New Homes

My estate is being demolished and the 2400 flats replaced with 2,000 new social housing and 2700 private flats for sale. In other words the density of the area is set to double. That's government policy in the city...stack 'em up. The idea as well is that mixed tenure will reduce social exclusion but there is absolutely no evidence to back this up. We (and other estates) are very much a guinea pig. John Prescott's other proposal is that we build on the green belt and instead have green wedges. I would be very pissed off if I owned a nice house with a lovely view of the Whyteleafe Valley only to have it built on. So I think this is okay so long as the impact on existing housing isn't too drastic. I think the emphasis on 'community' has a bit of a bollocky ring to it. I read somewhere recently that people don't just want nice neighbourhoods but sustainable communities. do they? I know I am highly unlikely to fratenize with my neighbours...not because I have anything against them but because all my social needs are met elsewhere. I think the key to our housing in future as you point out depends on infrastructure especially transport. We need fast efficient and economic train links into the capital. The migration is already happening even without decent transport links. People have no option with current house prices. If you read the property section of the evening London papers there are new developments advertised as being commutable to London including, High Wycombe, East Grinstead and Basingstoke. I can't quite see people commuting to work along the Basingstoke canal though! jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

Unfortunately, I work on just these kinds of housing schemes. I get very stressed out, seeing the tiny spaces that people are expected to squeeze themselves into. And if you're buying - well, I just don't understand how started homes go for £350,000. How's a couple pulling £40,000 between them (if they're lucky)got a chance of buying? We gave up ages ago, and rent a house that if we bought, would double our housing expense each month. We're waiting for the crash. Either that, or we'll become a nation of a few rich, who own all the houses, and the rest of us who rent. The lucky last are the people who bought in the late 90's, early 2000's.

As a side note, how come the government doesn't spend more of their cash on encouraging people and jobs in towns which are virtually empty and in desperate need of attention?

"how come the government doesn't spend more of their cash on encouraging people and jobs in towns which are virtually empty and in desperate need of attention?" Because that would go against their Thatcherite economic model. That said, now that all mainstream parties are agreed that the market isn't going to solve the housing crisis, serious action on stimulating struggling local economies with government might happen too.

Here we go with probably an unpopular view. Immigration is one of the problems. Too much of it, over too long a time. Done purely for political and economic reasons. Now we have a population that is increasing fast, in a tiny island that can't take it. Building more isn't going to solve the problem. It'll just delay the inevitable for a few more years. We have a housing crisis: too many people chasing too few homes: result, inflationary prices and misery for many. Infrastructures can't handle such a big population. Energy, water supplies and transport particularly. We have no future unless we face up to the reality: we need to stop immigration completely for a number of years, and look at ways to reduce our population, as well as develop the regions more to enourage population spread..

I pretty much agree with everything Lisa says. One thing I would add though is that we do need to get away from the obsession with owning houses and stigma around renting - especially when one is over 30. How often do you hear renting described as 'dead money'? Plenty of other countries have the rental model as the norm. jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

Jude is right about renting. I don't think blaming immigration is an unpopular view. Most people would agree that immigration is a factor in the housing debate. On this, you're just wrong: "Now we have a population that is increasing fast, in a tiny island that can't take it" The population of the UK is projected to grow by approximately 3 million less between 2001 and 2051 than it grew between 1951 and 2001. And we certainly don't have a literal lack of space. "Infrastructures can't handle such a big population. Energy, water supplies and transport particularly." Other infrastructures do handle much bigger populations. Planning and the investment in the infrastructure is more important than the number of people. "We have no future unless we face up to the reality: we need to stop immigration completely for a number of years, and look at ways to reduce our population," Even if this was a good idea, I'm not sure how it would be possible. Millions of people coming in and out of the country every year is a reality of the globalised world. Some people might like the idea but we can't really close the airports and station snipers along the Kent coastline. Once people are in the country, the question is, do we find ways for people to live and work here paying taxes in the legitimate economy or do we have a roughly similar number here anyway working in the alternative economy?

Back to Camilla... we do need to re-think our attitudes towards concepts of "Housing," "Home" and "Community"... remove the stigmas associated with renting, encourage people to live in self-sustaining communes, to self-build, etc. I have been partially involved, alongside my partner, a photographer, with something called The Natural House Project... a series of workshops, artistic projects, etc, which explore sustainable and relatively simple building methods and encourage people to drastically re-think their approach to preconcieved notions of "Home" and "Shelter"... this is the sort of thing we/government need to be encouraging! pe ps oid Blogs! "the art of tea" "that's an odd courgette"

' self-sustaining communes' with all due respect Peps, this sounds like the kind of thing that would have me eating the bran-shit I used to feed my guinea pig and wearing a kaftan. jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

Then you need to re-examine your perception of "self-sustaining communes," Jude! ;) Camilla... Re "We do need to challenge the idea that economic growth is everything"... Indeed, indeed and thrice indeed! pe ps oid Blogs! "the art of tea" "that's an odd courgette"

"We are now 60 million,the highest ever.I read somewhere more densely populated than China.Sustainabilty is about 30 mill." Who says? Why? The key reason for our current increase in population is people living longer. I think that's quite a good thing.

Is it? Dev il's Advo cate Blogs! "the art of tea" "that's an odd courgette"

bukharin: I really really hope you are right. But I fear that Camilla is also right. We potentially face problems, big ones, if climate change bites. I suppose that should be 'when', not 'if'. Can our infrastructure take the population growth? I don't think there's the political will to make it happen. Chronic underinvestment in public transport, no investment at all that I can see in the regions.

i was lucky enough to buy when it was relatively cheap to buy, about 10 years ago, i doubt i would be able to buy if i was looking today..if there is a crash i wouldn't be too pissed off, as we bought when property values were low anyway mixed tenure communities, that is a buzz word in social housing particularly in london, section 106 funding means any large development has to include social housing, and whereas in the past developers were able to get around this by paying a fine to the local authority. ken enforces it rigorously i manage mixed tenure schemes, they are usually a mix of 3 different tenures, owner occupied/shared ownership.social housing tenants, and tbh they can be a bit of a nightmare to manage, shared ownership and owner occupiers do not generally play well with social housing tenants, different lifestyles, different cultures, etc etc, as soon as someone has a financial interest, their tolerance levels seem to plummet as they see the value of their home threatened. generally an average street in most areas of london is mixed tenure, you have council houses, housing association houses, owner occupiers, private rented, but these have evolved over a number of years, with new build, there is no period of evolution, people are just thrust together, and sparks do fly

Yes, I remember you talking about this before - the problems with mixed tenure. Generally I find my neighbours (almost 100% council tenants) quite pleasant and quiet, it is just a few who engage in antisocial behaviour. I was talking to Styxbroox who lives on a similar large housing estate in North London and we agree that the recent influx of immigrants has actually improved our estates. The problem with shared ownership is that you still have to pay rent on the portion you don't own so it isn't much good to a single young person on 25K a year - it is do-able but will sap your income. Critics of the schemes for key workers say it skirts around what lies at the heart of the problem. The problem with social housing is that it is given to those with multiple social problems - I think it should be allocated differently. I am looking forward to being rehoused in a couple of years to a brand new mixed tenure development because much as I have no problem with the vast majority of my neighbours, having more private owners will mean that the intolerence and flying sparks you speak of will hopefully mean a clampdown on the antisocial minority. Both you and Lisa mention a possible crash. Nobody knows but it isn't looking likely. . . a slow in the market perhaps. Here's something to cheer you up anyway! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t8YTvdYXws jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

The news in the Metro this morning was about the current floods in Glos. Worc. Berks and Ox'shire. ...and it was mentioned that Gordon Brown's plans for 3 million new homes by 2020 mean this will just get worse. Most of these will be in the SE and the Thames gateway is particularly prone. So by trying to solve one problem we're just going to create another... jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

Plus ca change... plus la meme chose. Ewan

Imagination required! pe ps oid Blogs! "the art of tea" "that's an odd courgette"