Housing

[ahinton]

There are high-density housing alternatives to high-rise in this country, such as the 1970s architect award-winning one in the centre of Bristol near where I once lived - one of the houses of which has recently been on sale:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-42042262.html

The layout of the private estate consists of lean-to-styled houses, each on the entrance side facing onto public walkways which transect the estate, and on the small, high-walled courtyard garden, with upstairs parts of some of the houses bridging the walkways. The houses, pantiled on the slanted roofs, wood and glass faced on the garden side and yellow brick constructed at the back and each end, like the garden walls, are instantly attractive to the eye, modern, roomy and light. The garden walls afford privacy and many of the owners have planted creepers and climbing plants to cover them, contributing to pleasantness for passers through the walkways.

The asking price of this one was well in excess of the average (not that averages mean much in this market place!) but, as Kingsdown's actually in Bristol, no agricultural or other rural land has had to be used to undertake the project that you mention here, so it's just one useful and interesting example of what can and could be done without having to carve up large swathes of rural land for housebuilding.

[jean]

There are high-density housing alternatives to high-rise in this country...

The Victorian terrace takes some beating.

I have always thought that the Garden City movement has a lot to answer for.

[ardcarp]

In my view, the government in allowing the private rental sector to flourish without any legal constraints is highly culpable.

There is probably quite a fair balance between tenants' rights and responsibilies and landlords' ditto.

The old-fashioned landed gentry who probably had dozens of 'cottages' on their estates were very ethical (if paternalist) landlords charging modest rents and providing security of tenure, even extending to children and grandchildren.

In the bad old 'Rachman' days commercial landlords had too much power to evict tenants. This led to government introducing legislation to give tenants many more rights and more security.

This in turn led to private landlords dropping out of the market and leading to a housing crisis.

Then the government introduced what is called a Shorthold Assured Tenancy (which is what we have now) which, as I said above, leads to quite a good balance between tenant and landlord.

[ahinton]

The Victorian terrace takes some beating.

I have always thought that the Garden City movement has a lot to answer for.

That's understandable insofar as it goes, but I'm not sure that the kind of knee-jerk response on the part of government that would result in all new homebuilding having to be undertaken as a solution to the present problem and end up looking like that would necessarily be a good idea, since it might risk creating the impression that government is encouraging the building of new homes solely because of that problem and as a hoped-for solution thereto, so that all such new homes are put up under the overriding principle that there's a problem that must be solved. I rather think that, if taken too far, this could have repercussions later.

[jean]

Then the government introduced what is called a Shorthold Assured Tenancy (which is what we have now) which, as I said above, leads to quite a good balance between tenant and landlord.

You think six months is all the security any tenant needs?

I have to disagree with you.

[jean]

That's undersatnd insofar as it goes, but I'm not sure that the kind of knee-jerk response on the part of government that would result in all new homebuilding having to be undertaken as a solution to the present problem and end up looking like that...

Like what?

I was contrasting the high-density Victorian terrace with the low density of Garden City-influenced developments.

[ahinton]

Like what?

I was contrasting the high-density Victorian terrace with the low density of Garden City-influenced developments.

I know - but, as I tried to point out, if all new builds were to be high density, too many of them might well end up looking as they've been done that way just to try to solve a problem of the government's own making.

[Serial_Apologist]

I know - but, as I tried to point out, if all new builds were to be high density, too many of them might well end up looking as they've been done that way just to try to solve a problem of the government's own making.

Apart from dismissing every alternative proposal put forward, what would you do to solve the housing situation, then?

[ahinton]

Apart from dismissing every alternative proposal put forward, what would you do to solve the housing situation, then?

I had thought that I'd made it clear not only that I am neither "dismissing every alternative proposal put forward" but also that I do not claim to have a solution or solutions. I do, however, take the issue as seriously as it merits but I find it very difficult to figure out what could be tried with any hope of affordability and ultimate success. Since jean helpfully posted the links about the rather different situation in Germany, I was prompted to wonder whether UK's let it all go far too far for far too long and that it might now have gotten beyond resolution for all who are adversely affected by it.

I also pointed out that, as far as I can tell, there are two distinct, though linked, problems, the first being that there are nowhere near enough homes adequately to house the current UK population (and that the "bedroom tax" is at best a most ill-conceived an insult to the intelligence) and the second that so much of what there is has become unaffordable for large numbers of people to buy or rent; if the latter could be solved, it would, I think, be easier to begin to address the former with some eventual hope of success.

I mentioned the now hopelessly unrealistic gap between average incomes and average property prices (although, in so doing, I accept that "averages" for either don't, of course, tell the whole story). If that problem is to be addressed first, with the hope that it might help to lead the development of solutions for the housing shortage, there would have either to be massive rises in average earnings / profits, equally massive reductions in residential property values or both; I stated that the former would largely be unaffordable by employers and customers of small businesses and that the latter, even if achieveable (and I do not see how it would be), would leave millions in negative equity and wreak irreparable damage upon lenders, some of whom might collapse as a direct consequence. If I am right about either or both of these (and I'm not suggesting that this is the case), I cannot see how this gap could be bridged.

I also mentioned that, if "social housing" were to become a far larger proportion of the total housing stock, local authorities and housing associations would have to borrow vast sums to acquire it and this would also take a long time given the sheer scale of such a project. I have no idea how or from whom they could hope to borrow such sums and service those loans, especially given that with those acquisitions would inevitably come additional immense bills for management, maintenance, insurance and administration of their newly expanded property portfolios; rents and council tax would no more than scratch the surface of the latter and provide no funds for the former. Furthermore, some of those borrowings might come from lenders who could go under if the majority of their existing borrowers go into negative equity as a consqeuence of large reductions in residential property values, which would only add to an already desperately dangerous situation for local authorities and housing associations alike.

I have also suggested that property renovations to provide more housing might prove in some cases to be a cheaper alternative to buying up land and building from scratch and could also help with inner city regeneration.

Beyond that, I am being as honest as I can in saying that I do not pretend to have answers to these questions but at the same time I don't think that the concerns that I have expressed above are either irrelevant or unreasonable; If you or anyone else care to address any of them with possible solutions, however, I will be genuinely interested to read them.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Sewcondly, not all new homes for purchase or rent need necessarily be provided by means of new builds; renovations of derelict and semi-derelict disused properties could play their part in this as well, especially in cities where such renovation could contribute to inner city regeneration.

Against this we have to contend with idiotic politicians who say that certain cities are beyond redemption and should simply be abandoned.

[jean]

...as I tried to point out, if all new builds were to be high density, too many of them might well end up looking as they've been done that way just to try to solve a problem of the government's own making...

So though we have before us excellent examples of how to do high density well, we should eschew building that way for fear we might do it badly?

I don't think that the concerns that I have expressed above are either irrelevant or unreasonable

I think that one was!

[ahinton]

Against this we have to contend with idiotic politicians who say that certain cities are beyond redemption and should simply be abandoned.

Contend with or ignore? Has any UK politician actually said or published any such thing?

[ahinton]

So though we have before us excellent examples of how to do high density well, we should eschew building that way for fear we might do it badly?

Not at all; the services of imaginative architects will be vital is any such builds are to be a success. All that I would urder to guard against is indiscriminate high density builds without strict planning guidelines as to how it can be done.

That said, the principal problems remain, whether new bilds are high density or not - i.e. affordability for buyers and tenants and the costs of borrowing, both for the construction projects themselves on a sufficiently massive scale to enable to solution of the housing shortage problem and for the management, maintenance, insurance and admistration of those new homes to be owned by local authorities and housing associations.

I think that one was!

No longer, I hope!

[jean]

Has any UK politician actually said or published any such thing?

Policy Exchange did, back in 2008. They are said to be 'close' to Cameron, but even at the time he distanced himself from such nonsense.

Cities in northern England such as Liverpool, Sunderland and Bradford are "beyond revival" and residents should move south, a think tank has argued.

Policy Exchange said current regeneration policies were "failing" the people they were supposed to help.

A mass migration to London, Cambridge and Oxford would stop them becoming "trapped" in poorer areas, it said.

The think tank is seen as being close to David Cameron but the Tory leader branded its findings "insane"...

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

"Policy Exchange, which has been described as David Cameron's favourite think tank, is a registered charity set up in 2002 by Nicholas Boles, who recently worked as London Mayor Boris Johnson's chief of staff, and Michael Gove, who went on to become shadow education secretary."