According to the council’s analysis, if the ministers go ahead with the reform of the plan, around half of the affordable housing will not be built in several expensive areas of England.
According to the Local Government Association (LGA), the government could have unplannedly operated 30,000 such government houses, canceling developers’ duty to build up to 40 or 50 affordable housing units in five years.
Some areas are most likely to be affected by the least affordable and largest housing pressures, cross-party grouping said.
Elambridge in Surrey, where the average home costs more than 7 60,760,000, has 486 affordable homes under construction or with planning permission in the past five years. LGA said that if the proposed 40 or 50-unit margin is introduced, it will be reduced to 2 reduced1.
East Sussex’s Lewis District Council could lose up to 37% of its affordable homes based on past trends. Cornwall council leaders have complained that the change could result in the construction of 300 less affordable homes in the county each year.
The warning came as several Conservative councils objected to the reform of the plan, they also complained that it would limit local power over development. Housing Secretary Robert Genrich defended the plans in an interview with the Guardian and told Rebel Shire that his party had an “ethical mission” to build more homes.
The government recognizes the rise of margins where affordable housing should include more than 10 homes for more than 40 or 50 people, which could reduce the supply of affordable housing by 7% and 20%.
However, its advice on changes to the planning system states: “We expect that increasing polarization will enable more sites to be effective. [small and medium sized] Developers and distribution requirements will be removed to speed up their delivery.
LGA real estate spokesman David Reynolds, who is also the Conservative leader of the Sweden bureau Busnell, said the proposals were “extremely worrying”.
“We should help local people build affordable housing and reduce homelessness, rather than contributing additional funds to benefit developers and landowners,” he said. “These current proposals allow developers to gamble the system by simply creating schemes for 40 or less homes and therefore can’t avoid building an affordable home.”
Karen Randolph, Portfolio Holder for Elumbridge Planning, said: “We are strongly opposed to this approach. The average size of the development site in the borough was 0.11 hectares – about a quarter of an acre, he said.
CR William Meyer, a Liberal Democrat cabinet member for housing in the Lewis District Council, said: “We have a huge land crisis in Lewis and if smaller sites are left out it will make a difficult situation worse.” The city of Lewis is located in South Downs National Park, which has a rule that half the development of more than 10 homes must be affordable.
However, the change will affect other settlements in the district outside the park boundary, including Seaford and New Haven. Mayer said the answer was to build council housing instead of relying on private developers, and to that end the central government reduced spending on loans in March.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Housing, Community and Local Government said LGA was outperforming the risk, as the proposed deregulation was planned to last only 18 months to contribute to affordable income.
They added: “Our proposals will bring a new, simpler infrastructure tariff to help developers pay for them and at least more, if not more, affordable housing online than today.”