The scenario you outline requires us to believe that the expensively assembled design team didn’t spot a way to enhance the value of the development by taking out parking space. This boost to their income only became possible when a Hounslow councillor, with presumably zero experience in the sector, pointed out their error and forced them to make the amendment.Perhaps a better way to look at this is the price premium that a flat with a parking space normally attracts in this part of west London. The consensus on this seems to be somewhere in the range of £30,000 to £50,000. With the relatively low PTAL score of the Burlington Lane scheme you might expect it to be higher than that but if there is no actual space but a place on a car stacker, let’s just assume for now the premium is right at the lower end. This gives a lost value of around £1million for the 32 spaces foregone. It would be naïve in the extreme to not conclude that the developers will ask for this to be incorporated into the feasibility report which determines the number of affordable units. The report would be drawn up by a third party but they will be using the same industry assumptions as above. The amount would imply the net loss of three affordable units.Hounslow Council are unlikely to object to this and in fact they may be powerless to do so. Cllr Bruce inadvertently let slip what is driving the decision making behind this – it is the millions the council is set to receive through the Community Infrastructure Levy. I don’t blame the administration for this as some way has to be found to cover the budget shortfall but it did mean that the planning committee was willing to sign off on a tiny amount of affordable flats and now, due to the idiocy of one councillor, this number is likely to fall further.
Jeremy Parkinson ● 15h