London Skybar

[hella good]

Hi guys, just wanted to ask if there was an existing thread for the Shell Centre masterplan?

[Core Rising]

Originally Posted by hella good

Hi guys, just wanted to ask if there was an existing thread for the Shell Centre masterplan?

Just looked and can't find it. It's possible there isn't a thread, there was some talk on the Elizabeth House page, the rest of the conversation might have taken place on the projects and construction page. Anyway, have some pretty pictures.

[italiano_pellicano]

guys any news of the direction of the old restaurant gennaros ?

[Black Cat]

Curious that this pp news item has not had more coverage on this forum site:

http://www.cnplus.co.uk/news/500m-va...640403.article

[Loathing]

Originally Posted by Black Cat

Curious that this pp news item has not had more coverage on this forum site:

http://www.cnplus.co.uk/news/500m-va...640403.article

It has been mentioned in the One Nine Elms thread, and the City Compilations thread.

[Black Cat]

Thanks Loathing, all these Vauxhall cluster projects are getting confusing. Perhaps its a matter or renaming them for clarity, or simply having one thread for the Vauxhall Cluster till they start construction.

[metroranger]

Hi all, just something I have to get off my chest.
What does "affordable housing" mean?
The politicians are endlessly trumpeting out the phrase but no one challenges them to define it.
The old way of calculating a mortgage would be 3.5 x annual income.
So if the average starting salary is £20k (I'm being generous here) the mortgage should be £70k and starting home properties should be around this price to be affordable.
This is clearly not the case, so what do they mean by "affordable"?
I despair of modern journalist that reprint this empty phrase without challenging it.
What would you folks in the Skybar define as "affordable housing" and is there any within zone 3, - (not including part ownership which you don't own).

[LDN_EUROPE]

This should help you on your quest:

http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk/affordable-homes

My understanding is that it is a catch all term and includes social rent (social housing) and anything up to about 80% of market rent.

[LDN_EUROPE]

Just found this: http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk...-framework.pdf


3.3 "Affordable Rent is a form of social housing. Homes will be made available at a rent level of up to 80% of gross market rents. Gross market rents are generally expressed inclusive of any service charges. An Affordable Rent, set at up to 80% of the gross market rent, should take account of the service charge for a property (where applicable)."

[metroranger]

Originally Posted by LDN_EUROPE

Just found this: http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk...-framework.pdf


3.3 "Affordable Rent is a form of social housing. Homes will be made available at a rent level of up to 80% of gross market rents. Gross market rents are generally expressed inclusive of any service charges. An Affordable Rent, set at up to 80% of the gross market rent, should take account of the service charge for a property (where applicable)."

Many thanks for that. It is scary to see that their definition does not take into account average earnings only market rates, so not really affordable.

[LDN_EUROPE]

Yes, it also makes London less 'affordable'. Some argue that this will push the poor(er) out of inner London. 80% of gross market rent in, say, Belfast, would be much lower than inner London but wages may, in many instances, be the same. On the other hand, do we all have the 'right' to live anywhere we like? There are loads of places I'd prefer to live in London which I can't afford and I wouldn't expect to be subsidised. I also don't wish to move to a less expensive part of the UK/world.

[Loathing]

Why should the Government subsidize anyone in the UK who wants to live within zone 3?

[DarJoLe]

So people on low incomes aren't spending half their life and pay commuting into the centre?

[metroranger]

This straying away from my question. What is the definition of "affordable housing" a phrase which is endlessly trumped out by politicians yet never challenged by journalists. LDN_Europe has kindly pointed out the homes and communities definition of affordable rent which alarmingly does not take into account a persons ability to pay. How can something be defined as affordable when it does not take into account the ability to pay?

[Loathing]

'Affordable' by definition does not tell you who is able to afford. It's a catchall word for anything that's cheaper than market rates. I don't know why you're getting all pissy over the semantics.

[Black Cat]

Affordable housing is not limited to rental housing; the term can be applied to housing units sold at a discount from the market price. Usually the discount is negotiated with the planning authorities in return for "planning gain" to the developer (however this is calculated). Construction of affordable housing can also be profitable for the developer, though in theory should simply cover costs. However, the discount only benefits the first buyer, thereafter the unit is sold at market price and the first owner gets the windfall (if one exists). The main benefit of "affordable housing" may not be that subsidised housing is built for people with little or no income, but rather that more economic housing units are constructed for a segment of the property market that is not at the high value end.

[Loathing]

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

So people on low incomes aren't spending half their life and pay commuting into the centre?

But I can't understand how the Government could justify the expense. Wouldn't that money be better spent in cities other than London? Even a 30% subsidy on a house in London could build an entire house in poorer cities in the UK.

[UrbanG]

An interesting question Metroranger. I know this may not be a popular view but I think 'affordable' housing should be targeted at those who work nearby. The pursuit of decent housing is the reason we have so much unnecessary commuting. There is too much concern over keeping 'poorer' people in inner London. They should live where they can get work - anything else is completely dysfunctional

[Sesquip]

Originally Posted by UrbanG

I think 'affordable' housing should be targeted at those who work nearby.
There is too much concern over keeping 'poorer' people in inner London. They should live where they can get work - anything else is completely dysfunctional

They do work in inner London. Who cleans the toilets, serves the food, sweeps the streets, stacks the shelves etc. etc?
There aren't "poor job areas" and "rich job areas" - we all work in the same places and deserve to live near them, regardless of wealth.

[UrbanG]

Originally Posted by Sesquip

They do work in inner London. Who cleans the toilets, serves the food, sweeps the streets, stacks the shelves etc. etc?
There aren't "poor job areas" and "rich job areas" - we all work in the same places and deserve to live near them, regardless of wealth.

Dont misunderstand me, I have no objection to that (couldnt care less whether rich or poor per se) I guess my query is whether stable work in the locality was a condition for affordable housing - if not it should be. if it is there isn't nearly enough of it available for working people. My point is we focus on the poor when we talk about affordable housing - when it is not just the poor who cannot live in inner London it is middle class families too - there is something seriously wrong when a city cannot house so much of its workforce - I guess it suits those who want to keep house prices and rents artificially high.