Owl says: if so few vehicles would use the business park – why build it!
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/objectors-outline-traffic-chaos-safety-2934450
Category Archives: Developers/ Development
How EDDC planners and Clinton Devon Estates justify the unjustifiable in Newton Poppleford
A dilemma for The Independent Group and their Tory supporters.
Summary: dangle a carrot (a doctor’s surgery), take away the carrot, put two houses in the place of the surgery/carrot, get planners to say it cannot now be refused even though the carrot has disappeared… although the carrot never actually existed anyway!
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/villagers-anger-understandable-over-broken-
Young people: a home or a pension – take your pick
“Young people should be able to raid their pension pots early to help fund a deposit on their first home, a senior Government minister has argued.
Speaking this morning at think tank Policy Exchange, the secretary of State for housing James Brokenshire suggested that allowing savers to use pension savings as a deposit could help alleviate the financial barriers facing first-time buyers.
He said: ‘We should be looking at allowing an individual to use part of their pension pot as a deposit on a first-time home purchase.’
However, one pensions expert has labelled the idea as ‘bonkers’ and ‘dangerous’. …
… Tom Selby, senior analyst at AJ Bell, said: ‘This idea smacks of dangerous political short-termism.
‘While the housing market clearly has its problems, allowing people to raid their pensions is not a sensible answer.
‘Chronic undersaving for later life is one of the biggest challenges facing society today, so a proposal which encourages people to drain their pension pots risks making this problem even worse.’
Steven Cameron, pensions director at Aegon, added: ‘Saving for a house deposit and making provision for retirement are the two greatest financial challenges facing younger generations.
‘But the same money can’t be used twice and there’s a huge risk that offering early access to pensions to pay house deposits will be a far too tempting ‘bird in the hand’ offer.’ …”
“Helsinki’s radical solution to homelessness”
“Finland is the only EU country where homelessness is falling. Its secret? Giving people homes as soon as they need them – unconditionally”
A new way of planning: are no-overall-control councillors up for it?
” Participation not Consultation:
At Civic Voice we are aware of the growth agenda and the need for more homes to be built. Our members understand this too, yet all over England many of these members, who are knowledgeable and positive people, have had to engage in fighting Local Plans and planning proposals that they feel passionately are not right for their places.
It is time to change the way things are done and to bring communities genuinely to the heart of planning and place-making. ‘Participation not Consultation’ is about bringing people in at an early stage to develop the proposals through collaborative planning processes, also known as Charrettes.
The Charrette approach involves community members working alongside local authorities and developers to co-create design-led, visual plans and strategies. It is an inspirational and energising activity where the results of collaboration are seen immediately, with the knowledge that an individual’s input actually matters. It also has the potential to greatly increase the speed of the formal planning and design process.
Civic Voice has launched a campaign to bring these collaborative processes into mainstream planning so that, through shared working from an early stage, communities can help shape and support growth and development that is right for their place.”
Cranbrook to get massively BIGGER – first planning test for no-overall-control council
The first test of The Independent Group on large-scale development. It got to make up the EDDC Cabinet and its Leader, Ben Ingham, has appointed several current and former Tories to positions of influence.
What will each group’s stand be on large-scale development? And what happens if the smaller parties have different views to that of the Independent Group and Tories if they agree? Interesting.
There are a few worrying words in this press release – potential, proposed, outlines, capable of, vision, could, opportunities. Lots of leeway for developet mund-changing at a later date.
And missing words: affordable and social housing.
Plus our local NHS Trust wants more than £1.3 million before it considers the proposal sustainable for health needs.
“Plans for 930 new homes as part of the western expansion of Cranbrook have been revealed.
The proposals for the Bluehayes site would also see a primary school, sport and recreational facilities, community uses, green infrastructure, as well as a mixed use area of shops, food and drink and professional services built.
The Bluehayes site, which lies between the existing Cranbrook development and Broadclyst Station, is one of four proposed expansion areas of Cranbrook.
A new link road that would run from the Cranbrook railway station to London Road and to Broadclyst Station, through the middle of the Bluehayes site, is also proposed in the scheme handed in recently to East Devon District Council planners.
And the plans also reveal that a footbridge over the London Road that would connect the Bluehayes site with the proposed Treasbeare site, south of the road, could be built.
The Cranbrook Plan was backed by East Devon District Council’s Strategic Planning Committee in February which outlines the land where a further 4,170 new homes will be built.
It allocates 40 hectares of land at the Bluehayes Expansion Area for around 960 new dwellings, land capable of accommodating a community building, formal open space recreational land, a 420 pupil place primary school, formal play space with facilities for children and youth and allotments totalling an area of 0.55 hectare of land
Details with a planning statement submitted with the planning application says: “The submission of the new outline application for the Western Expansion of Cranbrook and the change of use of agricultural land to the north of Cranny Brook to SANG land, is consistent with the planning policy and the longstanding policy to deliver new homes to meet the needs of the area.
“The submission of the application for the Western Expansion area and their progression delivers certainty required in the long term delivery of growth and of the delivery of the vision for Cranbrook.
“The proposals have been designed to be residential led with the potential for the delivery of a new primary school and formal outdoor sports pitches to provide complementary community and social infrastructure to meet the needs of new residents.
“The application demonstrates provision of the necessary infrastructure to include internal roads, public transport provision, formal and informal open space uses to support itself and to mitigate any impacts of development on existing communities and wider infrastructure.
“Cranbrook and its Western Expansion have been fully justified in the context of local planning policy and in the context of the growth agenda and the national and local need for housing.
“The proposals will result in substantial and demonstrable benefits in terms of meeting the need for new homes in a sustainable manner, fostering economic development and further underpinning the sustainability of Cranbrook.
“The proposals will also help deliver the vision for Cranbrook and underpin the planning and delivery of infrastructure and the town centre.”
A 1.14 hectare site for a one-form entry primary school could come forward as part of the plans. The primary school will be built in either the Bluehayes or the Treasbeare allocation, depending on which is constructed first.
Details with the scheme also outline that a new link road from the Cranbrook station to London Road and to Broadclyst Station will be built.
There will be a new frontage to London Road which will comprise a mixed use area, providing opportunities for a range of residential, retail and small scale employment uses, and in future, a crossing over London Road to the southern expansion area may be accommodated.
But the Royal and Devon Exeter NHS Foundation Trust have requested a contribution of £1,332,313 from the developers, cash which will be used directly to provide additional health care services to meet patient demand.
Commenting on the application, they say: “Without the contribution being paid, the development would not be acceptable in planning terms as the consequence would be inadequate health services available to support it.”
Having considered the cost projections, the Trust say that they will require the full figure to ensure the required level of service provision is delivered in a timely manner.
They add: “Failure to access this additional funding will put significant additional pressure on the current service capacity, leading to increase delays for patients and dissatisfaction with NHS services.
“The contribution will ensure that Health services are maintained for current and future generations and that way make the development sustainable.”
The Bluehayes expansion is one of four proposed expansion areas for Cranbrook, which development also proposed for Treasbeare and Grange, south of the existing town, and Cobdens, to the east of the town.
A reserved matters application has also been submitted for 80 homes, for which outline planning permission has already been granted, for land north-east of the Cranbrook Education Campus.
East Devon District Council planners will determine the fate of the applications at a later date.”
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/cranbrook-getting-bigger-930-new-2923726
“Campaign to keep Brighton General Hospital land public”
“CAMPAIGNERS fighting to keep Brighton General Hospital land in public ownership are calling for more people to get involved.
About 100 people heard NHS campaigners, councillors and two MPs at a public meeting speak about the using the site for low-cost social housing.
Plans to redevelop the former Victorian workhouse at the top of Elm Grove are under discussion.
A new community health hub is proposed for the current ambulance station site, with a GP surgery and pharmacy, along with existing services for mental health, podiatry and early parenting. Health chiefs have said the cost of the project could be funded by selling the rest of the site for housing.
When Brighton and Hove City Council’s health and wellbeing board was given a briefing in November last year, one suggestion was the site be used to build homes for health workers.
An online petition, calling for meaningful public consultation about the future of the site, as well as asking for community beds and homes for social rent has more than 1,300 signatures.
Green councillor David Gibson said the site was a public asset in a city with “horrendous” housing problems. He added the Greens and Labour councillors and activists from the Brighton Housing Coalition, Sussex Defend The NHS and the Save Whitehawk Hill group had come together to shift the agenda to social housing.
Cllr Gibson said: “Privatisation and inequality have gone together. This country has become one of the most unequal countries in the developed world.
“You get better outcomes if you narrow inequality. If you want to narrow inequality, you need public provision, public support and public services which are decent.”
He said the council’s chief executive Geoff Raw would be meeting the board of the Brighton General landowner, Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust, to discuss options.
The campaign is pushing for the site to be taken into council ownership.
Carolyn Pickering, of Sussex Defend The NHS, reminded the audience the NHS freed people from the fear of choosing which child to spend their savings on if one became ill. She said: “The land is still part of the NHS. The NHS belongs to us and the land belongs to us so they should not be allowed to sell it.”
Council leader Nancy Platts said: “We will be inviting all interested parties into meetings about the Brighton General site and this includes the Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust as well as those campaigning about the future use of the site.”
https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/17673627.campaign-to-keep-brighton-general-hospital-land-public/
“Slums Croydon: ” Political pygmies” and their rabbit hutch flats
This is legal:
Offices to homes permitted development has led to some of the tiniest micro-flats being built in Croydon.
“PDR, as it is known, has managed to strip local authorities of their planning powers, but left them to deal with the costs and consequences arising from such developments. The government is considering extending PDR, allowing shops to be converted into flats or for extensions to be built without requiring any planning permission.
In Croydon, where the local authority used legislation to block any further office-to-resi conversions in the town centre after 2014, senior councillor Sean Fitzsimons has called such flats, “the slums of the future”.
But that was not before planning permission had already been given for the lucrative conversion of offices to at least 2,700 flats in the borough, and where some of the “micro-flats” are being marketed to Chinese investors, with one-bed apartments fetching £280,000.”
‘Political pygmies’ to blame for Croydon’s ‘slums of the future’
“An influential figure in British architecture has hit out at office-to-flat conversions – of which there have been thousands in Croydon – describing them as “ghastly little f**k-hutches”, and all thanks to policy which is being ruined by “political pygmies”.
“Copley has also discovered that 1,837 London PDR flats are smaller than the legal minimum standards, and that 240 were less than half this lowest threshold.
In a statement issued from Copley’s City Hall office they said, “Some of the worst examples are seen in Croydon where 80 per cent of properties identified failed to meet minimum space standards, including one development where the smallest flat was just 10 square metres.”
That flat is in Urban House on Cavendish Road in West Croydon.”
Slums of the Future: Croydon has capital’s smallest micro-flat
The new “sustainable” villages – beware estate rentcharges
Cranbrook has not recovered from the arrangenent where developers imposed charges on residents of their estates for such things as gardening and maintenance. In the end, the town council took over these charges and spread them over ALL residents, many of whom were naturally upset at extra charges they had never signed up for.
“Estate rent charges” – another warning on new-builds such as those in Cranbrook
Now, the new (brutalist architecture) estate developer in Exeter says it will severely restrict parking by having only 185 car parking spaces for 400 homes and residents will need permits to use the spaces.
BUT enforcement of these parking restrictions will be done by “a specialist management company which will patrol the site to ensure vehicles are parked within dedicated spaces and to ensure that non-residents aren’t using the site”.
And who will pay these charges? Just those who have parking spaces or ALL residents? And who will control escalation of the charges?
“Oxfordshire’s Housing and Growth deal at risk after local elections”
Well, not much chance of this here now so many Tories stull continue to have great influence over East Devon and Greater Exeter development:
“THERE is concern a major deal with Government could be scrapped if a council decides it does not want to take part.
All Oxfordshire councils signed up to the £215m Housing and Growth Deal and it was officially agreed in March 2018.
It provides £150m for infrastructure improvements, including to roads and railways, and £60m for affordable housing.
But there is concern within other authorities after the new coalition led by Liberal Democrats and Greens at South Oxfordshire District Council said they planned to review its Local Plan.
Sources within the councils have said there are worries the Government could pull out of the deal if it is delayed. It ripped up a similar plan in Manchester in March.
But Ian Hudspeth, the leader of Oxfordshire County Council, said: “We have got to wait and see what the councils say. It is entirely up to them but having £60m for affordable homes is a major issue to the councils. Losing that would be very upsetting for everyone.
“Everyone needs to be very careful about what they do and the consequences.”
When the Growth Deal was signed, the Government told the councils that they had to submit their Local Plans to an independent inspector by the start of April. They are outlines of where authorities plan to develop until the mid-2030s.
In South Oxfordshire, Lib Dems and Greens are opposed to the plan – although they appear to be against different parts.
It is understood the Greens would rather continue the project to build homes at Chalgrove Airfield and stop development on the Green Belt. But senior Lib Dem David Turner is wholly opposed to building on the airfield. He represents Chalgrove on the council.
Leigh Rawlins, SODC’s newly appointed cabinet member for planning, said the council would undertake a review over the Local Plan as part of ‘mature consideration’ following the election.
He said: “Clearly there has been a huge amount of concern about the Local Plan, the process and how it came together across the district.”
The uncertainty has left some residents furious, who are worried that Neighbourhood Plans they helped put together could be delayed or even scrapped as part of the Local Plan.
Justine Wood, who worked on East Hagbourne’s Neighbourhood Plan, said a delay to the Local Plan could mean speculative development.
She said: “There were 1,200 homes planned for East Hagbourne, which would have quadrupled the size of the village (through speculative development). It would have been catastrophic.
“But if they scrap the Local Plan they will get more than the 28,500 they are objecting to and they will have nothing they can do about it.”
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government cancelled a £68m deal for affordable housing with the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA).
GMCA said it would build 227,200 homes until 2034/5 – but then later committed to just 201,000 homes.
“Housing market ‘to be dealt a serious blow’ as most new home sales use Help to Buy scheme”
Many of the new homes in Cranbrook are bought using this scheme.
“Almost all new homes in some parts of the country are funded by the Help to Buy equity loan scheme, raising fears about a house price slump when the programme ends.
The Government lends buyers up to 20pc of the cost of a new-build house, meaning the would-be homeowner only needs a 5pc deposit and a 75pc mortgage. In London users of the scheme can borrow up to 40pc of a home’s value.
More than 97pc of new homes in Northampton were funded by Help to Buy last year, according to modular housebuilder Project Etopia. In Burnley the figure was 93.1pc, in Derby 92.4pc and in Warrington 91.4pc. …”
Research has shown it adds on average £33,000 to the cost of a new home:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2019/04/14/help-to-buy-costs-first-time-buyers-an-average-33000-extra/
Two big developers consider merge
“Two of the UK’s biggest housebuilders have kicked off secret talks about a tie-up just two years after a previous set of merger discussions broke down.
Sky News has learnt that Bovis Homes Group has approached Galliford Try in the last few weeks about a combination of a large chunk of their operations.
If consummated, a deal would represent a fresh catalyst for consolidation in Britain’s housebuilding sector.
Bovis has a market value of just over £1.3bn, while Galliford Try, which owns the Linden Homes housebuilding brand, is worth roughly £550m.
Both are among the ten largest housebuilders in the UK. …
A Bovis insider cautioned that it was unlikely to be interested in Galliford Try’s troubled construction division, which was responsible for a recent profit warning from the group.”
https://news.sky.com/story/bovis-approaches-rival-galliford-try-about-housebuilding-merger-11728118
Greater Exeter Strategic Plan: change or no change?
Now that the Local Election is over, we can see from this report in the Sidmouth Herald:
that potential sites for new villages in support of the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan (GESP) have been found and are due to be unveiled shortly.
A whopping 57,000 new properties cross the four council areas adjoining Exeter will have to be built to satisfy Exeter’s growth aspirations.
Quite soon, therefore, we can expect that the newly elected Councillors who represent us on the GESP, Councillor Susie Bond and Councillor Philip Skinner, will have to decide how many new villages East Devon will take and where they will be sited. Obviously close proximity to Exeter will be a significant factor and places like Lympstone, Woodbury, Clyst St Mary, Farringdon and West Hill must be in the frame.
To give an example of the impact to expect. A tiny community between Broadclyst and Pinhoe – Westclyst, has had a whopping 1200 houses imposed upon it. Where the highest quality agricultural land lay four years ago, bounded by about 30 bungalows, there are now sprawling housing estates.
In the past these decision have been kept a closely guarded secret. Will the new regime now act with transparency and openness?
We know from the CPRE study on “Devon’s Housing Needs” that:
•Far too many homes are already being planned for Devon in the next 10 years.
•Two thirds of these will be occupied by inward migration.
•Vacant and second homes are becoming a problem across the County.
•We in East Devon are taking a disproportionate share of development. Our Local Plan annual housing target is the highest in the Greater Exeter Area: 58% higher than Exeter, 53% higher than Teignbridge and nearly three times that of Mid Devon.
•Whilst we are planning too many houses, we are failing to plan for enough homes of the right type in the right location, especially for locally generated households.
Ex Councillor and one time Leader, Paul Diviani boasted in council, just before Christmas, that the high growth policy he advocated for East Devon was justified because “we have the land and we are good at it”.
In the election Paul Diviani was decisively rejected by the electorate, receiving a derisory 319 votes.
On 3rd May the voters clearly voted for change but are they going to get it?
Could EDDC Tiggers not find ONE “independent” to chair the Development Management Committee?
OK, we now refer to the ruling group at EDDC as
“TiggerTories”
a coalition of a mix of western-side “Independents” with western-side Tories.
And the Tiggers couldn’t even find ONE of their “independents” to chair the Development Management Committee!
Tory Mike Howe now holds the casting vote if the committee splits 50/50 on anything …
Unbelievable!
Surprise, surprise: the business people running Local Enterprise Partnerships are not attracting funding – from business people!
As Owl has been saying for YEARS – THESE EMPERORS HAVE NO CLOTHES!!!!! Neither do they have transparency or accountability.
It’s verging on the corrupt, definitely a conflict of interest and is certainly unethical – it means a very, very few business people, taking no risks for themselves or their businesses, divvying up OUR money for their own pet projects, with almost no oversight from the councils they have robbed of funds and no loss for them if projects fail or over-run in time or cost.
A national scandal.
“Private sector firms are not matching public sector funding for local regeneration, senior civil servants have admitted.
Two senior civil servants at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government told MPs on Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) that cash from the EU, public sector and higher education are still the main sources for funding regional development projects.
The department’s permanent secretary Melanie Dawes and director general Simon Ridley said match funding for the £9.1bn Local Growth Fund is largely dependent on match funding from councils and other public bodies.
Ridley also admitted there were still challenges over transparency and the boundaries of some Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs).
The LEPs were set up following the abolition of regional development agencies with the idea that they would be a partnership between business and local government – with an expectation that firms would help funding regional regeneration.
Ridley told the committee that the main private sector input into the LEPs is the time and expertise of board members who work for free.
Committee member Anne Marie Morris said: “Clearly, you are having the private sector involved, so how come you haven’t got a significant financial commitment from them?”
Ridley responded: “The capacity funding we give requires match from the LEP in different ways.
“A large number of business people on the boards do it without renumeration. A lot of the capacity support around the accountable body that the local authority provides is paid for by the LEP.
“Our core expectation was to set up partnerships between the private sector and local government to think about local area development.
“Some of those funding streams are matched by private sector funding schemes.”
Committee chair Meg Hillier asked if developers and construction firms were giving over and above Section 106 contributions to enable projects.
She said: “There is a danger that without having any skin in the game, businesses can walk away and local taxpayers end up picking up the bill.”
Ridley replied: “What the LEP is seeking to do is bring forward projects in the local area that wouldn’t otherwise be coming forward.
“They are often funded by more than one funding stream from the public sector.”
The committee also challenged the pair over a claim that LEPs tended to go to the top-five local employers and as a result, other firms were being left out of key decisions.
Oxford University has become a major decision-maker for its LEP, the committee heard.
Committee member Layla Moran asked: “How do we know that everyone who is a stakeholder in this money is actually involved in the decision?”
Hillier also questioned if the LEPs were accountable, citing Oxfordshire, where meetings were not being held in public.
Dawes said the use of scores in the LEPs annual performance review were conditional for funding being released and this had impacted on responses.
She said: “The real test is how it feels for local communities and I think that’s something that’s very difficult for us to judge in central government. We are on a bit of a journey here. It’s going to take a while.”
Ridley said local authorities had a crucial role in oversight, specifically through Section 151 officers who are ideally placed to deal with complaints.
He said: “All LEPs have got their complaints procedures. We have a clearer role realisation with the accountable body and the 151 officer, so they [the public] might write to them.
“The section 151 officer does have to get all the information that goes to the LEP board. I can’t personally here guarantee that absolutely all of that is in front of every scrutiny committee.”
Dawes confirmed the department has no metrics for assessing complaints being made about the LEPs.
MPs also raised concern about territorial battles between LEPs and combined authorities.
Decisions have still yet to be made about the boundaries in nine LEPs.
Dawes told the committee: “There are legitimate reasons why these geography questions are there. We are working actively with them.
“What ministers will have to work through is whether to impose a decision centrally.
“That would be a matter of last resort.”
“Rewild a quarter of UK to fight climate crisis, campaigners urge”
Rewilding would (according to the Environment Secretary) focus on:
Native woodlands
Salt marshes
Peat bogs
Ponds and lakes
Meadows and grasslands
all of which we have in abundance in East Devon.
Perhaps it is now time to revive the idea of a Jurassic Coast National Park (West Dorset would be an already-enthusiastic partner) which was squashed by the previous council because they feared losing their cosy relationship with housing developers …
And, as part of our climate emergency, make rewilding an integral part of all future neighbourhood, district and Greater Exeter development plans.
What’s the future for the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan? Highly debatable … unless …
Exeter – minor changes on 2 May (new Green Councillor, first Independendent councillor) but Labour still in control
Mid Devon – now no overall control (Lib Dems, Indies and Greens outnumber Tories)
Teignbridge – Lib Dems won control
East Devon – now no overall control (Indies, Lib Dems and Greens outnumber Tories)
Oh dear, looks like GESP may have to go back to the drawing board …
UNLESS the previous (unelected) councillors controlling it (Diviani for East Devon) and their bossy officers stitched it up before the falls from grace …
Leasehold houses: promise of fix … one day, maybe
“Housebuilders are to be investigated over the mis-selling of thousands of leasehold properties after a U-turn by the competition watchdog amid pressure from ministers.
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said it would examine the scandal surrounding new-build homes sold on leases that were subject to substantial increases in ground rents and the charging of “permission fees” for home improvements. Developers and freeholders could face legal action if the watchdog finds evidence of leasehold mis-selling. The watchdog said it would decide whether the practices constituted “unfair terms”, a breach of consumer contract law.
James Brokenshire, the housing minister, has previously called on the CMA to use its influence to tackle the “culture of consumer exploitation rife in the housing industry” with an inquiry into the estimated 100,000 homes sold with “extortionate” leases.
However, in November, the CMA told the minister it would not investigate the issue, citing the legal complexities surrounding historic cases of mis-selling. In a letter seen by The Times, the watchdog also noted it does not have the power to fine companies using its consumer powers and blamed Brexit preparations for it not being able to prioritise problems in the housing industry.
The U-turn comes after the Commons housing committee published a damning report on the scandal in March, calling for the law to be changed to help people stuck in leasehold properties with crippling fees that they are unable to sell on. It also criticised solicitors for failing to warn clients about the unfair deals, accusing some of being too close to developers.
The leasehold scandal emerged as developers began to sell houses on leasehold rather than freehold, often without the buyer fully understanding the contracts. In many cases the freeholds were bought by offshore investors who demand large sums from homeowners to buy out the contracts.
Taylor Wimpey, one of Britain’s biggest housebuilders, has set aside £130 million to help its customers escape unfair leases it sold. More than 40 property developers and freeholders this year signed a government-backed pledge to help homeowners affected by the scandal by changing the terms of leases for those with onerous clauses.
Sebastian O’Kelly, of the Leasehold Knowledge Partnership, said: “We welcome the CMA looking into this. It’s long overdue and will be welcomed by the 12,000 owners of new leases with doubling ground rents, and 88,000 where the ground rent is above 0.1 per cent of the sale price and whose properties are unsellable.”
The investigation comes as the industry attempts to improve its public image after criticisms of build quality as well as punitive hidden charges.
Countryside Properties this week became embroiled in a row with Joe Anderson, the mayor of Liverpool, who reportedly told residents he would ban the housebuilder from building in the city due to historic cases of selling leasehold homes with “doubling clauses” for ground rents.
Countryside said it no longer sold leasehold homes, had signed up to the leasehold pledge and took action to fix the doubling of ground rent leases that were in place two years ago. A spokesman for the Home Builders Federation said: “The industry has made huge progress to identify and address the issues raised on particular aspects of leasehold sales.”
Source: Times (pay wall)
Cranbrook – Town Council tries to explain why it has no town centre
Cranbrook Town Council Facebook page – the first major headache for the 3 new district councillors:
“CRANBROOK TOWN CENTRE DEVELOPMENTS
The Town Council is very aware that there is considerable interest in the town centre and many demands to deliver it. There is an assumption that the Town Council, East Devon District Council and the Developer Consortium should be delivering shops and cafes.
But this is not how a town centre is delivered. The Developer Consortium owns the land but beyond that delivery of commercial activity and some buildings depends on commercial interest. With around 1,900 occupied dwellings in the town we understand there is not yet the level of footfall to attract a great deal of commercial interest from large stores, supermarkets and others with the ability to build commercial properties.
In addition the Consortium are not currently required to have provided such development as the triggers have not yet been reached which are set out in the legal agreements which were signed when Cranbrook first received planning permission.
So the question is what is being done?
Members of the Town Council are meeting weekly with East Devon District Council’s planning team, the Exeter and East Devon Growth Point, the Developer Consortium and their architect.
The aim is to identify particular uses which can be delivered and strategies for their delivery. Importantly uses which are being discussed are the town hall, health and wellbeing hub, children’s centre, youth centre, town square and a market hall.
The work will lead on to ways of unlocking funding for this infrastructure and that is very much linked to the development of the expansion areas. Without that investment there would not be sufficient funding within the current legal agreement (“Section 106”) terms to deliver what the town requires in key buildings.
The challenge is to design and create a town for the 21st century. We are all aware of the pressures on high streets, especially from competition by on-line retailers. What we do not want is a town centre which is designed on traditional grounds which could result in empty premises.
Cranbrook is a 21st century town and we need a town centre which delivers what we cannot do online and a town centre which complements and enhances online business rather than competes with it. The town centre should incorporate social and green space as well. This is a massive challenge but one which we are meeting.
We will communicate updates when progress has been made.”
Government to foot bill to replace Grenfell-type cladding because developers refuse to do it
Well,you can’t upset your mega-millionairedonors can you?
“Ministers are believed to be poised to release hundreds of millions of pounds to fix private tower blocks wrapped in combustible Grenfell-style cladding after mounting public anger that dozens of freeholders and developers have refused to pay to make them safe.
About 20,000 people living in private leasehold homes are estimated to be affected by the risk caused by the now-banned plastic-filled panels, similar to those which helped spread the fire at Grenfell that killed 72 people.
Having spent months trying to persuade property companies to pay with only limited success, housing ministers appear to be convinced of the need to step in with public funds and are believed to be awaiting approval from the chancellor, Philip Hammond. An announcement is expected imminently, according to sources close to negotiations.
Some leaseholders have been forced to mount their own 24-hour patrols to make sure fires don’t break out, while others’ homes have become unsaleable. A survey of the impact on residents last month found some had turned to drink and drugs and others were suffering bouts of depression and suicidal feelings. The greatest number of affected buildings are in London and Greater Manchester and many belong to first-time buyers.
The standoff between leaseholders who say they cannot afford to pay bills of up to £80,000 each and freeholders and developers who say they are not obliged to pay under law has caused growing anger and frustration as next month’s second anniversary of the Grenfell disaster looms. Grenfell survivors have warned that a delay in tackling the problem means a second disaster is “in the post”.
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said on Wednesday that the lack of action by some private building owners was “completely unacceptable”.
“Due to lack of progress the government is looking at a range of new additional measures to get building owners to do the right thing,” they said.
Ministers have told campaigners that the decision lies with the Treasury. Those who have lobbied Hammond to release funds include Kevin Hollinrake, a Conservative member of the Commons housing select committee. He said on Wednesday: “We need to step in and provide a solution. That is going to include money and we are in conversation with the Treasury.”
Pressure has been growing on ministers to step in. The London mayor, Sadiq Khan, the housing charity Shelter and the Local Government Association (LGA), which represents town halls, have backed a national campaign fronted by leaseholders calling for public funds to strip off and replace the dangerous cladding on private apartment blocks over 18m in height.
Lord Porter, a Conservative peer and the LGA chairman, said: “Too many leaseholders are suffering stress on a daily basis because it is still not clear who will pay to fix their homes. This cannot and must not continue.”
Checks found 176 private residential towers were wrapped in the same aluminium composite material fitted to Grenfell Tower partly as a cosmetic improvement in a £10m refurbishment concluding in 2016.
But according to the government’s own figures, leaseholders in 93 private towers are not protected from remediation costs and works have been completed on just 10. The communities secretary, James Brokenshire, made £400m available to fix social housing blocks a year ago, moving money from an existing fund for affordable homes. As a result work on fixing council and housing association towers has progressed much faster.
However, there is concern any new money will only be made available to remove the aluminium composite cladding and not to fix other fire safety problems including high-pressure laminate panels which are also combustible and buildings where fire breaks supposed to stop fires spreading through cladding are missing or faulty.
Last week, the housing minister Kit Malthouse told parliament: “We have been engaged across government to consider additional interventions, so that progress can be made more swiftly.” He said he hoped to announce specific measures shortly.
He said leaseholders were currently protected from remediation costs in 83 out of 176 residential buildings. “The growing list of owners and developers who have stepped in includes Barratt Developments, Mace Group, Legal & General, Peabody, Aberdeen Asset Management and Frasers Property,” he said.
“In the social sector we are making good progress,” he added. “In the private sector, progress is slower; I absolutely admit that. We need to do something to speed that up, and we hope to increase the pace quite soon. Discussions are ongoing.”
East Devon Watch 