OT Migration and housing shortage.

Surely one who is such a passionate believer in freedom for the English can't be concerned about such a thing?

Populations do tend to increase. If the government didn't strangle new build we'd have the houses.

NT

Populuations do tend also to decrease.

Resources are not infinite

I detect an attempt at trolling

In article , charles writes

And maybe young people not getting married/living together so early and hence each wanting a place of their own. IMHO part of the problem is that we have failed to adapt to this change in demographic. Young people don't want a 3-bedroom detached with garden. What they want is a low maintenance apartment, somewhere to park the car and preferably within walking distance of a pub Answer - decent high rise.

Err if you buy to rent isn't the idea that you get someone to live in it and pay rent?

That?s wrong too with far fewer people per house now than then.

Something we don't seem to do here, and you see on the continent, is town centre housing. Shops are not high rise, but a few stories, perhaps five, with the commercial entity on the ground floor (restaurant, shop), and studio or one bed apartments on the floors above. Ideal for young single people - who then provide the life for the town at night. Close to amenities so they don't need a car.

Most high streets in London have housing above the shops. Indeed many of the shops in high streets were converted from houses.

another idiot pseudonym.

There was nothing really wrong with early high rises of the 50s & 60s. But they very much fell out of favour nonetheless. High rises seem to be more vulnerable than low rise to failure of ongoing investment.

NT

you have no idea have you?

Converting existing non-residential space to residential can be an issue, though.

I worked on a government backed scheme in the 80s that incentivised above-shop conversions. Very few could be achieved because of fire safety - installing the necessary escape was impractical, too expensive etc. London prices may well have caused a rethink since then.

High rises failed because they were filled with idle chavs.

The measure used is rooms occupied, rather than area.

Compared to many terraces of 19th century workers' cottages around here, that is generous for a 2 bedroom house.

Obviously, you can get larger houses, but not in the same price range. That is why I think that comparing new builds to workers' cottages is probably a more realistic comparison in terms of the markets they were built for.

That's not my experience

the "young" people in my family all want the 3 bed semi with garden

not a poxy flat - and absolutely NOT a high rise

It's all about status, not need

Flats are so down market (unless you can afford to live in Belgravia)

tim

Properties above shops are a nightmare for apportioning the maintenance bills.

They might work for council owned rentals, but as owner occupier properties they are a real no-go

and there's also the problem that no-one wants to live above the chip shop (and you don't know if todays newsagents is going to become tomorrow chip shop)

tim

Have you ever been in one? Poorly insulated and generally damp. Built down to a price rather than up to a standard.

But obviously more than good enough for council tenants.

There are still quite a number of residential properties above high street shops round here. Easily seen from the top of a bus. ;-) But some larger shops choose to have those for their own uses - perhaps for security.