It cannot be argued that one of the two forms of implementation of state policy in the field of affordable housing is preferable. In the case of Housing, the cooperative himself acts as a developer, and its participants themselves make all decisions related to construction. In the case of the form of the Dutch auction, the developer is determined by its winner, he independently conducts construction, and then a potential resident concludes an agreement with him on the acquisition of “squares”.
A list of citizens entitled to buy an apartment at a fixed price is slightly wider than in the case of housing. In this right, residents of dilapidated and emergency houses, citizens entitled to receive subsidies for the purchase or construction of housing at the expense of the budget, are vested. The list includes large and young families, civil servants, teachers, scientists, workers in medicine, culture, social sector, city-forming enterprises, employees of the military-industrial complex and others. If a person falls into both lists – both in the one that gives the right to buy social housing at a fixed price, and in the one that can become a participant in the housing cooperative – then he himself must choose the most convenient form of acquiring housing for himself.
Will the cost of housing erected according to a particular system differ, time will tell. While the RZHS Foundation believes that there will be no. The main difference and plus in the case of Dutch auctions is the initially fixed price. This stability is important for citizens. Indeed, there are frequent cases when a person concludes with developers at the construction stage of the shared participation agreement, which indicates one price, and acquires ready -made housing at another, higher cost. In the case of projects implemented by the fund according to the results of Dutch auctions, such risks are reduced to zero. Accordingly, there will be no risk of pulling the project, which leads to the appearance of deceived equity holders.