Tuesday, 29 November 2016

Not The Story It First Appears To Be...

A house builder has claimed it cannot include affordable flats in an otherwise luxury complex despite promising to do so in return for planning approval.
Developer Crest Nicholson South has made an offer of £1.2 million for Brighton and Hove City Council to build cheaper housing elsewhere after claiming it cannot create them as part of a new development in Hove.
But councillors have condemned the move which they say will divide communities and create ghettoisation with less affluent residents all housed away from the richer people.
Booo! Eeeeeevil, greedy developers!

Wait....
...the housebuilder contacted the council in August to say its chosen registered social landlord (RSL) Affinity Sutton had pulled out of the agreement and it could not reach an agreement with under bidder Hyde Housing.
Five other providers also turned down the chance with the Government’s decision to reduce social rents by one per cent for the next four years cited as a reason.
Heh! Seems business isn't going to stump up the cash for the government's barmy ideas.
Planning officers said they could not answer Labour councillor Lloyd Russell-Moyle’s question over why the city council could not step in and take on the management itself and that clarification was needed from housing officers.
Because then, I guess, they'd have to mix with those social tenants, rather than avoid them, let someone else have all the hassle, and boast about how well they've done in glossy council brochures...

6 comments:

Antisthenes said...

It has to be cretinous minds that believes it remotely practical that social housing and expensive housing can be mixed. The expensive housing will not sell as buyers are not cretins who will pay for the privilege of living next door to people who are likely to be of a cretinous nature. Then what more can be expected of Brighton they have voted for a cretinous MP and obviously councillors of the same ilk.

Anonymous said...

Don't the idiots realise that putting cheap crappy accommodation right next to posh expensive accommodation will either raise the value of the former or lower the value of the latter? They don't seem to have the slightest idea about how the real world actually works. Better off people don't want to be housed next to the plebs and there are really good reasons for this.

Stonyground

Anonymous said...

Developers and owners of buildings cynically renege on such commitments all the time with no come-back.
If a commitment is an essential part of getting planning permission then it should be a condition that an amount of money sufficient to meet the costs of fulfilling that commitment is placed in escrow - either that or the property is forfeit if the commitment isn't fulfilled.

Anonymous said...

Affinity Sutton? They probably pulled out of the deal as they were engaged in their own application to turf out social tenants of their Chelsea estate and replace with foreign money launderers

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/chelsea-social-housing-plan-will-lead-to-ghetto-for-the-rich-a3391996.html

Andrew Scarborough said...

In 1951 my father bought a plot of land from the local authority. This was one of many which were sold on what was predominately a council estate. My experience growing up there is that we all seemed to rub along together quite well. The estate is still relatively trouble free, the private houses are going for upwards of £750k, the sold council houses are selling easily for half a million. You can spot the council houses, they've all had new roofs this year. I just guess we were lucky that people were different then.

JuliaM said...

"Then what more can be expected of Brighton they have voted for a cretinous MP and obviously councillors of the same ilk."

It's beyond saving. Still, at least it concentrates them all in one place...

" They don't seem to have the slightest idea about how the real world actually works. "

Why would they? They don't inhabit it, after all!

"...then it should be a condition that an amount of money sufficient to meet the costs of fulfilling that commitment is placed in escrow ..."

But that would take foresight and an understanding of human nature.

"..their own application to turf out social tenants of their Chelsea estate and replace with foreign money launderers.."

A 'ghetto for the rich'? Hmm, well, it'll be a clean and safe ghetto. I'm all for it!

"...the private houses are going for upwards of £750k, the sold council houses are selling easily for half a million."

Same for my mum's ex-council house. God bless Maggie and the Right To Buy!