Affordable housing at Racecourse "not viable"... Options

[Exhausted]

You can understand why the developer doesn't want the value of their development diluted by Housing association rentals. It's hard enough now selling property to people who can afford to buy a decent home without the type of people that they, Housing Associations are forced or choose to rent their property to. I know that they are not new build, but just have a look at the tall houses in Pound Street that have had their doors stove in, presumably by plod looking for substances.

[Iommi]

My response would be don't be a freakin' developer. Policies are policies, I'd make it law, but then I'd give power to HAs to evict people more readily. Perhaps a drugs/violence conviction of a tenant on HA's premises or homes should mean a termination of a tenant agreement.

[Richard Garvie]

Do you really not understand? Really?

Central Government drive through Law and issue 'guidance' to Planning Authorities to ensure they help Govt deliver.
LAs write local policy that tries to deliver what they have been told they must in a way that is acceptable to their community.
Developers, who own Land Banks all across the country under various guises, seek to turn their holdings into profit and examine by the letter the policy documents to discover ways they can make the Council give them what they want.

Months of exploratory meetings precede an application, with Members and Officers huddled around maps and models hypothesising on what might be.

Developer then submits an application they feel will succeed.

Council may pass that application. The only comment the councillors can then make is that the application as passed is what is to be built. It is not for them to say what they think the developer may subsequently do: why would they pass an application if it was not likely to be the actual product. Is the developer going to tell them?

The PPd development is then reviewed by the developer for ways to increase profitability. Having got the permission the LA is very much over a barrel as regards refusing amendments, especially when they are incremental. They may not surmise where the appliocation is really going, even if it is obvious.

Thus (with the Racecourse) the Council approve something, and the developer thenseeks to amend. No-one at the Council can say other than what they have said. And in the real world that is the business of land development, the megabucks behind the developer trumps the public funds available to the LA.

You are an idealist, Mr G. Pragmatism is not weakness.

But the planning application went against the councils own proposed LDF. They said they had accepted it because it guarenteed 30% affordable housing and there was no way they would consider reducing that quota. The proposed affordable quota is actually just under 30%, but when I suggested a minimum percentage be fixed at whatever it is now, they said it wouldn't be needed because they would not accept a reduction in affordable units.

What we are hearing now is the council shifting from "we won't allow a reduction in affordable units, despite removing the minimum commitment in the proposed LDF" to "the affordable housing quota at the Racecourse is not viable". Guess what is next? "Due to viability issues with the afforable housing, we will now be letting the developers keep the S106 payments to ensure they delive 150 affordable housing units on the site". Isn't that what happened with PW??? Only, we now know that there is potentially no money for the affordable units there either.

[Richard Garvie]

You can understand why the developer doesn't want the value of their development diluted by Housing association rentals. It's hard enough now selling property to people who can afford to buy a decent home without the type of people that they, Housing Associations are forced or choose to rent their property to. I know that they are not new build, but just have a look at the tall houses in Pound Street that have had their doors stove in, presumably by plod looking for substances.

But not all affordable housing is HA. What we need is some lower priced stock to get people on the property ladder.

[Iommi]

It's the 'property ladder' mantra that has help phuq this and other countries up!

[Richard Garvie]

It's the 'property ladder' mantra that has help phuq this and other countries up!

Maybe I'm wrong, but everybody aspires to own their own home. I don't think there is anything wrong with aspiration. It's the banks giving irresponsible lending and giving people silly mortgages that messed us up. Touch wood, we seemed to get off a lot better than most countries, and had nothing like the number of reposessions that we had in previous recessions.

[Iommi]

It's not just talking about finance. I'm think also of social cohesion. Remember the rosy picture you painted of how neighbourly we used to be, I'm sure that the hunger for home ownership has helped to fracture that. I think it has 'helped' us to become more self-centred.

[NWNREADER]

But not all affordable housing is HA. What we need is some lower priced stock to get people on the property ladder.

Looks like you are getting your wish........
House prices on the way down could mean every house built at the Racecourse will be affordable...... And everywhere else for that matter!

[user23]

It's the 'property ladder' mantra that has help phuq this and other countries up!

Wasn't it one of Margaret Thatcher's ambitions, that everyone should own their own property?

It seems strange for a Labour politician to be inspired by this.

[Andy Capp]

I believe home ownership is something that New Labour wished to facilitate as well.

[dannyboy]

I believe home ownership is something that New Labour wished to facilitate as well.

RG isn't New Labour.

[NWNREADER]

I believe home ownership is something that New Labour wished to facilitate as well.

Tony B Liar certainly took it to heart

[Andy Capp]

RG isn't New Labour.

Nor was M Thatcher.

[dannyboy]

Nor was M Thatcher.

Really?

[user23]

RG isn't New Labour.

Is RG even Labour any more given he dismissed the Newbury Labour Party as "just a badge"?

[Andy Capp]

Really?

Really.

[dannyboy]

Really.

They do say you lean something new every day.

[NWNREADER]

They do say you lean something new every day.

I leant a piece of wood once, but it fell over.

[dannyboy]

I leant a piece of wood once, but it fell over.

LOL. Did it fall to the left, or the right?