London SE1 community website

How luxury flats avoid affordable housing regulations

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Current: 5 of 6
Friday 3 June 2016 3.04pm
Thanks. Sounds more 9 Elms part agreed

Our very own Central Waitrose (medium size) due official opening Friday 15th July. Southbank Tower. Blackfriars.
Friday 3 June 2016 7.18pm
I'll be there with my shopping trolley and I won't be out shopping any more until then. Sorry Rover, nothing to eat until those hallowed doors are open. I'll offer to cut the ribbon for them if the Queen fails to attend ,although she's bound to want to stock up on corgi food and halloumi for her husband.
Friday 3 June 2016 9.53pm
Thanks Sandy Pandy. But beware the trolley dollies rushing to fill their stock up and you get bowled over in the process as I was in Kensington branch Wednesday.. Obviously I was too at ease within their hallowed portals! :) I shall still be around to attend official opening hopefully

Cotswolds 12
Saturday 4 June 2016 9.49am
I agree, perhaps Southwark Council should be actively seeking to buy any flats that come up for sale in council stock. Even if they have to pay over the odds. I would find this more exciting than a Waitrose.
Saturday 4 June 2016 10.52am
Perhaps right to buy was the start of the rot! Especially now with increasing waiting list numbers

Cotswolds 12
Saturday 4 June 2016 10.55am
Perhaps right to buy was the start of the rot! Especially now with increasing waiting list numbers

Btw. I wasn't hurt too badly. Thx for asking

Cotswolds 12
Sunday 5 June 2016 8.21pm
Hi, I just wanted to say that I think the flats at 169 Long Lane look much nicer than the Valentine flats. I haven't been inside 169 (but I did look inside Valentine) but externally 169 look really great, with large terraces, communal spaces - including a large communal roof terrace! You don't get those luxuries at Valentine, (they have put large fans on roof (for Sainsbury's) instead), and the purchase cost of Valentine flats was very high given the area. I think Southwark council should be commended for these flats and hopefully we see more of this in Southwark.
Tuesday 7 June 2016 1.18am
spatua wrote:
...externally 169 look really great, with large terraces, communal spaces - including a large communal roof terrace! You don't get those luxuries at Valentine...

I agree. And in my opinion this is a problem, and one of the reasons that there was support for the Housing Bill, despite some of its obvious issues. I am in support of mixed neighbourhoods and very much support the provision of truly affordable housing for key workers in high cost areas, but it's gone too far when the tenants next door have made substantial payments to the Council who in turn provide larger and better appointed housing, on life tenancies with no means testing, at a quarter of market rents (or sometimes much less). The Housing Bill will change this when implemented later this year to limit tenancy terms and introduce means testing, but this will likely be after the tenancies at 169 have already been granted (and will come at the cost of some of the other changes the Housing Bill has forced through...).

I hope that these exceedingly high value council flats are awarded very conscientiously by Southwark Council (maybe restricted to key workers actively employed in the area?). Large parts of SE1 are already on the sad march to Notting Hill-ification, with only the poor and the (truly) rich being provided for.
Tuesday 7 June 2016 7.46am
sjac, whilst acknowledging that unfairness rankles, at least these places are lived in and not left empty like so many properties rated as high value. That grates on me far more, and I have yet to see any attempt at legislation to deal with this problem. I would add that dirty money may be involved too, so another reason to deal with this rather than attack the rights of less well off people to a roof over their heads.
Tuesday 7 June 2016 10.02am
Something I don't seem to see mentioned anywhere in these various debates about private vs social housing rents, is not that social housing rents are too low, but that all other rents are too high, as are house prices. Paying 1000+ rent each month, as many of my co-workers and friends do is, in my opinion, beyond belief. I'm not talking high-end luxury here either, just standard one bedroom flats, as any private renters on this forum will already know.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Current: 5 of 6

To post a message, please log in or register..
Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from:

We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions