Forum Topic

"One of the problems seems to be the insistance on using bedrooms rather than total size as the unit when deciding on affordable housing."MattWhilst I'm fairly sure I know what you are trying to say, the fact is we should be using bedrooms as the unit of measure.  If we did insist on 50% of bedrooms going to affordable housing, the developers might be more inclined to provide the 3- and 4-bedroom properties which, as you rightly say, we desperately need.However I do believe that the government needs to take responsibility here.  We live in an age in which more people than ever can work from home, without having to commute to work, from a computer which requires nothing more than a broadband connection.  Why then the insistence upon trying to cram an increasingly ridiculous proportion of the country's population into a relatively small area in and around London?  I saw an advertisement in a local paper a few weeks ago offering large and spacious council houses in Swansea.  In Huddersfield perfectly good housing stock has been bulldozed because the local authority can't find anybody to live in them.  And yet here we have small, unsoundproofed and shoddy flats thrown up at record speed with families of three or four sharing one bedroom for years because they have no reasonable chance of being suitably housed.  It is sheer madness, yet Prescott seems obsessed with the notion of accelerating the process rather than reversing it.The government appoints the inspectors who preside over the appeals to which you refer, and the guidelines under which they operate.  If the developers are overcoming the requirement for adequate social housing provision, then that can only be because the government's own directives are not being enforced.In the long term we should be investing in other areas of the country irrespective of what the Evening Standard may say, but with a view to halting and reversing the current mania for resettling the entire population of the UK into London and the Home Counties.The current policy is not good for anybody.  People need open spaces in which to live and breathe, and yet they also need somewhere to live.  Cramming people ever more tightly into shoddy, high-density rabbit-hutches built on somebody's local park is not an intelligent solution.

Phil Andrews ● 7094d

It's the "theoretical" requirement and personally I wish it was more solidly adhered to. The development on the Wallis House site will acheive 40%. It seems that when the Council rely on private developers they are at their mercy - the developers will say what their upper limit on affordable housing is; if members/officers stick to a higher number then they risk getting nothing (or falling foul of the appeal process and ending up with less either way).One of the problems seems to be the insistance on using bedrooms rather than total size as the unit when deciding on affordable housing. Consequently, much of the affordable housing consists of 1 and 2 bed flats, when, as I'm sure Phil is aware, we really need 3 and 4 bed houses. (A 4 bed house and a 1 bed studio flat both count as 1 housing unit, so it's obvious which of the two a developer will offer up for social housing).To indicate the latent demand: a three bed house HH house became available on the Syon Estate recently. Over three hundred people bid for it.If anyone knows how to solve the housing problems in West London I'd like to hear from them. I was working in Leeds a couple of weeks ago, where rows of excellent terraced houses are available. Yet when the govt tries investing in these areas the Evening Standard screams about how London is subsidising the North. And just before that I was at a housing conference where one of the potential solutions offered up was 'build more council housing'. Well, if this is a step down that road then I hope it succeeds.

Matt Harmer ● 7095d

“First trial of arm’s-length building gets the go aheadThe first arm's-length management organisation set to build new homes has been given the green light to proceed with its pilot scheme. Hounslow Homes' pilot model to develop homes for rent and sale, worked up in conjunction with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, was given the go ahead by Hounslow councillors this week. Hounslow Council will kick start the scheme by giving the ALMO free land. Hounslow Homes will then be able to fund the overall development by building homes for private sale that provide cross subsidy for the construction of social rented homes. The ALMO estimates that for every home it keeps for rent it will need to build one of a similar size for sale. It has plans in the pipeline to build up to 1,000 homes in the next five years. Homes built will not be subject to the right to buy. Tenants will be given an assured rather than secure tenancy agreement. Official papers handed to Hounslow councillors also revealed the council was considering lobbying the ODPM for an extension to the ALMO's contract, to enable it to borrow private finance over the longer term. Hounslow Council will have 100 per cent nomination rights on the homes built for social rent. The ALMO expects to start work on the initial scheme of 49 homes in March. Neil Isaac, director of resources at Hounslow Homes, said the high house prices in the area would help the scheme get off the ground. The pilot would not be using any prudential borrowing as it would add extra complexity, he said, but the ALMO would consider it for subsequent schemes. Gwyneth Taylor, policy officer at the National Federation of ALMOs, said the news was a huge boost for the long-term future of ALMOs. The model could be adapted for use by ALMOs across the rest of the country, she said. But Anthony Lee, director of housing consulting at Atisreal, questioned whether ALMOs would have the expertise to develop homes. Councils would be lacking the experience to oversee developments, he said. 'They are arm's-length management organisations, not developers. The [development] expertise is always in the registered social landlord sector.' Martin Latham, head of housing finance at Britannia Building Society, said lenders saw the opening up of private finance to ALMOs as a likely progression of their role. The lenders would be very keen to do business with ALMOs, he said, because of the high inspection results many had achieved. But separating any private finance from the spending restraints placed on councils could be problematic, he warned.Published: 15 December 2005”

David Johnson ● 7095d