Critics say mayor\u2019s support for central London development\u2019s monthly rents makes a mockery of idea of affordable housing<\/p>\n
Boris Johnson is set to approve plans for \u201caffordable\u201d flats that the Guardian understands could cost tenants up to \u00a32,800 a month to rent.<\/p>\n
The London mayor is expected to grant consent on Friday for the construction of 98 \u201caffordable rent\u201d apartments on the site of the Royal Mail\u2019s Mount Pleasant sorting office in central London in a deal that critics say makes a mockery of the idea that affordable housing is for the most needy.<\/p>\n
Confidential estimates of market rents filed as part of the application suggest tenants could be charged up to \u00a31,170 a month for a one-bedroom flat and up to \u00a31,690 for a two-bedroom flat. A family occupying a four-bedroom flat in the development could be asked to pay as much as \u00a3660 a week. According to a rule of thumb widely used by housing experts that housing costs should represent a third of income to be considered affordable, their family income would need to be around \u00a3100,000.<\/p>\n
Sarah Hayward, the leader of the London borough of Camden, said the expected rents on the Mount Pleasant scheme were among the highest ever seen for affordable housing.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf these rent levels are as claimed, they will not be in any way affordable,\u201d the Labour councillor said. \u201cBoris Johnson is showing his true colours. He doesn\u2019t want poor people living in London.\u201d<\/p>\n
The homes represent less than a quarter of those being built as part of the 681-unit development on the prime site that straddles the border of Islington and Camden and could be worth as much as \u00a31bn. The boroughs have objected strongly to the lack of cheaper units and believe the project would remain commercially viable if 50% of the homes were genuinely affordable.<\/p>\n
The rents the Royal Mail Group (RMG) calculates the homes would attract if placed on the open market are contained in a confidential financial appraisal submitted to the mayor\u2019s office based on figures provided by the property consultancy Knight Frank. A separate draft legal agreement says the \u201caffordable\u201d units will cost no more than 60% of market rents in the area and will on average have a discount of 44%.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is not affordable at all to most people who need it \u2026 [Boris Johnson] has perverted the definition of \u2018affordable\u2019 and made a mockery of the whole idea that affordable housing is there to help the people who need it most,\u201d said James Murray, the executive member for housing on Islington council.<\/p>\n
\u201cRent on a one-bed council flat close to this development is no more than \u00a3175 a week and people struggle with that. The idea you could add another \u00a3100 and it still be affordable is ridiculous. It shows Boris Johnson either doesn\u2019t understand social housing in London or doesn\u2019t care. This development is set to deprive Londoners of genuinely affordable housing while benefiting investors in luxury flats and Royal Mail shares.\u201d<\/p>\n
The mayor\u2019s office said it was satisfied that \u201cthe price per square foot for the affordable housing is reasonable and that a reasonable forecast of sales, rents and costs is set out\u201d in documents provided by the Royal Mail and its consultants.<\/p>\n
\u201cProviding more affordable homes, both to rent and buy, is one of the mayor\u2019s top priorities, and the report to be considered by the mayor proposes to double the amount of affordable housing in these planning applications,\u201d Sir Edward Lister, the deputy mayor for planning, said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe mayor is on track to build a record 100,000 low cost affordable homes for Londoners over his two terms, with more than 77,000 already completed. This year alone, more affordable homes are being built than in any other year since 1980. Methods for calculating how affordable rent levels are set are specified in national policy and we would expect the final figures to reflect that guidance.\u201d<\/p>\n
Johnson decided in January to call the scheme in and use the mayor\u2019s power to decide on the application. The move followed local criticism that the proposal was \u201cfortress-like\u201d. In June he said it would be \u201ca wonderful place to live\u201d, sparking complaints from Emily Thornberry, the local MP, that he could not be considered an impartial judge.<\/p>\n
The housing charity Shelter said the decision to peg \u201caffordable\u201d rents to market rents has made them unaffordable.<\/p>\n
\u201cExamples like this illustrate how the people in most urgent need of genuinely affordable housing are being squeezed by soaring property prices in London and a new definition of affordable rent that is not affordable in real terms for many people,\u201d said Toby Lloyd, Shelter\u2019s head of policy.<\/p>\n
Tom Copley, the London assembly member who leads on housing for Labour, said too little of the site was being used for affordable homes.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is a site that was until recently owned by the taxpayer, which is now being developed for big profits for RMG shareholders,\u201d he said. \u201cThe taxpayer has already lost once due to the undervaluation of Royal Mail when it was sold. Now they\u2019re losing again.\u201d<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n