SHOCK:- Urging old people into smaller homes 'may backfire'

ruggedtoast

Bedroom blocking boomers should be provided a network of excavated underground homes, to free up valuable topside accommodation for hard working Gen X and sun-seeking Millennials.

Generali

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Bedroom blocking boomers should be provided a network of excavated underground homes, to free up valuable topside accommodation for hard working Gen X and sun-seeking Millennials.

There are plenty of mines sitting empty.

michaels

Generali wrote: »

There are plenty of mines sitting empty.

I think rt had something slightly shallower in mind - say about 6 feet under....

Matt1977

Although I understand how uneconomical it is for developers to build bungalows on plots of land, at least these wouldn't (shouldn't?) incur complex leasehold agreements and service charges unlike blocks of flats.

Old_Git

there is another option .
First time buyers buy a house ,
second and third time buyers buy a bigger house and bring granny in to live with them .
This can also cut down the need for home helps and carers .

olly300

Old_Git wrote: »

there is another option .
First time buyers buy a house ,
second and third time buyers buy a bigger house and bring granny in to live with them .
This can also cut down the need for home helps and carers .

Except for second and third time buyer to buy their house they need to both go out to work so old person still needs a home help and carer. Plus not everyone gets on enough with their in-laws to wipe their a****.

MrsPBikerChick

Generali wrote: »

The fundamental problem IMHO is that almost no British people are prepared to allow any homes whatsoever to be built within a 10 mile radius of them and will fight tooth and nail to prevent it.

The logical thing to do is create more New Towns. Select some villages with good rail and road links and build 10,000 houses in each (plus schools, shops etc). Trouble is it would take 20 years of court cases and bickering to get to a point where the first digger could move in and the first political party promising to stop 'concreting over the countryside' would win by a landslide.

Until people are prepared to accept that new houses need to be built, not enough houses will be built.

I completely agree, and have you noticed the prime NIMBY culprits tend to be those who've been on the property ladder for years and have got themselves nice big houses? Such types tend to forget that not all home buyers are like them and that smaller properties for the likes of FTB's are needed. Otherwise who will they eventually sell their nice big house to when it comes time for them to, heaven forbid, downsize?

I'm not saying all nice big house owners are like that - not at all - but it's certainly a common characteristic of the main complainers down our way. Winchester is a perfect example - city is suffering because it can't attract young professionals but heaven forbid housing should be built which they can afford! :eek:

Brassedoff

The big question is what do you call affordable homes? Social housing? Lets face it, theres an element within the social housing that should get it re-named anti social housing.

I will also cross the Rubicon, who will the houses be for? My Nephew has a two up, two down house which he owns 80%, the two either side are 100% within the social housing group and are let out to a Polish chap and Lithuanian. And before anyone shouts racist, its not. For years we have had the dire need for housing, yet when we built some in the early to mid 2000's we gave them to economic immigrants. This released no pressure at all. My 24 year old still lives at home and cannot rent because the whoe stock has gone.

Where we live, the local town has in its plan to build 7800 homes, 40% to be social housing, this they have already said will see a substantial proportion going to outsiders from London and the South East as part of the governments plans to spread immigration away from the south east. . You can put 2+2 together. I don't think many cockneys will want to move up to the midlands.

So this leaves another large foreign group. How will that assist our local people who work in the major cities of the West Midlands to get a home in their own area. There's enough car washes and nail bars to count as the largest business sector.

If we are to build new homes, make sure the affordable ones go to the local population that has its roots in the Villages, Towns and City's where they come from, otherwise they will feel dis-enfranchised

Generali

Simply build enough houses for people to live in. The Market is perfectly capable of setting prices.

Sell them to whoever will pay: landlords or owner occupiers.

Brassedoff

Generali wrote: »

Simply build enough houses for people to live in. The Market is perfectly capable of setting prices.

Sell them to whoever will pay: landlords or owner occupiers.

By selling them to private landlords you take that property off the stock list thereby negating any good it could have done. If they are to build them, then selling them to buy-to-let should be banned.

And I am a landlord.