Pan meadows

All ‘affordable’ housing at Pan Meadows occupied by next month says Cllr Lumley

Ahead of this week’s Newport Parish Council planning meeting, Cllr Geoff Lumley (Lab) shares latest information about the ‘affordable’ housing at Pan Meadows – renamed Bluebell Meadows by Barretts in 2013.

He says all the ‘affordable’ housing at Pan Meadows will be occupied by next month – some 255 homes, of which 51 are shared ownership (20%).

Originally dubbed ‘Super Pan’, the development actually approved in December 2009, and started May 2010. According to Cllr Lumley, will by next month have a minimum of 330 homes occupied.

Affordable housing for Islanders
Cllr Lumley says,

“You may be interested to know that at current occupations 39% of the rented homes were Pan housing association tenants previously, assisting with the broader aim of integration. Quite a number of those housed from the Housing Register were also previously Pan (23) and wider-Newport residents.

“I am not aware of anyone moving into the affordable housing so far from Birmingham, Manchester, Bradford or Newcastle…….

“As of today there are 75 homes privately owned. I have no idea where they previously lived.”

Next stage of development
Cllr Lumley says 20 more homes will need to be sold and occupied before the spine road – Godric Road – will need to be built through to St George’s Way.

He finishes by saying,

“The developers are still building more for sale!”

Image: © Barratts/em>

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
49 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
davidwalter
6, October 2014 9:39 am

Is there a breakdown of the (social) housing list available in the public domain without having to do a FOI? Obviously names and ID identifiers would have to be redacted but other details could be available.

Geoff Lumley
Reply to  davidwalter
6, October 2014 10:00 am

I shouldn’t think so. Why on earth would you want that ?

davidwalter
6, October 2014 10:13 am

Planning applications for new housing estates, often building on green farmland or pasture, are justified by ‘need’. I’ve heard many different figures given (none official) for the number of people on the so-called housing list. I would be interested to know how many and what kind of applicants (elderly, families, singles,…) these are and whether they are presently housed or homeless. I have been told that most… Read more »

Geoff Lumley
Reply to  davidwalter
6, October 2014 10:17 am

Sounds like the Nimby’s have got to you. Why not just write to Cllr Stubbings (responsible Executive member) requesting statistical information regarding the register ? Its hardly FoI stuff…….

Stewart Blackmore
Reply to  Geoff Lumley
6, October 2014 10:37 am

I think I told you the size of the list recently David – there is no secret. But, in the spirit of helpfulness there are at present 8,677 people on the housing list. If I can access the numbers then so can you. People are on the list because of need, either because they cannot afford private sector rents or cannot afford, for whatever reason, to buy… Read more »

davidwalter
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
6, October 2014 10:44 pm

Geoff, Stewart…replying to yours this morning, having been out on the mainland all afternoon… Geoff. Nimbys. Yes, unashamedly NIMBY and NIABY. Not In Anyone’s Back Yard. Whether duke or dustman, landlord or tenant, people have a right to have their wishes respected when it comes to building near to their homes. That’s not to say their views are necessarily the only factor but, being the most local,… Read more »

tiki
6, October 2014 10:32 am

Contact Cllr Peacey-Wilcox she wears the housing cap and has her finger on the pulse.

Peter Daws
6, October 2014 1:09 pm

8,677 people on the list, maybe, but there are most certainly not 8,677 homeless people. Many of those on the list are there by way of ‘want’ rather than genuine ‘need’ (not all I agree. Many of those on the list they are there because their current accommodation isn’t large enough, cheap enough etc etc but neither is my own. The vast majority of these people do… Read more »

vix
Reply to  Peter Daws
6, October 2014 1:45 pm

‘Want’ is very much one of Beveridge’s Great Evils. And I doubt very much whether in 2014 people are on the housing list because they fancy a mere change of scenery. Our private housing levels of stock do not meet need. Many may have been adequate when tenants first moved in, but growing families mean they need to upsize. Some private landlords pull out and new private… Read more »

Colin
Reply to  Peter Daws
6, October 2014 1:49 pm

@Peter Daw Well said, that man. Probabably not a popoular opinion here, but spot on. I’ve seen housing lists elsewhere (not on thr island) and they are extremely misleading. In my village of 30 homes there were 25 people wanting accomodation there. Only 2 youngsters who actually lived in the village were on the list, the rest were others who would consider living there should anything be… Read more »

yjc
6, October 2014 1:23 pm

Interesting it is called PAN Meadows. What happened to Bluebell? It was never going to catch on with locals.

Stewart Blackmore
6, October 2014 1:28 pm

Peter, I never claimed that those on the list were homeless, i was giving a factual answer to David’s question. Neither you, nor I, have any idea as to why any of these people are on the list; you are purely speculating. And, actually, it is the State’s responsibility to look after its citizens. The local authority has a responsibility to house you if you become homeless… Read more »

Peter Daws
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
6, October 2014 2:22 pm

Stewart, sorry but I wasn’t suggesting that was what you were saying. ‘I’ was however stating that not all of those on the list were homeless and if someone is not homeless but their current accommodation doesn’t perfectly fit their needs then is it the state responsbility to find them someting that does? Believe or not my own personal views are far more red than they are… Read more »

Peter Daws
Reply to  Peter Daws
6, October 2014 2:24 pm

Sorry, some sloppy spelling there. Should read ‘states’ and ‘something’.

Cynic
6, October 2014 2:26 pm

Geoff Lumley’s figures do not seem to add up.

For clarity how many of the 255 “Affordable Homes’ are shared-ownership, are rented, have been sold privately or are still vacant?

Geoff Lumley
Reply to  Cynic
6, October 2014 3:51 pm

Please read what I actually said before firing off accusations about my numeracy ! Or is literacy your problem ?

Cynic
Reply to  Geoff Lumley
6, October 2014 4:20 pm

Please answer the question Geoff.

Shared ownership= 51
Rented= 39% (of how many,rental homes ?)
Privately owned=75
Vacant homes=?
Affordable homes=255

(BTW I am sufficiently literate and numerate to notice the holes in the above report e.g.. mixing numbers and percentages.)

Geoff Lumley
Reply to  Cynic
6, October 2014 5:10 pm

Dearie me Cicero….

Simple aritmetic:

255 ‘affordable’ homes, less 51 shared = 204 for rent. 39& of 204 = 80. None will be vacant by next month, as I said.

Privately occupied 75. Privately vacant – no idea, Barratts aren’t accountable to me, but to their shareholders and partners.

255 + 75 = 330 occupied.

Happy now ?

Cynic
Reply to  Geoff Lumley
6, October 2014 5:17 pm

Yes thank you Geoff- Why could you not have said that in the first place?

Geoff Lumley
Reply to  Geoff Lumley
6, October 2014 5:32 pm

Cicero. I was a bit short with you as you said my figures didn’t add up. Do you really think I would put out figures I wasn’t certain about ? Surely you have some idea of what sort of councillor I try to be by now ?

Cynic
Reply to  Geoff Lumley
6, October 2014 5:41 pm

Yes Geoff that was why I was surprised and asked for clarification.

Robert Jones
6, October 2014 6:12 pm

This question of “need” has always been interesting – it covers a lot of territory. People on the housing waiting list may not be, and probably aren’t, living on the streets, or sofa-surfing. Most of them will probably be living in housing that is damp, cold and hard to heat within any kind of normal budget, and overcrowded. I’m in a degree of housing need myself –… Read more »

retired Hack
6, October 2014 6:51 pm

…Anyway, I hope Mr Walter, who expressed a wish to get a feel for the facts, now feels he has had his wish granted, courtesy of people who clearly have a good grasp of them. Even if it’s not on an xls spreadsheet..

Alison Hayden.
6, October 2014 11:33 pm

The housing need is actually determined by the developer. It matters not what the Planning Department or local Housing Needs Survey says or concludes. An identified need for 40, not 89 houses was concluded by the Planning Department for Arreton. The Arreton Parish Residents Housing Needs Survey, which had a fantastic 76% return rate identified only 21 houses were needed over a five year period. This was… Read more »

Robert Jones
Reply to  Alison Hayden.
7, October 2014 12:14 am

That muddies the waters a bit – housing need is not determined by the developer, although I can understand why people living in Arreton feel that it was in their case. A Department of the Environment inspector over-ruled the parish council and county council which had refused planning permission – what then happens is that the developer or his agent appeals, and cites dubious figures on housing… Read more »

davidwalter
6, October 2014 11:41 pm

Alison — When you did your Housing Needs Survey, did you manage to get a copy of the ‘Housing List’? Or find out what it is, where it is, etc.?

Alison Hayden.
Reply to  davidwalter
6, October 2014 11:51 pm

It is held at the Planning Office. Anyone can apply to be put on the list, they can even apply for every list in the Country if they want to.
Arreton Parish Residents Group HNS identified only 12 who needed housing. This differed from the 22 who were on the housing list!

Robert Jones
Reply to  Alison Hayden.
7, October 2014 12:21 am

Was that a Parish Council survey, or your residents’ group? Not that it made a lot of difference in practice, probably, but a properly conducted survey by a statutory authority like the parish council is supposed to carry a certain amount of weight – anything done by a private group, no matter how well it was carried out, will carry less. The local housing list is one… Read more »

davidwalter
7, October 2014 12:34 am

Robert Jones — “Housing Needs Surveys conducted by parishes are something of a waste of time by all concerned ….”

I guess you’ve not kept up with the Localism Act?

Cynic
Reply to  davidwalter
7, October 2014 9:14 am

I tend to agree with Robert. Although HNS are a very valuable (and expensive) exercise for parish councils the ultimate value of the report demonstrates yet again the toothlessness of parish councils in local politics. (Yes- I have been a parish councillor in the past but resigned for that very reason). The Localism Act is a charade of faux-democracy that preaches local control while in practise it… Read more »

Robert Jones
Reply to  davidwalter
7, October 2014 12:07 pm

Why, David, would you assume that?

davidwalter
Reply to  Robert Jones
7, October 2014 12:19 pm

Robert, “Why, David, would you assume that?” It’s not clear what you mean by “that”.

Robert Jones
Reply to  davidwalter
7, October 2014 12:22 pm

Your conclusion that I have not kept up with the Localism Act is the point to which I clearly too briefly referred.

Alison Hayden
7, October 2014 8:37 am

The HNS was adapted to suit the parish of Arreton, as are most HNS’s. All the surveys on the IOW Council website show a lack of affordable housing in all areas of the island. This is less to do with all the housing stock, but more to do with poor wages and not enough employment on the Island. Affordable housing is only affordable if you have the… Read more »

Cynic
Reply to  Alison Hayden
7, October 2014 11:00 am

So you appear to confirm, David, that the PC wishes representing those of their parishioners can be overidden by a more senior level of government?

Plus ça change!

davidwalter
Reply to  Cynic
7, October 2014 11:11 am

Cicero — Yes, and it has to be. If you put the final decision on a development worth tens of millions in the hands of a few under-trained lay, unpaid parish councillors advised by a part-time clerk who likewise hasn’t a law degree or a degree in planning, you are asking for trouble for a number of obvious reasons. The change is that the PC’s comments are,… Read more »

Cynic
Reply to  davidwalter
7, October 2014 11:44 am

David regrettably that is not feasible. Few if any PCs could afford risking the legal costs associated with challenging a large development on appeal.

The “material” promise is immaterial in realpolitik when developers and greenfield site landowners stand to gain major profits from the development- as Arreton sadly found out.

Cynic
Reply to  Cynic
7, October 2014 11:49 am

Further David, is that not the claimed purpose of Neighbourhood Plans that are supposed to become “planning policy”.

Neither professional Planning Officers nor ministry Inspectors should be able to override Neighbourhood Plan in their decision-making.

If they are able to do so, it reveals the total sham thatis the Localism Act.

davidwalter
Reply to  Cynic
7, October 2014 12:01 pm

My understanding and interpretation is that the Parish Council’s opinions become ‘material’. Period. The Planning Consent is still subject to the Principal (Unitary) Authority (in our case).

Handing complete power to the Parish Councils would take us into the realm of Wonderland.

Cynic
Reply to  Cynic
7, October 2014 12:45 pm

David- as I say- wait and see the fate of Neighbourhood Plans in future large-scale development planning decisions.

Cynic
Reply to  Cynic
7, October 2014 1:49 pm

David does not the Localism Act’s awarding parish councils a “Community Right to Build” also fall into “the hands of a few under-trained lay, unpaid parish councillors advised by a part-time clerk who likewise hasn’t a law degree or a degree in planning, you are asking for trouble for a number of obvious reasons.” as I believe that they do not have to go through the formal… Read more »

davidwalter
Reply to  Cynic
7, October 2014 1:55 pm

I’ve no idea how that’s going to work but clearly professionals are going to be involved unless the PCs are going to moonlight as architects and builders as well as planning officers!

Cynic
Reply to  davidwalter
7, October 2014 2:45 pm

Does that mean the Localism Act is generally infeasible?

davidwalter
7, October 2014 9:40 am

Cicero — The big change is that the Parish Council’s opinion on planning matters is, for the first time, classified as ‘material’, provided they have done the Neighbourhood Plan and the referendum. It puts some real power into the PC BUT without the right control, training, checks and balances could be a danger to the community particularly if the PC morphs into an unrepresentative body, which many… Read more »

sam salt
7, October 2014 10:53 am

David, Whilst I embrace localism we have yet to see it work in a positive manner. I share Cicero’s concerns particularly with regard to planning matters. You quite rightly point out that Parish Council’s opinion, if they have carried out a Neighbourhood Plan and referendum where the plan is accepted, will be classified as “material”. However, here lies the problem. Parish Councillors commenting on planning issues still… Read more »

davidwalter
7, October 2014 11:06 am

Tess, I strongly agree, almost verbatim. However, I don’t believe the benefit in Localism is served by just another tier of scrutiny for adherence to planning rules. If that’s all it is then it’s worse than pointless because, as you say, the lay council is not trained and skilled enough. What the local parish *should* be able to do is add the ‘people’ factors such as those… Read more »

davidwalter
7, October 2014 12:29 pm

Robert — Ah, I see. The Localism Act (can) make Parish Councils’ comments ‘material’ making them… er… material!

Robert Jones
Reply to  davidwalter
7, October 2014 12:56 pm

True, it can. Whether that’s going to make a substantive difference is the question – as indeed you’ve said elsewhere. The trouble/inevitability is that the Parish Council is still only one of many considerations when the principal authority, and the DoE Inspectorate, come to make a decision. Arreton’s contention was essentially that the development would change the village beyond recognition – you’d have thought that would be… Read more »

reCaptcha Error: grecaptcha is not defined