Javid says build more expensive houses to solve housing crisis

So, where houses are expensive MORE expensive even more houses must be built because Javid thinks that will bring prices down! Yet developers will still be allowed to make more than 20% profit on EACH development before affordable housing has to be built.

Just watch for the first developer to blame Brexit for house prices that don’t go down, and watch Letwin’s report on land banking get kicked into the long grass!

Remember this is the man who has just given more than £800m earmarked fo4 affordable housing back to the Treasury.

And it will be COUNCILS which are sanctioned when developers keep land with planning consent bare NOT DEVELOPERS.

Well done, Javid, well done. Your developer donors getting bigger profits and councils being forced to bend to developer will – and still youngsters won’t be able to get on the housing ladder.

“Thousands of new homes are to be approved and council Nimbyism curbed, the housing secretary Sajid Javid tells Tim Shipman.

Up to five new garden towns are to be approved for the corridor between Oxford and Cambridge under government plans to launch a “housing revolution” this week.

In an interview with The Sunday Times, Sajid Javid, the housing secretary, said he would give the go-ahead to at least two new towns in the next few weeks and could push for up to three more. The decision comes after ministers agreed to fund a high-speed rail line and an “expressway” for cars between the two leading university towns.

“Along that corridor there’s an opportunity to build at least four or five garden towns and villages with thousands of homes,” Javid said. The first step will be to establish “new town development corporations” for the chosen sites, which will help developers and town planners to “cut through a lot of the bureaucracy”, he said.

Referring to the creation of Milton Keynes in 1967 and the transformation of London’s Docklands in the 1980s, Javid said: “We haven’t been that ambitious for a long time.”

Now that Theresa May’s latest Brexit speech is behind it, the government will return this week to what Javid calls “our No 1 domestic priority”.

He said: “We have a housing crisis in this country. Average house prices in England are eight times average earnings. In London, where we have the most acute shortage, it is 15 times average earnings. That’s not just the worst we have had in England , it’s the worst of any major developed economy.”

Last year 217,000 homes were built, more than double the total in 2010, but well under the 300,000 a year the government is aiming for by 2025.

This week ministers will change the planning rules to try to kick-start house-building “where it is needed” and turn the heat up on “Nimby councils” who have refused to build what is needed.

Tomorrow Javid will unveil a new version of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), to get councils to give more land for development. “You’ve got to release it where people are demanding more homes,” he said.

The NPPF will contain new national rules determining how many homes councils should be building each year — taking account of local house prices and wages and the number of key workers in the area. Javid is clear that will force many councils to set higher targets.

“It will no longer allow Nimby councils that don’t really want to build the homes that their local community needs to fudge the numbers,” Javid said. “For the first time it will explicitly take into account the market prices. If you are in an area where the unaffordability ratio is much higher you will have to build even more. It will make clear to councils that this number is a minimum, not a maximum.”

Javid will also launch a crackdown on councils who do not meet targets. He said: “The other thing we’ll introduce is the delivery test. If they say we’re going to plan for 300 a year at the moment there is nothing in the system that checks to see they are actually delivering the 300 and that is going to change.”

Councils who fail to step up will be stripped of their right to decide what gets built in their areas, with decisions made by independent planning inspectors instead. “Developers can only apply for planning permission in the areas the council has identified,” he said. “If the protection of that plan is switched off, a developer can apply for planning permission anywhere in your area.

“This is quite a big sanction for every local authority to not just come up with the right number, but once that number is in place, we are going to be breathing down your neck to make sure you are actually delivering on those numbers.”

Javid says that does not mean building on the green belt, “but it does mean that outside of naturally protected land like woodland and green belt they can pretty much roam everywhere outside that”.

The housing secretary has shown he is prepared to intervene after he threatened 15 councils who had failed to draw up any local plan for development.

“The last time York had a plan was 1954,” he said. “There was the chancellor’s district council, Runnymede. They responded positively. It doesn’t matter who you are or who your MP is, if you haven’t got a plan you will be hearing from me. If a council keeps ignoring its responsibility we can take that planning responsibility away from them and give it to someone else.”

The new planning framework will also seek to make local plans more responsive to their populations’ needs. Javid said: “Our nurses, police officers and fire officers want to live as close as possible to where they serve the British public. We want to make it easier it build and take their needs into account.”

In cities he is keen to see more building upwards. New rules will make it easier for homeowners to add two storeys to their houses — and will clear the way for a large number of mansion blocks to be built.

“The density of London is less than half that of Paris. We don’t want London to end up like Hong Kong,” Javid said, but he wants more “mansion blocks, the kind you might see in Kensington and Chelsea”. He said: “It will be quite surprising how easy we want to make it for people who want to build upwards.”

Further proposals to force developers to build more quickly will be revealed next week when the former cabinet minister Oliver Letwin publishes the interim findings of his report into the problem of land banking by developers.

“We need planning permission to turn into homes,” Javid said. “I don’t think Oliver is going to hold back.”

Javid is aware that failure to deliver could cost the Tories the next election. “We need a housing revolution. We have to show the British public that we are doing everything we reasonably can because if we don’t they will turn to the hard-left ideas of [Jeremy] Corbyn. If that means taking on councils, developers and others that’s what we’re going to do.”

Source: Sunday Times (pay wall)

“Housing ministry returns cash to Treasury”

Affordable homes? Pah, who needs them!

“The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has returned £817m of unspent cash to the Treasury.

According to website Huffington Post, the money includes £329m for the government’s Starter Homes programme, £72m for affordable homes and £52m for estate regeneration.

Labour’s shadow housing secretary, John Healey, said: “If the secretary of state can’t defend his department’s budget from the Treasury he should give the job to someone who can.”

http://www.room151.co.uk/151-news/news-roundup-pwlb-borrowing-reaches-464m-mhclg-returns-unspent-817m-to-treasury-us-firm-enters-advice-market/

Developers and loopholes – go together like a horse and carriage!

Owl says: as millions of pounds meant to be used for affordable homes was returned to the Treasury by the Department of Communities, Local Government and HOUSING, we can only assume this government doesn’t give a stuff about this.

“Property developers have used a legal loophole to halve the number of affordable homes that they are building in the countryside.

A study of more than 150 new housing developments found that confidential viability assessments had been used to cut the number of affordable houses by 48 per cent. The assessments let developers break promises made to get planning permission, if they can show those commitments will eat into profits.

The research, which was commissioned by Shelter, the charity for the homeless, and the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), found that eight rural councils lost 938 affordable homes after viability studies over the course of a year. “The viability loophole is slashing affordable housing supply in the countryside,” the report said. “The profits of volume housebuilders are rocketing, yet affordable housing provision by the same developers is being undercut on the grounds that it is not profitable enough.”

In one instance in Cornwall, the owners of a disused tin and copper mine promised that 40 per cent of the site’s 99 new homes would be affordable. They cut that commitment to zero with a viability study. The owners then advertised the plot for sale, boasting in the brochure that all of the plots had been approved for “open market housing” without any “liabilities”.

Central Bedfordshire, which was the worst affected of the eight councils in the study, lost 533 affordable homes in the 2015-2016 financial year.

Affordable housing includes homes for social rent, shared ownership and other intermediate tenures. “The term affordable in this context does not necessarily mean that these homes are in fact genuinely affordable to local people,” the report said.

The profits of Britain’s three biggest builders, Barratt Developments, Taylor Wimpey and Persimmon Homes, have quadrupled since 2012 to £2.2 billion a year. Yet they regularly cite financial constraints to reduce the percentage of affordable homes at new developments.

At Sowerby Gateway in North Yorkshire, Taylor Wimpey promised to build 256 affordable homes. A viability study cut that promise to zero. “Too much of our countryside is eaten up for developments that boost profits, but don’t meet local housing needs because of the viability loopholes,” said Crispin Truman, the chief executive of CPRE.

Councils can challenge viability studies but the government has guaranteed big builders at least a 20 per cent profit. If the builders can show that they stand to make less, the government will side with them.

“Developers are using this legal loophole to overpower local communities and are refusing to build the affordable homes they need,” said Polly Neate, the chief executive of Shelter.

Sajid Javid, the communities secretary, has promised to review how “viability is assessed” when he starts a consultation next week to overhaul the planning laws.

Separate research by the Institute for Public Policy Research, a think tank, found that the number of people sleeping rough in rural parts of England increased by 42 per cent from 397 in 2010 to 565 in 2016.

Houses are 26 per cent more expensive in the countryside because of pressure from wealthy retirees and buyers of second homes, but wages in rural areas are 26 per cent lower, which has created an exodus of young families.

Andrew Whitaker, from the Home Builders Federation, an industry body, said local authority targets were always negotiable. “There is a limit as to what can be extracted from development sites before they become unviable and you get no homes of any sort,” he said.”

Source: Times (paywall)

“Tory ministers decide not to spend £72 million set aside for affordable homes despite housing crisis The money will now be spent on building houses for sale worth up to £600,000”

“Tory ministers decided not to spend £72 million set aside to build affordable homes because it was “no longer required”, despite the housing crisis gripping Britain.

Communities Secretary Sajid Javid was forced to “surrender” the cash and send it back to the treasury, as part of £817 million his department failed to spend last year.

Some 115 million people are on council waiting lists in England, almost a quarter of whom are in London.

But a government memo, explaining the department’s underspend to the Treasury, states: “Part of the funding allocation for the Affordable Housing programme has not been required in 2017/18.”

The document also notes that the £817 million figure – much of which would have been intended for social or affordable homes – will now be spent on funding the Help to Buy programme.

In 2016-17, just 41,530 affordable homes were built, the second lowest figure for a decade.

The majority of affordable homes are so-called ‘affordable rent’, where the monthly rent is set at up to 80% of private market rent.

The number of cheaper, “social rent” houses built each year has plummeted from 39,560 in 2010-11 – the year the new “affordable rent” definition was introduced – to just 5,380 last year.

Labour’s Shadow Housing Secretary, John Healey said: “Feeble ministers are selling families short by surrendering much-needed cash for new homes.

“If the Secretary of State can’t defend his Department’s Budget from the Treasury he should give the job to someone who can.”

A DCLG spokesperson said: “We are delivering the homes our country needs and since 2010 we have built over 357,000 new affordable properties.

“But we are determined to do more and we are investing a further £9bn, including £2bn to help councils and housing associations build social rent homes where they are most needed.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-ministers-decide-not-spend-12098770

Oh, what a surprise! Another poor, poor developer at Hayne Lane, Honiton

One presumes that Councillors Diviani and Twiss are aware of this, having declared hospitality from Baker Estates in September and December last year:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/02/22/eddc-councillor-freebies/

PRESS RELEASE

“Developer requests reduced affordable housing provision on residential development at Hayne Lane, Honiton

Local planning authority will consider offer from Baker Estates to provide improved mix of houses at Hayne Lane development plus £0.5m contribution towards off-site affordable housing

East Devon’s Local Planning Authority (LPA) has received a request from Baker Estates to amend the amount of affordable housing that they provide on their development of 300 houses on land to the west of Hayne Lane in Honiton.

The request will be considered after 12 noon at the next meeting of East Devon District Council’s Development Management Committee on 6 March 2018, which is being held at Exmouth Town Hall

East Devon planning officers are recommending that the request be agreed.

As present Baker Estates is required to provide 40% of the dwellings (120 units) as affordable housing in accordance with the original planning permission granted on the site in 2015.

However, the developer is now asking the LPA to agree to reduce the affordable housing provision to 30% or 90 dwellings, whichever is the greater. This change would also affect the amount of financial contribution being secured for off-site open space, which would be reduced from £488,000 to £210,000.

In exchange Baker Estates is offering an improved mix of houses on the site and £500,000 financial contribution towards off-site provision of affordable housing.

The applicants have submitted this request as they believe that current planning policy would support a reduction in the provision of affordable housing down to 25%, if a new planning application were to be submitted. While they are offering less than the 40% affordable housing provision currently secured, they are offering more than the 25% they believe they would be required to provide if a new planning application were submitted.

The planning officers’ report advises that while there is a chance that Baker Estates may not be able to successfully argue 25% affordable housing provision as part of a new planning application, there is an equal chance that such a proposal would be acceptable should an application be submitted and determined on appeal by the Planning Inspectorate.

In addition, the planning officers believe that the viability of the site is such that it is unlikely that the council would be able to secure the current 40% provision into the future, and that agreeing to the request will negate the need for a lengthy and costly planning appeal, enabling the development to proceed as quickly as possible while providing 90, much needed, affordable housing units.

The report can be viewed on the council’s website:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/committees-and-meetings/development-management-committee/development-management-committee-agendas/

Cllr Mike Howe, Chairman of East Devon’s Development Management Committee, said:

“It is important that this sort of decision is made in the public view, so that everyone can understand the issues at stake. It is about striking a fair balance, while ensuring that the right amount of affordable housing provision is made.”

“Labour says land value tax would boost local government budgets”

“Labour is considering a tax on land values as a way of boosting local government budgets, shadow chancellor John McDonnell has said.

In a sign of the party’s confidence about growing public interest in a fresh approach to managing the economy, McDonnell said cuts to council spending were so severe that it might now be possible “to have a rational debate”.

At the last election the Tories called the proposal, which was included in Labour’s manifesto as part of a review of council funding, a “garden tax” that could force home owners to sell up. The Greens and the Liberal Democrats are also interested in the idea.

A land tax, where a percentage of the value of the land is levied annually is popular with some economists, who say it is a logical approach to taxing individual wealth. But many politicians across the political spectrum are alarmed at the thought of introducing a new tax. A new tax on wealth that creates losers as well as winners would inevitably be a hard sell.

But McDonnell told the audience at the event organised by the Resolution Foundation, where he set out Labour’s plans to boost household incomes, that the crisis in the funding of local services may have opened a window of opportunity.

“I think we are at a stage where the decline in terms of funding to local government and the consequential effect on local services – many of them are in crisis – means, I think, that people are now willing to consider more radical solutions than they have in the past.”

Councils are hamstrung by government rules and cannot raise council tax significantly without a local referendum, which would be costly to run and would have an uncertain result. But the tax – introduced nearly 30 years ago to replace the unpopular poll tax – has not been uprated since then. It leaves many councils struggling, with too small a tax base to meet all their obligations.

Other councils are on the brink of catastrophe. Northamptonshire county council announced earlier this month that it could only afford to meet its statutory obligations. On Thursday the accountants KPMG, who audit the council’s budget, said it did not balance and was therefore illegal.

The local government association has said that by 2020 many councils would struggle to provide some public services, partly because of botched central government reforms. By 2020, central government funding will have been cut by more than 50% since 2010.

Council tax is regressive because it is levied on a notional value that has no relation to household income or to the market value of the property. However, unless it is regularly updated, a land value tax would share some of those weaknesses. But it would be directly related to the wealth of the homeowner and it would capture the rapid growth in house values that have been a financial boost to those who own property.

One council, Westminster, one of the richest in the country, is now proposing that wealthy residents pay a voluntary additional contribution, ringfenced to help offer improved services to rough sleepers and young people.

There is increasing support in policymaking circles for a land-value tax. Tony Blair’s thinktank, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, backed the idea in a policy paper published at the end of last year. ”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/22/labour-says-land-value-tax-would-boost-local-government-budgets

“Demand for new homes sees house builder Barratt rake in profits and pledge another £175m payout to shareholders”

And all done on the back of building fewer houses:

“Profits rise at Barratt despite the UK’s biggest housebuilder building fewer homes”

and a bribery scandal:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/01/26/four-arrests-for-bribery-at-developer-barratts/

“House builder Barratt Developments is cashing in on the demand for homes across the UK with bumper half-year profits in the last six months of 2017.

The new home builder reported a record half-year profit of £342.7 million in the second half of last year, a 6.8 per cent increase on the year before.

While it said a slowdown in high-end central London homes could hit margins, Barratts planned to offset it by buying more land and ‘operational efficiencies’. …

The group revealed plans to pay out a special dividend to shareholders worth £175 million in both November 2018 and November 2019, something it said reflected its ‘confidence’ in performance. …”

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-5417233/Barratt-Developments-rakes-340m-profit.html

Gentrification and brownfield New York style

6pm today, BBC 2:

“Ade heads to Harlem and meets residents who are benefiting and suffering at the hands of gentrification. Ant is at Hudson Yards on the west side of Manhattan where an entirely new district is being built on top of a functioning rail depot.”

Another toothless tiger – a rented housing “watchdog”

Owl says: more money to be spent on another useless quango. Can you imagine the correspondence? Instead of a long-running battle with a landlord, it will be an everlasting problem with a taxpayer-funded quango, which could go something like this:

I live in a flat with no heating, my landlord refuses to fix it.
Rate your heating and explain your problem in as technical way as possible, on this 20 page form. (end of week 1)
I don’t have any heating, I can’t get more technical than that, I’m not a plumber or electrician.
We cannot process your complaint unless you fill in the form and have it certified by a plumber or electrician. (end of week 4)
(You fill in the form as best you can).
Sorry, you did not include information about the warranty and the plumber you engaged said he could not provide more information without a full inspection. (end of week 8)
I don’t have the warranty, my landlord has it and won’t let me see it, it’s my landlord’s responsibility to engage and pay for an inspection
Sorry, we can’t help you if you do not have a copy of the warranty and a copy of the inspection report from your landlord (end of week 12)
So what do I do now – I have no heating, I’ve paid for a plumber’s visit out of my own pocket and my landlord refuses to give me a copy of the warranty and refuses to call a plumber? (week 16]
Email: Thank you for using our service. Please rate our service on the attached questionnaire: was it
excellent,
brilliant or
outrageously, miraculously wonderful?

“HOUSEHOLDERS will soon be spared long-running battles with rogue landlords and builders to get their homes repaired.

A new watchdog will be appointed to adjudicate in disputes over damp walls, broken boilers and crumbling plasterwork.

The government appointed housing ombudsman will have sweeping powers to resolve disagreements between dissatisfied residents and landlords or builders.

He will also be encouraged to name and shame dodgy housing or repair providers.

It will be a lifeline for millions of tenants or home-owners locked in long-running rows over everything from outstanding repairs to cracks in new-build homes. …”

Housing Secretary Sajid Javid will today launch an eight-week consultation on the precise role of the new official.”

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5604478/new-housing-watchdog-to-be-set-up-to-deal-with-rogue-landlords-over-home-repairs/

Question: how many homes in the south-west have planning permission but not yet built?

Answer:

34,929

out of a total number of 423,544 in England.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/more-400000-homes-planning-permission-12035753

“Developers leave 420,000 homes with planning permission unbuilt, new figures show”

“The number of homes that have not been built despite receiving planning permission has soared in the last year, new figures reveal, meaning sites for hundreds of thousands of new properties are being left undeveloped.

More than 400,000 homes have been granted permission but are still waiting to be built, according to analysis published by the Local Government Association (LGA) – a rise of 16 per cent in the past year.

The data also shows developers are taking significantly longer to build homes than they were four years ago. It now takes an average of 40 months from planning permission for a property to be completed – eight months longer than in 2013-14.

The findings will probably raise questions over why developers are taking more than three years to complete homes, and in many cases failing to build them at all, at a time when the UK is building around 50,000 fewer properties per year than is needed to meet current demand.

In 2015-16, the number of homes in England and Wales that had received planning permission but not been built was

365,146

A year later that had risen to

423,544

Developers argue that a burdensome planning system stops them building properties more quickly, but the LGA said the new figures prove that delays are the fault of developers, not councils.

Councillor Martin Tett, the organisation’s housing spokesman, said: “These figures prove that the planning system is not a barrier to house building. In fact the opposite is true. In the last year, councils and their communities granted twice as many planning permissions as the number of new homes that were completed.

“No one can live in a planning permission. Councils need greater powers to act where house building has stalled.”

Arguing that town halls need to be given greater freedom to borrow money to fund new homes, Mr Tett added: “Our national housing shortage is one of the most pressing issues we face. While private developers have a key role to play in solving our housing crisis, they cannot meet the 300,000 house-building target set by the Government on their own.

“We have no chance of housing supply meeting demand unless councils can get building again.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/developers-real-estate-homes-planning-permission-unbuilt-social-housing-crisis-figures-a8212641.html

Home ownership amongst the (non-wealthy) young has plummeted in 20 years

“New research from the Institute for Fiscal Studies shows how an explosion in house prices above income growth has increasingly robbed the younger generation of the ability to buy their own home. For 25- to 34-year-olds earning between £22,200 and £30,600 per year, home ownership fell to just 27% in 2016 from 65% two decades ago.

Middle income young adults born in the late 1980s are now no more likely than those lower down the pay scale to own their own home. Those born in the 1970s were almost as likely as their peers on higher wages to have bought their own home during young adulthood.

Andrew Hood, a senior research economist at the IFS, said: “Home ownership among young adults has collapsed over the past 20 years, particularly for those on middle incomes.”

The IFS said young adults from wealthy backgrounds are now significantly more likely than others to own their own home.

Between 2014 and 2017 roughly 30% of 25- to 34-year-olds whose parents were in lower-skilled jobs such as delivery drivers or sales assistants owned their own home, versus 43% for the children of those in higher-skilled jobs such as lawyers and teachers. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/feb/16/homeownership-among-young-adults-collapsed-institute-fiscal-studies

Buzzfeed says Tory Housing Minister in private Facebook group that wants to sell off all council housing, privatise all health care and bring back workhouses for debtors

“The Conservatives’ new housing minister, Dominic Raab, belonged to a private Facebook group that argues for council housing to be sold off at market value, healthcare to be privatised, and the return of workhouses for the poor.

Raab was, until Thursday morning, one of 14 members of a closed group called the “British Ultra Liberal Youth — The Ultras”, which was set up about seven years ago. He withdrew from the group after being approached for comment.

Raab told BuzzFeed News: “I wasn’t aware of this group, let alone that I had inadvertently and mistakenly been linked on Facebook. I have corrected it, and needless to say I do not support its aims.”

Because the group is closed, BuzzFeed News is unable to see activity within the group — just the description and membership. There had been no new posts or new members in the last 30 days.

According to the group’s “About” page, it believes that “Britain is a nation that has been shooting at it’s [sic] own feet for too long” and that “too much tolerance of socialism has cost us a trillion pounds”.

“If this were a football field,” the description continues, “we would be racing down the right wing so close to the touchline, we would be doing so very carefully making sure we don’t put our feet outside the field of play.”

It is the duty of members, it adds, to pressure mainstream Conservatives into realising that selling off council housing, ending free healthcare, and bringing back workhouses for debtors are policies that “have found their time to enter Britain”.

At the time of publishing, the 13 other members appeared to include another current Tory MP, Henry Smith; a former Tory MP; and others who have stood unsuccessfully for parliament for the Conservatives or UKIP.

Smith was unavailable to comment because he is travelling, but an aide said he wouldn’t have voluntarily joined the group, and that he hasn’t used that Facebook account for more than a year. “Certainly someone may have added him to the group and he clearly didn’t notice but he definitely does not join any such groups himself,” the staffer said.

According to Facebook, you can be added to a closed group if you’re friends with someone in that group, and you’ll receive a notification that you’ve been added.

Raab joined Facebook in 2010 and uses his account to publicise his work as an MP and minister. In one recent post, he promoted an opinion piece he wrote for the Daily Telegraph about the government’s £866 million investment in local housing projects. Housing is “one of the great social challenges of our generation”, Raab wrote.

Raab, 43, was appointed housing minister in Theresa May’s new year reshuffle, putting him in charge of one of the Conservatives’ top policy priorities. Addressing the housing crisis has been one of the party’s main concerns after it polled significantly worse than Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour among voters under 40 at the last election, and the prime minister has said she will make it her personal mission to get more people into homeownership.

Raab was a City lawyer and Foreign Office official before becoming a parliamentary aide to David Davis. He was elected MP for Esher and Walton in 2010 and was a minister in the Justice Department before moving to housing last month.

Having been tipped as one of the rising stars on the Tory right, Raab was seen as unlucky not to be given a cabinet position during the reshuffle last month.

He was criticised during last year’s general election campaign for saying on the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire show that food bank users typically aren’t poor but have a “cashflow problem episodically”.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexspence/the-tory-housing-minister-was-in-a-private-facebook-group

“Further defects found at housing [new-build apartments] with Grenfell-style cladding”

“More than a dozen fire safety concerns have been uncovered in a new housing complex covered in Grenfell-style flammable cladding, built by one of Britain’s biggest housebuilders, Galliard Homes.

In the weeks after the Grenfell Tower fire, which claimed 71 lives, defective fire doors, missing fire-stopping, dangerous fire escapes and holes in plasterboard meant to stop the spread of flames and smoke were identified by fire officials at New Capital Quay in Greenwich, London, which is home to about 2,000 people and opened in 2013.

The Guardian has learned that another deficiency notice from the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) was issued on 25 January in relation to all 11 blocks in the complex.

It identified 16 fire safety issues, including a lack of arrangements to evacuate vulnerable and elderly residents, an ineffective maintenance regime, a broken firefighting lift and a broken fire hydrant outside one of the blocks.

It also found that “the procedures to be followed in the event of serious and imminent danger to relevant persons are inadequate”, raising residents’ fears about being trapped in the event of a fire.

Ruth Montlake, 85, who lives on the seventh floor of one of the blocks, said: “The fire situation is very worrying. I am hard of hearing; how will I know to evacuate?”

Simone Joseph, 35, a fashion buyer and mother of a seven-year-old boy, said there had been three fires in her block in the time she had lived there.

“To know that seven months down the line we are living in this property with this cladding is upsetting,” said Joseph, who rents from Hyde Housing, the head leaseholder of two of the blocks. “People have been cutting corners for so many years and are putting people’s lives at risk and they have to be held accountable.”

With more than 1,000 homes, New Capital Quay is believed to be one of the biggest single private housing developments in the country discovered to have flammable cladding in the wake of Grenfell. Galliard sold two-bedroom apartments for £700,000.

A fire warden patrol was put in place when the cladding was discovered last summer, but residents are concerned that it is still in place seven months after the west London disaster.

“We simply do not feel safe living in buildings with defective cladding that could rapidly go up in flames while we are sleeping,” one woman told the local council in an email exchange.

Galliard said some of the defects identified in July had been addressed and there had been no issue with missing fire-stopping material, just an error during the inspection.

It said the building was different to Grenfell: “Totally unlike Grenfell, NCQ was built and still has full and proper fire precautions with fire doors, fire-stopping, fire alarms, smoke-extract systems and no gas in apartments. The block at NCQ which has the most cladding has a full sprinkler system throughout.”

It also said that three of the 16 issues raised by fire authorities in its latest report were “not true” and questioned two further issues.

Asked whether residents were safe, Galliard said LFEPA was the leading expert. “They have the statutory power to issue notices to evacuate the homes. They have to date decided not to do so,” it said.

While residents fear their lives are at risk while the cladding remains, they are also concerned they will be asked to pay the estimated £20m-£40m bill – between £20,000 and £40,000 a flat – to make it safe. In addition, they face a £1.25m bill for round-the-clock fire patrols.

But they are particularly concerned about how difficult it is to get information and said they were forced to use a freedom of information request to uncover the fire safety notices from the London Fire Brigade (LFB).

Galliard, which is facing a bill of up to £40m, is planning to sue the warranty and insurance provider, National House Building Council. NHBC has indicated it will defend the claim.

Meanwhile, 30 fire marshals are patrolling the 11 buildings 24 hours a day at an estimated cost of £25,000 a week. But residents are concerned that wardens are not the solution.

Annabel Parsons, 54, a business psychologist who lives in the complex, said one marshal had been spotted asleep and another had brought a blanket with him. Before they were equipped with hand-held klaxons, one warden said their plan to raise the alarm in the event of a fire involved throwing stones at windows, residents claimed. Galliard said that without a date, time, name and other details of the fire marshal, it was an “impossible allegation to investigate”.

Hyde Housing, which has interests in six of the blocks as well as being head leaseholder in two, said the situation was “very distressing” for residents.

“We urge all those bodies involved in resolving this matter to do so speedily,” said Brent O’Halloran, director of asset management at Hyde.

A recent tribunal regarding a building in Croydon was told that official guidance was that fire wardens were the “least-efficient, most resource-intensive” solution of three recommended by LFB.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/15/further-defects-discovered-at-housing-with-grenfell-style-cladding

Redrow posts record profits

“Housebuilder Redrow recorded record profits and revenues after completing it highest ever number of homes in the first half of its financial year.

The figures

Profits before tax rose by 26 per cent year-on-year in its first-half accounting period to hit £176m. Revenues rose by 20 per cent to £890m.

Legal completions from by 14 per cent to 2,811 during the period, while order books were up by five per cent year-on-year at £1.05bn….

Why it’s interesting

This time last year Redrow was chasing Bovis Homes for a merger. That fell through after Bovis rejected their advances, so the FTSE 250 firm has had to look for growth through other means.

The Flintshire-headquartered builder has since defied the slowdown in house prices to post a string of strong profits.

Economists are not confident about the state of the UK housing market, after an extended period of real wages being squeezed and uncertainties around the Brexit process.

What Redrow said

Steve Morgan, chairman of Redrow, said: “Reservations in the first five weeks of the second half have been in line with the strong comparable period last year. We entered the second half with a record order book, and customer traffic and sales remain robust.

“Given the strength of both our order book and land holdings, together with the robust sales market, our growth strategy remains on track. This gives me every confidence it will be another year of significant progress for Redrow.”

Why it’s interesting

This time last year Redrow was chasing Bovis Homes for a merger. That fell through after Bovis rejected their advances, so the FTSE 250 firm has had to look for growth through other means.

The Flintshire-headquartered builder has since defied the slowdown in house prices to post a string of strong profits.

Economists are not confident about the state of the UK housing market, after an extended period of real wages being squeezed and uncertainties around the Brexit process.

What Redrow said

Steve Morgan, chairman of Redrow, said: “Reservations in the first five weeks of the second half have been in line with the strong comparable period last year. We entered the second half with a record order book, and customer traffic and sales remain robust.

“Given the strength of both our order book and land holdings, together with the robust sales market, our growth strategy remains on track. This gives me every confidence it will be another year of significant progress for Redrow.”

Why it’s interesting

This time last year Redrow was chasing Bovis Homes for a merger. That fell through after Bovis rejected their advances, so the FTSE 250 firm has had to look for growth through other means.

The Flintshire-headquartered builder has since defied the slowdown in house prices to post a string of strong profits.

Economists are not confident about the state of the UK housing market, after an extended period of real wages being squeezed and uncertainties around the Brexit process.

What Redrow said

Steve Morgan, chairman of Redrow, said: “Reservations in the first five weeks of the second half have been in line with the strong comparable period last year. We entered the second half with a record order book, and customer traffic and sales remain robust.

“Given the strength of both our order book and land holdings, together with the robust sales market, our growth strategy remains on track. This gives me every confidence it will be another year of significant progress for Redrow.”

http://www.cityam.com/280180/housebuilder-redrows-revenues-and-profits-rise-record

Build higher and quicker in towns and cities say Tories

“The government’s proposed planning reforms are “too weak to make a difference”, three former Tory ministers have said.

Nick Boles, John Penrose and Mark Prisk said that Britain was facing a “slow-motion crisis” that would leave a generation locked out of home ownership, and that the government’s response to the problem was inadequate.

Sajid Javid, the housing secretary, announced this week that the government would consult on changes making it easier for developers to add new floors to existing buildings. MPs criticised the scale of the plans.

“You are absolutely right that overhauling our slow, expensive, uncertain and conflict-ridden planning laws is the place to start,” they said in a letter to Mr Javid. “But given the size of our housing crisis, we’d like to encourage you to be even bolder.

“Unless these proposals allow for building up not out in all towns and cities, and without red tape, they will be too weak to make a difference on the scale that’s going to be needed.”

Mr Boles, Mr Prisk and Mr Penrose are former ministers for planning, housing and architecture respectively. They are urging Mr Javid to remove the need for permission when urban property owners want to build up to the height of the tallest building in the same block, or to a fifth storey, whichever is higher. Their proposals would encourage mansion blocks, terraces and mews rather than tower blocks, they said.

Mr Penrose, who is chairman of the all-party parliamentary group on housing and planning, said: “We’ve simply got to build more homes, whether they’re to rent or to buy, so they’re cheap enough for everyone to afford. Housing is a huge, slow-motion crisis, so we’ve got to be bold. Otherwise a generation will stay locked out of the dream of home ownership and house prices will keep spiralling upwards.”

Source: Times (pay wall

“TORY MP STANDS UP FOR LABOUR POLICY PLAN IN SPAT WITH TORY MINISTER”

“A Tory minister has been taken to task for juvenile political point scoring by an unlikely source – a senior Tory MP.

The incredible spat between two of the Tories’ most prolific tweeters broke out when Treasury Secretary Liz Truss took a cheap shot at a housing policy being considered by Labour.

Under the plan, which is revealed on the front page of today’s Guardian, landowners would no longer be allowed to inflate the price of land sold for property development:

[There then follows a nasty Twitter spat between Tories Liz Truss and Nick Boles where Bowles sticks up for Corbyn!!!]

Truss responded by trying to tar the attempt to get more council homes built as some kind of Stalinist land grab.

But Nick Boles, himself a former planning minister, was having none of it.

The pair continued to spar until Truss brought the embarrassing blue-on-blue battle to a curt conclusion.

The clash comes after Boles made clear his dissatisfaction with abject lack of policy ideas coming from the Government and his party. …

The Conservative family is not a happy one.

As for Truss’ objections to Labour’s policy, we were reminded of a policy included in the last budget by her boss, Chancellor Philip Hammond.

Hammond announced an anti-land banking policy which the Tories had described as “Mugabe-style expropriation” when Labour floated the idea.

Liz Truss will be defending this “sinister confiscation” before you know it…

https://politicalscrapbook.net/2018/02/tory-mp-stands-up-for-labour-policy-plan-in-spat-with-tory-minister/

Tories disagree about compulsory land purchase for housing

Wonder where Swire stands on this?

“Labour’s plan to force the cheap sale of land to the state to boost housebuilding has been branded “deeply sinister” by Liz Truss, chief secretary to the Treasury, but the proposal has exposed a split in the Conservatives with influential Tory backbenchers backing the plan.

The shadow housing secretary, John Healey, told the Guardian on Thursday that a Jeremy Corbyn-led government could use compulsory purchase powers to buy land at closer to agricultural value rather than paying up to 100 times more, the kind of mark-up that land zoned for housing can currently fetch.

The proposal is intended to reduce the cost of building new council housing but Truss responded on Twitter saying: “First the utility companies, then the landowners. Who next? #freedomerosion #confiscation”.

She said she could not support the state imposing prices on landowners or private companies, adding: “We need more market not less.”

Nick Boles, the former Tory planning minister, who supports a similar policy to Labour, denied it was sinister and replied to Truss: “Why should a few landowners receive all of the windfall profit from planning permission when the taxpayer bears the cost of infrastructure?”

He argued that existing prices of development land aren’t the product of market forces.

“They’re the product of artificial scarcity created by the nationalisation of development rights and the introduction of the planning system,” he said.

Former education minister Robert Halfon also said he was sympathetic to the idea and said it was “an option we should look at”.

“We have to rapidly solve our housing crisis and we need to build social housing quickly,” he said. “We need to seriously look at this kind of thing and see the evidence on whether it would make a difference or not.”

Sajid Javid, the housing secretary, is examining proposals to remove planning permission from those who build too slowly. Oliver Letwin, the former Downing Street policy chief, is due to publish a review of land-banking later this year.

Landowners warned that small farms could suffer from the Labour proposal, which they described as “seeking to forcibly remove their assets at artificially low prices”.

“Compulsory purchase of land should only ever be a last resort and in practice it is far more likely to be small family farms that suffer, not the big players who have far more means to defend themselves,” said Christopher Price, policy director at the Country Land and Business Association which represents over 30,000 landowners across rural England and Wales.

Paul Smith, managing director of Strategic Land Group which makes money by securing planning permission for greenfield sites and sharing in the uplift in value, also attacked the plan.

“Land values are a consequence, not a cause, of house prices,” he said. “The industry and government should pool its collective wisdom and have a proper conversation around finding a workable solution to freeing up land – there are surely more straightforward ways to release land for development which should be fully explored.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/02/labours-housebuilding-plan-labelled-deeply-sinister-by-tory-minister

“Labour plans to make landowners sell to state for fraction of [development] value

Won’t that put the cat amongst the East Devon land-holding fat pigeons! And to add insult to land-owning injury – some top Tories agree!!!

“… Landowners currently sell at a price that factors in the dramatic increase in value planning consent is granted. It means a hectare of agricultural land worth around £20,000 can sell for closer to £2m if it is zoned for housing.

Labour believes this is slowing down housebuilding by dramatically increasing costs. It is planning a new English Sovereign Land Trust with powers to buy sites at closer to the lower price.

This would be enabled by a change in the 1961 Land Compensation Act so the state could compulsorily purchase land at a price that excluded the potential for future planning consent.

Healey’s analysis suggests that it would cut the cost of building 100,000 council houses a year by almost £10bn to around £16bn.

… With the “hope value” removed from the price of land, the cost of building a two-bed flat in Wandsworth, south-west London, would be cut from £380,000 to £250,000, in Chelmsford it would fall from £210,000 to £130,000 and in Tamworth in the West Midlands, where land values are lower, it would drop from £150,000 to £130,000.

“Rather than letting private landowners benefit from this windfall gain – and making everyone else pay for it – enabling public acquisition of land at nearer pre-planning-permission value would mean cheaper land which could help fund cheaper housing,” said Healey.

The proposal is expected to face strong opposition from landowners, including many pension fund investors, who would risk losing considerable sums on what they expected to receive. Savills, the property consultancy, warned that owners might launch legal challenges claiming the move infringed their property rights.

Companies known as strategic landowners make money for investors by buying agricultural land that may be needed for future housing at low prices, securing planning consent and selling it on for significant profits. They include Legal & General, which boasts “a strategic land portfolio of 3,550 acres stretching from Luton to Cardiff”.

… A similar policy has been advocated by some leading Conservatives, including the former planning minister Nick Boles. In a sign of growing political consensus, he said the huge windfalls gained by some landowners were inequitable and that the current system of capturing the uplift in land value through section 106 agreements was “incredibly inefficient”, because private developers could afford to outwit planners with expensive lawyers and consultants.

“There will be mass opposition, but there aren’t that many landowners and they are not a huge voting block,” Boles said. “Not all Conservatives would naturally feel comfortable with this but I have been struck by the positive reaction.”

Speaking earlier this week Javid indicated he would like to change the system. He said: “I think it’s right that the state takes a portion of that uplift to support local infrastructure and development.” …

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/01/labour-plans-landowners-sell-state-fraction-value

“Number of council homes sold off under Right to Buy increases five-fold in six years after Tories lift cap”

“The rapid loss of social housing because of the Right to Buy scheme has been laid bare after new figures revealed more than five times more homes are being sold now than in 2012.

Councils said Right to Buy had become “unsustainable” after it emerged the sell-off of council homes has drastically accelerated in the past few years, while Labour labelled the figures “indefensible”.

More than £3.5bn of public money has gone to help almost 60,000 tenants buy their home at a hefty discount in the past six years, prompting local councils to warn of a “fire sale” of low-cost homes.

Town-hall leaders said Right to Buy had become “unsustainable” and could not be continued unless councils are given more powers to build replacement homes. …

In April 2012, Conservatives ministers “revamped” Right to Buy and raised the maximum discount on a property to £75,000 (it has since increased further, to more than £100,000, in some parts of the country). Since then, the number of homes sold off has increased by 409 per cent, from 2,638 in 2011-12 to 13,416 in 2016-17.

This has come at a rising cost to the taxpayer, with the average discount given to tenants having more than doubled since 2012, from £26,690 to £61,810 – a 132 per cent increase.

It means tenants are able to buy their home at less than half the market value – with the average discount now at 43 per cent of the property’s value, up from 25 per cent in 2012.

In total, nearly 58,000 council homes have been privatised under Right to Buy in the past six years alone.

The mass sell-off comes despite the number of social homes in England having hit record lows and council house waiting lists reaching ten years in some parts of the country. …”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/right-to-buy-council-homes-sold-off-private-landlords-rent-tory-cap-a8189881.html