Brighton is 5th least affordable city in UK

[Guinness Boy]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...st-and-least-affordable-cities-in-the-UK.html

Brighton is officially the fifth least affordable city in the UK with an average house being effectively 8 times more expensive than the average income. Those bemoaning the effect on our town of landlords, students and the DFLs it's only going to get worse. How the heck are kids born here supposed to be able to stay here?

 

[Titanic]

Build more houses? but where??

 

[Notters]

Surprised it's that far down the list TBH.

 

[mikeyjh]

I'm surprised it's only 5th to be honest - Incredibly expensive property and local salaries that are probably lower that average. Hate to think what disposable incomes some people living in the city have to deal with....

 

[Blackadder]

Truro surprised me, being so high.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Build more houses? but where??

I think that's one of the problems. Hills on one side, sea on the other, houses already to the other. Do these government subsidy schemes take in to account if you are local to a city? They should do.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Build more houses? but where??

Toads Hole Valley? 700 homes

http://www.toadsholevalley.co.uk/the-project.html

 

[somerset]

....... and local salaries that are probably lower that average.

Where did you get this little nugget of information,......?

 

[somerset]

Surprised it's that far down the list TBH.

I think its about right,.... but it is within an hour of the Capital, the two biggest airports in the country and several channel ports..... that all comes at a price.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Toads Hole Valley? 700 homes

http://www.toadsholevalley.co.uk/the-project.html

What about razing Withdean Stadium? Should please the more vocal residents there....

 

[Titanic]

Toads Hole Valley? 700 homes

http://www.toadsholevalley.co.uk/the-project.html

That is the sort of thing, but 700 is peanuts... it needs to be 5,000+ to make a difference.

 

[albion534]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...st-and-least-affordable-cities-in-the-UK.html

Brighton is officially the fifth least affordable city in the UK with an average house being effectively 8 times more expensive than the average income. Those bemoaning the effect on our town of landlords, students and the DFLs it's only going to get worse. How the heck are kids born here supposed to be able to stay here?

im 25, and about to move in with my brother and his girlfriend who are buying a house, shes just sold her flat and theyre getting an upgrade

unless i come into some major money....i.e winning the lottery without ever buying a ticket, i have no idea if i will ever own a property, the prices are stupid, i can barely afford rent and child maintenance and drive to work each month, let alone have a mortgage on top

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

Truro surprised me, being so high.

I think it's more that you earn absolutely naff all in Cornwall rather than property being particularly expensive...

 

[Guinness Boy]

Truro surprised me, being so high.

I think it's more that you earn absolutely naff all in Cornwall rather than property being particularly expensive...

It's work in tourism or nothing. Plus the tourism, with its celebrity chefs and second home owning Londoners also drives the house prices up.

 

[ozzygull]

It is massively more expensive then Reading. I was looking to see what I could afford if I was to sell my house in Reading and move to Brighton. I would go from a four bedroom detached house and would lucky to get a 2 bed flat. And it is not just the centre, If I was looking for a similar house in Hangleton for example, would be looking at a £200,000 more. Crazy, I may have to wait until I retire before moving back so that I can afford to down size.

 

[The Large One]

That is the sort of thing, but 700 is peanuts... it needs to be 5,000+ to make a difference.

The City Council has said it needs 16-20,000 new homes, but has only identified enough sites for 11,500.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Where are the main sites for the 11,500? I can only think of Mile Oak as a possibility.

 

[Pevenseagull]

It's work in tourism or nothing. Plus the tourism, with its celebrity chefs and second home owning Londoners also drives the house prices up.

plus the number of second homes reduces the need for infrastructure so there's less work to do

 

[Titanic]

The City Council has said it needs 16-20,000 new homes, but has only identified enough sites for 11,500.

It needs a radical approach, a sea change in thinking, to make that sort of development happen. Sadly I doubt our 'politicians' are up to the challenge.

 

[Machiavelli]

This is all part of an long running trend, and is what happens when housing policy merely encourages market forces. One policy that would have a real effect would be a land value tax, which will act as a disincentive/exorbitant cost for over popular sites (rates on Oxford Street in London, or Churchill Square in Brighton, for instance, would rise substantially), and act as an incentive for people to move into those un- and under-occupied housing that litter so many parts of the country -- mainly those de-industrialised areas. A Land Value Tax has long been a Green Party policy, so Westdene Seagull will no doubt think it's a dreadful idea, but Labour are increasingly warming to the idea under Miliband, and I wouldn't be surprised if they put it into their forthcoming election manifesto.