New forms of high density affordable housing are often advocated as a response to current policy concerns related to housing shortages, containing suburban sprawl, and the desire to promote an ‘urban renaissance’ in some cities.
More recent research was released in April. The full report, Residents' views of new forms of high-density affordable living by Joanne Bretherton and Nicholas Pleace, is published for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation by the Chartered Institute of Housing (price £14.95) This study explored residents’ views about living in new affordable higher density housing and how far residents’ expectations of living in high-density developments were met. In particular it explores: reasons for moving in; the impact of architecture and design; community cohesion, including integration across tenures; crime and antisocial behaviour; the impact of the surrounding neighbourhood; future housing aspirations, including whether residents wanted to move; housing management; affordability.

About the project:

The research included a survey of 240 residents in eight new housing schemes; focus groups and interviews with residents in those schemes; residents' seven-day 'diaries' on their use and perception of their homes; and interviews with housing managers and developers. The case studies were located in England and Scotland – three in London, one in north-west England, two in south-east England, one in the south of England and one in Scotland. They were diverse and varied in size, design, density, and the percentage of affordable housing and tenure mix. While the eight case studies were broadly comparable in many respects, they had a variety of design, ethos and purpose. Various key points are exposed:

• Residents often reported that they did not feel that they lived at 'high densities', even though this was the case. They appreciated the innovative architecture and design that offered a sense of space and light within the homes.
• Low cost home ownership (LCHO) respondents sometimes struggled to pay the cumulative costs of mortgage, rent and service charges. Some social rented tenants also found it hard to make ends meet.
• Both owner occupiers and LCHO respondents felt that the scheme was made a less desirable place to live because of the presence of social rented tenants. Conversely, social rented tenants and LCHO respondents felt stigmatised within schemes where their homes were physically separate from 'market price' owner occupied housing.
• The schemes had introduced greater socio-economic diversity into the areas where they were situated, but they were not always well integrated within those areas. Residents often reported feeling 'separate' from their neighbourhood. And although they felt safe in their developments, they often felt threatened by the surrounding neighbourhood.
• Many of the residents felt housing management and maintenance were unsatisfactory and expensive.
• Most residents either intended or wanted to move. This was usually because of the area in which the scheme was situated, rather than the scheme itself.

The research suggests that the Government objective of delivering more affordable homes in mixed communities will only succeed if close attention is paid to their management, how 'affordable' they are for LCHO residents, and the placement of the affordable properties within the scheme. The development also has to fit correctly within the surrounding neighbourhood and community.

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

Forum Questions:

Do you agree that location, space and cost are the key issues?

Isn’t it time we applied the SMART car thinking to housing?

Can new high density developments ever provide an affordable, attractive place to live?

Do you have anything to say about this?

Email: housing@tspltd.co.uk

Visit Building Specification.com for the latest Building News, Product Features and Articles