HOME   ARCHIVE   GALLERY   SHOP   ABOUT US      
 

 
SALFORD COUNCIL SET TO ENSHRINE HUGE DEVELOPER PROFITS INTO PLANNING PROCESS
 

Star date: 4th June 2015

DEVELOPER VIABILITY AND MASSIVE PROFITS TO BE OFFICIAL SALFORD COUNCIL POLICY

"We note the Council has supported residential developments based upon viability to support a reduced contribution, and this can be met with local political and community unease" Barratt Homes

Salford Council is set to enshrine huge profits for developers and to waive planning fees officially in line with `viability' reports, despite the controversy these issues have aroused. After a consultation, only with those on its planning data base, the new `approach to planning obligations' is set to be endorsed next week by Derek Antrobus, Assistant Mayor for Planning, and Gena Merrett, Assistant Housing Mayor.

Full details here...


Both online and in the new print issue, the Salford Star has been documenting the loss of 830 affordable houses and 19,275,553 in planning fees and obligations over the last twelve months alone. The Star showed how a developer can make over 20million profit while its scheme can be deemed `not economically viable' in a hopelessly skewed planning process that even both Tory and Labour councillors have fiercely criticised...

"What's been going on behind the door I don't know" said Councillor Karen Garrido at a recent planning panel meeting, while Assistant Mayor for Planning, Derek Antrobus was equally scathing...

"It's totally unacceptable that developer after developer comes here claiming that they can't comply with our policy when our local communities are being robbed left, right and centre" he frothed "If you're in business and invest there's always a risk that you might not make profits but we're told when we're assessing viability that we're supposed to guarantee a certain margin of profit...and it's the public sector that's underpinning their profits. We're told that the economy's booming and then the next day we get developers pleading poverty and saying they can't comply. I don't know who to believe any more..."

While his words sound like fighting talk, next week Councillor Antrobus, along with Assistant Housing Mayor, Gena Merrett, is set to endorse a new `approach to planning' which will enshrine massive developer profits and `developers pleading poverty' into the planning system.

The Salford Star print issue deconstructed the huge document on which this new policy is based, showing how developers' profits of up to 20% were to be taken into account along with other costs when `viability' is assessed, via an equation A-(B+C+D+E)...

`A' is the `Gross Development Value', or income from sales, ground rents etc. From this total is then deducted land costs (B), building costs, including sales and marketing (C), interest costs (D) and developer's profit (E). To this equation was added extra building costs, and, by the time standard Section 106 planning fees (public realm, infrastructure, education, heritage, climate change) and provision of affordable housing were added schemes were becoming economically `unviable' all over the place which allowed developers to `plead poverty' and avoid paying the city millions of pounds.

The snappily titled Supplementary Planning Document Planning Obligations (or SPD) document went out for consultation earlier this year but for the eyes only of developers, organisations and individuals already on the Council's planning data base. And, of course, the vast majority of those who responded were developers intent on screwing the city for even more money...

Peel Holdings, as usual, complained about everything but, along with two other developers, even objected to Salford Council's weedy attempt to re-claim some money after it has waived fees for certain schemes. Having waived fees, the Council insists on inserting a `clawback' arrangement, whereby, if developers do make a profit (relying on their honesty) they will pay some Section 106 fees.

Peel, and the others, objected to this, while wanting a clause inserted that worked the other way too that if, once schemes were completed, the profit was less than anticipated, any fees they had paid would be refunded by the Council. In response, Council planning officers told them to do one... "the developer would in essence be shifting its loss on to the city council. It is not appropriate for the city council to underwrite developer risk in this way..."

While developers tried pushing their luck, the Council report on the consultation unsurprisingly notes that "a number of developers expressed support for the proposed approach regarding the negotiation of reduced contributions where a developer considers that the cumulative effect of policy and planning obligation requirements would compromise development viability in relation to a particular scheme..."

Barratt Homes acknowledged the controversy that surrounds the avoidance of fees by developers... "We note the Council has supported residential developments based upon viability to support a reduced (ie below policy) contribution, and this can be met with local political and community unease" it stated "...the SPD should set out positively why this occurs, in order to reduce or manage such opposition by informing them of the realities of development."

Hmmm. Meanwhile, following the Royal Borough of Greenwich proposing to make developers' `viability assessments' (or `poverty pleading') public (see previous Salford Star article click here), Salford Council does not include such a clause in the report to be endorsed next week.

Indeed, the English Cities fund, in its consultation response, insists the policy should "recognise developers' sensitivities regarding disclosure of confidential and commercially sensitive information, and should state that the City Council will accommodate developers' desire to maintain the confidentiality of information provided..." 

Since the consultation, the Council has amended the huge profits that developers are allowed to make in viability assessments, reducing this from 20% to 17.5%. But there is the added loophole... "a higher percentage developer profit may be necessary for higher risk schemes"...

A Community Impact Asessment on the policy doesn't refer at all to the loss to the city as a result of developers avoiding millions of pounds worth of fees and the provision of affordable housing. It only stresses the positive aspects from the money it might receive in planning fees. But the introduction to that Assessment explains what the policy is all about...

"A key principle guiding the review is the need to ensure that the city council's approach to planning obligations has clear regard to development viability" it states "The cumulative impact of all financial requirements when taken together with other policy requirements should not compromise development viability across the city. The purpose of the review is not therefore to place additional financial requirements on new development, but to rationalise the existing approach to securing planning obligations to ensure that it is clear."

...Clear to all that `developers pleading poverty' and avoiding fees is set to be enshrined into official Salford Council practice.


To read the Salford Star report into the 19million Planning Scandal and The Secrecy behind the English Cities fund see the print issue click here




Labor Voter wrote
at 09:34:50 on 07 June 2015
Joe. It is because gays do not understand UKIP. Many think UKIP is racist and hate gays. People need ways to here what they stand for at the top for example.

joe oneilll wrote
at 20:51:07 on 05 June 2015
Looks Like London's gay community want to ban us...

Michael F in SalFord wrote
at 19:13:54 on 04 June 2015
With UKiP taking part in London's Gay Pride parade as quoted in Pink News this week it seems some political parties are realising they need to connect with all voters to win. I urge the Salford Conservative Party to be highly determined to follow UKiP's example by making policy challenges that will see diversity at the top of the Salford Council agenda, including on getting builders to invest more in social housing. If builders cannot afford the levy let them invest in 25% of their development being socially affordable.

Please enter your comment below:
 
 
 
Salford Star Hoodies
Salford Star contact
Deli Lama
advertisement
 
Contact us
phone: 07957 982960
Facebook       Twitter
 
 
Recent comments
article: SALFORD CITY COUNCIL SPENT ALMOST 10,000 ON MIPIM PROPERTY JAUNT
Superb picture. It seems to capture the mind of our great leader. ... [more]
article: NATIONAL GRID WILL NOT RE-THINK DEMOLITION OF SALFORD DIRTY OLD TOWN GASWORKS
The heritage -cultural value of these gasholder frames would only enhance the profitability of a scheme with flats inside.Lets fac... [more]
article: NATIONAL GRID WILL NOT RE-THINK DEMOLITION OF SALFORD DIRTY OLD TOWN GASWORKS
The children of today will have nothing to remind them of what was once a great city, and it's all down to greed, greed, and more ... [more]
article: NATIONAL GRID WILL NOT RE-THINK DEMOLITION OF SALFORD DIRTY OLD TOWN GASWORKS
As long as its not more Apartments... [more]
article: NATIONAL GRID WILL NOT RE-THINK DEMOLITION OF SALFORD DIRTY OLD TOWN GASWORKS
A park doesnt make money. Overpriced goldfish bowl apartments do. ... [more]
 
 
 
 
 
Days
Hours
Minutes
Seconds
 
 
 

Donate

Help the Salford Star...

all donations welcome

 
 

More articles...

SALFORD CITY COUNCIL SPENT ALMOST 10,000 ON MIPIM PROPERTY JAUNT

Star date: 21st June 2018

COUNCIL SPENT 5,750 ON MIPIM PR IN SOUTH OF FRANCE

Salford Council spent almost 10,000 on the jaunt to the MIPIM property orgy in Cannes. A newly published contract register shows that, as well as the 4,022 costs for the City Mayor and two officers to go to the South of France paid by unknown private sector companies, the Council also spent 5,750 on marketing and PR for MIPIM.

The contract register also shows the Council is spending 9,500 on a 'Salford Story' press consultant, 118,000 on its failed 'digital community hub', over 14,000 on a 'leadership programme' and, er, 25,000 on milk and bread?

Full details here...

NATIONAL GRID WILL NOT RE-THINK DEMOLITION OF SALFORD DIRTY OLD TOWN GASWORKS

Star date: 20th June 2018

'WE RECOGNISE THE HISTORIC INTEREST'...BUT THEY'RE BEING DEMOLISHED!

Despite musical protests and petitions, the National Grid is adamant that the Salford gas holders, made famous in the Dirty Old Town anthem, will be demolished.

Campaigners are asking for the Grid to re-think a new use for the structures, like in many other towns and cities, but the company states that while "We recognise the historic interest in the Salford gasholder...the structure is being dismantled..."

Full details here...

SALFORD COUNCIL REFUSES TO REVEAL WHO PAID FOR CITY MAYOR TRIP TO SOUTH OF FRANCE

Star date: 19th June 2018

COUNCIL BLOCKS FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST ON 4,000 MIPIM TRIP

Salford City Council has refused to answer a Salford Star Freedom of Information request on which private company paid the 4,022 costs for City Mayor Paul Dennett and two staff to go to the South of France for the MIPIM property event.

The Council states that "the commercial interests of the Council outweigh that of the public interest in disclosure". The Salford Star is to appeal the decision.

Full details here...

DEVASTATING SURVEY OF NORTH WEST COUNCIL WORKERS SHOWS LOCAL SERVICES COLLAPSING

Star date: 18th June 2018

OVER 80% OF COUNCIL WORKERS HAVE NO CONFIDENCE IN SERVICES AND ALMOST 50% THINKING OF LEAVING THEIR JOBS

A survey of almost 1,500 local council workers in the North West reveals that 81% have no confidence in the future of local services, 49% are thinking of leaving their jobs, 54% believe their council no longer delivers quality services, and 45% think that their employer doesn't make the right decisions for the public.

The other results of the survey by UNISON to coincide with its local government conference make equally depressing reading, as the union states that "Vital local services in the North West are collapsing".

Full details here...

SALFORD TIME OUT FOR CARERS

Star date: 18th June 2018

TRIPS, CAKES, MASSAGE, ADVICE AND CHAT AS CARERS TAKE TIME OUT

"I was absolutely weary...I needed to get out of the house" Ernie

Caring for a loved one is indeed a labour of love but it can also be life consuming and draining. So a group called Time Out For Carers is making a difference, running weekly sessions where escapism is the order of the day.

There's free massages, trips out, advice on allowances, tea and coffee and cakes, but, most importantly, relaxed informal chats with carers who are all in the same position.

Full details here...

 



written and produced by Salfordians for Salfordians
with attitude and love xxx