Wood Green Transformation - More plans Approved

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ruth Valentine on March 23, 2018 at 10:12

How much of this would be social housing?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh on March 23, 2018 at 10:46

The chances are that in reality very little will be. It's worth being clear on how these developments are negotiated with the Council. In most cases a developer will bargain to minimise any housing which is not provided by them after completion at their chosen price. This usually means that they have to agree to some level of 'affordable housing'. There are three types of 'affordable housing' Tex below from gov.uk).

1. Social rented housing is owned by local authorities and private registered providers (as defined in section 80 of the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008), for which guideline target rents are determined through the national rent regime. It may also be owned by other persons and provided under equivalent rental arrangements to the above, as agreed with the local authority or with the Homes and Communities Agency.

2. Affordable rented housing is let by local authorities or private registered providers of social housing to households who are eligible for social rented housing. Affordable Rent is subject to rent controls that require a rent of no more than 80 per cent of the local market rent (including service charges, where applicable).

3. Intermediate housing is homes for sale and rent provided at a cost above social rent, but below market levels subject to the criteria in the Affordable Housing definition above. These can include shared equity (shared ownership and equity loans), other low cost homes for sale and intermediate rent, but not affordable rented housing. Homes that do not meet the above definition of affordable housing, such as ‘low cost market’ housing, may not be considered as affordable housing for planning purposes.

If we take the Hampden Road development as an example, no social rented housing was included. Only other types of 'affordable housing' was included. Flats are nw on sale for £0.5M for a one bed flat. Therefore one of the 'affordable' flats to buy in this development would be £400k.

A further complication is that is is very typical that part way through the build of a development a developer will go back to the Council, plead cost overruns and bargain to reduce the previously agreed level of 'affordable housing'.

At theis stage, he following as been agreed - 

Chocolate Factory - 72 affordable. 

Iceland - 32 affordable.

If this development is running to form it's probably safe to assume that 'affordable' in this instance doesn't include social rented.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh on March 23, 2018 at 11:05

I just checked on the Iceland development and the 'affordable housing' is 50% 'affordable rented' and 50% 'London Living Rent' (LLR). As I understand it LLR is similar to 'affordable rented' but calculated at the ward level. The level for Noel Park Ward where these developments are based is £805 for a 1-bed and £920 for a 2-bed. In Harringay ward those figures are about £100 higher.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on March 23, 2018 at 11:14

Affordable is essentially subjective. If you're on minimum wage you need to share a flat/house with others (and don't even THINK about having any children). If you're unemployed you need to leave London.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Con2 on March 23, 2018 at 11:13

Good to see money being invested in the area

• ▶ Reply