Jump to content

Sadiq Khan acts to increase affordable housing and prioritise for Londoners


Recommended Posts

Interesting. It also shows though how law and planning rules are getting in the way of any meaningful attempts to do something. Also why does it have to be private developers who build on the land? Why can't it be housing associations or even councils the land is sold to?

Pity he couldn't have enforced a greater percentage of social/affordable housing in the new AFC Wimbledon stadium development.


http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/sport/14696865._All_systems_go___Sadiq_Khan_hands_back_AFC_Wimbledon_stadium_decision_to_Merton_Council/


9.6%. Great, that's really going to make a difference.

It doesn't have to be private developers. The article is simply assuming that even with the 50% affordable housing requirement, private developers (due to economies of scale and general efficiency) will be the highest bidders to join the joint-venture with TFL. That's not unreasonable to assume.


Anyhow, raising the affordable housing requirement (as was his pledge) was always going to reduce land values. It appears though that his focus will just be government land rather than imposing a new 50% requirement across all of London. Otherwise there would be no legal problem.


Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Interesting. It also shows though how law and

> planning rules are getting in the way of any

> meaningful attempts to do something. Also why does

> it have to be private developers who build on the

> land? Why can't it be housing associations or even

> councils the land is sold to?

Londoners being given priority over overseas investors is the main thing.


If developers know that offplan will sell at whatever price they set (foreign investors, largely) then it will follow that they will aim for the high end market.


If they are restricted to sell at to Londoner's primarily, it should mean that prices will be lower, flats of smaller size/ lower spec.


It's a good thing.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • "You have no idea why"   To be fair Sue, it's blindingly obvious to anyone who has a conversation with anyone who isn't a Corbyn supporter. And even some who liked Corbyn (like me initially) found him somewhat flaky even at his most popular But let's say you are right and I have NO idea why anybody might not vote for him. They still didn't vote for him. He lost two elections. The second one badly (and strongly predicted but the stubborn old goat wouldn't budge so we we were stuck with Johnson and another 3 million PMs in the 5 years that followed) So even with ZERO evidence, we have our eyes and ears and brains But we do have evidence   https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/27022-their-own-words-why-voters-abandoned-labour
    • As I said, it was my understanding. I worded it very carefully. I didn't/don't know for sure, so clearly not a fact. And hardly an "opinion", which is something completely different. You have no idea what reason anybody might have had for not voting for him (unless you can point to some opinion poll results which actually asked people?)
    • Also, just to add, the threat to kill someone's dog and try to kick it, is an additional extremely unpleasant layer. I have noticed a lot of the burst water balloons lying around in the park too- that is not great for the environment either.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...