Councils to build 2,000 homes for social rent
Councils are to build more than 2,000 homes for social rent, after having their bids for funding approved by the government.
Housing minister John Healey has announced that 47 councils will receive a share of £127 million, which they will be expected to match to bring the total investment to more than £250 million.
Eighty per cent of the homes built will be expected to exceed current standards for energy efficiency and carbon dioxide emissions.
The chancellor Alistair Darling announced the government was making £100 million available for councils to build homes for social rent in the Budget in April. This was increased by further funding announced in the Building Britain’s Future document in June, bringing the total for the Local Authority New Build programme to £460 million
The additional funding was part of a £1.5 billion package intended to fund the building of 20,000 homes over the next two years.
Mr Healey said today’s announcement is part of the Building Britain’s Future programme, and that he will be unveiling a second wave of projects in the autumn. He said work on some of the sites announced today would begin before the end of the year.
All bids had to be good value for money, and be able to start on site by March 2010. The Homes and Communities Agency received bids from 51 local authorities, approving 205 schemes in all. The four local authorities that were unsuccessful, which had submitted proposals for 20 schemes, are now working with the HCA to see if their bids can be improved for round two.
Mr Healey said: ‘Despite the tough economic climate, the biggest council house building programme for almost two decades will begin by the end of the year.
‘This boost for affordable housing will help build the homes we need and it’s also a shot in the arm for the construction industry creating over five thousand jobs. And built to some of the toughest ever standards this is good for the environment and means lower fuel bills for the families who live in them.’
Sir Bob Kerslake, chief executive of the HCA, said: ‘The reaction to this funding programme by local authorities has been outstanding and proves that councils are geared up, confident and enthusiastic about developing their own homes.’
The announcement comes on the same day as the government’s public spending watchdog, the Audit Commission, releases a report saying councils are putting too much emphasis on building new homes, and should put more effort into upgrading existing stock.
How the funding breaks down
| Region | Number of Local Authorities | Number of schemes | Number of homes | Grant (£s) |
| East Midlands | 10 | 29 | 314 | 16,474,312 |
| North West | 7 | 26 | 253 | 16,966,531 |
| London | 6 | 45 | 332 | 28,577,784 |
| Yorkshire & Humberside | 6 | 45 | 453 | 26,824,162 |
| South West | 6 | 23 | 156 | 10,058,206 |
| North East | 5 | 16 | 226 | 11,750,258 |
| South East | 4 | 13 | 123 | 8,273,521 |
| West Midlands | 2 | 5 | 157 | 8,078,404 |
| Eastern | 1 | 3 | 7 | 295,057 |
| Total | 47 | 205 | 2,021 | 127,298,235 |
Source: Homes and Communities Agency
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (7)
Andrew Fiske | 09/09/2009 10:42 am
I had to read this twice - the same number of new homes being proposed in Yorkshire & Humberside as London and only 123 in the south east. Isn't there more of an over supply in the north? It has always stuck in my mind a cover story in Inside Housing a few years ago when new houses were being knocked down in the north because of low demand. I presume the HCA took this into account and have left a lot of funding for LA's in areas of high demand to put in bids for phase 2?
Anyway it's good news and marks a significant shift towards LA's building again which I don't think will go away. As LAs we must ensure that we don't make the same mistakes as we did in the past and build high density mono-tenure schemes as many of these haven't been too successful.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Doublethree | 09/09/2009 12:58 pm
If a percentage of these new homes were bungalows or small houses for allocation to over 55's only who are willing and able to downsize from larger social housing properties, there would be some point. Older tenants are staying put in underoccupied homes because they dont want to move to flats. Every incentive and encouragement should be given to tenants if they want to downsize, whether thats in bedroom numbers or in property size. If a house was built to accommodate 4 units and only 2 occupy it, help the 2 move to a smaller place if they want to and give them some choice. A flat or nothing is no choice at all. Increase allocation age and overnight, there will not be such a great need for housing.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Una Planner | 09/09/2009 1:10 pm
In response to Andrew Fiske - The LA building programme requires land to be provided by authorities at nil cost, and where will most land be found? - in areas where stock was previously cleared because of 'low demand'. A few years ago this land may have been earmarked for sale to private developers or RSL's but the drop in value since now makes it preferable to retain for direct development.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Michael Lydon | 09/09/2009 4:41 pm
Interesting to see cost comparisons in bids from the North and South.
Yorks and Humberside providing 120 more units across similar number of schemes as London for nearly £2m less. Maybe there is a need to employ more Northern contractors down South and achieve better VFM??
Your thoughts Mr Friske?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Sancho | 09/09/2009 5:56 pm
Without seeing the unit mixes, it's kind of hard to comment on VFM. I happen to know the content of one of the London bids and a lot of the schemes are single, large family units.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Joe Halewood | 09/09/2009 8:10 pm
2,000 homes - Whoopeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Er - isnt there 2m plus on waiting lists - er... werent 1,600,000 houses lost to social housing through the right to buy?
Lets put this news into its real context, its not even a drop in the ocean.
And can we please stop the silly myth that there is any surfeit of property oop North!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Andrew Fiske | 10/09/2009 9:06 am
In response to Mr Lydon's comments there is often a criticism if a Housing Strategy is driven by opportunism rather than a clearly thought out approach to meeting housing needs.
So 1403 new Council Homes to be built north of Watford and 631 in the south with the greatest needs - an excellent national strategy!
Take the point about cheaper to build - hopefully that doesn't mean they're also cheaper to demolish?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment