Alternative housing in London: Three examples from one south London

neighbourhood

Kath Scanlon and Melissa FernandezLSE London

14 April 2015

Before looking at alternatives…

What is standard London housing?

• Dwelling types: half houses, half flats

• Age: 40% built before 1900 (mostly in inner London)

• Outer London—spike in 1930s

• Tenure: 48% owner occupation; 24% social housing; 26% private rental

• Built by speculative builders (private) or local authority or housing association (social)

An idea of prices

Average dwelling price (London-wide)£356,054 = €493,190

Median private rent (London-wide)£1300/month = €1800

One- or two-bedroom flat, furnished

The current model

• High demand for housing (strong economy; demand from both local residents and overseas investors; population growth and immigration) →

• High house prices, which should →

• New supply – but does it work? Mayoral target: 42,000 new homes/year. Last actual: 17,930 completions.

Why not?• Planning constraints (green belt etc)• Local political and public opposition to new construction• Dominance of a few large house builders

What’s ‘Alternative housing’, and can it help?

Alternative logics, models and practices that

• Recognise the inadequacies of current market offer;• Challenge dominant forms of provision by offering

something complementary – or something disruptive

Includes

• Experimental , life-style and utopian schemes (e.g., co-housing and self-build)

• Technical solutions (e.g., live-work units and flat-pack housing)

The policy context

In London

• 'Build Your Own Home – the London Way’

• 2013-15: HCA ‘Community Right to Build’

Nationally• Funding for self-build• Guidance for councils• Modified tax regime• Using modular pre-fab• Housing Zone prospectus

One example: Walters Way, south London

Features: • Simple ‘flat pack’

construction method

• 13 homes self-built by eventual owner-occupiers

• Based on standard units of construction materials so easy to modify

1980s project, designed byWalter Segal

Walters Way

But…• Timber frame construction

viewed as flimsy in Britain• Dwellings built with

unconventional techniques can be difficult to mortgage

• Local authority supported/organized this scheme and a couple of others nearby, but institutional memory of innovation is now lost

2nd example: Artists’ live/work community

Havelock Walk, Forest Hill, south LondonFeatures: • entire street of properties that combine

living and working space for artists• Grew organically over 10+ years from

original foothold by sculptor• Now established artists’ neighbourhood

that has had ripple effects across the area

But…• Development done in spite of council

opposition• Popularity of the scheme means new units

now cost £1 million plus—too much for most artists

3rd example: Co-housing community for older people

Featherstone Lodge, Forest Hill, south London

‘intentional communities… created and run by their residents. Each household has a self-contained, personal and private home but residents come together to manage their community, share activities, eat together. Cohousing is a way of combating the alienation and isolation many experience today, recreating the neighbourly support of a village or city quarter in the past’

(UK Co-housing network)

An ongoing process

Our research into one scheme

Located in Forest Hill, South London

Began in 2011 after Housing Association bought the land/site [site-first]

Senior (50+) group, mainly single women

Long process: - just got planning permission—start-

finish minimum 5 years- Cost uncertainty and fluctuation

Issues

• Finding a site and high cost of land (for developers and groups): difficult to compete with commercial providers; need improved access to finance

• Newness of the endeavor leads to misunderstandings in relationships with Housing Association & Local Authorities; so greater knowledge needed

Lessons

Alternative housing models could contribute to supply, although at the moment they are marginal. More empirical work is needed to understand what makes them successful.

Need to rethink current valuation of housing and more bottom-up resident and community participation.