Jump to content

Budget - hit or miss ?


observer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Don't suppose the Chancellor had a lot of elbow room,  but can't understand why the Tories are so fixated on home ownership, when the reality is that most youngsters simply cannot afford to get on the housing ladder. Surely the answer is to build a shed load of cheap rented "council" apartments, in order to increase supply and sate demand, which should reduce price inflation in the market generally.   According to one news report,  now is an ideal time to borrow, so perhaps he should give Councils the green light to get on with it ?   The other positive he seems to be doing, is legislating to stop developers from holding land banks, and if Councils are given powers to CPO such land at the original market price, perhaps existing permissions on brown field sites, will reduce developer pressures on the green belt ?          :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet there are a lot of owners who are twitching right now after buying up land & property to simply sit on until the time or price is right for selling on to other developers etc.
I wonder if our council will CPO ?......but then saying that the council would benefit greatly from some IF they could CPO buy for the original market price as they may then pass it on for a higher price, maybe with outline planning, or even develop it as a Council for maximum return just like whoever bought and sat on if for years would have hoped to do one day.
Mmmmm............ me thinks the councils and government will make a lot from this ruling.....and I doubt it will stop them wanting to build on green belt land too :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obs, I believe you are right that the chancellor did not go as far as you suggested. Actually I see little of what is in the actual budget document in what has been discussed. The budget does require that by 2020 if the number of homes in the Authority is less than 75% of the target at that date in the Local Plan the applications have a presumption in favour of development. This would that a rogue developer has a case at appeal if anything is then turned down. There is a new and grave risk in setting the targets high.

The council spending limits change applies to areas of "High Affordability Pressure" only and the caps to be removed are on Housing Revenue Accounts (HRA), Warrington does not have an HRA since it sold Golden Gates Housing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...