Does no one remember Kowloon Walled City
Hong Kong has had some pretty nasty places to live over the years.
to be fair that particular part was in a bit of legal limbo and the result of refugees flocking there
Hong Kong's "coffin cubicles"
- Thread starter scorza
- Start date
to be fair that particular part was in a bit of legal limbo and the result of refugees flocking there
I thought you were referring to it being a solution for London - I'm not sure there is as much of an issue within those sorts of towns themselves. Point is that demand for space in places like Central London, Hong Kong etc.. is still high and will likely be for the foreseeable future. That there are some big employers in other places like say Reading isn't going to change that too much.
You suggested allowing people to have a right to camp out in public spaces, build on greenbelt land in high demand areas and allow mobile housing... that's a combination that sets precedent to an influx of land being leased out in an unsustainable way to a group of people who are able to up sticks and move quickly.
Jez does have a point with his 10k traveller site, if you suddenly open up the green areas around London all you're going to do is encourage a mass migration towards the wealth and not enough time to build the facilities to support these new migrating communities. Planners struggle with this already and as the Wixams development near here shows is not a suitable solution. There isn't enough money to build the facilities fast enough to keep up with the demand of the community, but the development isn't being built fast enough to justify the scale of facilities the community needs.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 2,136
Because people who live in extreme squalor are so proud of their life.
He's not intelligent enough to digest and understand this, so expect an unintelligible answer shortly. Look at the posting history, it is rather interesting.
A point we're seeing an masse in this country with record levels of flooding because drainage systems can't cope.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,655
Anywhere that has a high demand for housing, really.
If anything, I'd guess the problem is increasing in other areas precisely because it was implemented (poorly) as an intended solution to London!
It's quite simple - If people are flocking to London, find out what they're going there for and move that to somewhere that can better handle the demand. Loads of empty space in already-developed areas in the North and Midlands, from old docks to factory complexes, abandoned projects and the like. There was a time people complained that all the industry and business was moving to London - This is the result.
Part of that is because there is no untamed land upon which to build brand spanking new developments, so they're building on the flood planes... and the water has to go somewhere. Existing public infrastructure isn't designed for this and when water assets fail due to the overload, it gets even more expensive in many ways.
It isn't that simple, people have been flocking to London for centuries, you're not going to change that overnight. Sure there are housing issues in other parts of the country but not really as comparable as a global city like London, Hong Kong etc.. where millions of people all want to live and where prime central locations are at such a premium
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,655
Yes.
But WHY?
Because it's the capital? Because that's the prestigious place to have your business? Because that's the most totes awesome fashionable place to live? Because that's where all the rich, cool, famous people live and you might advance yourself by bumping into them?
London is a foul, dirty place, but there's something there people want. If it's no longer there, people won't want it so much.
No, not at all... but you can change it... and probably a bit quicker than you'd expect. It took, what, two or three decades for things to migrate South? While The North doesn't seem as desolate a place as, say, Buffalo, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Cleveland or St Louis after their 1950s industries either declined or abandoned them, the effect is similar.
Nothing stopping companies moving back up there, though, especially since we're less about the Industrial side now and more into data, technology and service industries. Most of it you could theoretically site anywhere.
These days technology moves fast and companies can rise to lofty, world-dominating heights. Imagine if Facebook, Google, Steam and, say, whoever handles Chris Roberts's marketing, all based themselves in Saltburn-by-the-Sea... I bet you'd see that town spring up and expand massively in a very short space of time.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,655
It's a fairly common sci-fi concept, really. I've been seeing/reading it in media for decades, both the shiny Japanese hotel form and more often the outright slum style.
all of those things and more...
that isn't likely to happen for good reason - Facebook and Google have based themselves in central London because they want to attract global talent
Talent that can travel to anywhere with major transportation hubs. Leeds. Manchester. Newcastle. All easy options. Good road links. International airports. Heck Newcastle even has sea access with a deep quay.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 77,410
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
There are a few reasons why HK people live like they do.
The Government controls the land, they control what is sold and controls most of the land. Only 24% of Hong Kong's land are actually habitable, 40% of land consists of Parks and Nature reserves. There are a lot of smaller island but they are inhabitable. What you are left with is what is already small area of land. London do not really have this problem, these land are not in accessible, there are green belts but I hazard a guess more than 24% of land can be built on with easy access.
There is also a political aspect, since the government controls the land, if they suddenly release so much as 1% more from the parks and nature reserve to be built on, it will cause the housing market in the city to plummet which will have a devastating effect in the economy so they have no interest of doing that. For example, when the old airport in Kowloon back in the 90's was demolished, it would have been perfect to use it as housing, it hasn't turned out that way, the government controls all that land and most of it are just brown field at the moment, you can check out Google Maps and take a look. You will see housing all around it but a lot of empty spaces where the airport was. So politically, they have to choose their timing to release the land to sell to contractors/investors.
Then you add in to the really high population per land availably, surrounded by water, there is no where to go basically. There is also the influx of Chinese from the mainland increasing the population.
Did you know the most expensive street is in Hong Kong? The rent is higher than 5th Avenue. The highest population density is also in Hong Kong. The most expensive property per square feet sold in the world is also in Hong Kong.
London although expensive, it is not not the same level, I seriously doubt these kind of accommodation will ever happen in London. For one thing, you will just move out of London and go live up north where you get a lot more for your money. In Hong Kong, there is no where else to go, as a Hong Kong residence, you can't just go into China without some papers so it's not like you can just move to China, but as a Brit, there is no bureaucracy stop you going into Wales or Scotland. So there is this barrier to constraint you in the City. There is nothing stop you walking out of London on the M1 and start hitchhike to Newcastle should you want to.
The Government controls the land, they control what is sold and controls most of the land. Only 24% of Hong Kong's land are actually habitable, 40% of land consists of Parks and Nature reserves. There are a lot of smaller island but they are inhabitable. What you are left with is what is already small area of land. London do not really have this problem, these land are not in accessible, there are green belts but I hazard a guess more than 24% of land can be built on with easy access.
There is also a political aspect, since the government controls the land, if they suddenly release so much as 1% more from the parks and nature reserve to be built on, it will cause the housing market in the city to plummet which will have a devastating effect in the economy so they have no interest of doing that. For example, when the old airport in Kowloon back in the 90's was demolished, it would have been perfect to use it as housing, it hasn't turned out that way, the government controls all that land and most of it are just brown field at the moment, you can check out Google Maps and take a look. You will see housing all around it but a lot of empty spaces where the airport was. So politically, they have to choose their timing to release the land to sell to contractors/investors.
Then you add in to the really high population per land availably, surrounded by water, there is no where to go basically. There is also the influx of Chinese from the mainland increasing the population.
Did you know the most expensive street is in Hong Kong? The rent is higher than 5th Avenue. The highest population density is also in Hong Kong. The most expensive property per square feet sold in the world is also in Hong Kong.
London although expensive, it is not not the same level, I seriously doubt these kind of accommodation will ever happen in London. For one thing, you will just move out of London and go live up north where you get a lot more for your money. In Hong Kong, there is no where else to go, as a Hong Kong residence, you can't just go into China without some papers so it's not like you can just move to China, but as a Brit, there is no bureaucracy stop you going into Wales or Scotland. So there is this barrier to constraint you in the City. There is nothing stop you walking out of London on the M1 and start hitchhike to Newcastle should you want to.
Last edited:
that you can get there easily makes little difference, it is the fact there is already that critical mass of people with those skills that is important
Shocking. As people have mentioned, just tidying up and streamlining your life would go a long way into making a better life for yourself. No idea how they can think straight with all that around them, it's a vicious cycle.
Yeah we'd like to keep our green space in Yorkshire thanks
it isn't just that there is also the fact that there is high demand to live near the central areas just like with other cities (yes this problem is particularly amplified in HK)
It isn't so much that people can't develop housing in other areas but that housing isn't so desirable as a result of it's location
for example HK has abandoned villages:
http://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-...844/windows-past-abandoned-villages-hong-kong
abandoned developments such as sea ranch:
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/12/architecture/paradise-lost-hong-kong/index.html
the housing exists and could be developed again but people wanted to live centrally causing various housing to be abandoned elsewhere
It's not unreasonable to suggest everyone gives up a bit for the overall growth of the country. Barely any of the country is built on in the grand scheme of things.