UKs Richest Avoid Housing Rules

[anonymous-user]

The government gives a thumbs up to do what you what! (For a fee of course)

https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s...

[Caddyshack]

I would hate to read the Guardian.

[Maralago]

It’s called viability. I worked for a developer who delivered thousand plus apartments and not a single affordable one. These buildings were listed buildings or brownfield sites with contamination issues. If we had to deliver affordable housing, they would not be viable and the site would sit empty and no housing delivered. Also, on these sites, mostly in middle of nowhere and more suited to retirees, second home owners, they would not make suitable family affordable housing. The service charges would be too much, no facilities or assessable to schools and bills could be high being listed buildings. It makes sense to pay a cash contribution which can be used to develop proper housing in better and more suitable location houses.

In some cases, to rile you up even more, we would use something called “Enabling Development”. This is to say that on a listed building, if we demonstrate it would not be profitable to develop, it would sit empty and no use and fall into disrepair. In order to make it profitable enough to make it worth risking money to develop, we would need consent to build new-build units around the site elsewhere or even on a other site, that would perhaps not ordinarily come forward for development as quickly…

Edited by Maralago on Sunday 2nd October 21:40

[reggie82]

Caddyshack said:

I would hate to read the Guardian.

What’s wrong with the guardian?

[Caddyshack]

reggie82 said:

Caddyshack said:

I would hate to read the Guardian.

What’s wrong with the guardian?

They write rubbish to make people angry, like most of the newspapers. The article linked was typical of winding up the angry.

[Dingu]

Caddyshack said:

reggie82 said:

Caddyshack said:

I would hate to read the Guardian.

What’s wrong with the guardian?

They write rubbish to make people angry, like most of the newspapers. The article linked was typical of winding up the angry.

Sounds like a lot of the NP&E contributors read it I jest of course.

[anonymous-user]

Caddyshack said:

reggie82 said:

Caddyshack said:

I would hate to read the Guardian.

What’s wrong with the guardian?

They write rubbish to make people angry, like most of the newspapers. The article linked was typical of winding up the angry.

How many times have you contacted them to ask them to change their editorial then?

[esuuv]

pocketspring said:

The government gives a thumbs up to do what you what! (For a fee of course)

https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s...

So you book a lovely holiday / hotel with your family - work hard, save up, pay for it - do you take council kid from down the road too - because they need a holiday aswell?

[bongtom]

esuuv said:

pocketspring said:

The government gives a thumbs up to do what you what! (For a fee of course)

https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s...

So you book a lovely holiday / hotel with your family - work hard, save up, pay for it - do you take council kid from down the road too - because they need a holiday aswell?

If the "kid" is around 21yo, female and wearing blue spandex and is proper council then it's a yes, of course.

[Cold]

I'm just trying to see which housing rules were avoided. They seemed to go through all of the council approved policy procedures which culminated in them paying a financial contribution to the council's affordable housing fund - as per the regulations.

Very poor rant by the OP. 2/10

[Caddyshack]

pocketspring said:

Caddyshack said:

reggie82 said:

Caddyshack said:

I would hate to read the Guardian.

What’s wrong with the guardian?

They write rubbish to make people angry, like most of the newspapers. The article linked was typical of winding up the angry.

How many times have you contacted them to ask them to change their editorial then?

I dont think it works like that. Vote with your £, you either buy it or you don’t.

‘Dear British media, please stop being so negative, stop triggering the fear and anxiety of the public and drop the over hyped headlines and non stories - I know it is what makes people buy the paper but I don’t like it"

[JagLover]

pocketspring said:

The government gives a thumbs up to do what you what! (For a fee of course)

https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s...

This is prime central London and maybe there does need to be some flexibility in the rules. Perhaps an option to build social housing elsewhere in the city?.

Even when we were building lots of council housing I am not sure this is an area that would be chosen.

[ChocolateFrog]

The only issue I can see is that they managed to negotiate the cash in lieu payment down from about £40m to £10m.

They're not going to house council tenants in the war office building are they? So it's either build some somewhere else or give cash to the council.

[voyds9]

Be interesting to know what an 'affordable' house is in London

And why people feel entitled to live there

[JagLover]

bongtom said:

If the "kid" is around 21yo, female and wearing blue spandex and is proper council then it's a yes, of course.

With giant hoop earnings?

[vikingaero]

JagLover said:

bongtom said:

If the "kid" is around 21yo, female and wearing blue spandex and is proper council then it's a yes, of course.

With giant hoop earnings?

And no morals.

[Gecko1978]

Council got £10m be interesting to know how many and where the flats are going to be built with that money.....

[anonymous-user]

Cold said:

I'm just trying to see which housing rules were avoided. They seemed to go through all of the council approved policy procedures which culminated in them paying a financial contribution to the council's affordable housing fund - as per the regulations.

Very poor rant by the OP. 2/10

+1

It is just a reasonably standard part of planning negotiations between developer and council.

No one could seriously expect that affordable housing would be built in the OWO.

[Voldemort]

voyds9 said:

And why people feel entitled to live there

Where do you think teachers, shop workers, refuse collectors, etc, etc should live? You'd have them commute in from Luton?

[anonymous-user]

voyds9 said:

Be interesting to know what an 'affordable' house is in London

And why people feel entitled to live there

I work in the social housing and local government sectors, and I can see both sides of the argument.

I can fully understand why people get upset by the concept of others being 'allowed' to live in very nice locations without having to pay the asking price, or anywhere near the asking price, but at the same time we have to make efforts to prevent areas becoming ghettos, for either the rich or poor, and we have to try to provide housing in areas where people can find employment, or where employees are required, even if those are hugely expensive areas such as central London, the Cotswolds, The Lake District etc.

Whether all this works well or not is a different matter, but as said, we must make efforts. If we took the 'PH' approach of just telling everyone "Earn more or sod off to wherever housing is cheap" then pretty much everyone under the age of 30, as well as our poorest or less able, would all have to move to County Durham or Hull. I think we all agree that just wouldn't be practical or sane.

Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 3rd October 09:26