Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Haringey 3rd highest loss of houses from conversion to flats over last four years
Whilst my interpretation of this data needs checking, the Focus on London report, appears to show that Haringey is experiencing some of the highest levels of conversions of houses to flats in the capital. (See Table 11 on page 161 of the chapter on Housing from the Focus on London report).
As some of us are beginning to look more deeply at conversions in Harringay, it raises the question in my mind of why this is happening in our borough. Are there good social or economic reasons or is something else driving these stats?
As some of us are beginning to look more deeply at conversions in Harringay, it raises the question in my mind of why this is happening in our borough. Are there good social or economic reasons or is something else driving these stats?
Tags for Forum Posts: hmo, hmos, housing, illegal conversion
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Stephen, I also get a bit narked about the use of the term "family" homes. Over the last few years my family home has consisted of;
- 2 men and two kids
- 2 men, 1 kid and 1 cat
- 2 men and 1 cat
Don't think that's the kind of family the term is meant to encompass!
-
Permalink Reply by Liz on
-
Having worked for years in the education service in Camden, I can assure you that the term 'family' is a very loose one that does not mean 2.4 kids. The family is simply the easiest way to refer to a variety of circumstances. It may be loaded with judgement in the pages of the Daily Mail, but ordinarily, it is simply shorthand.
It can be single parent, grandparents bringing up kids, extended family, gay couples bringing up kids, you name it but the point is a group of people who are living together as a 'unit' with certain expectations about the amount of space and privacy that each person gets.
I know that there are families in the local area that are bringing up kids in cramped conditions because that is all they can afford. I also know there are kids who are forced to move around a lot from temporary flat to temporary flat because of a shortage of decent housing. As Alan says, this affects their mental and physical health and their ability to do well in school. The types of conversion that we are witnessing around here are almost always splitting the houses into a warren of single bedsits (being the most profitable use), not suitable for a family group (whatever its make up) but in which they nevertheless end up.
-
Permalink Reply by Alison P on
-
Most of what I want to say has already been said; the need for a mix of housing types, for good quality housing, and for proper enforcement of the planning law.
My first flat was a okayish conversion in Stroud Green; that is what I could afford, I wanted to live on my own, and couldn't possibly afford the rents that were required (I know this sounds like a complete joke now!). Lots of people couldn't possibly afford to buy a house in Harringay (us included, were we buying now) so I can't see any decline in the demand for flats, and I don't have a problem with that so long as we aren't talking about the rubbishy four-'studio'-hutches-per-house that we all know and loathe. Bascially I think it is up to Haringey; they need to be far far stricter in enforcing the law about conversions - there have been enough already and now it should stop.
I'm interested as well in the fact that Haringey isn't alone in suffering from this; the worst borough is actually Lambeth (who have lost 451 houses and gained 1346 flats in four years - roughly 3 flats per house). This compares with Haringey's 223/687 - again, about 3 flats per house). The other borough with a really high conversion rate is Croydon. I don't know much about either; are there any useful parallels?
As an aside, I'm sure I read somewhere that developers completely over-estimated the need for small flats and there are now not enough 'family homes' (for want of a better word) and too many new build flats. Whether that is true here I don't know.
-
-
Reading the report its saying two things. Development is moving toward more and more flats. A first look this would seem to be in response to a greater need for flats from an increase in smaller households BUT the report also says:-
As with homelessness, overcrowding remains a significant problem in London and so far does not seem to have been significantly affected by the slump in the housing market. According to the latest estimates for three years to 2006/07, around 200 thousand London households were overcrowded, almost seven per cent of all households, and around 50 thousand higher than the level of the mid-1990s. London had by far the highest regional rate of overcrowding in England, with just two per cent of households overcrowded in the English regions outside London. In London, overcrowding is most prevalent in social housing with 12.2 per cent of households overcrowded, compared with 2.7 per cent of owner occupiers and 10.5 per cent of private renters, although the latter figure has grown rapidly in recent years (my bold)
So the underlying story is that London is getting more and more small units while more people in the private rented sector are living in overcrowded conditions. So its not about responding to need, its about responding to what people can afford, which is small, cramped and overpriced flats. The trend to smaller homes is the cause of the problem, not the response to it.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
And let's not forget overcrowding in the public rented and Housing Association sectors. Which includes a lack of larger homes for larger families*. It can inflict damage on family relationships; and people's physical and mental health. It reaches into the future, often with an impact on children's and young people's education.
For me at least, this underlined my revulsion at those MPs who exploited the expenses rules with their second and third homes.
___________
(* Widely defined :-)
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
