Building new homes in a city like Gloucester can be a difficult issue. On the one hand, a rising population – partly caused by increasing immigration, partly because of the needs of the labour market, which is short of skilled labour and needs immigration in a number of sectors, and partly because of a rising birthrate –demands that more housing is built.

On the other hand, although the city has a reasonable amount of public open space, which no-one wants to lose to build more housing, there is limited alternative space to build the housing which is not only needed to support the increasing population, but also to replace existing ageing housing.

One solution is to focus on brownfield sites. Thousands of homes have been built on the former RAF Quedgeley site, now known as Kingsway. More than four hundred have been built in the canal side area close to the Docks in Hempsted. Many more are being planned for the former cattle market site at St Oswalds. Three hundred are also in the planning in the railway sidings off Great Western Road.

Viability issues on potential sites

There are smaller brownfield sites which are potential building opportunities, but many come with viability issues. Some are on contaminated ground, so the cost of decontamination exceeds the profit developers expect to achieve. Others are simply unaffordable for developers who are expected to ensure that some housing is delivered at lower cost to create affordable housing. We have to build more, but this can be very contentious.

If agreement with neighbouring authorities for building on Gloucester’s boundaries, but within their administrative borders, can be secured, this could help fill Gloucester’s housing need, but may fail to deliver the infrastructure needed by the residents. This means the revenue (council tax) from this housing goes to neighbouring authorities, but the infrastructure (GP surgeries, roads, schools) has to be supplied by an already overstretched sector in Gloucester.

Furthermore, it often means that green space is swallowed up by additional urban sprawl. The loss of green belt when considering the over-arching problems of the climate emergency makes this solution ever more unwelcome.

It’s a tricky dilemma.