SHOCKING new figures have revealed that only five affordable homes have been completed in five years under York’s controversial “50 per cent” policy.

Three leading figures in the city’s building industry claimed today the statistic proved the policy had been a “catastrophic failure,” which had actually made it harder for people wanting an affordable home and had led to builders and developers going out of business.

Developer John Reeves, architect Matthew Laverack and quantity surveyor Paul Cordock, who obtained the figure from City of York Council under a Freedom Of Information request, claimed the authority had previously “spun and misrepresented” figures to make it appear such homes were going to be produced in large numbers.

But council bosses, who strongly denied spinning any figures, said planning permission had been granted for 730 affordable homes since the policy was introduced but the developments had been hit by a time lag, which had increased because of the economic climate and a shortage of mortgages.

The row concerns a decision implemented in April 2005 to press for 50 per cent of new homes to be affordable in schemes involving 15 properties or more within the main urban area or large villages – while in smaller villages, the threshold is two or more. The three critics, who have claimed over the years that the scheme is strangling development, said today the figures vindicated their stance.

Mr Laverack said: “The truth is out. We now know for a fact that the council’s 50 per cent affordable policy has been a catastrophic failure. Moreover, it is clear the council has tried to cover up this disaster and make it appear that their policy has been successful.”

Mr Cordock said the authority had repeatedly claimed the policy would work and was working, but never produced any proof. “Out of the 601 units completed in the last five years, only five come from the 50 per cent policy, which means 99 per cent have come from either the 25 per cent policy that was in force before April 2005, or housing association schemes.”

Mr Reeves said: “This is damning evidence that the 50 per cent policy is not delivering.”

But the council spokeswoman insisted that 50 per cent was a target and not a rule.

She said: “Each development has a viability assessment undertaken which includes an element of profit for developers, based on industry-accepted developer profit of 15 to 20 per cent. The requirement for developers to contribute to affordable housing only starts after this has been taken into account.”

She said the 730 homes secured under the rule would be built over the next few years, just as homes under the 25 per cent policy were being completed now.

“There is always a time lag between permission being granted and developers building homes.

“For this reason, these homes have not appeared as completions yet, which is as expected. For example, the application for development of the former York College site was first submitted in 2003, and is only now starting to deliver homes of any type.”

Land would take three more houses

ARCHITECT Matthew Laverack claimed today that this piece of land illustrated the problems experienced since the 50 per cent policy came in.

Mr Laverack said the gardens at the back of several terraced properties in Earswick village were big enough for up to four new homes to be built. But the current policy meant two of the four would have to be “given away” to a housing association for a sum lower than they cost to build, and the provision of social housing would make it harder to sell the remaining two homes to private buyers.

As a result, the landowner had decided to build only one house on the land.

Mr Laverack said if the site had been 100 yards towards the city and inside the ring road, it would have been below the urban threshold of 15 homes and the policy would not have applied.