Ah, the hunt for affordable housing. It’s like looking for a needle in a haystack, but with worse odds. Especially in London, where they need a whopping 83,000 new homes per year but are only building half that. And let’s be real, the housing shortage isn’t hitting the elite, who have more than enough money to buy a house that costs more than our entire lifetime earnings. No, the struggle is in the cheaper end of the market, anything less than £450 per square foot. It’s like trying to find a unicorn, but at least unicorns are cute and magical.

Now, you might think that if they just built upwards, they could fit more people on less land. I mean, it works in skyscraper-filled cities like New York and Seoul, so why not London? And don’t even get me started on the fact that only 6% of land in Britain is even built on. But here’s the catch: tall buildings cost a pretty penny. And by pretty penny, I mean an arm, a leg, and possibly our firstborn child. The value of land has risen by over a third in the past ten years, and the cost of building materials skyrocketed in just three years. Plus, maintenance ain’t cheap, and let’s not forget about the elevators that are more expensive than our yearly rent.

And God forbid anything goes wrong with these towers, because not only is there a risk of cladding that might end up murdering people, but the cost of fixing a towering disaster is often so ridiculous that demolishing the whole thing is the cheaper option. Plus, London’s built almost entirely on clay, which means those buildings are prone to cracking and damage, making them the equivalent of Jenga towers but with actual human lives at stake.

Then there are those pesky affordable housing quotas that weigh on developers like a ton of bricks. Because who needs to help normal people who don’t have a trust fund, right? Developers are getting tired of being told what to do with their millions, and so they’re turning more and more residential sites into commercial ones or putting new buildings only in areas with higher property values. Because why build affordable housing when you can build a gym, a private cinema, and a rooftop lounge that buyers will probably never use?

And even when high-rise buildings do succeed, they often do so by sidestepping affordability targets in favour of cash handouts that promise to build cheap homes elsewhere. But let’s be real, those promises are usually only as empty as an abandoned high-rise apartment. Buyers are often investors who leave flats empty, and affordable housing is left as an afterthought.

But fear not, there is a silver lining. Mid-rise mansion blocks can be just as effective at creating greater density, and they don’t cost an arm and a leg. One area in London, Maida Vale, is the densest square kilometre in Britain, thanks to its mid-rise buildings between five and ten storeys high. It’s no Hong Kong, but it’s a start. But even mid-rise buildings have to overcome one major obstacle: Britons’ cultural dislike of flats. Who needs to live in a flat when you can have a whole house to yourself, right? Plus, there’s that whole privacy and unsuitability for children thing.

In conclusion, the hunt for affordable housing continues to be a wild goose chase. The pandemic may have prompted the conversion of some offices into residential property, but it barely dents the housing shortage that England is facing. Developers are fed up with being told to create affordable housing. And let’s not forget the Britons’ cultural dislike of flats. It seems we’re all doomed to live in our childhood bedrooms forever. Here’s to hoping our parents don’t turn them into home gyms.