Building Houses Means Fewer Affordable Houses

7
243

A wondrous perversion of the language here:

We’ve a claim here that creating more housing reduces the amount of affordable housing there is.

No, really:

If you go through the planning system then in return for being granted the permission you must build – or reserve from those built – some units of affordable housing. The definition here being below market price. So, if people are allowed to just build housing without going through the planning system then there’s that shortfall of below market price housing being produced.

Which is, of course, the real complaint here. That bureaucracy isn’t gaining those new assets to have control over, that “affordable” housing to be allocated by the bureaucracy.

This is a claim that should be greeted with that Anglo-Saxon Wave, obviously.

7
Leave a Reply

avatar
5 Comment threads
2 Thread replies
6 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
6 Comment authors
jghPcarTDGavin LongmuirJohn B Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Spike
Guest
Spike

Also give a Bronx cheer to the notion that compelling a developer to give stuff away, as a condition for exercising his rights, creates wealth or lowers the average price.

John B
Guest
John B

If a developer has to sell some of the development at a loss, won’t that mean he will charge more for the other units in the development to make up for it thereby making them less ‘affordable’?

And isn’t the point of buying houses in a certain price band to ensure your neighbours aren’t riff-raff povs?

TD
Guest
TD

The affordable units are usually included in a density bonus. If a lot is zoned for 10 units per acre then the developer might get a 20% density bonus to build 12 units with two affordable. This, of course, actually acts to diminish the value of the market rate (errr “unaffordable units”). The project is denser, the units are smaller, and as you suggest, some prospective buyers might perceive the presence of the affordable unit occupants as lessening desirability. The developer doesn’t really have a lot of ability to simply increase the price as they wish to sell their market… Read more »

Gavin Longmuir
Guest
Gavin Longmuir

The galling thing about “affordable housing” is the same as about “fair trade” coffee — it is anything but fair. In the coffee case, a chosen person gets to sell his coffee beans at above-market prices. In the housing case, a chosen person gets to buy (or rent) her house at a below-market price. Everyone would like to have those benefits, but only the chosen few get them. Who selects the lucky winners?

TD
Guest
TD

Oh man, it’s a process, but basically in order of application assuming their income qualifies them. In addition to factoring in whether it is a one, two, three or more bedroom unit, there are also tiers of what is called affordable: Moderate Income, Low Income, Very Low Income, an of course, Very Very Low Income. The tiers are based on bands around Area Median Income as published for each county, again varying with family size. Believe me, the first time you have to encounter this nonsense and have to deal with it, it’s like going through the looking glass. And… Read more »

Pcar
Guest
Pcar

@TW

Also, any builder who has one entrance for flat buyers and another for ‘social housing’ flats is castigated by BBC/Groan

@TD

You omitted “illegal immigrants/refugees” go to top and immediately housed

jgh
Guest
jgh

Presumably, these “unaffordable” houses will just sit there unpurchased, because they’re like, unaffordable.