Posted by

Posted on

30 Apr 2018

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Health and Social Care (local), Rural communities

“MPs and peers in call to ‘age-proof’ homes in rural areas”

“Rural England needs more homes that are suitable for an aging population, an all-party parliamentary group has said.

Following a nine-month inquiry, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Housing and Care for Older People, today published a report calling on local planning authorities to ensure provision of new homes for older people.

The inquiry found that 50% of rural households would be over the age of 65 by 2039.

The APPG’s report said the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs needed to play a key part in the integration of policies for housing, health and social care in rural areas for older people.

Other recommendations were directed at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, suggesting all new homes be built to the Lifetime Homes standard of accessibility.

Inquiry chair Lord Best said: “For all the advantages of living in the countryside, life can be pretty miserable if your home is no longer right for you; if you can no longer manage the steps and stairs, if maintaining the property is costing too much, if keeping warm is a trial and your energy bill’s a nightmare, if you can no longer tend the once-beautiful garden.”

Best said that the APPG was concerned that older people would face “a huge challenge to their independence and wellbeing if their homes are no longer suitable.”

Izzi Seccombe, chair of the Local Government Association’s community wellbeing board, said: “Councils want to see a desperately needed residential revolution in older people’s housing.

“It’s essential that housing for older people enables them to live independently at home for longer, by including adaptations which enable them to get around easily and support them at home.

“If councils are given the right tools, we could trigger that residential revolution and deliver the homes our older residents need, but with an ageing population, the clock is ticking.”

MHCLG has been contacted for comment.”

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2018/04/mps-and-peers-call-age-proof-homes-rural-areas

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

30 Apr 2018

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Inequality, Land banking, Land Supply, Spin

Case law will impact on developers who say they can’t (now) afford affordable housing

Parkhurst Road Limited v Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government & London Borough of Islington. Case No: CO/3528/2017, in the High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Planning Court, 27 April 2018.

“A High Court judge has backed Islington Council in a long-standing battle between the council and developer First Base (Parkhurst Road Limited), who refused to provide affordable homes on a former Territorial Army site in line with the council’s planning rules.

The developer bought the site on Parkhurst Road in 2013 and has attempted to secure planning permission for a residential development with little or no affordable housing, ignoring the long-standing planning requirements on the provision of affordable homes set by the council.

An initial planning application was submitted in 2013 by the developer who were assisted by Gerald Eve as viability consultants. The council refused planning permission for this development twice on the grounds of not providing enough affordable housing, as well as other matters.

The case centres around the viability assessment of development and, in particular, how the price of land should be determined in planning, which is a tool increasingly used by developers and their viability consultants in recent years, to avoid complying with councils’ planning requirements on affordable housing.

Two lengthy public inquiries were held, both of which were won by Islington Council. Each time the low level of affordable housing provided on the scheme was being justified by the developer on factors such as the purchase price paid for the site, and land transactions of other schemes. Following the second public inquiry held in early 2017, an Independent Planning Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State, upheld Islington’s refusal of planning permission in his decision of 19 June 2017.

The developer then mounted a legal challenge against the Planning Inspector’s decision at the High Court. The Planning Inspector’s decision was defended in court jointly by Islington’s legal team and the lawyers representing the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government (MHCLG).

Normally, the role of the courts in planning disputes is very limited and restricted to legal technicalities only. However, in this case the Judge Justice Mr David Holgate allowed a fairly detailed examination of planning issues and the development viability evidence in particular.

Today (Friday, 27 April) he dismissed the legal challenge on all three grounds put forward by the developer, and concluded that he was satisfied with the Planning Inspector’s decision to dismiss the developer’s appeal and uphold the council’s decision to refuse the planning application.

Responding to the judgement, an Islington Council spokesperson said:

“We are delighted by the High Court judgement. This decision reinforces Islington Council’s long standing position that developers should abide by the councils’ planning guidelines – rather than overpaying for land and then trying to bypass our affordable housing requirements.

“There is a shortage of good quality, genuinely affordable housing in Islington and a significant unmet housing need. The council is doing everything it can to address this, because we believe that everyone should have somewhere to live that is affordable, decent and secure – and developers must respect these important priorities when they purchase sites in Islington.”

In a highly unusual move, in a postscript to the judgment, Judge Mr Justice Holgate also recommended that the current, widely used, guidance on viability assessments by the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) should be revised “in order to address any misunderstandings about market valuation concepts and techniques, the “circularity” issue and any other problems encountered in practice over the last 6 years, so as to help avoid protracted disputes of the kind we have seen in the present case and achieve more efficient decision-making.”

This is something that the council has been calling for over the last couple of years, due to serious concerns about how the RICS Financial Viability in Planning (2012) guidance note was being applied in practice.

Islington Council’s planning guidance on Development Viability is very clear and specifically cautions developers against overpaying for land and using the purchase price as a justification for providing little or no affordable housing. This landmark judgment reinforces what Islington (and many other councils) have been arguing for years that affordable housing requirements cannot be bypassed by using the “dark art” of viability assessments to ignore planning policy requirements.”

http://www.islington.media/r/97837/high_court_backs_islington_in_a_landmark_planning_case_on

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

29 Apr 2018

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Housing (local), Inequality

Comments

1 Comment

“Millennial housing crisis engulfs Britain”

“Home ownership among young families has plummeted across every corner of Britain over the past 35 years, according to a devastating inquiry into the housing crisis facing millennials.

The proportion of families headed by a 25- to 34-year-old that own their own home has more than halved in some regions, showing that the crisis goes far beyond London.

Analysis conducted as part of a two-year investigation into intergenerational fairness in Britain, chaired by a former Tory minister, found that millennials are being forced into increasingly cramped and expensive rented properties that leave them with a longer commute and little chance of saving for a home. It also finds an increasing proportion of the young living in overcrowded housing.

The commission, which has been overseen by the Resolution Foundation thinktank and includes the former universities minister David Willetts, is expected to conclude that new taxes on property wealth may be the only way to restore fairness and prepare the country to pay the care and support costs of an ageing population.

Ownership among 25- to 34-year-olds has plummeted in Greater Manchester from 53% in 1984 to 26% last year. It has fallen from 54% to 25% in south Yorkshire, from 45% to 20% in the West Midlands, from 50% to 28% in Wales and from 55% to 27% in the south-east. In outer London, the proportion has collapsed from 53% to just 16%. Out of 22 regions analysed by the commission, in only one – Strathclyde in Scotland – has home ownership among the young remained stable. It stood at 32% in 1984 and 33% last year, having peaked at 45% in 2002.

Ownership in London has fallen consistently over the past 30 years, whereas rates in some other parts of the country declined more slowly before the early 2000s, but very rapidly thereafter.

Even favourable economic conditions are likely to result in millennials catching up with the home ownership levels of the previous cohort only by the age of 45. Fast-growing inheritances will help some, but nearly half of young non-homeowners have parents who do not own either.

Millennials, classed as those born between 1981 and 2000, are half as likely to own a home at the age of 30 as baby boomers because of higher prices, low earnings growth and tighter credit rules. In the 1980s it would have taken a typical household in their late 20s around three years to save for an average-sized deposit. It would now take 19 years, the analysis shows.

Almost two-fifths of millennials rent privately at 30, double the rate for Generation X, born between 1966 and 1980, and four times the rate for baby boomers – born after the war until 1965 – at the same age.

Millennials are now spending an average of nearly a quarter of their net income on housing, three times more than the pre-war generation, now aged 70 and over.

Their living space is also declining. Each person living in the private rented sector now has on average eight square metres less space than they did in 1996. Meanwhile, those who own their own homes enjoy an extra four square metres each. Since younger households are more likely to be private renters than owners, they now have less space on average per household member. Just under one in 10 households headed by millennials in their late 20s now live in overcrowded conditions.

They are facing longer commutes than older generations endured. If current differences continue, millennials will spend almost three full days more commuting in the year they turn 40 than the baby boomers did at the same age.

The Resolution Foundation says that a combination of an ageing population and an increased demand for services which governments are committed to deliver means that welfare spending looks likely to increase very substantially in the coming decades.

It says that one way of addressing some of the generational implications of tax rises would be to change the age profile that these additional revenues are drawn from. The tax treatment of property and pension wealth may also have to be considered….”

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/nhs-doctors-confidentiality-patients-children-a8326106.html

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

28 Apr 2018

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Inequality

“Millennials don’t need living rooms, says leading architect”

“In a briefing paper, Patrik Schumacher, who worked on the London Aquatics Centre built for the Olympics, argued that centrally-located “hotel room-sized” studio flats are ideal for busy young people.

“Those who are now making the hard choice between paying 80 per cent of their income on a central flat versus commuting from afar, will in the liberalized future appreciate new options and perhaps choose to pay only 60 per cent for a smaller but more central flat.

“For many young professionals who are out and about networking 24/7, a small, clean, private hotel room-sized central patch serves their needs perfectly well,” he said.

The most central homes should be given to people “whose productive lives are most enhanced by being thus positioned, i.e. those who operate at the centre of our network society, attending early morning meetings, after work networking events,weekend conferences, and professional lectures”, he said.”

Mr Schumacher argues in the paper published by the Adam Smith Institute that the minimum size of 38 square metres on newbuild flats is “paternalistic” and stops poorer young people from getting on the housing ladder.

He said: “Units half that size, built at an earlier time, are rare and thus at the moment overpriced, hotly desired commodities, for rent or for sale.

“Lifting this prohibition would allow a whole new (lower) income group, which is now excluded, to enter the market. This move would both boost overall unit numbers and affordability.” …

He said planning regulations have been “unduly politicised and thereby paralysed”.

In 2016 the controversial architect told an audience at the World Architecture Festival in Berlin that public spaces such as streets and parks in London should be privatised and social housing should be abolished. …

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/25/millennials-dont-need-living-rooms-says-leading-architect-says/

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

27 Apr 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Asset sweating, Austerity cuts, Inequality

County council refuses to spend business profits on affordable housing

“Liberal Democrat councillors have criticised Surrey County Council for failing to spend profits from its £298m commercial property portfolio on council services.

In November, the council transferred £3.8m of rental income from the properties into its revolving infrastructure and investment fund.

However, Liberal Democrats complained that the original investment strategy, agreed by the council in July 2013, promised to use income to support the delivery of functions and services.

Cllr Hazel Watson, leader of the Liberal Democrats on Surrey County Council, said: “I am deeply concerned that none of the income derived from the county council’s extensive property investment portfolio so far has been used to support council services.

“This contradicts previous assurances from the Conservative administration that the purpose of their investment strategy was to support the county council’s budget.

“The county council is proposing millions of cuts to services this financial year and it is simply unacceptable for them to use precious resources to purchase more property, when that resource should be used instead to protect services for Surrey residents.”

Responding to the criticism, Tim Oliver, Surrey’s Conservative cabinet member for property and business services, said: “The investment portfolio created under the investment strategy consists of property investments which have been made by the council in order to deliver economic regeneration or to provide for long-term future service use, whilst delivering an investment return.

“These assets provide flexibility in the estate whilst producing a net revenue.”

He said that the total net income delivered to date by the strategy will be used to support spending on council services in the future and was expected to have reached £5.3m by March 2018.”

http://www.room151.co.uk/treasury/lib-dems-slam-use-of-property-profits-at-surrey-cc/

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

25 Apr 2018

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Honiton/ Gittisham

Jobs before houses or houses before jobs on Honiton brownfield site?

“Plans to demolish the former Halse of Honiton site and convert it into a 32-home development are set to be rejected.

The Homes and Communities Agency submitted plans last year to build the new homes at Foundry Yard on a brownfield site that was recently vacated by Halse of Honiton, who have moved to a new site in Ottery St Mary. …

But East Devon District Council’s development management committee are being recommended to refuse the application when they meet on Tuesday, May 1.

The report says: “The site is considered to be an employment site and in assessing the proposal, it has not been demonstrated that a continued use employment use would significantly harm the quality of a locality whether through traffic, amenity, environmental or other associated problems.

“Furthermore, options for retention of the site or premises for its current or similar use have not been robustly explored, the site having been subject of a flawed marketing exercise that ruled out any such uses before marketing began.

Evidence from the Economic Development also indicates a strong demand for employment generating sites in Honiton coupled with a shortage in the supply of such sites. The release of the site for housing would therefore not comply with Strategy 32 of the Local Plan and the development would not be sustainable development as it would contribute to imbalances in the provision of housing and jobs in Honiton.”

The application submitted by the HCA had said: “The proposed development of the site creates an opportunity to provide a high quality residential development that integrates well with adjacent areas of Honiton.

“The development will be sustainable, providing much needed open market and affordable homes in a town centre location, with good connectivity.” …

The developer is also proposing ten of the proposed homes – or 30 per cent – to be affordable, five per cent more than the required provision of 25 per cent. …”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/plans-former-halse-honiton-site-1495246

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

25 Apr 2018

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Health and Social Care (local), Inequality, Spin

Comments

1 Comment

“Sleeping rough more comfortable than army exercises – Tory MP”

Where to start? Of course, sleeping rough for a TV programme is easy! A nice warm bed to return to (not to mention a nice MPs salary) AND a film crew to keep you safe! AND he forgets to say he did his TV programme in 1991!

“A Conservative MP and former army officer has said that sleeping rough is “a lot more comfortable” than military exercises, in a debate he led on tackling street homelessness.

Adam Holloway, the MP for Gravesham in Kent, told parliamentary colleagues in the Westminster Hall debate on Tuesday that if a person is “able-bodied and sound of mind” there are resources that make it possible to sleep rough.

He said begging was also part of the problem, allowing homeless people to make “quite a lot of money”.

Holloway, a supporter of the pro-Brexit campaign group Leave Means Leave, also said that a rise in street homelessness was driven by eastern European immigration, claiming that many migrants from that region preferred to sleep rough than pay for accommodation.

He said mental illness and drug addiction were “real ingrained problems” behind homelessness that needed to be tackled to solve the crisis.

Holloway, who told MPs he had spent a number of nights during the parliamentary recess in February sleeping on the streets as part of a television programme on street homelessness, said: “One observation I do have, if you are able-bodied and of sound mind there are all sorts of services – not quite 24 hours a day – that make it possible to sleep out.

“I’m 52, I was in the army; to be honest for me sleeping rough in central London is a lot more comfortable than going on exercise in the army.

“But if you’re mentally ill or you are old or you are personality disordered then it is a very different thing. Or if you’re drug addicted it is very difficult. We have to accept that some people are able to sleep rough because there are resources to do so.”

Holloway’s comments come after research revealed at least 78 homeless people died on the streets and in temporary accommodation this winter, bringing the number of recorded homeless deaths to more than 300 since 2013.”

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

22 Apr 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Housing (local), Inequality, Section 106

“Councils sit on £375m earmarked for affordable housing”

“Local councils in England are sitting on hundreds of millions of pounds of money designated for affordable housing.

A total of £375m is available, £100m of which has not even been earmarked for a specific project. This is despite a survey last year for the Town and Country Planning Association showing that 98% of councils described their need for affordable homes as either “severe” or “moderate”.

The cash has been accumulated under so-called section 106 agreements by which builders and developers give a council a ringfenced amount of money instead of building affordable homes within a development themselves.

James Prestwich, the head of policy at the National Housing Federation, which represents housing associations, said it confirmed the federation’s view that section 106 was flawed. “Affordable housing should be delivered within new developments, rather than developers simply funding its delivery elsewhere,” he said. “This would guarantee that affordable housing will be built alongside other homes.”

Some of the worst offenders shown up by research carried out by the Huffington Post are in London and the south-east. The housing minister Dominic Raab’s own local council, Elmbridge in Surrey, has £8m waiting to be invested.

Raab was criticised this month after he blamed high levels of immigration for increasing house prices. A review by the statistics watchdog found that his department had used an outdated statistical method to calculate the causes of housing pressure and their relationship with house prices.

The London borough of Kensington and Chelsea, which has yet to find new homes for two-thirds of the Grenfell survivors and other families affected by the disaster, has £21m of dedicated reserves. It says £19m has been set aside for Grenfell families.

Two Labour-held councils also in London, Southwark and Camden, between them have more than £90m that could be spent on affordable homes. Altogether, just 14 councils account for two-thirds of the unspent cash.

Rough sleeping in London has risen by at least 18% over the past year; in England as a whole, it is up 15%. Although a shortage of affordable homes is only one of many causes that explains the continuous rise over the past seven years, its consequences have a series of knock-on effects.

A spokesman for Southwark said the money it had was already allocated and the projects for which it was intended would be completed within the next five years.

Camden has set up a new scheme for affordable home building, the community investment programme, which is intended to create 1,400 affordable homes over 15 years.

Tony Travers, a local government expert at the London School of Economics, said nearly a decade of cuts had left council capacity to manage big projects “hollowed out”.

“Average cuts of between 25% and 30% over eight years and the way they have protected children’s and adult social care services have led to bigger cuts in departments like housing and planning. There is no question that their capacity to handle major projects has been eroded.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/apr/22/councils-sit-on-375m-earmarked-for-affordable-housing

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

18 Apr 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Housing (local), Labour ( Devon)

“Labour would rip up definition of affordable housing, Corbyn says”

“A Labour government would rip up the government’s definition of affordable housing and instead bring in a measure linked to people’s incomes, Jeremy Corbyn will say on Thursday.

A report, Housing for the Many, accuses ministers of stretching the term affordable to breaking point to include homes let at up to 80% of market rents – more than £1,500 a month in some areas – and homes for sale up to £450,000. “It has become a deliberately malleable phrase, used to cover up a shift in government policy towards increasingly expensive and insecure homes,” it says.

The Labour leader and John Healey, the shadow housing secretary, set out the party’s plans to link affordability to people’s incomes on tenures including social rent, living rent and low-cost ownership, in the 40-page green paper, to be launched on Thursday.

Labour says one “common yardstick” is whether rent or a mortgage costs more than one-third of a household’s after-tax income.

The green paper says Labour is keen to help not just the poorest in society, but also “the ‘just coping’ class in Britain today who do the jobs we all rely on – IT workers, HGV drivers, joiners, warehouse managers, lab technicians, nurses, teaching assistants, call centre supervisors, shop staff. They are the backbone of the British economy and heart of our public services.”

Britain faces an acute housing affordability crisis, with around 1.7m private rented households currently paying more than a third of their income in rent and 1m owner-occupiers paying more than a third of their income on their mortgage.

Corbyn will say: “When housing has become a site of speculation for a wealthy few, leaving the many unable to access a decent, secure home, something has gone seriously wrong. We need to restore the principle that a decent home is a right owed to all, not a privilege for the few. And the only way to deliver on that right for everyone, regardless of income, is through social housing.”

The paper includes a series of other measures, including creating a new Department of Housing and an independent watchdog, along the lines of the Office for Budget Responsibility, to assess the government’s policies and ensure they are delivered.

A Labour government would also end the right to buy, which the Cameron government extended to cover tenants in social housing, risking the depletion of the supply of social housing. Labour would also lift the cap on borrowing by local authorities, to allow councils to build more social housing themselves.

A Conservative spokesperson said: “Labour would kick away the housing ladder from everyone living in council houses by taking away their right to buy, just as Labour did in Wales. Under the Conservatives, we are investing £9bn to build more good-quality homes that people can afford and have seen the highest number of new homes being built for a decade.”

Healey will say: “The housing market is broken and current Conservative housing policy is failing to fix it. We have to build more affordable homes to make homes more affordable.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/18/labour-would-rip-up-definition-of-affordable-housing-corbyn-says

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

27 Mar 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Land banking, Land Supply, Planning System

Letwin explains rationing new builds to keep up prices with a new phrase “absorption rate”!

“A Government-commissioned report has blamed delays in the house-building process on builders concerns about future sale prices.

In the Autumn Budget the Chancellor set up an independent review to look at the delays between planning permission being granted, and houses being built. This review is being led by Sir Oliver Letwin.

The Treasury has now published the commission’s interim report alongside the Spring Statement:

Click to access Build_Out_Review_letter_to_Cx_and_Housing_SoS.pdf

These initial findings suggest that house-builders concerns about sale prices are a major factor in slow “build out” of homes on many of these larger developments.

Letwin says this review had initially focused on larger housing developments and major housebuilders. Further analysis may look at smaller scale models.

In a letter to the Chancellor and Sajid Javid – the secretary of state for housing communities and local government – Letwin says housebuilders have cited a number of “limitations”, including a shortage of available skilled labour, the availability of capital, provision of local transport infrastructure and the slow speed of installations by utility companies.

But in the interim report Letwin says: “I am not persuaded that these limitations are in fact the primary determinants of the speed of build out on large permitted sites at present.”

He goes on to say the fundamental driver of build out rates, once detailed planning permission is granted, appears to be the “absorption rate” – that is the rate at which newly constructed homes can be sold into the local market without materially disturbing the market price.

This rate, he says appears to be largely determined at present by the type of home being constructed and the pricing of the new homes built.

The interim report goes onto say this problem can be exacerbated by many larger development having a style of size of home that is fairly homogeneous.

The next stage of this review will look at whether build-out rates could be improved, either by reducing the reliance on large builders, or by encouraging them to offer more variety in terms of the type and price of property offered.

The report adds: “We have seen ample evidence from our site visits that the rate and completion of the ‘affordable ‘ and social rented’ homes is constrained by the requirement for cross-subsidy from the open market housing on the site.” This can delay the build out of these homes, the report adds.

Letwin says he plans to publish more detailed draft analysis by the end of June, which will contain a more detailed description of the problem and its causes.

The independent review will then seek comments from interested parties before a final analysis which will include a list of recommendations to improve the situation.”

Interim report on planning delays published alongside Spring Statement

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

24 Mar 2018

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Planning System, Sleaze

Weasel words on affordable housing from the government’s minister

Sajid Javid faces battle over 4% affordable homes in Sainsbury’s scheme

“The housing secretary, Sajid Javid, is facing a legal challenge after he approved a 700-home housing scheme by the supermarket chain Sainsbury’s, which includes just 4% affordable housing.

The 29-storey development in Ilford, east London, will be built in a borough that has a stated policy that 50% of all new homes should be affordable. It estimates it needs an extra 15,000 affordable homes in the next 15 years, but Javid backed a scheme with just 27 affordable homes. The rest are expected to be sold for about £400,000 for a two bedroom flat.

The London mayor, Sadiq Khan, branded the approval “outrageous” and said 4% was a “disgraceful” contribution. Labour’s shadow housing secretary, John Healey, said it was “a clear case of ministers backing private developer profit over the homes that local people need”.

A local residents group Ilford Noise is now preparing to request a judicial review of the decision after Javid accepted Sainsbury’s claim that the scheme would not be viable with any more affordable units. Javid’s report concluded: “There is no good reason to dispute the agreed conclusions of the financial experts.”

The decision came just weeks after Javid gave a speech insisting it is “totally unacceptable” for developers to claim they cannot afford to meet affordable housing promises.

He said: “It cheats communities of much-needed housing and infrastructure and gives new development a bad name.”

But in this case, where Sainsbury’s never promised more than 4%, he has allowed the developer to hugely undershoot the local target. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/23/sajid-javid-faces-battle-over-4-affordable-homes-in-sainsburys-scheme

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

22 Mar 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Scrutiny, Transparency

“Manchester council to publish files used to bypass affordable housing quotas”

“Manchester city council has voted to make public the secret documents used by developers to bypass affordable housing quotas.

Analysis by the Guardian earlier this month showed that developers behind almost 15,000 new homes given the green light by the council’s planning committee in the past two years all managed to avoid including any affordable housing in their developments.

In many cases, developers submitted confidential viability assessments to successfully argue that their projects would not go ahead if they were to offer even one flat for affordable rent or sale. Just 65 of the 14,667 units analysed by the Guardian made any concessions to affordability, being pitched as shared ownership properties.

Over the past year councillors on Manchester city council’s planning committee have become increasingly frustrated that they are being asked to approve huge new developments – some containing 1,500 market-rate, luxury apartments – without being able to scrutinise the viability assessments.

‘We said it wasn’t acceptable’: how Bristol is standing up to developers
On Wednesday councillors voted to require viability assessments for developments of more than 15 units where less than 20% of the development is affordable housing as part of the planning process and for these to be public.

After the unanimous vote, all information submitted for the documents (including commercially sensitive information) will also now be made available to members of the planning committee and other relevant members of the council in advance of determination of the planning decision.

The motion read: “This council notes that developers have often used viability assessments to avoid their obligations to provide affordable housing and where this happens, it can damage public confidence in the planning process. Labour councils in Greenwich, Bristol and Lambeth have improved transparency by making their viability assessments public. “This council believes that the developers who make money from building in our city have an obligation to make a fair contribution to providing affordable housing.”

Last November Bristol became the latest city to force developers to be transparent by publishing viability assessments. Bristol’s mayor, Marvin Rees, believes that it sends a signal to developers: “We’re a great city to do business in – but we want the right kind of money.”

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/mar/21/manchester-council-to-publish-files-used-to-bypass-affordable-housing-quotas

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

21 Mar 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Planning System, Rural communities

Effect of “viability loophole” on rural communities

“House builders are exploiting a legal loophole so they don’t have to build as many affordable homes in the countryside, claim campaigners.
Homeless charity Shelter and the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) analysed data they say shows that housing developers are shirking their responsibilities.

The two charities released their findings ahead of a speech by communities secretary Sajid Javid who is expected to outline government reforms to national planning rules.

Looking at eight rural councils over one year, the analysis shows that half the affordable homes that councils were required to build were lost when viability assessments were used.

Shelter and CPRE said their findings demonstrated that the housing crisis was not just confined to cities – but was having a serious impact in the countryside as well.

They said developers were using ‘viability assessments’ to argue that building affordable homes could reduce their profits to below around 20%.
This gave them the right to cut their affordable housing quota.
It meant developers were over-paying for land and recouping the costs by squeezing affordable housing commitments – a tactic often used by developers building big housing schemes.

Shelter and CPRE are calling on the government to use planning rules to stop developers from using this loophole to wriggle out of providing the affordable homes that communities need.

Similar research carried out by Shelter on housing lost to viability assessments in urban area paints a national picture of the affordable housing drought right across the country.

Shelter chief executive Polly Neate said: “We can see for the first time the true scale of our housing crisis – it’s not just blighting cities but our towns and villages too.

“Developers are using this legal loophole to overpower local communities and are refusing to build the affordable homes they need.”
Both charities said the government should use their current review of planning laws to close the loophole and give local communities the homes they required.

CPRE chief executive Crispin Truman said: “A lack of affordable housing is often seen as an urban problem, with issues of affordability in rural areas overlooked.

“It cannot be ignored any longer.

“Too much of our countryside is eaten up for developments that boost profits, but don’t meet local housing needs because of the “viability” loophole.”

Without adequate affordable housing, rural communities risked losing the young families and workers they needed to be sustainable, said Mr Truman.
The full report is available here.”

http://rsnonline.org.uk/community/loophole-means-fewer-affordabler-homes

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: