Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Developer of Flats Behind Langham Seeks Removal of Affordable Housing Requirement
Last year an Enfield-based developer was given planning permission to build a block of ten flats of a plot of land behind the Langham Club, fronting on to Colina Road.
Permission was granted on the condition that a £247,000 contribution was made towards affordable housing.
This week's planning applications list shows that an application has now been made to have the affordable housing obligation removed. Here's what the new application says:
REAR OF 600 GREEN LANES, LONDON, N8 0RY VIABILITY ASSESSMENT/SECTION 106BA APPLICATION 
The Viability Assessment for the above scheme is attached. The DCLG has inserted Section 106BA, BB and BC into the Town and Country Planning Act (1990), as part of the Growth and Infrastructure Act (2013).
These sections enable an application and appeal procedure for the review of existing planning obligations which relate to the provision of affordable housing. 
The objective of the procedure is to bring back into development those sites that are currently stalled as a result of affordable housing obligations making those schemes unviable.
Annex B of the procedure set out timings for the determination of the application by the local authority and if required, for the Planning Inspectorate to issue a decision notice as part of written representations.
The Viability Assessment represents the application stage of the Section 106BA process and we would now anticipate a response from the London Borough of Haringey within 28 days of submission. I am available to respond to any queries raised which may be raised in relation to the submitted Viability Assessment. 
A question for those of you with more experience; was the original condition onerous and merely serving to delay much needed housing? Or was it a fair condition which should be staunchly defended to support the provision of much-needed affordable housing?
Links
Original application - hgyol.in/1Nth36P
New Application - hgyol.in/1USmn5X
Tags for Forum Posts: housing
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by pamish on
-
Anyone would think they want to drive huge numbers of people into the clutches of private landlords.
Footnote - 40% of MPs have buy-to-let businesses.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
David Lammy, Tessa Jowell and Sadiq Khan have between them taken more than £100,000 in donations from property developers alone in their race for the Labour Party's mayoral nomination. More on Christian Wolmar's website here.
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
"clutches of private landlords". That must be almost as bad as being in the clutches of private restauranteurs or private schools. Very scary indeed Pamish.
-
-
my perspective is skewed by not having managed to acquire that crucial second property in my 40s. And some of the landlords round here are pretty scary, judging by the speed with which they shoot in and out of their houses.
-
-
Yes there are bad landlords, just as there are bad doctors and architects, but in my view a knee-jerk characterisation of all landlords as being Rackmanesque, is as inaccurate and unhelpful as one painting all doctors with the Shipman brush.
-
-
I'm also skewed beyond making carefully reasoned posts by anger at the deliberate and wholesale removal of social housing including the mad idea to force Housing Associations to sell off their stock. If there is no such provision then the rachmans will expand to fill the gap, as well as all the nice ones like my friends and relations with their one-dwelling small businesses.
-
-
I have great sympathy with your anger and with your disbelief at the sale of HA properties. Bad landlords should be dealt with and the ones like your relatives encouraged to help make the best of what is a shitty situation for many in the housing trap.
-
-
Yep, bring on the Newham licensing model. At least get them registered or looking over their shoulders.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
