Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting TANEWS to 80360, or email
Councillor criticises ‘cynical’ builders for overlooking less profitable housing sites
Private developers have been blasted as “cynical” for overlooking inner-city sites in favour of more lucrative schemes when building new homes.
A Council-owned plot of scrubland in Bowling was marketed as a potential housing site, but failed to attract any interest from private developers.
So the Council has now submitted its own plan, for 36 homes, which would all be rented out as social housing.
Ward councillor Alyas Karmani (Ind, Little Horton) welcomed the idea of new social housing, saying it was badly needed. But he accused developers of being short-sighted by overlooking such sites, as Bradford was a great place to invest because housing was in such short supply.
He said: “It’s very cynical. Private developers don’t want to develop things they know they won’t get a premium for.”
Coun Karmani acknowledged the land, south of Ripley Street by the railway tracks, would not attract high house prices.
He said: “It’s not the most glamorous area in the world, however, anyone who does develop housing there knows there will be people taking up that housing.”
Councillor Sher Khan (Lab, Little Horton) took a different view, saying he was less concerned that private developers had overlooked the site because affordable housing was so badly needed.
Coun Naveeda Ikram (Lab, Little Horton) acknowledged the site had not proved appealing to developers, but she thought this was because it was in an industrial area and wasn’t a symptom of a wider problem.
She said in the circumstances it was good news that affordable housing was being considered as an alternative.
The planning application was also discussed at a recent meeting of the Regulatory and Appeals Committee, where members heard from the Council’s agent, Paul Glover.
He said: “We actually took the scheme to the private market to determine any interest and got no response from that.”
The meeting heard recent house sales in the vicinity had been as low as £32,000.
Some members were concerned to hear that because the scheme was 100 per cent social housing, planners were not expecting there to be any financial contribution to local schools. The application was deferred to see whether there was any way an education contribution could be incorporated.
Comments are closed on this article.