ECF refreshes Salford resi masterplan
ECF’s plans to build 42 homes on the former Farmer Norton car park will no longer be delivered as affordable or built to Passivhaus standards, as was originally planned.
The three-bedroom townhouses will “still deliver robust sustainability credentials” but will no longer target Passivhaus accreditation. They will be sold on the open market, according to a Salford City Council report outlining the changes.
ECF is in talks with the GMCA over funding to support the delivery of the project. Public sector support would help bridge an identified viability gap, caused by “the current economic climate”, the report states.
Work on another 100% affordable Passivhaus project, the 100-home Willohaus, is ongoing following the completion of Greenhaus, which is also designated as affordable and meets Passivhaus standards.
Plans for another 200 homes in a later phase at Farmer Norton are in the works. This part of the project is expected to deliver an affordable element as part of the wider Adelphi Village scheme.
Max Bentham, development director at ECF, said: “The homes which form Farmer Norton phase one will now be available for open market sale to ensure delivery of a high-quality, mixed tenure, sustainable community that provides homes to meet the needs of different people across Salford.
“Farmer Norton phase one will form part of the wider Adelphi Village, which includes Willohaus – 100 affordable, Passivhaus certified apartments, which are currently under construction. Across the rest of the masterplan, there are also plans for additional affordable and highly sustainable new homes.”
I fail to understand how these flat, well connect sites have viability gaps. The road infrastructure is next door, i am assuming power, sewers, BT in adjacent highways. Unless there is some horrific contamination on site. Seems to be the easiest place to build.
By j
Not viable at how much, 20%+ profit margin?
By Anonymous
Maybe building more homes may improve viability? I really don’t understand why the proposal is so low density in this location? This site could accommodate far more homes than 42 very ugly houses.
By JB Strasse
The site is a 10 minute walk to the city centre… it warrants much higher density, this is the inner city not a suburban village.
By Anonymous
Passivhaus is just an accreditation and process to follow on building standards and similar can be achieved by good specification. Hopefully they will be built to the forthcoming future homes standard as a minimum and be operationally net zero.That said, I still don’t understand why they can no longer be delivered as affordable given the recent announcements from MCHLG on social and affordable rents programme of £39bn. Perhaps, ask some of the tower developers to chip in….oh they can’t, viability issues et al.
By Anon sense
Not a penny of GMCA money should go to these jokers.
By Anonymous
Underpromise and over-deliver…..hmm.
@hy isn’t the rest of the car park being delivered? This is a tiny element, seems ridiculous not to spread infrastructure costs over more homes. Besides, who wants to buy a house overlooking the remainder of a surface level car park!!!
By Anonymous
Densify! It’s pathetic to see such low density so close to the city centre!
By Anonymous
“Public sector support would help bridge an identified viability gap, caused by “the current economic climate”, the report states.”
Taking a lower profit margin would also bridge the gap, ensuring that the predictable “viability gap” cop out doesn’t have to be trotted out every time a development lands at the LPAs door.
By Planning Periscope
Imposing lower profit margins is a great way to get nothing built at all.
By Abab