A HEATED debate is brewing in Ledbury over whether or not the town should get more social housing, as residents await the town's biggest single expansion in its history.

And demand is growing for local people to be first in the queue for any new social housing, as Ledbury braces itself for 1800 new homes, with most of those requiring a mortgage.

Posting on the Voice of Ledbury Facebook site, resident Sarah Jayne Evans said: "The so-called affordable housing I've looked at to buy isn't affordable in any way shape or form; the houses are still over priced like any other property on the market.

"The only reason it's more 'affordable' is purely down to having a smaller mortgage by only purchasing 50, 60, 70% of the property. I thought affordable would mean a property that's less in price for people who have lower incomes, but it's not in any of the new build estates I've seen."

And resident Steve Farrell feared the impact on young people in rural communities, unless something is done.

He said: "The whole country needs more social housing. We have allowed the social housing stock to be virtually eradicated over the last four decades. To most young people 'affordable housing' is a contradiction in terms. Rural areas are dying because young people are being given priced out of their areas. We have to do something sooner rather than later."

And resident Becky Davis added: "We desperately need social housing in Ledbury. I know numerous families with small children living in small 1 and 2 bed flats. I did for a while; there were four of us in a 1 bed flat, I consider myself very lucky to have been found a house. Living in cramped conditions has a negative impact on mental health, sleep, causes stress in relationships, homework is difficult, simple family eating is difficult.

"People in the local area in this situation should be given priority."

Resident Sam Jones believes houses prices don't match local wages, and none of the new homes should go to buy to let landlords.

She said: "There seems to be a constant mention from developers about affordable housing but none seem to want to give a price of what they think is affordable housing. Based on the wages in the area for general work, then affordable housing would need to be well under £100,000.

"I think that there should be a clause that none of these houses can be bought by buy to let landlords; which is what happened with a large percentage of the New Mills two and three bedroom properties."

The housing row started to surface late last month when, as part of reserved matters consultation concerning 100 new homes behind the Full Pitcher in New Street, town councillors did not support "the proposed variation to change from 55% social rent to ‘affordable’ rent".

Affordable rent includes shared ownership, which is part buy and part-rent, as opposed to properties that are usually rented out at an affordable rate by housing associations.

In a response to the town council, Herefordshire planning officer Roland Close called the

amendments "not significant".

This led to town councillor Tony Bradford, who is keen to get more social housing in Ledbury, calling Mr Close's response "dismissive".

But in further correspondence with the town council, Mr Close has clarified that the development behind the Full Pitcher, which already has outline planning permission, will "accord with the original outline permission and Herefordshire Council Core Strategy policy"

And of the 100 housing planned for the site of Ledbury's old cricket ground, 40 per cent, not 55 per cent, will be affordable housing provision, with 22 of the new houses being for social rent and 18 for shared ownership.

The mix of affordable and social housing has been welcomed by a number of local people.

Alison Turner said: "We need both social and affordable family homes."