housing

Moving a town down the road requires a huge amount of money and incredible engineering expertise, but not losing the community in the process might be even more complex

One sunny day last August, a 713-tonne, 113-year-old church was lifted off the ground and placed onto a specialised 224-wheel transporter to begin its journey five kilometres down the road.

The Gothic revival Kiruna Church is a beloved building, once named the most beautiful in Sweden. It would’ve stood where it did to the west of the Arctic town for many decades more, had the ground not threatened to swallow it up.

A great cheer went up as the church arrived at its new home, traffic lights, lamp posts and even a bridge having been demolished to make way for the timber structure. Among the spectators was Sweden’s King Carl XVI Gustaf and children who clambered onto roofs for a better look. The widely publicised event made headlines across the world and the typically capable Swedish engineering team earned many metaphorical slaps on the back.

And then, a week later, everything changed.

READ MORE: I stayed in the new ice hotel – it’s not the cold that some guests can’t handle

OPINION

Milo Boyd

“They smashed us in the head,” says Kjell Törmä, a local journalist and lifelong resident. The 67-year-old has chronicled the town’s move since 2004, when mining company Luossavaara Kiirunavaara Aktiebolag, (LKAB) first told the population what its digging had done.

A century of going down into the 2km iron ore deposit had caused fissures to spread from the mine to the town centre, roughly 2km away.

It was decided that the town must be moved, or else its foundations would collapse. At first, 4,700 residents would be moved to the safer east of the town – their homes bought and then demolished by LKAB, which is legally required to fund the estimated £737m relocation effort. Twenty buildings, including the church and iconic town hall, would be driven to safety.

“Almost everyone in Kiruna accepts this change, but many of us don’t like it. It is tragic in many ways. We have to accept it or accept that we will lose our jobs,” Kjell told the Mirror.

“In my family, my mother and father worked for LKAB for 75 years together, one of my brothers worked there for 20 years. I have done a lot of jobs for the mine as a freelancer. Almost every family depends on LKAB.”

As reluctantly accepting of the town’s move as locals may have been before, what came after the church relocation has caused far more disquiet. Eight days later, once the world’s press had left the town, 6,000 more locals were told their homes would be demolished.

“The mining company is the enemy. A lot of people are taking the money and leaving,” former Kiruna resident Hannes told me on the night train to the town.

The young dad was returning north, having swapped his hometown for Malmo in the far south several years ago. “I find it depressing to go back now,” he said, in between marshalling his sociable toddler as she made her way down the carriage.

Hannes’ parents have also left and soon, so will his cousin Kjell. “When they told us we had to move, I was in shock and sad for a week. Then my wife and I decided we would turn a page in our lives,” Kjell explained.

As technically remarkable as the great shift east is, and as deep as LKAB’s pockets seem to be when it comes to paying over the odds to homeowners, moving a town is complex.

Kjell is losing a home he’s spent 35 years building. Each day, he can hear machines working away in the distance.

“Many people who have moved from Kiruna and come back say it’s not my town anymore. I have always answered, ‘no it’s not the town for us elders, but for the kids. They grew up with this, it will be their town.’ But, a lot of memories are disappearing all the time.”

Exploring the old and new sides of town, their distinct personalities are immediately obvious. When city planner Per Olof Hallman drew up the blueprint a century ago, he selected the best location in terms of climate, placing the traditional Swedish timber home on a south-facing slope, close to the mines and with a favourable aspect and microclimate. Streets followed the terrain to avoid wind tunnelling and to maintain beautiful views for the residents.

In the new town, tall modern blocks of flats have been built in a dip, which blocks the view south and, according to a University of Gothenburg study, can be 10C colder than the old town.

The slightly ramshackle feeling of a community that has grown organically over the years is replaced with something a little more familiar.

“It looks like anywhere else in Sweden now,” Hannes says.

This is not to say that the move has not been attempted with great care, attention or love by those in charge. Indeed, Kjell says LKAB have managed it “very well” on the whole.

But it is undeniably difficult to transport a place that isn’t just physical buildings, but memories.

Göran Cars, the current urban planner for the Kiruna municipality, acknowledges the challenge. “I was stupid coming up here, because I assumed that the way to maintain identity and preserve history was to move physical buildings,” he told Dezeen.

“We are moving the church. When I speak to people they say: ‘Yes I know that, but what about a grave? How about the birches?’ I didn’t understand that. They are small trees! But they are 100 years old – as old as the church. I get the question time and time again: ‘What about the birches?’ So now we are moving the birches.”

The complexity of the challenge is sobering. This is, after all, Sweden, where the structures of local democracy are strong, the engineering sector is world-leading, and the concerns of nomadic reindeer herding Sami are increasingly heard. It’s also a project backed by one of the world’s biggest iron ore mines.

These are advantages other places won’t enjoy. And there will be many more such places.

The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report warns that the predicted 1.5 centigrade increase in global temperatures will lead to an average sea-level rise of between 26 and 77 centimetres by the end of the century. With 2C of warming – which looks increasingly likely – the Greenland ice shelf could melt, triggering a rise of up to seven metres.

The world’s largest cities Miami and Mumbai are under threat and the Maldives will likely be uninhabitable by 2100. Not just 10,500 as in Kiruna’s case, but millions of people will have to move.

LKAB and Kiruna Council were approached for comment.

Mayor Karen Bass has had a lengthy political career, spending six years in the state Legislature, 12 years in Congress and the last three in the top elected office at Los Angeles City Hall.

Now, facing the toughest reelection battle of her career, Bass is marketing herself in a way that might surprise some Angelenos: She’s running as a champion of change.

And she’s not alone.

City Councilmember Nithya Raman, who has represented a Hollywood Hills district since 2020, says her last-minute decision to enter the race was fueled by “a sense of urgency that things needed to change.”

Three other major candidates, all political newcomers, argue that an outsider is needed to shake up the status quo.

“We can no longer keep our city together with duct tape and slurry,” said Rae Huang, a leftist community organizer, at a recent candidate forum on housing and transportation.

The race to embrace the mantle of change in the June 2 primary election comes at a moment of political peril for Bass, a veteran Democrat who has racked up high disapproval numbers in several voter surveys.

In recent months, Bass has revamped her messaging, saying she’s been tackling problems that have “been around for multiple decades,” such as homelessness, sluggish police hiring and trash-strewn streets.

Last week, speaking to the Pacific Palisades Democratic Club, Bass said she wants another four years to finish that work. She also implied that, in her zeal to fix the city’s problems, she quietly pushed out a dozen high-level bureaucrats, including those who dealt with trash pickup and police recruitment.

“Let me just tell you that in three years and three months, it is difficult to change what has been a practice for over four decades,” Bass told the group. “I am very clear that there needs to be massive change, and I’ve done a lot of change.”

Raman has portrayed herself as someone who shook up the system while in office, securing a 4% cap on rent increases for more than 600,000 apartments and opposing initiatives she viewed as “disastrous” for the city’s budget. She said the city is falling short on an array of issues, including traffic deaths and housing affordability.

“So much of what’s happening in L.A., our inability to address our biggest crises — our housing crisis, our homelessness crisis, but also essential services like lights and potholes — so much of this has resulted from a lack of clear urgency in decision-making at City Hall,” said Raman, the first L.A. council member to win office with the backing of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Those types of arguments have elicited salty responses from Huang, tech entrepreneur Adam Miller and conservative reality TV personality Spencer Pratt.

Miller, who described himself as a lifelong Democrat, pointed out that Raman runs the powerful five-member council committee on housing and homelessness. He argued that both she and Bass have failed on those issues, as well as on public safety and much needed infrastructure repairs.

“These are the people who have been running the government,” said Miller, who made a fortune developing education software. “So I don’t understand how they could describe themselves as change-makers. They’re the ones who have been the problem.”

Pratt offered a similar take on social media, calling Raman and Bass “two peas in a pod,” while portraying himself as a change agent.

“I’m a wrecking ball to the status quo,” he said in one post.

Neither Pratt nor his representative responded to an interview request.

In one recent high-profile poll, about 56% of respondents said they had an unfavorable view of Bass. In another, about 40% of those surveyed said they had not yet made up their minds about who should lead the city.

“It’s clear that there are concerns among voters about the direction of the city — and the state, quite frankly,” said Pomona College politics professor Sara Sadhwani, referring to the race for governor. “In both instances, there are lackluster candidates, and so we see voters being very much undecided in both of these incredibly consequential races.”

The election season got underway a little more than a year after the Palisades fire, which destroyed thousands of homes and left 12 people dead.

Bass, who was out of the country when the fire broke out, was unsteady in her early public appearances and, since then, has faced sharp criticism over the pace of the rebuilding. She has defended her record on the recovery, saying she cut red tape and suspended city permit fees, while also pressing the Trump administration to crack down on insurance companies that fail to compensate wildfire survivors.

The back-and-forth over change and the status quo broke to the surface during last month’s housing forum in downtown L.A.

At one point, Raman voiced alarm over the city’s elevated “people mover” being built at Los Angeles International Airport, saying it is so far behind schedule that it won’t be ready before the World Cup, which starts in June.

Raman said that as mayor, she would ensure that such projects are finished on time — and replace airport leadership if it fails to happen.

“Nithya, you’ve been on City Council for six years, though,” Huang shot back. “Why have you not moved this forward?”

(At five years and four months, Raman’s tenure is slightly less than that.)

Raman countered that, as a council member, she only has control over certain issues.

“So much of what’s going wrong in Los Angeles requires the mayor to get involved,” she said.

Bass did not attend the forum, traveling instead to New Orleans for a reelection fundraiser. Pratt also skipped. In their absence, the three remaining candidates pounded on a wide array of municipal ills, including broken sidewalks, high rents and sluggish housing production.

Raman, at that event and elsewhere, has sought to differentiate herself from Bass, and City Hall more broadly, by highlighting her dissenting votes.

In 2023, Raman opposed a package of police pay increases negotiated by Bass, saying they were too expensive and would deprive other city departments of funding. Last year, she voted against a $2.6-billion upgrade of the Convention Center, citing similar long-term cost concerns.

Bass, for her part, said she’s been shifting the direction of the city in critical ways. Previous city leaders were too hesitant to build temporary housing for homeless people, she said, leaving them to languish on sidewalks while waiting for government-funded apartments to be built.

After taking office in 2022, Bass declared a local emergency on homelessness and launched her Inside Safe initiative, which has put thousands of people into hotels and motels. Raman signed off on the emergency and the funding for Inside Safe but now says the program is too expensive.

The mayor said she also pushed for changes in LAPD hiring, not just by making officers’ salaries more competitive, but by hacking away at a slow and bureaucratic recruitment process. Speaking to the Palisades Democrats, Bass said she got that done, in part, by changing the leadership and staff at the city’s personnel department.

Bass told the group she’s preparing to launch an initiative to clean up the city’s streets — and that she made a personnel move in that regard as well.

“In terms of cleanliness, I’ve had to change the leadership of the Department of Sanitation, because I couldn’t get the job done,” she said.

Sadhwani, the Pomona College professor, said she doubts that voters will view Bass as a reform candidate. Raman, she argued, is also part of the establishment.

“They cannot run from the fact that they have been in power,” she said.

The economic ripple effects of the Iran conflict are pushing mortgage rates higher, adding new pressure to the U.S. housing market even as conditions tilt in favor of buyers, the Associated Press reported Saturday.

Rates on a typical 30-year mortgage

WASHINGTON — President Trump is singling out the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority as a cautionary tale about Democratic mismanagement of publicly funded programs, using it to justify proposed cuts to homeless assistance services across the country.

Trump’s proposed budget for the next fiscal year, released Friday, asks Congress to eliminate the Continuum of Care — a federal program that funds housing and services for homeless Americans — citing concerns about “fraud and corruption” among local agencies that administer it.

The White House points to LAHSA, which manages many homeless services for the city and county, as the example of why the program needs to go.

The agency has faced criticism locally for years for lack of proper oversight and the county is in the process of transitioning programs to an internal department.

“LAHSA has an abysmal record of reducing what is the highest number of street homeless individuals in the United States, and an independent audit issued in March 2025 found that the authority failed to accurately track billions of Federal and local dollars,” the budget says.

The local agency pushed back in a statement after the budget was released.

“Cutting this funding or destabilizing the Continuum of Care program would directly result in more tents on our streets, not fewer,” said Gita O’Neill, the agency’s interim chief executive, adding that under its leadership unsheltered homelessness in Los Angeles has fallen 15% and that 90% of the program’s funding goes “directly to rental assistance.”

Local officials are already grappling with homeless service cuts at the state and county level given budget constraints and LAHSA warned Trump’s proposal would make matters worse.

“If anything, we need additional funding to cover rising costs, not fewer, to maintain our current momentum,” the agency said Friday.

The funding dispute over homelessness services is one front in a broader budget assault on California programs by the Trump administration.

Trump’s proposal also asks Congress to eliminate millions in funding from state initiatives the White House is characterizing as wasteful, ineffective or “woke.”

The cuts, if enacted, would cancel $4 billion in unspent funding for the state’s high-speed rail project, which the White house called a “boondoggle,” and strip grants from the Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California, which the budget criticized for “actively working to dismantle systems of power and privilege that favor whiteness.”

Smaller items are also targeted on the White House’s chopping block: a Los Angeles gelato festival, a dance building in Santa Cruz — which the White House dubs “one of the richest cities in the nation” — and a $3-million grant for a playground tied to an unspecified performing arts center in California.

Trump’s proposed cuts to California projects are part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to reshape federal spending priorities, largely by trading social programs for a massive military buildup.

The president is asking Congress to approve $1.5 trillion for defense and to slash $73 billion from domestic programs, a massive restructuring that would leave states, including California, to absorb costs Washington no longer wants to carry.

Trump made that vision explicit at a private Easter lunch at the White House on Wednesday, telling guests that the federal government should no longer be responsible for funding social programs that many Americans rely on.

“We can’t take care of daycare. We are a big country,” Trump said. “We are fighting wars. We can’t take care of daycare.”

If states want to offer those services, Trump said, they should raise taxes to pay for them.

“Medicaid, Medicare, all these individual things, they can do it on a state basis,” he said. “We have to take care of one thing: military protection.”

His proposed budget reflects that priority, which lawmakers will need to contend with as they grapple with the mounting costs of the Iran war and an economic fallout from a military operation that has left Americans paying more items, including gas pump.

Under the proposed budget, Trump is also seeking to make some investments in California projects.

The White House, for example, is seeking $152 million from Congress to turn Alcatraz back into a maximum-security prison, an idea the president has talked about for several years.

He also called on Congress to establish a National Center for Warrior Independence at the West Los Angeles VA Medical Center.

Times staff writer Andrew Khouri, in Los Angeles, contributed to this report.

A federal judge in Rhode Island ruled on Tuesday that the Trump administration’s effort to dramatically change the criteria to get tens of millions of dollars in funding to aid homeless people was unlawful.

Several nonprofits filed a lawsuit last year accusing the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development of changing the rules for receiving $75 million to build housing for homeless families and individuals. The plaintiffs accused the Trump administration of issuing a new Notice of Funding Opportunity, or NOFO, for the Continuum of Care program to better align with its social policies.

U.S District Judge Mary McElroy, nominated by President Trump, said the department’s “slapdash imposition of political whims” was unlawful and she ordered it to scrap the new policy.

“Once again, this Court is faced with a case in which an executive agency has made a last-minute decision to make major, disruptive changes to grants within its purview, all for the express purpose of accomplishing the current administration’s policy objectives,” McElroy said in her ruling that the NOFO violated the Administrative Procedure Act, a law governing how federal agencies develop and issue regulations.

A spokesperson for HUD did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advocates for plaintiffs welcomed the ruling.

“For more than three decades, the federal government has supported housing providers and communities through HUD’s programs to help people experiencing homelessness move into stable housing,” Skye Perryman, president and chief executive of Democracy Forward, co-counsel for the plaintiffs, said in a statement. “We are pleased that the court has stopped the Trump-Vance administration from holding life-saving funding hostage to a political agenda.”

Ann Oliva, chief executive of the National Alliance to End Homelessness, said the ruling was “a victory for people across this nation who have overcome homelessness and stabilized in HUD’s permanent housing programs.”

“Today’s news reinforces a fundamental truth: that the work to end homelessness is not partisan, and never should be interfered with for political means,” Oliva said in a statement.

Plaintiffs argued the Trump administration was aiming to upend polices in place for decades to satisfy its political considerations, including whether jurisdictions “support sanctuary protections, harm reduction practices, or inclusive policies for transgender people.”

The Alliance and the Women’s Development Corporation argued that HUD lacked the authority to make the changes, adding that the new award process was “shockingly unlawful” and would “irreparably injure qualified applicants for these funds and the communities they serve.”

In its court filings, HUD argued the new criteria was an effort “to ensure the availability of funding to protect our Nation’s most vulnerable individuals and families from the trauma of homelessness while simultaneously promoting self-sufficiency.”

“Defendants acted reasonably and prudently because the NOFO conditions, focusing on public safety, cooperation with law enforcement and prohibitions on illegal drug use, are sufficiently related to the funding goals of self-sufficiency and reduction of trauma,” HUD wrote.

Casey writes for the Associated Press.

Finland has been crowned the world’s happiest country for the ninth consecutive year in the World Happiness Report 2026, and it’s just three hours from the UK with direct flights from £17

The world’s happiest nation has been unveiled, and it’s just three hours from the UK with £17 flights available.

For the ninth year running, Finland, with its varied terrain and exceptional quality of life, has been crowned the happiest country of 2026. The Scandinavian nation claimed top spot in the World Happiness Report 2026, released by the Wellbeing Research Centre at the University of Oxford.

The findings emerged after a survey of approximately 100,000 individuals across 140 nations, with Finland singled out for freedom to make life choices, social support, and life expectancy. Additional factors thought to contribute to Finland’s satisfying way of life include its minimal crime levels, unpolluted environment, and work-life equilibrium, alongside its stunning natural splendour.

The Nordic nation boasts thousands of unspoilt lakes with sparkling waters and captivating woodlands that blanket over 70 per cent of the territory. The varied scenery is genuinely spectacular and undeniably elevates the standard of living for Finnish residents, providing abundant prospects for outdoor pursuits and wellness.

It’s not exclusively those residing in the nation who can discover its marvels. Finland has emerged as a sought-after holiday spot for visitors eager to observe the shimmering northern lights, trek through its remarkable landscape, or sample its extraordinary saunas, with over 3 million scattered throughout the country.

Whilst many associate Finland with its enchanting Lapland winter wonderland, particularly beloved during the festive season, the country is undoubtedly a year-round destination spanning its four distinct regions. From lakeside retreats to woodland escapes and seaside breaks.

Finland’s capital, Helsinki, makes for a perfect starting point for a pedestrian-friendly city break, boasting cutting-edge art galleries, legendary saunas, thriving eateries and stunning Nordic architecture. The city’s peninsula position, encircled by islands, provides convenient access to some of the nation’s finest natural attractions, from woodlands to islands and shorelines.

Direct flights to Helsinki in April start from £17 one-way, according to Skyscanner. Although you’ll need to layer up with temperatures hovering around 8C during spring, the city’s stunning scenery makes it well worth the journey, with countless walking routes through its peaceful, postcard-perfect landscapes.

Additionally, with an exceptionally strong sauna culture, you’re never far from a warming dip after a day’s exploration. Among Helsinki’s most sought-after destinations is Löyly, a striking waterfront sauna and dining venue, housed in a modern Nordic building with seaside panoramas.

Further notable Finnish destinations include Rovaniemi, celebrated as the Lapland gem, and Tampere, offering another stylish urban getaway. There’s also Kuopio for those seeking to retreat to the peaceful lakes, and Turku, famed for its historic castle and waterside dining establishments.

Beyond Finland, other Scandinavian nations, including Iceland, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, also featured amongst the globe’s happiest countries. Meanwhile, Costa Rica, boasting its tropical climate, rainforests and beaches, secured fourth position, with European destinations commanding the list.

Top 10 happiest countries in the world 2026

1. Finland
2. Iceland
3. Denmark
4. Costa Rica
5. Sweden
6. Norway
7. Netherlands
8. Israel
9. Luxembourg
10. Switzerland

Do you have a travel story to share? Email webtravel@reachplc.com

The U.S. Department of Justice announced Thursday that it has launched an investigation into two California women’s prisons to determine if they unconstitutionally provided housing and preferential treatment to “biological male prisoners.”

In a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom, Assistant Atty. Gen. Harmeet Dhillon — who heads the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division — said investigators will look into “widely reported allegations of deprivation of female prisoners’ rights” at the Central California Women’s Facility in Madera County and the California Institution for Women in San Bernardino County.

The Justice Department said in a news release that there have been allegations “of sexual assaults, rape, voyeurism and a pervasive climate of sexual intimidation due to the presence of males in the women’s prison.”

Newsom’s office referred The Times to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. A spokesperson for the agency said it is “committed to providing a safe, humane, respectful and rehabilitative environment for all incarcerated people.”

The Department of Justice also notified Maine Gov. Janet Mills of an investigation into allegations that the state “has allowed a biological male inmate to remain housed with women despite complaints that the male inmate has assaulted or harassed several female inmates.”

Dhillon said in a video posted on X that the investigations are part of a new project called the “single-sex prisons initiative” to look for potential civil rights violations in which female inmates are forced “to be in the same rooms with men who are posing as women to get access to the female prisons.”

“In California there are reports of many dozen such men housed in women’s prisons which of course is exposing these women to sexual assault and other forms of violence and harassment that, if true, are extremely troubling and could violate the civil rights of these women,” Dhillon said.

In 2020, Newsom signed into law Senate Bill 132, which gives transgender, nonbinary and intersex inmates at state prisons the right to be housed at either men’s or women’s facilities. Opponents of the law sued the following year, alleging that it was unconstitutional and created an unsafe environment for women in female facilities, with some plaintiffs claiming they were assaulted.

At the time, LGBTQ+ advocates slammed the suit as baseless and damaging.

“The way they wrote [the complaint] is saying that trans women are men and they are putting men in women’s prisons, which is completely false,” Bamby Salcedo, president and chief executive of the TransLatin@ Coalition, which cosponsored SB 132, previously told The Times. “They’re making a claim that is not accurate and not respectful towards trans women specifically.”

In an interview with the Times Thursday, Salcedo said that while there may be instances in which people have abused the law, she stressed “it is the responsibility of the CDCR to protect people who are incarcerated.”

“They should be able to not just follow the law, but also to be able to screen people appropriately,” Salcedo said.

Salcedo said she was not surprised to hear about the new Justice Department investigation, calling it “an effort for this administration to continue to deny opportunities and access to trans people in our society.”

The Women’s Liberation Front, which brought the lawsuit, announced this week that a federal court had dismissed the case but that they planned to appeal. In an emailed statement, Elspeth Cypher, Women’s Liberation Front board president, called the Justice Department investigation “welcome and long overdue.”

“I hope that this investigation provides the women in prison with some hope that finally someone is listening,” Cypher said.

Under the bill enacted in 2021, 1,028 inmates housed at male prisons have requested to be moved to female facilities, according to data as of March 4. The department had granted 47 requests and denied 132. Another 140 applicants “changed their minds,” according to the department.

State officials said that 84 inmates sought to be transferred into men’s facilities from women’s prisons. Of those, seven were approved.

According to the corrections department, 2,405 inmates identify as nonbinary, intersex or transgender. Those populations are said to experience excessive violence in prison. A 2007 UC Irvine study that included interviews with 39 transgender inmates found that the rate of sexual assault is 13 times higher for transgender people, with 59% of those surveyed reporting experiencing such encounters.

The Justice Department said Thursday that its investigation was just getting underway and that it “has not reached any conclusions regarding allegations in these matters.”

“I’m very determined to ensure that no woman who’s incarcerated in the United States is subject to potential rape, sexual assault or other violations of her civil rights as a condition of incarceration to satisfy some woke ideology by the state,” Dhillon said. “If these states are violating these rights and they don’t stop, we will make them through litigation.”

Time Out has ranked the 51 most beautiful places in the world, and the top spot goes to Spain’s Picos de Europa mountain range that’s just a two-hour flight from the UK with Ryanair

The world is brimming with extraordinary destinations to discover, and pinpointing the most stunning is no easy feat, but Time Out has tackled the task.

The publication recently unveiled a list of the 51 most beautiful places in the world, featuring everything from lakes to beaches, National Parks, libraries, vineyards, and historic towns. Yet, claiming the number one position is a breathtaking mountain range that provides remarkable hiking opportunities, and it’s merely a two-hour flight from the UK.

The Picos de Europa in Spain is a striking, rugged limestone mountain range that soars to a height of 2,650 metres. Located just over 12 miles from the coastline, the mountains ascend steeply, forming deep gorges to discover, reports Express.

READ MORE: Corridor for Brits’ holidays is shrinking and is now just 50 miles wideREAD MORE: Woman finds ‘secret compartment’ in plane toilet and contents are brilliant

One route, the Cares Trail, ranks among the most sought-after walks in Spain, tracing a canyon and passing through craggy peaks and cascading waterfalls.

Spanning 13 miles in total, it’s not suitable for novices, though its gentle inclines make it achievable for walkers who can manage the distance. A straightforward choice is to board the Fuente Dé cable car, whisking you up the mountainside in moments and letting you relax and admire the verdant landscape below.

Upon reaching the summit, you can also explore additional hiking trails, including some demanding, steep climbs that provide spectacular vistas.

The mountains form part of the broader Picos de Europa National Park, and this region features the Lakes of Covadonga. These glistening blue waters are encircled by peaks and vegetation and resemble landscapes you’d encounter in Scotland or the Lake District, making it difficult to believe you’re in Spain.

This protected national park is abundant with wildlife, including brown bears, wolves, vultures, and eagles, and you’ll probably encounter mountain goats and vibrant butterflies amongst the limestone surroundings.

At the foot of the mountains, you can discover towns like the medieval Potes, brimming with centuries-old stone and half-timbered buildings and cobbled streets that lend it a rustic allure.

The town’s centrepiece is the Torre del Infantado, a 15th-century tower once the residence of medieval royalty, now a museum with a rooftop terrace providing sweeping views of the town.

Arenas de Cabrales on the park’s periphery is another favoured spot to stay. It’s renowned for producing Cabrales cheese, and has evolved into a gastronomic hotspot due to its plethora of acclaimed restaurants serving Northern Spanish cuisine.

Don’t expect to find paella on the menu. In this region, the dishes are hearty and rustic, such as bean stews and grilled meat, with ingredients sourced locally from the mountains.

The Picos de Europa is just under two hours from Santander Airport, and is serviced by airlines including Ryanair. Routes from the UK to Santander operate year-round from Edinburgh and London-Stansted, and seasonal flights operate from Birmingham and Manchester. Flights start from just £15 one-way and take 2 hours from the UK.

Got a story you’d like to share? Drop us an email at webtravel@reachplc.com

March 20 (Asia Today) — This commentary is the Asia Today Editor’s Op-Ed.

With Seoul apartment values posting their biggest increase in five years, concerns are growing that a heavier property tax burden will spill into the Jeonse and monthly rental markets. Jeonse is a unique Korean housing lease system where tenants pay a large lump-sum deposit instead of monthly rent, and get it back at the end of the lease.

Landlords are already showing signs of passing higher holding costs on to tenants through steeper rents and larger Jeonse deposits. If the government now moves to raise taxes further, including on single-home owners whose properties are deemed non-residential, it risks worsening instability in the rental market.

According to the Korea Real Estate Board, Seoul apartment Jeonse prices rose for a 57th straight week as of the second week of March, with the cumulative increase reaching 4.79%. Monthly rents climbed even faster. In February, the average monthly rent for an apartment in Seoul stood at 1.515 million won, or about $1,010, up 12.5% from a year earlier.

The sales market, by contrast, has cooled. Apartment prices in Seoul’s three Gangnam districts and Yongsan-gu have fallen for four consecutive weeks. But the Jeonse and monthly rental markets are becoming more unstable as new apartment supply shrinks and listings for existing units tighten. The shortage has been aggravated by the reinstatement in May of a capital gains tax surcharge on owners of multiple homes.

Against that backdrop, higher officially assessed home values are likely to add even more upward pressure on rents. The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport said this year’s official values for multifamily housing in Seoul rose 18.67% from a year earlier. That was the third-largest increase on record, behind only 2007 and 2021, both periods of sharp home-price gains.

In the three Gangnam districts and the Mapo-Yongsan-Seongdong area, where assessed values climbed more than 20%, many homeowners could see property tax bills rise by more than 50%. Even without a revision to tax law, the annual burden can increase by as much as 50%. Once local education taxes and the rural special tax are included, the actual increase can be even greater.

The number of single-home owners subject to the comprehensive real estate tax also rose sharply. Homes assessed above 1.2 billion won, or about $800,000, now total 487,362, up 170,000 from a year earlier.

For many elderly homeowners living on national pension payments, interest income or dividends, annual property taxes running from several million won to tens of millions of won can be difficult to absorb. Assessed values are also used to calculate regional health insurance premiums and can affect existing pension burdens, making the overall impact even heavier.

South Korea has already seen what happens when landlords shift tax costs onto tenants. During the previous progressive administration, rising tax burdens contributed to sharp increases in monthly rents and Jeonse deposits. Past data show that when the property tax rate rises by 1 percentage point, about 30% of the additional burden is passed on through Jeonse deposits and roughly 40% to 50% through monthly rent.

Even so, the government is considering higher property taxes or smaller long-term holding deductions to curb what it calls high-value single-home investments used for non-residential purposes. But real estate taxation can have broad collateral effects. If efforts to suppress housing prices go too far, tenants may once again end up paying the price.

The government should scrap any reckless plan to raise property tax rates on single-home owners.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260319010005978

California and a coalition of other states sued the Trump administration Monday over its efforts to roll back fair housing rules that bar certain types of discrimination by landlords, including against LGBTQ+ people.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development rule change threatening funding for states that offer housing protections for LGBTQ+ and other marginalized individuals who are not explicitly covered by federal law is illegal, undermines state efforts to combat discrimination and would push vulnerable people onto the streets.

“In effect, the Trump administration is attempting to roll back civil rights enforcement in housing at the federal level, and pressure states to weaken their own protections as well,” Bonta said during a news conference Monday. “That’s not just bad policy, it’s unlawful.”

Representatives from HUD and the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The federal Fair Housing Act explicitly bans discrimination based on seven traits: race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status and disability. Under rules set forth during the Obama administration, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has for years interpreted the law as banning discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Many states, including California, also have adopted laws explicitly banning discrimination against LGBTQ+ people and other marginalized groups not mentioned in the federal law, with California also banning discrimination based on marital status, ancestry, source of income and veteran or military status.

In September, HUD issued new guidance threatening to decertify state housing agencies — stripping their federal funding and ability to investigate discrimination claims — if they provide anti-discrimination protections other than those spelled out in the Fair Housing Act. The guidance also barred state agencies from using federal funds to “promote gender ideology,” “fund or promote elective abortions” or promote illegal immigration, according to the lawsuit.

The guidance followed that of HUD Secretary Scott Turner, a former NFL player and Trump loyalist, who announced last year that HUD would no longer adhere to a 2016 Obama-era rule protecting transgender people from housing discrimination, which Turner said “tied housing programs, shelters and other facilities funded by HUD to far-left gender ideology.”

“We, at this agency, are carrying out the mission laid out by President Trump on January 20th [2025] when he signed an executive order to restore biological truth to the federal government,” Turner said in a statement, referring to Trump’s order calling on federal agencies across the government to rescind protections for transgender Americans.

“This means recognizing there are only two sexes: male and female,” Turner said. “It means getting government out of the way of what the Lord established from the beginning when he created man in His own image.”

Among other things, the administration said rules barring discrimination against transgender people allowed “biological men to enter shelters intended for women impacted by trauma, domestic abuse and violence.”

LGBTQ+ advocacy groups condemned the move, noting that transgender Americans face heightened discrimination in a slate of areas — including housing — and need protections. They also contended that HUD’s new policies violate a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court decision barring employment discrimination based on gender or gender identity.

Bonta said the Fair Housing Act “set a floor, not a ceiling, for protections against discrimination,” which means that states “have the authority to go further and protect more people,” as California has endeavored to do.

He said HUD has supported the state’s anti-discrimination work for decades through the Fair Housing Assistance Program, which provides funding to state and local agencies to investigate and enforce laws against housing discrimination. HUD’s new guidance “threatens to undermine that system” by demanding an end to state protections not just for LGBTQ+ people, but for military veterans, immigrants as well as women receiving abortions and other reproductive healthcare, he said.

“Families across California are already struggling to find homes they can afford, and the last thing they need is for the federal government to make it harder,” Bonta said. “At its core, this lawsuit is about protecting a fundamental civil right: the right to rent, buy, or live in housing without discrimination.”

Bonta said California interprets the Fair Housing Act’s ban on sex discrimination as protecting LGBTQ+ people, but the Trump administration doesn’t agree — making the state’s more explicit protections important.

He said about $3 million in federal funding is currently at stake for California, with millions more at stake in other states.

Illinois Atty. Gen. Kwame Raoul, who is helping lead the lawsuit and spoke alongside Bonta Monday, said states with robust antidiscrimination laws “will not go backwards and we will not give in to threats” from the Trump administration.

“These actions are part of a broader, ongoing pattern by this administration to subvert the legal protections our country has put in place to combat discrimination, and to tear down the hard fought progress we have made for civil rights,” Raoul said. “It is also just the latest page in the president’s illegal playbook to use funding and programs created by Congress to try to strong arm states into adopting Trump’s preferred policies.”

The states allege that HUD’s targeting of state antidiscrimination policies comes after it downsized its own workforce and significantly reduced its ability to investigate housing discrimination complaints and enforce fair housing laws. They say the new guidance violates multiple federal laws, including laws that govern federal spending and rule changes, and are asking the federal court to immediately invalidate the guidance as unlawful.

Bonta and Raoul are joined in the lawsuit by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

WASHINGTON — The Senate passed a broad bill on Thursday to make U.S. housing more accessible and affordable, a rare bipartisan effort in Congress to address a growing national problem.

The bill, which passed 89 to 10, would reduce regulations, regulate corporate investors and expand how housing dollars can be used to build affordable homes and rentals. It will now head back to the House, which passed a similar bill earlier this year.

“We have a housing shortage all across America,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who worked with Republicans to win overwhelming support from both parties for the legislation. “We need more housing of every kind. More housing for first-time home buyers, more housing for renters, more housing for seniors, more housing for people with disabilities, more rural housing, more urban housing, more, more, and more.”

The legislation, she said “will help drive down prices.”

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-S.C.), led the effort with Warren. He said ahead of the vote that the Senate could “do what so many people failed to do in this legislative body for the last few decades, and that is pass consequential legislation that makes it easier to become a homeowner.”

Roadblocks ahead for the legislation

Despite the overwhelming bipartisan vote in the Senate, It’s unclear whether the House will pass the legislation again — or if President Trump will sign it.

Trump has strongly backed the bill through the bipartisan negotiations, but he has also slowed its momentum with a declaration last weekend that he won’t sign any new measures unless Congress passes legislation that would require voters to show proof of citizenship and end most mail-in balloting. The Senate is expected to begin consideration of that bill next week, but it is unlikely to pass as all Democrats oppose it.

At the same time, House leaders have indicated that they are unlikely to accept the Senate version of the housing legislation and have suggested they could launch a formal conference process to negotiate a final deal between the chambers — a process that could take months.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said ahead of the bill’s passage on Thursday that conference negotiations are a possibility, “but obviously the quickest way to do this would be to pick up the Senate bill and pass it.”

If the White House wants that to happen, he said, “they’ll probably have to make that argument to House leadership.”

Making housing more attainable

The bill would give local governments more power on housing issues, allow banks to invest more in affordable housing and lift limits on the number of units in a public housing development that can receive private financing through Section 8 funding that helps rehabilitate properties.

“You’ve got many provisions in this bill that stop treating the U.S. like one single housing market and start giving local leaders the tools they need to fix their unique regional puzzle,” said Peter Carroll with Cotality, a company that tracks housing data.

The bill aims to make homebuilding easier by streamlining some regulations that require environmental reviews and inspections. It also eliminates a limit on a grant for emergency shelter beds and street homelessness outreach.

As many affordable housing developers are leaning on manufactured and modular homes that can be transported to areas that need housing, the legislation also lifts the requirement that they have to be built on a permanent chassis, making them easier to build and design.

Housing advocacy and policy groups say they wish the bill went further by investing money in building more housing and assisting renters.

“This legislation is the product of essentially senators and House members wanting to come up with something that could pass with both Democratic and Republican votes, which means it’s inherently less ambitious,” said Yonah Freemark, a researcher at Urban Institute.

Corporate investors

One of the more contested provisions of the bill would bar institutional investors from buying single-family homes — a top priority for Trump.

The bill defines such investors as any that directly or indirectly own 350 or more single-family homes. Investors of any size would not be required to sell single-family homes bought before the date that the bill becomes a law.

They would still be allowed to buy or build single-family homes if they rent them out, but would be required to sell them to an individual homebuyer after seven years and offer that buyer “price concessions” and give tenants a 30-day “first-look” period when the time comes to sell the home.

A need for reform

The U.S. housing market has been in a slump dating back to 2022, when mortgage rates began to climb from pandemic-era lows.

Sales of previously occupied U.S. homes have been hovering close to a 4-million annual pace now going back to 2023 — well short of the 5.2-million annual pace that’s historically been the norm. They slowed last year to a 30-year low and have remained sluggish so far this year, declining in January and February versus a year earlier.

A sharp run-up in home prices, especially in the early years of this decade, and a chronic shortage of homes nationally worsened by years of below-average home construction have left many aspiring homeowners priced out of the market.

Meanwhile, while the median U.S. monthly rent has been declining for more than two years, it was still 15.2% higher in January than it was at the start of 2020, according to data from Realtor.com.

The trends have ratcheted pressure on lawmakers this year, with midterm elections looming in November, to show they’re working on ways to make homeownership and rental housing costs more affordable.

Kramon, Veiga and Jalonick write for the Associated Press. Kramon reported from Atlanta and Veiga reported from Los Angeles.