Mixed tenure development - Revision history

Editor at 08:18, 26 April 2021

2021-04-26T08:18:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:18, 26 April 2021
Line 5:		Line 5:
	It is thought by some that this mixing of people from different socio-economic backgrounds creates more diverse, cohesive and interesting communities and helps to improve social mobility. It can also be used as a policy to compel developers of private housing to make some provision of social housing.		It is thought by some that this mixing of people from different socio-economic backgrounds creates more diverse, cohesive and interesting communities and helps to improve social mobility. It can also be used as a policy to compel developers of private housing to make some provision of social housing.

−	Mixed tenure development became common in the ~~1970's~~, providing an alternative to uniform estates or 'mono-tenure developments' which were thought to segregate socio-economic groups and to create deprived ghettos. It has subsequently been encouraged by successive governments through policies such as the right to buy and right to acquire and through the use of section 106 agreements requiring that developers build a proportion of new housing as 'affordable housing', that is, '...social rented housing, affordable rented housing and intermediate housing, provided to eligible households whose needs are not met by the market' (Ref National Planning Policy Framework)	+	Mixed tenure development became common in the 1970s, providing an alternative to uniform estates or 'mono-tenure developments' which were thought to segregate socio-economic groups and to create deprived ghettos. It has subsequently been encouraged by successive governments through policies such as the right to buy and right to acquire and through the use of section 106 agreements requiring that developers build a proportion of new housing as 'affordable housing', that is, '...social rented housing, affordable rented housing and intermediate housing, provided to eligible households whose needs are not met by the market' (Ref National Planning Policy Framework)

	However, mixed tenure developments are seen by others as an attempt at social engineering, forcing people to live in community groups they would not themselves choose. It is also seen by criticised for allowing the government to avoid providing council housing, and as a way of hiding poverty by simply dispersing it, rather than dealing with the causes.		However, mixed tenure developments are seen by others as an attempt at social engineering, forcing people to live in community groups they would not themselves choose. It is also seen by criticised for allowing the government to avoid providing council housing, and as a way of hiding poverty by simply dispersing it, rather than dealing with the causes.
Line 19:		Line 19:
	* The boom of the private rented sector and buy to let has changed the anticipated tenure mix.		* The boom of the private rented sector and buy to let has changed the anticipated tenure mix.

−	In 2012, [http://~~www~~.~~cih~~.~~org/resources/PDF/Scotland%20Policy%20Pdfs~~/~~Mixed%20Tenure~~/~~Mixed%20tenure%20report%20September%202012~~.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], a briefing paper published by The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, found that mixed tenure developments accounted for a greater proportion of affordable housing investment than had ever been the case previously, and that mixed tenure developments were an essential component in achieving balanced and sustainable communities.	+	In 2012, [http://urbanrim.org.uk/cache/Clarke-mixed-tenure-report.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], a briefing paper published by The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, found that mixed tenure developments accounted for a greater proportion of affordable housing investment than had ever been the case previously, and that mixed tenure developments were an essential component in achieving balanced and sustainable communities.

	It reported little evidence of purchaser reluctance to buy property on mixed tenure developments, and found shared equity had been a particularly popular option for first time buyers. However, it suggested that a 'tenure blind' approach to design was crucial, and that there remained challenges around owners' expectations for managing anti-social behaviour caused by, or perceived to be caused by social housing tenants.		It reported little evidence of purchaser reluctance to buy property on mixed tenure developments, and found shared equity had been a particularly popular option for first time buyers. However, it suggested that a 'tenure blind' approach to design was crucial, and that there remained challenges around owners' expectations for managing anti-social behaviour caused by, or perceived to be caused by social housing tenants.

−	~~= Find out more =~~	+	= Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki. =
−		+
−	=== Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki. ===	+

	* Affordable housing.		* Affordable housing.
Line 37:		Line 35:
	* Smart cities.		* Smart cities.

−	=== External references ===	+	= External references =

	* [http://urbanrim.org.uk/mixed%20tenure.htm Mixed Tenure housing development, Brian Williams, 2009].		* [http://urbanrim.org.uk/mixed%20tenure.htm Mixed Tenure housing development, Brian Williams, 2009].
−	* [http://~~www~~.~~cih~~.~~org/resources/PDF/Scotland%20Policy%20Pdfs~~/~~Mixed%20Tenure~~/~~Mixed%20tenure%20report%20September%202012~~.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, 2012.	+	* [http://urbanrim.org.uk/cache/Clarke-mixed-tenure-report.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, 2012.
	* Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66. NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, 28 September 2015.		* Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66. NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, 28 September 2015.

	[[Category:DCN_Definition]] [[Category:DCN_Guidance]] [[Category:DCN_Policy]] [[Category:Policy]] [[Category:Property_development]]		[[Category:DCN_Definition]] [[Category:DCN_Guidance]] [[Category:DCN_Policy]] [[Category:Policy]] [[Category:Property_development]]

Designing Buildings at 06:09, 7 October 2020

2020-10-07T06:09:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:09, 7 October 2020
Line 43:		Line 43:
	* Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66. NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, 28 September 2015.		* Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66. NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, 28 September 2015.

−	[[Category:~~Policy~~]] [[Category:DCN_Policy]] [[Category:Property_development]]	+	[[Category:DCN_Definition]] [[Category:DCN_Guidance]] [[Category:DCN_Policy]] [[Category:Policy]] [[Category:Property_development]]

Designing Buildings at 12:32, 12 July 2016

2016-07-12T12:32:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:32, 12 July 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	The term 'mixed tenure development', sometimes referred to as 'integrated housing' or 'tenure integration', describes an urban planning strategy in which poorer and more affluent residents live in a mixed community.

−	The term ‘mixed tenure development', sometimes referred to as ‘integrated housing’ or ‘tenure integration’, describes an urban planning strategy in which poorer and more affluent residents live in a mixed community.	+	At its most basic level this may simply involve developing neighbourhoods in which some streets are intended for owner occupiers, and others for social housing. However, more diverse mixed tenure developments might adopt a 'pepper-potting' approach in which social housing is 'randomly' sprinkled throughout privately-owned housing.
−		+
−	At its most basic level this may simply involve developing neighbourhoods in which some streets are intended for owner occupiers, and others for social housing. However, more diverse mixed tenure developments might adopt a ~~‘pepper~~-~~potting’~~ approach in which social housing is 'randomly' sprinkled throughout privately-owned housing.	+

	It is thought by some that this mixing of people from different socio-economic backgrounds creates more diverse, cohesive and interesting communities and helps to improve social mobility. It can also be used as a policy to compel developers of private housing to make some provision of social housing.		It is thought by some that this mixing of people from different socio-economic backgrounds creates more diverse, cohesive and interesting communities and helps to improve social mobility. It can also be used as a policy to compel developers of private housing to make some provision of social housing.

−	Mixed tenure development became common in the ~~1970’s~~, providing an alternative to uniform estates or ~~‘mono~~-tenure ~~developments’~~ which were thought to segregate socio-economic groups and to create deprived ghettos. It has subsequently been encouraged by successive governments through policies such as the right to buy and right to acquire and through the use of section 106 agreements requiring that developers build a proportion of new housing as ~~‘affordable housing’~~, that is, ‘...social rented housing, affordable rented housing and intermediate housing, provided to eligible households whose needs are not met by the ~~market’~~ (Ref National Planning Policy Framework)	+	Mixed tenure development became common in the 1970's, providing an alternative to uniform estates or 'mono-tenure developments' which were thought to segregate socio-economic groups and to create deprived ghettos. It has subsequently been encouraged by successive governments through policies such as the right to buy and right to acquire and through the use of section 106 agreements requiring that developers build a proportion of new housing as 'affordable housing', that is, '...social rented housing, affordable rented housing and intermediate housing, provided to eligible households whose needs are not met by the market' (Ref National Planning Policy Framework)

	However, mixed tenure developments are seen by others as an attempt at social engineering, forcing people to live in community groups they would not themselves choose. It is also seen by criticised for allowing the government to avoid providing council housing, and as a way of hiding poverty by simply dispersing it, rather than dealing with the causes.		However, mixed tenure developments are seen by others as an attempt at social engineering, forcing people to live in community groups they would not themselves choose. It is also seen by criticised for allowing the government to avoid providing council housing, and as a way of hiding poverty by simply dispersing it, rather than dealing with the causes.
Line 12:		Line 11:
	Some owner-occupiers believe that mixed tenures reduce the value of their property, and there can be conflict between people from different backgrounds who may have different behavioural expectations.		Some owner-occupiers believe that mixed tenures reduce the value of their property, and there can be conflict between people from different backgrounds who may have different behavioural expectations.

−	In September 2015, the NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, published ~~[http://www.nhbcfoundation.org/Publications/Research-Review/Tenure-integration-in-housing-developments-NF66~~ Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66]. This literature review considered the success of different approaches to mixed-tenure developments, finding that:	+	In September 2015, the NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, published 'Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66'. This literature review considered the success of different approaches to mixed-tenure developments, finding that:
−	*Financing is the main barrier to mixed tenure development.	+
−	*If the design and quality of the overall development is to a high standard, property prices are not necessarily affected.	+	* Financing is the main barrier to mixed tenure development.
−	*A wider range of typologies and unit sizes enables people to move from one type to another and so stabilises neighbourhoods.	+	* If the design and quality of the overall development is to a high standard, property prices are not necessarily affected.
−	*Management structures and costs should be agreed before building commences.	+	* A wider range of typologies and unit sizes enables people to move from one type to another and so stabilises neighbourhoods.
−	*The boom of the private rented sector and buy to let has changed the anticipated tenure mix.	+	* Management structures and costs should be agreed before building commences.
		+	* The boom of the private rented sector and buy to let has changed the anticipated tenure mix.

	In 2012, [http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Scotland%20Policy%20Pdfs/Mixed%20Tenure/Mixed%20tenure%20report%20September%202012.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], a briefing paper published by The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, found that mixed tenure developments accounted for a greater proportion of affordable housing investment than had ever been the case previously, and that mixed tenure developments were an essential component in achieving balanced and sustainable communities.		In 2012, [http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Scotland%20Policy%20Pdfs/Mixed%20Tenure/Mixed%20tenure%20report%20September%202012.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], a briefing paper published by The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, found that mixed tenure developments accounted for a greater proportion of affordable housing investment than had ever been the case previously, and that mixed tenure developments were an essential component in achieving balanced and sustainable communities.

−	It reported little evidence of purchaser reluctance to buy property on mixed tenure developments, and found shared equity had been a particularly popular option for first time buyers. However, it suggested that a ~~‘tenure blind’~~ approach to design was crucial, and that there remained challenges around ~~owners’~~ expectations for managing anti-social behaviour caused by, or perceived to be caused by social housing tenants.	+	It reported little evidence of purchaser reluctance to buy property on mixed tenure developments, and found shared equity had been a particularly popular option for first time buyers. However, it suggested that a 'tenure blind' approach to design was crucial, and that there remained challenges around owners' expectations for managing anti-social behaviour caused by, or perceived to be caused by social housing tenants.

	= Find out more =		= Find out more =

	=== Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki. ===		=== Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki. ===
−	*Affordable housing.	+
−	*Neighbourhood planning.	+	* Affordable housing.
−	*NPPF.	+	* Neighbourhood planning.
−	*Pepper-potting.	+	* NPPF.
−	*Rent to buy.	+	* Pepper-potting.
−	*Right to acquire.	+	* Rent to buy.
−	*Right to buy.	+	* Right to acquire.
−	*Section 106 agreement.	+	* Right to buy.
−	*Smart cities.	+	* Section 106 agreement.
		+	* Smart cities.

	=== External references ===		=== External references ===
−	*[http://urbanrim.org.uk/mixed%20tenure.htm Mixed Tenure housing development, Brian Williams, 2009].
−	*[http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Scotland%20Policy%20Pdfs/Mixed%20Tenure/Mixed%20tenure%20report%20September%202012.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, 2012.
−	*[http://www.nhbcfoundation.org/Publications/Research-Review/Tenure-integration-in-housing-developments-NF66 Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66]. NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, 28 September 2015.

−	[[Category:Policy]]	+	* [http://urbanrim.org.uk/mixed%20tenure.htm Mixed Tenure housing development, Brian Williams, 2009].
−	[[Category:Property_development]]	+	* [http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Scotland%20Policy%20Pdfs/Mixed%20Tenure/Mixed%20tenure%20report%20September%202012.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, 2012.
		+	* Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66. NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, 28 September 2015.
		+
		+	[[Category:Policy]] [[Category:DCN_Policy]] [[Category:Property_development]]

Designing Buildings at 10:23, 2 October 2015

2015-10-02T10:23:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:23, 2 October 2015
Line 30:		Line 30:
	*NPPF.		*NPPF.
	*Pepper-potting.		*Pepper-potting.
		+	*Rent to buy.
	*Right to acquire.		*Right to acquire.
	*Right to buy.		*Right to buy.

Designing Buildings at 10:19, 2 October 2015

2015-10-02T10:19:16Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:19, 2 October 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:

−	The term ‘mixed ~~tenure’~~ development, sometimes referred to as ‘integrated housing’, or ‘tenure integration’ describes an urban planning strategy in which poorer and more affluent residents live in a mixed community.	+	The term ‘mixed tenure development', sometimes referred to as ‘integrated housing’ or ‘tenure integration’, describes an urban planning strategy in which poorer and more affluent residents live in a mixed community.

−	At its most basic level it may simply involve developing neighbourhoods ~~with~~ some streets intended for owner occupiers, and ~~other~~ for social housing. ~~More~~ diverse mixed tenure developments might adopt a ‘pepper-potting’ approach ~~through the ‘sprinkling’ of~~ social housing ~~amongst~~ privately-owned housing.	+	At its most basic level this may simply involve developing neighbourhoods in which some streets are intended for owner occupiers, and others for social housing. However, more diverse mixed tenure developments might adopt a ‘pepper-potting’ approach in which social housing is 'randomly' sprinkled throughout privately-owned housing.

−	It is thought by some that this mixing of people from different socio-economic backgrounds creates more diverse, ~~socially~~ cohesive and interesting communities and helps to improve social mobility. It can also be used as a policy to compel developers of private housing to make some provision of social housing.	+	It is thought by some that this mixing of people from different socio-economic backgrounds creates more diverse, cohesive and interesting communities and helps to improve social mobility. It can also be used as a policy to compel developers of private housing to make some provision of social housing.

−	Mixed tenure development ~~has been~~ common ~~since~~ the 1970’s, providing an alternative to uniform estates or ‘mono-tenure developments’ which ~~can lead~~ to ~~segregation of~~ socio-economic groups and to ~~the creation of~~ deprived ghettos. It has been encouraged by successive governments through policies such as the right to buy and right to acquire and through the use of section 106 agreements requiring that developers build a proportion of new housing as ‘affordable housing’, that is, ‘...social rented housing, affordable rented housing and intermediate housing, provided to eligible households whose needs are not met by the market’ (Ref National Planning Policy Framework)	+	Mixed tenure development became common in the 1970’s, providing an alternative to uniform estates or ‘mono-tenure developments’ which were thought to segregate socio-economic groups and to create deprived ghettos. It has subsequently been encouraged by successive governments through policies such as the right to buy and right to acquire and through the use of section 106 agreements requiring that developers build a proportion of new housing as ‘affordable housing’, that is, ‘...social rented housing, affordable rented housing and intermediate housing, provided to eligible households whose needs are not met by the market’ (Ref National Planning Policy Framework)

−	However, It seen by ~~some~~ as an attempt at social engineering, forcing people to live in community groups ~~that~~ they would not themselves choose. It is also seen by criticised ~~as a mechanism~~ allowing the government to avoid providing council housing, and as a way of hiding poverty by simply dispersing it, rather than dealing with the ~~actual~~ causes ~~of poverty~~.	+	However, mixed tenure developments are seen by others as an attempt at social engineering, forcing people to live in community groups they would not themselves choose. It is also seen by criticised for allowing the government to avoid providing council housing, and as a way of hiding poverty by simply dispersing it, rather than dealing with the causes.

−	Some owner-occupiers believe that mixed ~~tenure reduces~~ the value of their property, and ~~that~~ there can be conflict between people from different backgrounds who may have different behavioural expectations.	+	Some owner-occupiers believe that mixed tenures reduce the value of their property, and there can be conflict between people from different backgrounds who may have different behavioural expectations.

−	~~On 28~~ September 2015, the NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, published [http://www.nhbcfoundation.org/Publications/Research-Review/Tenure-integration-in-housing-developments-NF66 Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66]. This literature review considered the success of different approaches to mixed-tenure developments, finding that:	+	In September 2015, the NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, published [http://www.nhbcfoundation.org/Publications/Research-Review/Tenure-integration-in-housing-developments-NF66 Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66]. This literature review considered the success of different approaches to mixed-tenure developments, finding that:
	*Financing is the main barrier to mixed tenure development.		*Financing is the main barrier to mixed tenure development.
	*If the design and quality of the overall development is to a high standard, property prices are not necessarily affected.		*If the design and quality of the overall development is to a high standard, property prices are not necessarily affected.
−	*A wider range of typologies and unit sizes ~~enable~~ people to move from one type to another and so stabilises neighbourhoods.	+	*A wider range of typologies and unit sizes enables people to move from one type to another and so stabilises neighbourhoods.
	*Management structures and costs should be agreed before building commences.		*Management structures and costs should be agreed before building commences.
−	*The boom of the private rented sector and buy to let has changed the anticipated tenure mix.	+	*The boom of the private rented sector and buy to let has changed the anticipated tenure mix.

−	In 2012, [http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Scotland%20Policy%20Pdfs/Mixed%20Tenure/Mixed%20tenure%20report%20September%202012.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], a briefing paper published by The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, found that mixed tenure developments accounted for a greater proportion of ~~the~~ affordable housing investment ~~programme~~ than ~~has~~ ever been the case previously, and that mixed tenure developments were an essential component in achieving balanced and sustainable communities.	+	In 2012, [http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Scotland%20Policy%20Pdfs/Mixed%20Tenure/Mixed%20tenure%20report%20September%202012.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], a briefing paper published by The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, found that mixed tenure developments accounted for a greater proportion of affordable housing investment than had ever been the case previously, and that mixed tenure developments were an essential component in achieving balanced and sustainable communities.

−	It reported little evidence of purchaser reluctance to buy on mixed tenure developments, and ~~that~~ shared equity had been a particularly popular option first time buyers. However, it suggested that a ‘tenure blind’ approach to design was crucial, and that there remained challenges around owners’ expectations for managing anti-social behaviour caused, or perceived to be caused by social housing tenants.	+	It reported little evidence of purchaser reluctance to buy property on mixed tenure developments, and found shared equity had been a particularly popular option for first time buyers. However, it suggested that a ‘tenure blind’ approach to design was crucial, and that there remained challenges around owners’ expectations for managing anti-social behaviour caused by, or perceived to be caused by social housing tenants.

	= Find out more =		= Find out more =
Line 29:		Line 29:
	*Neighbourhood planning.		*Neighbourhood planning.
	*NPPF.		*NPPF.
−	*Pepper-potting	+	*Pepper-potting.
		+	*Right to acquire.
		+	*Right to buy.
		+	*Section 106 agreement.
	*Smart cities.		*Smart cities.

Designing Buildings: Created page with " The term ‘mixed tenure’ development, sometimes referred to as ‘integrated housing’, or ‘tenure integration’ describes an urban planning strategy in which poorer and ..."

2015-10-02T10:09:31Z

Created page with " The term ‘mixed tenure’ development, sometimes referred to as ‘integrated housing’, or ‘tenure integration’ describes an urban planning strategy in which poorer and ..."

New page

The term ‘mixed tenure’ development, sometimes referred to as ‘integrated housing’, or ‘tenure integration’ describes an urban planning strategy in which poorer and more affluent residents live in a mixed community.

At its most basic level it may simply involve developing neighbourhoods with some streets intended for owner occupiers, and other for social housing. More diverse mixed tenure developments might adopt a ‘pepper-potting’ approach through the ‘sprinkling’ of social housing amongst privately-owned housing.

It is thought by some that this mixing of people from different socio-economic backgrounds creates more diverse, socially cohesive and interesting communities and helps to improve social mobility. It can also be used as a policy to compel developers of private housing to make some provision of social housing.

Mixed tenure development has been common since the 1970’s, providing an alternative to uniform estates or ‘mono-tenure developments’ which can lead to segregation of socio-economic groups and to the creation of deprived ghettos. It has been encouraged by successive governments through policies such as the right to buy and right to acquire and through the use of section 106 agreements requiring that developers build a proportion of new housing as ‘affordable housing’, that is, ‘...social rented housing, affordable rented housing and intermediate housing, provided to eligible households whose needs are not met by the market’ (Ref National Planning Policy Framework)

However, It seen by some as an attempt at social engineering, forcing people to live in community groups that they would not themselves choose. It is also seen by criticised as a mechanism allowing the government to avoid providing council housing, and as a way of hiding poverty by simply dispersing it, rather than dealing with the actual causes of poverty.

Some owner-occupiers believe that mixed tenure reduces the value of their property, and that there can be conflict between people from different backgrounds who may have different behavioural expectations.

On 28 September 2015, the NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, published [http://www.nhbcfoundation.org/Publications/Research-Review/Tenure-integration-in-housing-developments-NF66 Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66]. This literature review considered the success of different approaches to mixed-tenure developments, finding that:
*Financing is the main barrier to mixed tenure development.
*If the design and quality of the overall development is to a high standard, property prices are not necessarily affected.
*A wider range of typologies and unit sizes enable people to move from one type to another and so stabilises neighbourhoods.
*Management structures and costs should be agreed before building commences.
*The boom of the private rented sector and buy to let has changed the anticipated tenure mix.

In 2012, [http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Scotland%20Policy%20Pdfs/Mixed%20Tenure/Mixed%20tenure%20report%20September%202012.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], a briefing paper published by The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, found that mixed tenure developments accounted for a greater proportion of the affordable housing investment programme than has ever been the case previously, and that mixed tenure developments were an essential component in achieving balanced and sustainable communities.

It reported little evidence of purchaser reluctance to buy on mixed tenure developments, and that shared equity had been a particularly popular option first time buyers. However, it suggested that a ‘tenure blind’ approach to design was crucial, and that there remained challenges around owners’ expectations for managing anti-social behaviour caused, or perceived to be caused by social housing tenants.

= Find out more =

=== Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki. ===
*Affordable housing.
*Neighbourhood planning.
*NPPF.
*Pepper-potting
*Smart cities.

=== External references ===
*[http://urbanrim.org.uk/mixed%20tenure.htm Mixed Tenure housing development, Brian Williams, 2009].
*[http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Scotland%20Policy%20Pdfs/Mixed%20Tenure/Mixed%20tenure%20report%20September%202012.pdf The challenges of developing and managing mixed tenure housing], The Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland, 2012.
*[http://www.nhbcfoundation.org/Publications/Research-Review/Tenure-integration-in-housing-developments-NF66 Tenure integration in housing developments - NF66]. NHBC Foundation and the Homes and Communities Agency, 28 September 2015.

[[Category:Policy]]
[[Category:Property_development]]