How to solve the housing crisis?

[Tuearts right boot]

A little out of left field but many of these problems could be very easily resolved with a sweeping policy review.

My suggestion is this, once you get to 50 years old you are automaticaly executed but the government, not only would this free up housing on a regular basis but it would also remove the need to save for your pension. As there are no pensions to pay for that funding could be spent elsewhere to help the more needy. Also given that you know the day you are going to check out there is no point having savings, you may as well blow it all on holidays and luxury items and it will also help the economy. Jobs are created on a daily basis so the unemployment numbers drop and the youngsters will be able to find work.

It's easy to resolve but it takes difficult decisions :)

I'm with you on this one. However, any chance we could make it 58, I've still got a few things left to do..

 

[Kompany Car]

not sure of you point - I was aware of the word near having been used but I was just stating there are schools and jobs in ( or near ) both areas. Presume you mean Pennines? Whereabouts - West Yorks? As has been pointed out elsewhere on BM today you travel to London to work out of choice.........not a real answer though is it?

My point was that there is affordable housing just not where people want to live and the main reason people live in a particular area is the ease of getting to well paid work and the quality of the schools for children.
Do a search on Rightmove, in the UK there are loads of houses for less than 100k but there is very little work where they are located. So ensuring better jobs in these areas by the government deliberately refocusing the economy to be less London centric and improving low cost transport is the answer.
It's about making the less desirable areas more desirable.
And no not West Yorkshire, Dore, Sheffield but originally Hyde.

 

[Stockton Heath Blue]

Any thread that includes development and Dead Kennedys is a winner.

The idea of the govt having a house builder is potentially a sound one (council houses anyone?) - they have lots of land assets and could set op as a non-profit organisation.

Very back of a fag packet is that the land is one third, the build one third and the profit one third - clearly many, many variables in this.

The trouble with the land coming in for free and the profit being wiped off is that the land is the asset that the govt would want to maximise in terms of any disposals - in order to generate funding for other items. A sustained focus on master planning and community provision needs to sit hand in hand here. This is why the idea of mixed communities and affordable housing provision via the experts in the house building industry (pretty much at zero cost) is a sound one. The issue is, though, that this in turn reduces return on the overall scheme, pushes up values of the market open stock and on occasion reduces the appetite of the landowners to sell who may wish to land bank until policy changes in their favour.

The PRS model is booming in town as some of you will be more aware that others, though seems to be predominantly driven by overseas and significant fund investment, with no real grasp of the consequences when the bubble bursts or over supply of flashy new stock drives the margins down to unsustainable levels. There are only so many beardy hipster types that will live in town in a formulaic two bed box and the future key will be investment in infrastructure to support a more diverse resident demographic. Perhaps only when Manchester reaches saturation point will this model start to take off in other major cities, as it barely works at the moment anywhere other than London or Manchester. Some say partly because of restricted knowledge of the uk's cities by the foreign investor market. - Good the see the likes of Renaker and others flooding the market whilst they still can and recent new-build starts with a 4 year programme to completions keep me enthused that there isn't a crash round the corner just yet. I guess when the crash comes we can just stick all of the homeless in unrentable towers like the olden days.

The real key to affordable housing provision is of course supply and demand. More sites need to be released for housing more quickly. Well designed, mixed tenure communities with great facilities and infrastructure comes at a substantial cost and whatever the govt they will look for easy wins in terms of income generation. The Barbican in London was designed and built for council flats. The city of london then jumped ship and sold off as they realised the intrinsic value that could pay for more homes in other areas. It's a rich man's ghetto with bland public space and no cohesive community - just they all pay an exorbitant service charge and don't have a total disregard for their own environment. I wonder what it would look like today if it was an "affordable" community with a different type of resident group as it's original intention? This is edging on to social engineering, though this is all part of the melting pot.

We do still deliver "affordable homes" via the RSLs (registered social landlords) - in most instances not for profit developers borne from the council housing management departments - which in essence do what WW is suggesting. They have the ability to develop market housing too, as long as the profit from that is driven back in to more affordable housing provision.

Perhaps they need a wider remit for land acquisition and relaxations or more efficiency in the ludicrous planning system - and more funds.

It is a far, far more complex issue than "build more homes" - though if WW has a couple of sneaky sites up his sleeve I'll get the consents and the great and good of BM can build them - we'll be billionaires before the end of the year!

As you say, it's not as simple as some might think. Probably going to generate more questions than answers but here goes.

1) The UK planning system is archaic and not fit for purpose. Too many back-handers and the like.
2) Too few housebuilders, which means they need scale in order to generate sufficient profits. Therefore not many interested in sub-50 unit developments. Encourage small & regional builders to undertake more schemes.
3) I work in property finance and the current lending market is shite. Lenders have lost track of risk and reward. The old adage being banks are happy to lend to those who least need it or not being there when funding is most needed. Spec commercial devt funding is as common as rocking horse shit.
4) PRS is yet to be market tested and I have it on good authority that there will be c.15,000 resi units coming to market in Manchester over the next few years, which is going to create over-supply issues. Still not convinced the rents or returns are going to be there.
5) Freeing up land will only work if people want to live in those locations and builders can make enough money and the right infrastructure is in place. Unfortunately, populations migrate to where the work is, which means the big cities get bigger exacerbating the problem.

Liverpool is an interesting development where Permitted Devt Rights are seeing sites hoovered up for resi, student acc, hotels, etc. but they have a fairly unique tourist market to accommodate this.

Whoever the government, it's going to need some blue sky thinking to come up with a solution that works or doesn't lose someone a shitload of votes.

 

[bluebaja]

Thjere is no putting the Genie back in the bottle. London and the South East are stuffed. I honestly believe that there is nothing that can be done to fix this within the next 50 years. The answer to individuals though perhaps is simple, L&SE are attractive because there is work, but what sort of work? Look at the reports recently issued about housing and the shocking conditions that people have to live in, mostly in rented accomodation. These are people that earn very little doing jobs in the service industries, many of them immigrants. Why ? I live in North East Wales, there are plenty of jobs here, maybe you can get £8 per hour in L&SE, and get £7 an hour here, but you can buy a very nice flat where I live for £90k. I genuinely do not understand the issue beyond the L&SE problem.

 

[bluethrunthru]

I don't even think building more is the answer now - affordability is the one and the only problem and we have allowed "market forces" to fuck us over - probably overseas buyers laundering money but hey its the Tories so what to expect.

I just watched a House Through Time on BBC 2 - 5 Grosvenor Mount Leeds - goggle it you can see the house. At one point it was bought buy a guy in the early 70's who came down from Scotland to be the Film reviewer for the Yorkshire Post. A good well paid professional job in 1974 and he paid £1,450 for it, Nowadays they said that translates to £34,500...... go on Zoopla and the like - Guide Price is £543k...........I could say I'm alright Jack I own my house but I have 2 kids - one rents a flat at what I think is an exorbitant rent in the centre of York the other one lives with us....I have no idea how they are going to own or rent in the future.

 

[WNRH]

I don't even think building more is the answer now - affordability is the one and the only problem and we have allowed "market forces" to fuck us over - probably overseas buyers laundering money but hey its the Tories so what to expect.

I just watched a House Through Time on BBC 2 - 5 Grosvenor Mount Leeds - goggle it you can see the house. At one point it was bought buy a guy in the early 70's who came down from Scotland to be the Film reviewer for the Yorkshire Post. A good well paid professional job in 1974 and he paid £1,450 for it, Nowadays they said that translates to £34,500...... go on Zoopla and the like - Guide Price is £543k...........I could say I'm alright Jack I own my house but I have 2 kids - one rents a flat at what I think is an exorbitant rent in the centre of York the other one lives with us....I have no idea how they are going to own or rent in the future.

Anyone can afford to buy a house. The issue is what house and in what area.

I rented for 8 years before finally buying a house in an area I wanted.

I could have purchased one for half the price in a so called less desirable area with ease.

A quick search on RightMove and you can buy a two bed terraced house in an inner city suburb for £120k. A nurse on £22k a year and a shelf stacker at Tesco on £18k a year should be able to afford that but some won’t (and I include me in that) as they aspire to nicer things and complain that the same house 3 miles away is double the price.

 

[talkativesprout]

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

A population cull.

 

[lazerblue]

A population cull.

of illegals

 

[bluethrunthru]

Anyone can afford to buy a house. The issue is what house and in what area.

I rented for 8 years before finally buying a house in an area I wanted.

I could have purchased one for half the price in a so called less desirable area with ease.

A quick search on RightMove and you can buy a two bed terraced house in an inner city suburb for £120k. A nurse on £22k a year and a shelf stacker at Tesco on £18k a year should be able to afford that but some won’t (and I include me in that) as they aspire to nicer things and complain that the same house 3 miles away is double the price.

yeah but the point I was making in 1974 a decent middle or upper middle class standard job got you that house - a decent middle class management job in Leeds will see you on £50-60k if you are lucky - x 5 is £250- £300k where is the other £250k coming from?