Quote Originally Posted by az_gila View Post
Don't know how you did the commute... even when I lived in LA I only spent 15-25 minutes on the road, going 5 miles one-way... Think of all of the hours you consumed, but it's all personal choice...

----------------------------


Your designer-living comment is interesting, and contrasts with the US which has a completely different approach.
This California govt. presentation is long, but pages 35 + 36 give the US approach.

http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/hrc/plan/h...fd_hsg0506.pdf

Redevelopment must include provisions for low-cost housing.

I find it interesting that with all of the social housing provided in the UK, that redevelopment can ignore it.

Perhaps that says that more social housing isn't really needed in Liverpool?


-----------------

As an architect you might be interested in some of the examples near the end of the linked presentation...
Aw no I was working most of the time (asleep) and not my choice.

Social Housing is definitely needed in Liverpool. 23000 on the waiting list??? I think... maybe. But it doesn't keep pace with the private sector or rather the private sector pricing is running away from it.

The only effective way to get affordable housing in the last two or three governments was via government subsidy ie., people were living in houses they couldn't otherwise afford. It wasn't really 'affordable housing' - it was government subsidised housing and in my view unsustainable for that reason. Central Government was driving up the Public Sector borrowing requirement to meet the acts. Ok, that's going to work long-term...

It'll be interesting to see what's next since the funding has been pulled and council still have responsibilities to provide housing under the Housing Acts.

Me? Look at someone else's work? oh, ok.

[Ok, I looked - don't get me started on the environmental economics of detached houses... and ixnay with the idgesbray]