Affordable Housing

Showing comments and forms 1 to 6 of 6

Comment

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 13150

Received: 24/02/2016

Respondent: Alexandra Hammond

Representation Summary:

The Plan doesn't make the definition of the term "intermediate" clear. Would this be "affordable" properties such as shared ownership and Help to Buy?
Will there be family homes which would be affordable to families with average income.
Given that Brentwood has very high house prices compared to other towns in Essex I am concerned that "affordable" homes will still be out of the reach of many of the town's residents.
What impact will the Government's new Starter Homes scheme have?

Full text:

To whom it may concern,

Firstly, thank you for giving the community the opportunity to find out about and comment on the council's plans for our town. I think it would be useful for residents to have a summarised version as at over 200 pages long it is more than most people are going to be willing to peruse. I have done my best to read as much as I can in one evening and shall comment on the points I consider most important. I welcome the drop in events being held and I hope to attend. I am one of the unfortunate residents who has missed the boat when it comes to buying a property in Brentwood, and possibly even Essex. I grew up in Brentwood as have many generations of my family before me.

With the exception of the land off Doddinghurst Road on either side of the A12, I agree to the proposals for the building of more properties. I think the land by Doddinghurst Road would be better used to provide a slip road giving access to the A12 at that point. It would reduce the traffic heading through Brentwood town centre and possibly open up opportunities to build dwellings in Pilgrims Hatch and further north in the borough without impacting so much on traffic through the town. I expect this would not be a popular suggestion if it is even possible!

Your plan doesn't make the definition of the term "intermediate" clear. Would this be "affordable" properties such as shared ownership and Help to Buy? A household of two people earning the average wage of £26,500 (perhaps teachers or nurses) with two dependants under 18 could perhaps borrow £225,000. Will there be family homes which would be affordable to that kind of family? I recently called Help to Buy East and South East to get an indication of the value of the property my husband and I could purchase using the Help to Buy Equity Loan scheme. I was told we could buy a property in the region of £210,000 which was disappointing given that we would require a family sized home and for that in Essex the minimum cost would be around £260-270k for a new build. Given that Brentwood has very high house prices compared to other towns in Essex I am concerned that "affordable" homes will still be out of the reach of many of the town's residents, including ourselves. I was very excited when I first heard of the Government's new Starter Homes scheme, however when I realised that the scheme had a long way to go before being finalised and available for use I was very disappointed, as my husband will have passed the cut off age of 40 by that time. Maybe it may be an option for my children to purchase a home in 15 years or so!

I don't think the 35% minimum of affordable housing goes far enough given that that will include social housing. At the end of 2012 there were around 1000 people on the social housing waiting list. The plan is for a little over 5000 new homes, so around 20% should be for social housing. This leaves only 15% for "affordable" homes. I expect the 35% also includes the sheltered housing that will need to be replaced. I understand that the developers want to maximise their profits and I'm sure if all the properties build were sold at market value they would sell with no problems, however this wouldn't be right for the community. Another thing that is very important for me is that the more affordable properties (if not all properties) are offered to people with a strong local connection first, but I from what I have read something is in place to ensure this happens. I know many people are moving out from London as the city becomes even more affordable and it would be pretty galling if these families were snapping up our "affordable" homes.

I also think that the ratio of 1,2,3 and 4 properties should be reconsidered. Given that families on the waiting list for social housing are waiting longer for 3 bedroom properties than for smaller ones it makes me think the need for larger properties is high.

I recently enquired about the homes to be built on the old Warley Adult College site and the developer informed me that the flats would not be eligible for the scheme and there was no guarantee that the houses would be part of the scheme either. This is because according to them the terms of Right to Buy state that there must be no longer than 6 months between reservation and completion. Do you think this could be an issue with providing other Help to Buy homes in the proposed developments? How could this be prevented?

I am intrigued by the 5% self build allocation on larger developments. How would somebody get involved with that? Would you be looking for people to set up a Community Land Trust?

There isn't a huge amount of detail said in the draft plan regarding the William Hunter Way improvements. I agree with the general consensus that a cinema would be a great asset to the community and should be built on the site. My main concern would be how to provide enough parking to replace the spaces lost by the building. Would there be underground parking or perhaps rooftop parking similar to The Brewery in Romford? If Lidl is to go ahead with opening a store at Wates Way then perhaps another supermarket on the William Hunter Way site would not be necessary.

I was recently searching for part time office based job in Brentwood, which was not that easy due to the lack of jobs being advertised. Any opportunity to create more jobs in the town and reduce the need for commuting can surely only be a good thing.

That is all the feedback I have for now. I hope that you can address my concerns.

Comment

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 13153

Received: 24/02/2016

Respondent: Alexandra Hammond

Representation Summary:

I recently enquired about the homes to be built on the old Warley Adult College site and the developer informed me that the flats would not be eligible for the scheme and there was no guarantee that the houses would be part of the scheme either. This is because according to them the terms of Right to Buy state that there must be no longer than 6 months between reservation and completion. Do you think this could be an issue with providing other Help to Buy homes in the proposed developments? How could this be prevented?

Full text:

To whom it may concern,

Firstly, thank you for giving the community the opportunity to find out about and comment on the council's plans for our town. I think it would be useful for residents to have a summarised version as at over 200 pages long it is more than most people are going to be willing to peruse. I have done my best to read as much as I can in one evening and shall comment on the points I consider most important. I welcome the drop in events being held and I hope to attend. I am one of the unfortunate residents who has missed the boat when it comes to buying a property in Brentwood, and possibly even Essex. I grew up in Brentwood as have many generations of my family before me.

With the exception of the land off Doddinghurst Road on either side of the A12, I agree to the proposals for the building of more properties. I think the land by Doddinghurst Road would be better used to provide a slip road giving access to the A12 at that point. It would reduce the traffic heading through Brentwood town centre and possibly open up opportunities to build dwellings in Pilgrims Hatch and further north in the borough without impacting so much on traffic through the town. I expect this would not be a popular suggestion if it is even possible!

Your plan doesn't make the definition of the term "intermediate" clear. Would this be "affordable" properties such as shared ownership and Help to Buy? A household of two people earning the average wage of £26,500 (perhaps teachers or nurses) with two dependants under 18 could perhaps borrow £225,000. Will there be family homes which would be affordable to that kind of family? I recently called Help to Buy East and South East to get an indication of the value of the property my husband and I could purchase using the Help to Buy Equity Loan scheme. I was told we could buy a property in the region of £210,000 which was disappointing given that we would require a family sized home and for that in Essex the minimum cost would be around £260-270k for a new build. Given that Brentwood has very high house prices compared to other towns in Essex I am concerned that "affordable" homes will still be out of the reach of many of the town's residents, including ourselves. I was very excited when I first heard of the Government's new Starter Homes scheme, however when I realised that the scheme had a long way to go before being finalised and available for use I was very disappointed, as my husband will have passed the cut off age of 40 by that time. Maybe it may be an option for my children to purchase a home in 15 years or so!

I don't think the 35% minimum of affordable housing goes far enough given that that will include social housing. At the end of 2012 there were around 1000 people on the social housing waiting list. The plan is for a little over 5000 new homes, so around 20% should be for social housing. This leaves only 15% for "affordable" homes. I expect the 35% also includes the sheltered housing that will need to be replaced. I understand that the developers want to maximise their profits and I'm sure if all the properties build were sold at market value they would sell with no problems, however this wouldn't be right for the community. Another thing that is very important for me is that the more affordable properties (if not all properties) are offered to people with a strong local connection first, but I from what I have read something is in place to ensure this happens. I know many people are moving out from London as the city becomes even more affordable and it would be pretty galling if these families were snapping up our "affordable" homes.

I also think that the ratio of 1,2,3 and 4 properties should be reconsidered. Given that families on the waiting list for social housing are waiting longer for 3 bedroom properties than for smaller ones it makes me think the need for larger properties is high.

I recently enquired about the homes to be built on the old Warley Adult College site and the developer informed me that the flats would not be eligible for the scheme and there was no guarantee that the houses would be part of the scheme either. This is because according to them the terms of Right to Buy state that there must be no longer than 6 months between reservation and completion. Do you think this could be an issue with providing other Help to Buy homes in the proposed developments? How could this be prevented?

I am intrigued by the 5% self build allocation on larger developments. How would somebody get involved with that? Would you be looking for people to set up a Community Land Trust?

There isn't a huge amount of detail said in the draft plan regarding the William Hunter Way improvements. I agree with the general consensus that a cinema would be a great asset to the community and should be built on the site. My main concern would be how to provide enough parking to replace the spaces lost by the building. Would there be underground parking or perhaps rooftop parking similar to The Brewery in Romford? If Lidl is to go ahead with opening a store at Wates Way then perhaps another supermarket on the William Hunter Way site would not be necessary.

I was recently searching for part time office based job in Brentwood, which was not that easy due to the lack of jobs being advertised. Any opportunity to create more jobs in the town and reduce the need for commuting can surely only be a good thing.

That is all the feedback I have for now. I hope that you can address my concerns.

Object

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 13432

Received: 17/03/2016

Respondent: Mrs Jean Laut

Representation Summary:

Please do not develop any Green Belt until every scrap of brownfield has been utilised.

Full text:

Please do not deveelop any green belt until every scrap of brownfield has been utilised

Object

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 13589

Received: 23/03/2016

Respondent: Anne Clark

Representation Summary:

There is NOT a need nor a shortage of "affordable" housing. My husband and I SAVED to be able to put a deposit down on our house (as did our parents!), we certainly didn't expect to be able to buy one straight away! We then bought one that we could afford and didn't expect anything else!
There are quite a few £million plus houses in Brentwood that we'd like but can't afford - maybe you should make them affordable to us??!

Full text:

There is NOT a need nor a shortage of "affordable" housing. My husband and I SAVED to be able to put a deposit down on our house (as did our parents!), we certainly didn't expect to be able to buy one straight away! We then bought one that we could afford and didn't expect anything else!
There are quite a few £million plus houses in Brentwood that we'd like but can't afford - maybe you should make them affordable to us??!

Support

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 14787

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mr Jon Bright

Representation Summary:

Of course the definition of "affordable" is somewhat contentious & at times Orwellian - i.e affordability = unaffordabilty. The Government seems to regard affordable as being something like 80% of market rents for the rented sector, although their whole housing policy now seems to lean overheavily towards owner-occupation with little regard for those that are unable or do not wish to buy. My view is that there is a definite need for more sub-market rented homes, provided by Housing Associations or dare I say it the local authority itself.

Full text:



I was pleased to be able to attend your presentation at the Ingatestone Community Centre on 22nd February. I have since been able to download the Draft Plan and read some parts of it. Overall it seems very comprehensive, well-reasoned and informative.
As a former local government housing officer for some 30+ years, I very much support the provision of more genuinely affordable housing for the Borough in general and Ingatestone in particular. The sites earmarked within Ingatestone seem to me to be good & appropriate options.
Of course the definition of "affordable" is somewhat contentious & at times Orwellian - i.e affordability = unaffordabilty. The Government seems to regard affordable as being something like 80% of market rents for the rented sector, although their whole housing policy now seems to lean overheavily towards owner-occupation with little regard for those that are unable or do not wish to buy. My view is that there is a definite need for more sub-market rented homes, provided by Housing Associations or dare I say it the local authority itself.
Obviously in an ideal world, every bit of open countryside would be protected (I say this as a keen rambler in the countryside & elsewhere), and places like Ingatestone Garden Centre (IGC) wouldn't be closing. But as IGC has closed down that seems to be an ideal site for genuinely affordable rented housing and/or low-cost owner-occupied dwellings - ideally affordable in perpetuity and perhaps with a reasonable priority for local people. I think somewhere like Ingatestone needs an increase in that type of provision. What it doesn't need is more footballers' mansions, or developments like that at Trueloves Lane (where, hilariously, the new homes were marketed as affordable with a price tag of some £1.5 million!). Without more affordable housing, where do people expect the next generation to live? Kids living with parents until they're about 50? Or moving to Scunthorpe (for example) just to find somewhere to live.
Reading a recent article in "Inside Housing" it was reported that just over 10% of England was currently used for housing. Nationally, to build some 2.5 million homes over the coming years would only take things up to around 12%. So I think we are some way short yet of concreting over the entire countryside, as some fear.
As you state in your report, any new development needs to be appropriate in scale and design for its location, have suitable infrastructure, protect Green Belt as much as possible, have suitable landscape buffers / definable boundaries etc (e.g. between Ingatestone & Mountnessing) and, where affordable housing is included with a scheme, to be well integrated (i.e. avoiding what has been referred to in the media as "poor doors"!).
On the question of affordable housing (Policy 7.5), I am aware that developers will at times seek to avoid any affordable quotas, instead making a payment for the Council / HA to develop elsewhere. I think this leads to less mixed communities and should be resisted as far as possible.
From some of the conversations I overheard at the meeting of 22nd February, I suspect a fair few local residents won't share most of my views, and will probably be in the "nimby" camp, of not building anything anywhere ever. I wonder how many of those objecting are living in developments which were themselves once open land and no doubt subject to similar objections a generation or two ago?
One thing I'd query - in Sections 7.20 /7.21 you refer to 17.1% of local households having someone with a disability / long-term illness, yet only 5% provision for such groups is proposed for new developments.
I remember at one time there was discussion of "lifetime homes" - developing new homes that could be easily adaptable for people in all stages of their life. But these are probably not popular with developers.
To finish on a parochial note, I'm wondering what the plans are for 24 Norton Road, Ingatestone - the former Children & Families Consultation Service offices - which have been empty and boarded up for some months now. I assume this site will be earmarked for housing?
Many thanks.
John Bright CIHCM

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 14890

Received: 25/04/2016

Respondent: Kingsley Dent

Representation Summary:

Is it possible that housing associations could become actively involved where the property can be retained and controlled for those who work in the Borough? We must be able to find a way around the private developers and their 'need' for market value. This may sound a little like
'Council Housing' but until supply outstrips demand, our young residents will continue to lose out.

Full text:

Having viewed the development plan, I would like to thank you for the very detailed
options outlined and offer the following considered opinions.

1. With a plan of such magnitude, we should be bold and imaginative as we look to develop
an environment that will enhance the town's character.

2. Whilst we cherish the idea of the Green Belt, we need to be realistic about the small areas
between existing developments that hold little or no community benefit. These should be
used for development where possible and where the current infrastructure allows.

3. The sheer size of the challenge dictates that something like the Dunton Garden Suburb is
necessary. We should be bold in this and ensure that a new area is developed that can
have all the amenities, infrastructure and potential for community.

4. The need for affordable/social housing is vital if the town is to continue with its mix of
retail, business, commerce, manufacturing etc. I recognise that this style of housing is a political
problem but our proximity to London is continuing to make house prices accelerate even more.
Is it possible that housing associations could become actively involved where the property can
be retained and controlled for those who work in the Borough? We must be able to find a way
around the private developers and their 'need' for market value. This may sound a little like
'Council Housing' but until supply outstrips demand, our young residents will continue to lose out

Attachments: