Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
adamUK

Nimbyism Makes My Blood Boil.

Recommended Posts

In the local freebie, Now and Then, there was the usual low-grade effort of journalistic hack-dom reporting on yet more cossetted nimbys objecting to anything and everything. This makes my blood boil so I thought I had to write.

My letter below:

Dear Sir,

It's disappointing to read a one-sided opinionated article thinly disguised as a "report" in issue 36 of Now and Then.

At both ends of the street of my terraced house in Eaglescliffe there have been two flat conversions (one house being demolished and rebuilt into flats, the other being a straight conversion). Both developments are sensitive to the building styles (circa 1900) here and with the extra residences, the effect on traffic has been, frankly, unnoticeable.

The recent meteoric rise in house prices has been caused, in part, by a shortage of housing. This has left many potential first time buyers priced out of the market and prevents homeowners moving up the ladder as the gap widens further. Both national and local governments are also correct to try and prevent, wherever possible, urban sprawl into green-belt areas which can never be reclaimed and also promote increased use of cars and thus congestion. The government's recommended solution is to redevelop existing urban areas. In the approval of the application to redevelop the site, I am sure Stockton Council is fully aware of all the guidelines and has taken these into consideration. Yet again, objections on any grounds by a small number are causing the system to grind to a halt and increasing the cost to local taxpayers.

I would speculate that Mrs Baker and her supporters fail to understand the broader issues of urban planning and the need to manage the UK's natural resources effectively. I am sure the council suspect Mrs Baker's objections to be one thing only: NIMBYism.

Yours sincerely,

Adam Potter, Eaglescliffe.

P.S. As the editor of a widely distributed periodical, you, the editor, at least have a moral duty to provide a balanced article if you claim it to be a report. If you badge your article as opinion, you can, naturally, print what you like.

The article is attached.

Flattenned.doc

Flattenned.doc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

"has been caused, in part, by a shortage of housing."

But has it really?

Think back to 1997, 1998, 1999 - do you remember ever reading in the paper about nurses / teachers / policemen who can't afford to live near to where they work? We now have all this "key worker" nonsense and John Prescott "cheap house" nonsense.

I refuse to believe there has been a population explosion, and the real reason that new (young) police officers, postmen, nurses etc... can't live next to their jobs has nothing to do with undersupply, and everything to do with (cough) something else.

You know. The thing we're not allowed to say.

Dr Bubb's demographics chart shows a glut of 40 year olds. More so than the 60 year old baby boomers. The 30 year olds (spot on where I am) number significantly less than the 40 year olds. From here on down, it gets slightly less again.

These people should be leaving something of an oversupply of property in their wake at that particular rung of the ladder stage.

I've said it before on here - I'm using the continued non-materialisation of JP's cheap 1000s of houses as a yardstick for the government's actual confidence in the housing market. Imagine the fallout if there's been an HPC in 4 years time, while the south east has been carpeted with cheapy houses. Nurse Gladice turns round to JP in 2009 and say "Why thankyou kind sir, but I can live right next to the hospital now..."

Would be a disaster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

QUOTE TELEGRAPH

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtm.../11/ixcity.html

The participation of the mortgage industry was announced with much fanfare by Gordon Brown in May, as part of the Homes for All initiative to put an additional 100,000 first-time buyers on to the housing ladder by 2010
Peter Williams, deputy director general of the Council of Mortgage Lenders, said: "We still don't know where the Government is coming from" but insisted discussions were moving forward. He added: "We've got to get this squared away by the end of this month if the Government really wants the scheme to start in April 2006 [as planned]. It is frustratingly complex and time is running out."
Both Abbey and A&L claimed to have been deterred by the investment required to get what is a relatively small scheme up and running. The Government's current proposals are for the scheme to be used on just 20,000 homes by 2010.

Smell a rat?

:blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I refuse to believe there has been a population explosion, and the real reason that new (young) police officers, postmen, nurses etc... can't live next to their jobs has nothing to do with undersupply, and everything to do with (cough) something else.

You know. The thing we're not allowed to say.

There hasn't you are correct. My own personal opinion is that the house price bubble is caused by sentiment (the herd mentality), influx of BTL, the availabilty of 'cheap' money and the VI's talking up the market. Only a small part is due to a housing shortage mainly due to lifestyle changes (more people living alone) and virtually none to increases in population (as the net population of the NE is actually going down).. I am just replaying the guff that the EA tells me (and everyone else).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is something you have missed that very important.

The Government has poured borrowed money into the economy, money that has to be paid back by future generations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One factor in all this is that older generations aren't selling up and downsizing, which is one reason why they moan so much about increases in council tax - because they're asset rich.

A while ago I came across the "lifetime savings hypothesis", which is that peopler are nett borrowers into their early thirties, then as their careers progress, incomes rise and children leave home, become nett savers in their forties/fifties. Then they retire and use their savings/assets to fudn their retirement. This hypothesis suggests that retired people should downshift their property, leaving family homes available for the next generation - DrBubb's demographics hypothesis.

Some research in Australia, however, showed that this hypothesis started to break down in the mid-1990s. What they found is that people's wealth CONTINUED TO RISE in retirement, largely because of generous pension provision and HPC. The consequence is that these people don't need to sell their family homes. This has a cascade effect that leads to long-term stagnation, because those family homes are effectively locked up for decades. And increasing longevity aggravates this (coupled with, of course, the cost of funding pensions, the burden of which falls on those in work - who might otherwise have bought those family homes - and so it goes on).

I guess this should really be a separate thread...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One factor in all this is that older generations aren't selling up and downsizing, which is one reason why they moan so much about increases in council tax - because they're asset rich.

A while ago I came across the "lifetime savings hypothesis", which is that peopler are nett borrowers into their early thirties, then as their careers progress, incomes rise and children leave home, become nett savers in their forties/fifties. Then they retire and use their savings/assets to fudn their retirement. This hypothesis suggests that retired people should downshift their property, leaving family homes available for the next generation - DrBubb's demographics hypothesis.

Some research in Australia, however, showed that this hypothesis started to break down in the mid-1990s. What they found is that people's wealth CONTINUED TO RISE in retirement, largely because of generous pension provision and HPC. The consequence is that these people don't need to sell their family homes. This has a cascade effect that leads to long-term stagnation, because those family homes are effectively locked up for decades. And increasing longevity aggravates this (coupled with, of course, the cost of funding pensions, the burden of which falls on those in work - who might otherwise have bought those family homes - and so it goes on).

I guess this should really be a separate thread...

You can test this hypothesis with a quick survey. On this site I would guess a lot of us are 30-somethings with baby boomer parents. We have probably mostly left home, where our baby boomer parents still live. Given this, it would be interesting to find out how many bedrooms are left empty in your parents' home?. I am guessing there is a huge number of empty bedrooms locked up in the system by baby boomers who are hanging on to the family home as an investment.

frugalista

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can test this hypothesis with a quick survey. On this site I would guess a lot of us are 30-somethings with baby boomer parents. We have probably mostly left home, where our baby boomer parents still live. Given this, it would be interesting to find out how many bedrooms are left empty in your parents' home?. I am guessing there is a huge number of empty bedrooms locked up in the system by baby boomers who are hanging on to the family home as an investment.

frugalista

Once i move out again there will be two free rooms in my parents home :) until they sell up and move to spain...

The whole argument of houses being the price they are due to market demand seems like madness. I definately think it has more to do with sellers taking advantage of the whole "prices only go up, get on the ladder while you can" argument.

Nearly everyone i speak to refuses to believe in a price crash, "this i a good area", "prices will stagnate then go up again". I always ask people to justify, usually with responses like "well, urm, thats how it goes. prices always go up!".

Why is it people only want to believe that prices go up yet they base their beliefs on, well nothing...media spin! yet looking at the statistics tells such a different story. Even I can rip apart an average persons opinion on the housing market with what little i know and have learnt from here, i felt i even held my own up against an estate agent who owned an estate agency...who was pretty much telling us renting was the way to go, he was taking us to look at one of his letting properties...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can test this hypothesis with a quick survey. On this site I would guess a lot of us are 30-somethings with baby boomer parents. We have probably mostly left home, where our baby boomer parents still live. Given this, it would be interesting to find out how many bedrooms are left empty in your parents' home?. I am guessing there is a huge number of empty bedrooms locked up in the system by baby boomers who are hanging on to the family home as an investment.

frugalista

Two - would be three but my Brother lacks the social skills to live on his own (seriously)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tru, my parents retired 1987, bought house 1991 (they were FTB, and searched for "perfect house" while renting)

Oddly enough, they are now better off than when they first retired. My father's hobby is investment, and he as done well out the markets.

HPI/C is irrelevant to them - they will stay where they are till death or incapacity - tho' they are hoping for death rather than needing nursing home.

Four empty bedrooms, but they are in a great tourist ares, so rare not to have at least some occupied by relatives/ friends, especially at weekends

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 301 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.