Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Michael Bach

Recent activity

Comments (13)

  • Comment on: Chipperfield’s Munich housing block proposal revealed

    Michael Bach's comment 15 October, 2018 1:36 pm

    Well at least it looks like housing and fits into its setting, unlike One Kensington Gardens which looks like a car park and is totally alien to its setting.

  • Comment on: Emma Dent Coad: ‘Grenfell changed everything forever’

    Michael Bach's comment 19 June, 2018 5:57 pm

    Grenfell should be a game changer, not just for construction and management of social housing, but for creating a new social contract/covenant between local authorities and their residents. Residents now want to be involved in decisions that affect their lives and want a place at the table in co-designing new housing.

  • Comment on: Zero-carbon homes set to be reintroduced

    Michael Bach's comment 28 April, 2016 8:34 am

    The Government is committed to reversing their defeats in the Lords - don't hold your breath

  • Comment on: Why can’t we identify sites where towers would be suitable?

    Michael Bach's comment 13 April, 2016 8:30 am

    That is exactly what Westminster City Council did - but they are now giving "mixed messages" by encouraging tall buildings that depart from their own development plan - Paddington and now West End Green.

    Robert Davies has done a U-turn from being an original signatory to the Skyline Campaign to buying the idea that tall buildings are a sign of growth and Westminster needs more of that!

    This not the policy clarity and consistency that you are advocating!

  • Comment on: Fears over move to make office-to-resi rights permanent

    Michael Bach's comment 14 October, 2015 11:58 am

    Lee, you are very mixed up and cannot be bothered by the facts.

    The planning system in London has been delivering the permissions sought by the development industry, but it cannot make them build the housing. There are currently permission for some 270,000 homes which developers are just sitting. The planning system is not stopping these being built, including the redevelopment and conversion of secondary offices no longer suitable for offices. Before the Government's intervention the planning system was delivering up to 4,000 units a year from this source. The PD rights to turn any offices - whether vacant or occupied - has not yet produced much additional supply in London, but it has led to speculative emptying of office space, especially space for small businesses.

    You acknowledge that we need more office space. Indeed the Government - with their "planning" hat on - requires local authorities to plan for the "objectively assessed need" for offices. Meanwhile they are encouraging change of use to housing - a one-way trip - which has significantly reduced the supply to extremely low vacancy rates in some parts of London. The latest change, apart from those areas that will keep their exemption until 2019, will further reduce the supply of office space. Since the NPPF proposes that offices should be in town centres or close to public transport interchanges, how will we get replacement space let alone new offices if we we unpack our town centres.

    A free-for-all to turn everything into housing is bad news! We do need to build more housing. Why not ask the question "why are house builders not building enough housing"?

View all comments