Craig Williams, Surely His Political...
News1 min ago
6,000 New Second/third/holiday Homes For The Rich.....
20 Answers
Answers
1 to 20 of 20
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Canary42. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
developers tend to wriggle out of affordable homes requirements, unfortunately
http://
http://
So, Canary42, you object to Fareham Council choosing to adopt the Welborne Plan?
Perhaps you would have preferred them to create some afordable housing for local people?
Oh, hang on a moment, that's exactly what the Welborne Plan does!
Quote 1:
"Meeting the needs of those in the Fareham area who cannot access the housing market is one of the key priorities of the Council and is an important objective for Welborne. Delivering new affordable housing is vital in achieving sustainable development and Welborne provides a rare opportunity for the Borough to deliver a significant number of affordable homes and to make a real contribution towards addressing the current backlog of housing need".
Quote 2:
"Development at Welborne shall provide a total of 30% affordable housing (approximately 1,800 homes) with an initial tenure split of 70% affordable or social rent and 30% intermediate tenures".
http://
Perhaps you would have preferred them to create some afordable housing for local people?
Oh, hang on a moment, that's exactly what the Welborne Plan does!
Quote 1:
"Meeting the needs of those in the Fareham area who cannot access the housing market is one of the key priorities of the Council and is an important objective for Welborne. Delivering new affordable housing is vital in achieving sustainable development and Welborne provides a rare opportunity for the Borough to deliver a significant number of affordable homes and to make a real contribution towards addressing the current backlog of housing need".
Quote 2:
"Development at Welborne shall provide a total of 30% affordable housing (approximately 1,800 homes) with an initial tenure split of 70% affordable or social rent and 30% intermediate tenures".
http://
Councils don't have the money to build lots of new houses; developers do.
So it makes sense for councils to allow developers to build houses for the well-off but, at the same time, impose conditions that ensure that they also provide 'affordable housing'.
Apart from anything else, it ensures that new estates (or entirely new towns) have a broad social mix, thus avoiding the creation of 'sink estates' that resulted from attempts to provide social housing in earlier times.
So it makes sense for councils to allow developers to build houses for the well-off but, at the same time, impose conditions that ensure that they also provide 'affordable housing'.
Apart from anything else, it ensures that new estates (or entirely new towns) have a broad social mix, thus avoiding the creation of 'sink estates' that resulted from attempts to provide social housing in earlier times.
>>>I don't understand what point Canary is trying to make
Well that's something we can agree upon, Ummmm ;-)
However I suspect (and, indeed, hope) that Canary42 would be thinking of longer-term solutions to homelessness than simply providing more hostels, such as increasing the housing stock available to rent (whether in the private sector or through social housing providers) to those who qualify for Local Housing Allowance.
That's exactly what (in part, at least) the Welborne Plan seeks to do!
Well that's something we can agree upon, Ummmm ;-)
However I suspect (and, indeed, hope) that Canary42 would be thinking of longer-term solutions to homelessness than simply providing more hostels, such as increasing the housing stock available to rent (whether in the private sector or through social housing providers) to those who qualify for Local Housing Allowance.
That's exactly what (in part, at least) the Welborne Plan seeks to do!
It's not as simple as that though. The range of reasons why people are homeless are too vast to be able to address. But in the meantime hard working people are still finding it near on impossible to find affordable housing.
To me it still comes back to wealth envy and that envy is transferred to some sort of moral stance. How dare someone own two houses when there are homeless people sleeping on the streets...
What next....how dare you indulge in nice food while some people have to use food banks?
To me it still comes back to wealth envy and that envy is transferred to some sort of moral stance. How dare someone own two houses when there are homeless people sleeping on the streets...
What next....how dare you indulge in nice food while some people have to use food banks?
Thanks for all your responses. I'm afraid I just don't believe the affordable homes will materialise, it won't be the first time actual not equal plan.
As regards envy, why is this reprehensible but greed is OK - the Tory mantra profits before people resonates somewhat.
And to answer ummmm's first post, this is a very popular holiday area so many will end up as holiday homes.
As regards envy, why is this reprehensible but greed is OK - the Tory mantra profits before people resonates somewhat.
And to answer ummmm's first post, this is a very popular holiday area so many will end up as holiday homes.
Thanks for the heads up.
I'm looking for a holiday home in the area :-)
No seriously, as a second home owner , the last place I wanted was in the middle of some housing estate via a new build shoe box , with tiny gardens and lots of other people screaming kids.
I doubt if many will end up as second home to be honest.
Isle of wight maybe they would have and a small development of say just 10 property.
I'm looking for a holiday home in the area :-)
No seriously, as a second home owner , the last place I wanted was in the middle of some housing estate via a new build shoe box , with tiny gardens and lots of other people screaming kids.
I doubt if many will end up as second home to be honest.
Isle of wight maybe they would have and a small development of say just 10 property.
Our current place in Cornwall has a planning restriction on it.
You can live in it all year , but you must it can't be your only propertyweird I know and it blocks out first time buyers.
We tried to get the restriction lifted , but failed.
Seems bude council want it as a second home only ?
Reason ...gawd knows
You can live in it all year , but you must it can't be your only propertyweird I know and it blocks out first time buyers.
We tried to get the restriction lifted , but failed.
Seems bude council want it as a second home only ?
Reason ...gawd knows
ummm "I don't understand what point Canary is trying to make."
Having seen quite a few of Canary's posts, I'm as convinced as I can be that he/she doesn't understand what points he/she is ever trying to make!
Canary42 "I'm afraid I just don't believe the affordable homes will materialise..." The council has said 1800 of the 6000 homes will be affordable, and therefore you have no grounds for your disbelief, rather you made this comment because buenchico provided you with facts that completely debunked the premise of your original statement.
Your general stance appears to be that all the while there are homeless, people should not be allowed to have a second home or a holiday home. This is obviously patently absurd, but I'm interested why you think this. If I was lucky enough to have a second home or a holiday home, are you saying I should feel guilty because there are homeless or that I would be somehow morally questionable because I have a home I don't always live in?
Ummm drew an excellent analogy with a food bank.
Having seen quite a few of Canary's posts, I'm as convinced as I can be that he/she doesn't understand what points he/she is ever trying to make!
Canary42 "I'm afraid I just don't believe the affordable homes will materialise..." The council has said 1800 of the 6000 homes will be affordable, and therefore you have no grounds for your disbelief, rather you made this comment because buenchico provided you with facts that completely debunked the premise of your original statement.
Your general stance appears to be that all the while there are homeless, people should not be allowed to have a second home or a holiday home. This is obviously patently absurd, but I'm interested why you think this. If I was lucky enough to have a second home or a holiday home, are you saying I should feel guilty because there are homeless or that I would be somehow morally questionable because I have a home I don't always live in?
Ummm drew an excellent analogy with a food bank.
1 to 20 of 20
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.