Decision 2 April - Proposed Development - The Sidings, Railway Rise, SE22

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

22 hours ago, ED_moots said:

The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes...

The private sector is not going to build a significant amount of social housing. Everyone is very keen for *everyone else* to subsidise construction of social housing. I take it none of the objectors to this scheme was suggesting putting up council tax so Southwark could build more social housing...?

Social housing isn't going to appear in serious numbers if the state doesn't borrow money and build it.

Edited April 4 by Dogkennelhillbilly

[Sally Eva]

On 02/04/2025 at 13:45, Earl Aelfheah said:

This wouldn't surprise me. I never understand how approval to drop affordable housing commitments is granted post planning permission. Shouldn't be possible, but often seems to happen.

I think that the value of one unit of social housing in a luxury block is so great that taking the money and building real social housing elsewhere with it, can be a preferable option.

[first mate]

Meantime,  pushing this development through allows Cllr McAsh and the Council the opportunity to spin 'positive' numbers and data, to show they are meeting the council and Labour's new housing targets. 

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Yes - and this is a good thing because meeting housing targets is a good thing. If Labour or any other party had managed to do it consistently over the last decade perhaps we wouldn't be in a housing crisis.

I'm not sure if "don't build more housing because it's only rich foreigners that will end up living there" is official Lib Dem policy or not.

[first mate]

Let's wait and see how many affordable family homes and social housing actually get built. 

Edited April 6 by first mate

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Why? It's not like that's the only type of housing needed.

[alice]

10000 Southwark people on council waiting list.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Sounds like Southwark needs to build some social housing and the Dulwich Society needs to stop objecting because new housing is "visible".

But if people were really concerned about housing costs, they'd be in favour of increasing the supply of housing to a growing population. "In favour of development so long as it's low volume social housing paid for by the private sector" is really just austerity NIMBYism with a mask on.

[Penguin68]

1 hour ago, alice said:

10000 Southwark people on council waiting list.

But the bulk of the build is for student accommodation, with just 'some' affordable housing which will, if history is anything to go by, become much less once the scheme is started. Southwark has, I believe, quite a number of empty properties which are not in use. The number of people on Southwark's waiting list is frankly irrelevant to this scheme, which won't touch the surface.

52 minutes ago, Dogkennelhillbilly said:

Sounds like Southwark needs to build some social housing and the Dulwich Society needs to stop objecting because new housing is "visible".

This isn't 'new housing' which is visible, but commercially profitable student bedsits (at least, the developers hope it will be commercially profitable). 

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Apparently something only counts as housing if People Like Us live in it!

[Penguin68]

It only counts as housing as regards the Southwark shortfall of affordable homes if it isn't student one room bedsits for short term rent! 

[CPR Dave]

7 hours ago, alice said:

10000 Southwark people on council waiting list.

None of them are ever likely to live in this development though.

[first mate]

A govt. research briefing (25 March 2025)  indicates that while higher education student numbers reached record levels in the early 2020's, those numbers are dropping. The rise was largely international students in postgraduate courses who are now being put off by higher university fees and visa costs/issues, whereas the trend for entrants to other undergraduate courses has fallen. Applications for full time undergraduate places in 2024 were lower than the high of 2022.

Schools are closing and it is projected there will be fewer 18 year olds going into higher education. Very short term there may or may not be demand for this level of student housing, but a development of this size and scale and impact on the locale must be future-proofed. Are we sure this has been done?

Edited April 8 by first mate

[ed_pete]

Interesting the projected demand.  One imagines that you don't undertake this kind of investment without the business case to back it up.  There's one going up near a friends office in the City that is for 782 students.  OK, these are much closer to HE establishments but there still has to be the demand.

https://dominusrealestate.co.uk/projects/65crutchedfriars/

[Penguin68]

42 minutes ago, first mate said:

Schools are closing and it is projected there will be fewer 18 year olds going into higher education.

There is also I believe some evidence that students are choosing to go to universities, where they do, closer to home so as to avoid additional costs by living at home. Personally I think this is a mistake - being an undergraduate is a first chance for independence - but if economics and costs are making this so the demand for accommodation such as this will again be weakened.

[first mate]

@ ed pete "there still has to be the demand".

I don't know but wondering if developers have been able to make a case based on the increase in demand from 2023-2024. The research I looked at said demand had risen by 500 in that period,  but was still below an all time high in 2022.
 

There will be others who know much more about this area who can give the rationale in favour; perhaps this latest govt. research is incorrect or only gives part of the story. My point is if, as seems likely, this development does little to solve the current housing crisis at local level for the non student population, I hope that the council is very, very sure that this level of student accommodation is warranted at this location.

I have not managed to look at the plans in detail but how sustainable are the plans for the build; how will it be heated, what about impact on water and waste services?

 

 

Edited April 8 by first mate

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

There's still a massive shortage of student housing in London regardless of short term fluctuations - just look at how expensive it is now and what a barrier it is to mobility!

What are people worried about anyway? That there will be so few students in London that a private landlord has to cut rents and makes lower profits? Oh no! 😂

[James Barber]

The developer is now onward selling the scheme to realise their profits. A developer contact tells me this happens when they can't believe their luck at getting planning permission and the promises they've had to make to a council to get their way.

Any purchaser is likely to try and realise more profits by seeking changes to the approved scheme. 

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

None of that makes any sense. Rumour and vibes-based governance...

 

Meanwhile, thanks in part to the NIMBY tendencies of certain councillors, 23 London council areas saw 0 (zero) new housing units under construction in Q1 2024. Pitiful. About 724,000 (net) people moved to the UK in 2024, a sizeable chunk of them to London.

The already high demand for housing is increasing, and the supply isn't changing at all. Rent prices (and therefore taxpayer funds paid to private landlords through Housing Benefit) are going up...and new housing units are objected to because they're "visible" and because a fear that rich foreign students will live there. 

[Sue]

2 hours ago, Dogkennelhillbilly said:

 and because a fear that rich foreign students will live there. 

?????

 

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

On 02/04/2025 at 15:32, James Barber said:

We don't yet know the pricing of the student accommodation but the Champion Hill student accommodation when open was priced around the £200 pw mark. Some is proposed to be discounted, but likely that will inflate the mainstream pricing. You have to be a rich student for such prices. It resulted in mostly foreign students affording that.  Any developer is likely to set their pricing close to this.

The Lib Dems are against tightening visa requirements to live in the UK and against shrinking the university sector, and also (at least in Dulwich) against housing being built if it means that foreign students live in it. 🤷

[first mate]

The govt research cited earlier in this thread suggests that the number of foreign uni students seeking places is reducing and that this is nothing to do with available accommodation, but with rising uni course fees and issues to do with visas. So I wonder what the true level of demand will be for these student rentals, if many cannot afford them? If there was insufficient uptake on the student side what would happen to the properties?

Edited April 26 by first mate

[spider69]

Boat people

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

There it is...if you dog whistle long enough, eventually someone will bark. 

[spider69]

Woof woof