Jump to content


Photo

An Object Lesson In Why Not To Outsource In National Security.


  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

#41 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,188 posts

Posted 22 October 2018 - 1747 PM

Japan has FAR less arable land and far less horizontal land than the UK does. They seem to make things work AND deal with earthquakes as a risk too.
  • 0

#42 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,180 posts

Posted 22 October 2018 - 1829 PM

One more point to consider is population change.

Japan's population is 1 million less than what it was in 2008. The UK's is 5 million more than what it was in 2008.

Although, with the number of the high rise residence buildings that I have always seen being built in Osaka, the population of Osaka prefecture has been about 8.8 million through the last 20 years thus indicating people are likely changing living dwellings as described in the article.

So if population growth was less in the UK, then probably the housing problem would be less severe or perhaps may not be much of a problem.

Edited by JasonJ, 22 October 2018 - 1830 PM.

  • 0

#43 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,146 posts

Posted 22 October 2018 - 2040 PM

Good point regarding population growth, as from what I gather, the UK in general and London in particular are welcoming and open to immigration from Europe, former colonies, and around the world. Such immigrants will often cluster in urban areas and consequently increase demand for real estate in those areas.


  • 0

#44 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,188 posts

Posted 22 October 2018 - 2149 PM

One more point to consider is population change.

Japan's population is 1 million less than what it was in 2008. The UK's is 5 million more than what it was in 2008.


Was that birth rates? Or immigration?

If it was immigration WHY? Part of government planning on such things should relate to available resources.

Edited by rmgill, 22 October 2018 - 2149 PM.

  • 0

#45 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,180 posts

Posted 22 October 2018 - 2203 PM

Yeah, putting a hold on immigration until the housing industry catches up is probably a good approach to take.
  • 0

#46 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,977 posts

Posted 22 October 2018 - 2207 PM

Here in Vancouver we are constrained by mountains and water. People say increase density, but forget, housing is only part of it, water, sewage, transportation and food all becomes part of the mix. Also once you increase density to a certain point, particularly with a multi-cultural population, things go south. 


  • 0

#47 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,329 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 0212 AM

Its not immigration thats the problem. We had mass migration in the 1950's from the Commonwealth, and we had a council house building boom at the same time. We never ran out of Council housing stock to the degree we now have.

 

I think, and its just a personal view, that many of the problems we have is the private sector look at the Government and say 'You should do that', and the Government look at the private sector and say 'No, thats a private sector job' and consequently it falls through the cracks. Cheap price housing for the new homeowners or the retired is a prime example of this. National infrastructure is another. We havent had a national strategy on infrastructure or housing (and the 2 could and should go hand in hand) since the 1960's. And there is no prospect of their being one either.

 

Yes, migration has exacerbated an existing problem. But in truth, there has been underfinancing of regional authorities since the 1970's, at the same time as there has been a complete lack of oversight of what local authorities are spending the money on.


  • 0

#48 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,345 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 0436 AM

Land availability is a significant issue. Brown field sites represent a somewhat uncertain risk to builders due in part to clearance requirements for contamination, commonly asbestos in existing buildings.

Greenfield sites are easier to build on, but planning consent for large developments is onerous and time consuming, and can even escalate to Secretary of State level, which can take years.

A lot of unexploited land is inaccessible - Scotland north of about Perth, for example, or protected, something like I understand the way US National Parks are protected, and some is military.

With land costs being significant, housebuilders tend to produce premium housing with a small footprint, in regions where there is a market. Banks require 25%+ deposits and charge 5% over base rate. Negative equity falls on the purchader, not the lender - you can't hand over the keys and walk away debt-free.

And on...

BTW, last house price reports show SE relatively static, with growth in the more traditionally depressed areas, like Wales. There us some evidence that people are cashing in on expensive SE properties to retire early to the regions.
  • 0

#49 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,776 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 0642 AM

As I said in other topic, if you want affordable housing that will not put people in heavy debt for 25 years - only solution are brutalist concrete monstrosities.


  • 0

#50 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,329 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 0709 AM

Been there, done that. :)

 


  • 0

#51 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,188 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 0835 AM

Its not immigration thats the problem. We had mass migration in the 1950's from the Commonwealth, and we had a council house building boom at the same time. We never ran out of Council housing stock to the degree we now have.


They were commonwealth however and saw themselves as British subjects didn't they? What do the new immigrants see themselves as?


I think, and its just a personal view, that many of the problems we have is the private sector look at the Government and say 'You should do that', and the Government look at the private sector and say 'No, thats a private sector job' and consequently it falls through the cracks.


Well if there's money to be made doing in the private sector someone will do it. But if your regulations make it so difficult to do that they can't make money. Don't expect someone business man to outlay millions of £ for zero gain.
  • 0

#52 Dark_Falcon

Dark_Falcon

    The Stryker's Friend

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,275 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 0855 AM

As I said in other topic, if you want affordable housing that will not put people in heavy debt for 25 years - only solution are brutalist concrete monstrosities.

 

Concrete can be used without brutalism: The key is the proper amount of ornamentation and humanizing structural design.  I can't quantify this exactly, since its based on feeling, but I'm certain its something that can be done with imagination.


Edited by Dark_Falcon, 23 October 2018 - 0859 AM.

  • 0

#53 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,776 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 0917 AM

Ornamentation - more money.
I would rather live in the bare concrete affordable and well made tower than in good looking shit that is gonna get wracked in the first natural disaster.

Edited by bojan, 23 October 2018 - 1535 PM.

  • 0

#54 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,329 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 0936 AM

Here, we have managed to do the worst of both worlds. We built cheap shit, which is at least fireproof, then ruin the safety by making it look pretty.


  • 0

#55 JWB

JWB

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,688 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 1108 AM

As I said in other topic, if you want affordable housing that will not put people in heavy debt for 25 years - only solution are brutalist concrete monstrosities.

Or you can go tiny pre-fab:


  • 0

#56 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,345 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 1122 AM

We have "park homes" - as per "Trailer Park". In the South East, these are cheaper than normal houses... but they can still be above 4x the national average family income.


  • 0

#57 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,188 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 1128 AM

 

As I said in other topic, if you want affordable housing that will not put people in heavy debt for 25 years - only solution are brutalist concrete monstrosities.

 

Concrete can be used without brutalism: The key is the proper amount of ornamentation and humanizing structural design.  I can't quantify this exactly, since its based on feeling, but I'm certain its something that can be done with imagination.

 

fallingwater-831x624.jpg


artmuseum.jpg


Edited by rmgill, 23 October 2018 - 1129 AM.

  • 0

#58 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,329 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 1131 AM

I believe they have only just clear the last prefabs on the outskirts of Bristol, which would have been thrown up fairly soon after WW2 to cover the houses lost in the Blitz. For temporary housing that is incredibly good value, and actually exceeded some of the council houses built at the time. My Grandfathers council house, erected in the 1950's, was demolished a good 25 years ago.

 

They have one erected at Duxford museum, and I had a look around one. I can see why my father so well regarded the one his aunt had, they were incredibly well designed for the time.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 23 October 2018 - 1133 AM.

  • 0

#59 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,188 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 1140 AM

If you need housing for Hundreds of thousands then make more prefabs. It beats having them live 5 to a room in a shed behind someone's Edwardian home.
  • 0

#60 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,345 posts

Posted 23 October 2018 - 1155 AM

They build bricks and mortar quickly enough - they're mostly timber-framed and brick-clad now, with plasterboard interior walls. A problem is getting to the point where they can lay the first stone, as it were. And as I noted above, once they've gone to the effort, the return on premium properties is better, so they don't build the ticky-tacky boxes the way you suggest.


  • 0