amount mentioned above, how much of it is high-density urban fabric? (I.e. where 80% - 100% is built on – still leaving 20% for gardens) Less than 0.1%. Again, I bet that surprised you?

3. So, how is the land used locally?

Airfields 0.49%

Sports facilities 1.49%

Arable farmland 85.64%

The rest being made up of various other minor types such as pastures and waterways, etc.,

I read that property covers less of the UK than the land revealed when the tide goes out. The assumption that vast bands of our local area have been concreted over doesn't stand up to inspection. However, the effect of housing undoubtedly spreads beyond its actual footprint, in terms of noise, pollution and roads.

Now I am not suggesting we concrete over every inch of the locality, but our country’s population levels are growing at a quicker rate than the homes we are building. I appreciate the emotional effect of housing is greater than other land use types because most of us spend the vast majority of our time surrounded by it. As Brits, we live our lives driving along roads, walking on footpaths and working and living in buildings meaning we tend, as a result, to considerably overemphasise how much of it there is.

The bottom line is residents and local authorities are going to have to put their weight into building more homes for people to live in. There is going to have to be some give and take on both sides, otherwise house prices will continue to rise exponentially in the future and Stamford youngsters won’t be able to buy their own Stamford home, meaning Stamford rents and demand for private rented accommodation in Stamford can (and will) also grow exponentially.