Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
SarahBell

Land Is Free ...

Recommended Posts

http://curbly.com/diy-maven/posts/9261-6-places-where-land-is-free

1. Marquette, Kansas will give you a lot if you agree to erect a 1,000 s.f. house upon it. If you dream of having a house with a BIG garden, the city will throw in an adjacent lot if you ask nicely.

2. Atwood, Kansas and the surrounding environs of Herndon and McDonald are offering 4 - 110' x 130' lots for free.

3. Elwood, Nebraska have lots available for 'a minimal fee'.

4. Marne, Iowa is offering up some lovely lots for, yes, free.

5. Muskegon, Michigan is giving way land to businesses who are willing to set up shop in their community. The size of the acreage depends upon how many employees the business foresees hiring.

6. Camden, Maine is offering up 3.5 acres for 'the right business that can create good jobs'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://curbly.com/diy-maven/posts/9261-6-places-where-land-is-free

1. Marquette, Kansas will give you a lot if you agree to erect a 1,000 s.f. house upon it. If you dream of having a house with a BIG garden, the city will throw in an adjacent lot if you ask nicely.

2. Atwood, Kansas and the surrounding environs of Herndon and McDonald are offering 4 - 110' x 130' lots for free.

3. Elwood, Nebraska have lots available for 'a minimal fee'.

4. Marne, Iowa is offering up some lovely lots for, yes, free.

5. Muskegon, Michigan is giving way land to businesses who are willing to set up shop in their community. The size of the acreage depends upon how many employees the business foresees hiring.

6. Camden, Maine is offering up 3.5 acres for 'the right business that can create good jobs'.

Many countries do that. Planned development. It is a win/win game. The government gets land very cheaply, just install the infrastructure and utilities, and then individuals pay for the building costs. The country has more housing for a very low cost, and more tax payers, utility companies have more clients, etc. No brainer. I bet our Victorians did a similar thing. But now thanks to NIMBYs (helped by the BBC) the word "development" has acquired a negative connotation. Sick, perverted people.

.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many countries do that. Planned development. It is a win/win game. The government gets land very cheaply, just install the infrastructure and utilities, and then individuals pay for the building costs. The country has more housing for a very low cost, and more tax payers, utility companies have more clients, etc. No brainier. I bet our Victorians did a similar thing. But now thanks to NIMBYs (helped by the BBC) the word "development" has acquired a negative connotation. Sick, perverted people.

Meh. There's plenty of development the world over.

Just too many people :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh. There's plenty of development the world over.

Just too many people :rolleyes:

Not true. Don't worry about that. The world population will peak at around 9 billion mid-century, and decline afterwards. And we will have enough food and water at the peak.

Too many silly hysterical propaganda around that issue. Many with nasty racist background behind it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not true. Don't worry about that. The world population will peak at around 9 billion mid-century, and decline afterwards. And we will have enough food and water at the peak.

Fair enough.

If you believe that then there is simply no case for further development in Europe.

European Population Projections Year        Population (m)2000       7272005       7292010       7332015       7342020       7332025       7292030       7232035       7162040       7082045       7002050       691

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough.

If you believe that then there is simply no case for further development in Europe.

European Population Projections Year        Population (m)2000       7272005       7292010       7332015       7342020       7332025       7292030       7232035       7162040       7082045       7002050       691

You are correct, forecasting a stable population for western Europe, and probably Britain as well.

And if you think our UK housing stock is already good enough, both in terms of quantity and quality, then we would not need any improvement.

Do you?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct, forecasting a stable population for western Europe, and probably Britain as well.

And if you think our UK housing stock is already good enough, both in terms of quantity and quality, then we would not need any improvement.

Do you?!

WRT quantity.. apparently we will have a stable population for the next 10 years followed by drops.

Houses in the North are available in some areas for relatively little (although apparently everybody wants to live in London).

It would be a bit pointless building many thousands of houses if we expect the population to drop.

WRT quality.. I am not aware that councils don't allow planning permission for most forms of home improvement. That said I wouldn't take particular issue to bad quality housing being destroyed and replaced with something of a higher quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WRT quantity.. apparently we will have a stable population for the next 10 years followed by drops.

Houses in the North are available in some areas for relatively little (although apparently everybody wants to live in London).

It would be a bit pointless building many thousands of houses if we expect the population to drop.

WRT quality.. I am not aware that councils don't allow planning permission for most forms of home improvement. That said I wouldn't take particular issue to bad quality housing being destroyed and replaced with something of a higher quality.

Quantity and quality are related. They are not separate issues. Particularly in the long term, and in countries where market forces are just organised by the public authorities, instead of being blocked, as it happens here. In real life, in the long term, and in many countries, cities evolve, change, modernise. Sometimes new, better neighbourhoods and suburbs are built, and sometimes worse older areas get cheaper, more affordable to the less well-off, and eventually some are even demolished, and replaced with new developments.

Re. regions (North or London), populations must be allowed to move, due to their preferences, tastes, economic interests, etc. Government interventions must be very carefully thought in these areas, very prudent. Usually the market and people have more fundamental and better reasons than central planners.

We have an acute housing scarcity in the south. We should have a more sensible planning system here, instead of the current cruel system, blocking families such as mine from building their own homes with their own money. It is an evil system, fuelled by selfish NIMBYs bastards (the property owning/voting majority), with the natural complicity of politicians and mainstream media.

I've been discussing all sides of this issue for many years (housing shortage here in the south), and it is obvious to me now that It is not possible to justify the current planning blockage with arguments that are both logical and ethical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been discussing all sides of this issue for many years (housing shortage here in the south), and it is obvious to me now that It is not possible to justify the current planning blockage with arguments that are both logical and ethical.

When our population shortly drops we will all be happier. In fact, if the boffins are to be believed, in 140 years we will practically get 2 houses each! ( <_< )

In the mean time if you want to build your own house on your own land.. here's a plot.. £160k

Plot with Planning Permission

Make it to any exacting standard you like ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you view the issue across the Irish Sea where they relaxed planning controls which led to 'ghost estates' in the downturn all over the country.

The credit versus population versus planning merry go round is interesting. The following are often stated.

I am not familiar with the situation in Ireland. I read about "ghost estates" but at the same time some house prices there still look high to me. But as I am not familiar with their areas/neighbourhoods, it is difficult for me to "value" those properties. It is possible that the crash happened in specific areas, and because property prices are "sticky", prices didn't have time yet to fully "contaminate" other ("better") areas. Maybe. But as they had a building boom, prices should fall more there than here.

It seems to me that lack of planning controls cannot stop a boom in prices where excessive credit is available. (Ireland) (Spain) (USA)

I mostly agree, but mainly because finances are a much faster factor, and supply (planing, developing, building) a much slower factor - though more permanent, structural. Give it time, and supply should prevail, in the long term.

Excessively strong planning controls combined with immigration and an increasing concentration in the SE can add to the problem of high prices and can contribute to stopping a bust in prices. (UK)

+ 1

Though NET migration was not that big a factor. It was much less powerful than finance.

LINK: http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=153649&view=findpost&p=2765859

A lack of suitable land and a very dense population can add to a credit fuelled boom in prices but cannot stop a bust (Japan).

As for Jeremy Grantham's other existing bubble - Australia, I have no answers whatsoever at this stage!

Usually "suitable land", particularly if you have a decent transport system, would not justify these crazy prices we had in London. I think too much and too cheap finance was the main short term factor there. And the "green belt" could have been developed, at least partially, with the rest turned into parks. More useful than pastures inside the M25!

Re. Australia, I am not following that case. Lack of time, one must chose some priorities.

I'm not sure how the UK experience can be different from that of the Japanese. Any suggestions?

I am not sure either. One hope is that we may have a more flexible private sector. But I am not sure. Our total national debt (gov. + households + companies) is too big. Similar to Japan's, as I am sure you know. I don't know for sure what will happen. I do think though that our best (only?) chance is to cut the gov. deficit as fast as possible, to favour monetary policy as opposed to fiscal policy to get sustainable growth - low interest rates. And to regulate mortgages, to avoid directing too much credit to mortgages again. Vince and Clegg know that. And the BoE and FSA have been indicating that direction. Let's hope.

Meanwhile, I'll rent for now, to keep my options open, including emigration. Unfortunately. Labour's damage may have been too much for me to impinge it on our future children.

.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When our population shortly drops we will all be happier. In fact, if the boffins are to be believed, in 140 years we will practically get 2 houses each! ( <_< )

In the mean time if you want to build your own house on your own land.. here's a plot.. £160k

Plot with Planning Permission

Make it to any exacting standard you like ;)

£160k for that plot, in that location?! :o

Are you serious?!

It is really very hard to believe that you are not aware that you have just made my point, and more strongly than I had managed!

What side are you on??

:unsure:

As I said, it is obvious to me now that It is not possible to justify the current planning blockage with arguments that are both logical and ethical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not true. Don't worry about that. The world population will peak at around 9 billion mid-century, and decline afterwards. And we will have enough food and water at the peak.

Too many silly hysterical propaganda around that issue. Many with nasty racist background behind it.

You don't think that the vastly different population densities of the USA and UK have anything to do with the practicality of this? Everyone having that much space in the UK would utterly ruin it. There are simply far too many people here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What side are you on??

:unsure:

I'm happy to state my position.

I own no land or property, I would simply like to see a reversal of the misallocation of credit into the housing market together with a drop in prices as the speculative mania subsides.

On the other hand I do not believe it is desirable or particularly helpful to see an ever increasing population and further urbanisation of rural areas. As we agree that population growth is predicted to drop over the next few decades we can presumably agree that further urbanisation / housing development will not be needed in future either.

I would just like a caveat in there somewhere that states we will manage our population to the growth levels predicted.. just to make sure the experts get it right. Not hard to do.. just manage migration where required :)

Edited by libspero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not true. Don't worry about that. The world population will peak at around 9 billion mid-century, and decline afterwards. And we will have enough food and water at the peak.

Too many silly hysterical propaganda around that issue. Many with nasty racist background behind it.

Why are you convinced that population will peak? why not go to 10-15 billion or more?

Historical precident says unless there is a major war/famine/plague etc. there is nothing to prevent population growth - policies dont work unless you have total control as in China, and even then it causes huge dissatisfaction and affects gender balance. Yes in developed countires population from natives has started to decline but thats a comparatively small % of the world when you look to India or Brasil.

It's my opinion that a huge proportion of our current woes with finance, pollution, developement etc. are down to massive population growth in the last 200yrs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't think that the vastly different population densities of the USA and UK have anything to do with the practicality of this? Everyone having that much space in the UK would utterly ruin it. There are simply far too many people here.

If you mean zoning, and plots for self builders: Surely UK plots don't have to be as big as America's. In my case a terraced house would do fine, say a plot 5m or 6m wide x 25 or 30m long. Simple, modest. Do the math, and see what percentage of UK surface would be covered by a million of these plots. Even if you double the area, to account for streets, etc. 1% of UK surface perhaps?

Another thing, re. countries sizes: In most countries people do concentrate in large urban areas, New York, Paris London. The size of the more distant country side (beyond practical commuting distance) does not affect these urban prices much.

.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy to state my position.

I own no land or property, I would simply like to see a reversal of the misallocation of credit into the housing market together with a drop in prices as the speculative mania subsides.

On the other hand I do not believe it is desirable or particularly helpful to see an ever increasing population and further urbanisation of rural areas. As we agree that population growth is predicted to drop over the next few decades we can presumably agree that further urbanisation / housing development will not be needed in future either.

I would just like a caveat in there somewhere that states we will manage our population to the growth levels predicted.. just to make sure the experts get it right. Not hard to do.. just manage migration where required :)

Please libspero, stop worrying about imigration. Just read this post please: http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=153649&view=findpost&p=2765859

I'll reply to the rest of your post later. Hopefully soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you convinced that population will peak? why not go to 10-15 billion or more?

Historical precident says unless there is a major war/famine/plague etc. there is nothing to prevent population growth - policies dont work unless you have total control as in China, and even then it causes huge dissatisfaction and affects gender balance. Yes in developed countires population from natives has started to decline but thats a comparatively small % of the world when you look to India or Brasil.

It's my opinion that a huge proportion of our current woes with finance, pollution, developement etc. are down to massive population growth in the last 200yrs.

Not only UN projections, but already occurred falls in natality in most of the world. We had some good moving charts here some months ago, by a Swedish academic, IIRC talking at a TED conference. You may YouTube it. Sorry i can't look for it now. Perhaops another forum member can find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please libspero, stop worrying about imigration. Just read this post please: http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=153649&view=findpost&p=2765859

I'll reply to the rest of your post later. Hopefully soon.

Indeed.. I'll let it rest. I'm becoming a bit of a bore.

For the record though I am not worried by immigration per se. I think migration between countries is healthy and desireable. I just think it should be balanced where possible, or if our population shrinks, slightly positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy to state my position.

I own no land or property, I would simply like to see a reversal of the misallocation of credit into the housing market together with a drop in prices as the speculative mania subsides.

+ 1

On the other hand I do not believe it is desirable or particularly helpful to see an ever increasing population and further urbanisation of rural areas. As we agree that population growth is predicted to drop over the next few decades we can presumably agree that further urbanisation / housing development will not be needed in future either.

I think we had this discussion before, and the main cause of our disagreement was that we were thinking about different pasts of the country. The area I am thinking about, am familiar with, is in the south, East and West Sussex, and parts of Hampshire. This area has a very acute housing shortage, ad at the same it has plenty of space. Probably less than 1% or 2% is "built up". Most of it is underutilised land, mostly pastures, that can house either 10 families or just 1 cow. For me the logical and ethical choice is clear.

And if in 20 or 30 years the country's housing needs go down, fine, just demolish the worst properties - plenty around I guarantee you.

I would just like a caveat in there somewhere that states we will manage our population to the growth levels predicted.. just to make sure the experts get it right. Not hard to do.. just manage migration where required :)

As it has been done. NET migration has been pretty well balanced (surprisingly) in this generation (considering people still alive, here or abroad, immigrants/emigrants).

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=153649&st=0&p=2765859entry2765859

Because we have such bad housing and transport network we feel we live in crowded conditions. And we do. But it is not because the size of the country. Britain is much bigger than most people think. Fly over it to see it. It is huge! And mostly empty! We have plenty of land. This silly propaganda of a "small crowded island" is the biggest and deepest con in British culture. Take a look from the sky, and you will snap out of it.

.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://curbly.com/di...re-land-is-free

1. Marquette, Kansas will give you a lot if you agree to erect a 1,000 s.f. house upon it. If you dream of having a house with a BIG garden, the city will throw in an adjacent lot if you ask nicely.

2. Atwood, Kansas and the surrounding environs of Herndon and McDonald are offering 4 - 110' x 130' lots for free.

3. Elwood, Nebraska have lots available for 'a minimal fee'.

4. Marne, Iowa is offering up some lovely lots for, yes, free.

5. Muskegon, Michigan is giving way land to businesses who are willing to set up shop in their community. The size of the acreage depends upon how many employees the business foresees hiring.

6. Camden, Maine is offering up 3.5 acres for 'the right business that can create good jobs'.

I guess these places are free for a reason. I wonder if its because they are sh*t and in America.

Do I get a free bullet hole as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't think that the vastly different population densities of the USA and UK have anything to do with the practicality of this? Everyone having that much space in the UK would utterly ruin it. There are simply far too many people here.

There are too many people in the UK relative to the infrastructure.

There is plenty of room for all, but there is no land available due to the developers landbanks, the Church, the Oxbridge colleges, the Royals/aristocracy, the government and the ridiculous planning system. That's rather an intimidating bunch of VIs, so I wouldn't hold your breath for it to get better.

The banks have stolen all the money, so none available to build the roads/railways/trams/bus networks necessary to make life more agreeable and closer to European standards. Again, don't hold your breath for it to get any better.

The energy infrastructure will also show itself to be inadequate in the next few years. Again, the banks stole the money that should have been invested in this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes this is propaganda and it is well propagated by the elitists, there is plenty of land, plenty of food plenty of carbon energy, we can all get on with things if only they would let us.

Try flying over Japan which is one third more densely populated that the UK all you can see is wooded land with the odd little microcosm of human live.

+ 1

There are too many people in the UK relative to the infrastructure.

Exactly!

There is plenty of room for all, but there is no land available due to the developers landbanks, the Church, the Oxbridge colleges, the Royals/aristocracy, the government and the ridiculous planning system. That's rather an intimidating bunch of VIs, so I wouldn't hold your breath for it to get better.

Well put. Sadly. :(

The banks have stolen all the money, so none available to build the roads/railways/trams/bus networks necessary to make life more agreeable and closer to European standards. Again, don't hold your breath for it to get any better.

The energy infrastructure will also show itself to be inadequate in the next few years. Again, the banks stole the money that should have been invested in this.

Well, not only the banks fault, but I generally agree.

(Also the last gov. spent too much. And didn't regulate the mortgage sector. And kept interest rates too low. No wonder millions of people borrowed recklessly. Though these borrowers are not 100% free from blame either. General collective hysteria typical of a Ponzi scheme. And the media went with it too. Total madness all over the place.)

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes this is propaganda and it is well propagated by the elitists, there is plenty of land, plenty of food plenty of carbon energy, we can all get on with things if only they would let us.

Try flying over Japan which is one third more densely populated that the UK all you can see is wooded land with the odd little microcosm of human live.

Sure, the UK could support a larger population, but you're talking about trashing the parts that we've not already wrecked, the bits of the UK that are still actually worth keeping. Not a price worth paying IMO. There's hardly anywhere in England that actually feels quiet and remote. More building would exacerbate that, and that, to me at least, would be a big drop in quality of life even though I live in an urban area. If there were hundreds of thousands of people living crammed in a dozen to a tiny terraced house you would have a point, but I see no signs of a genuine wide-spread housing shortage. There are places where there is one, but its localised.

Flying over England, especially at night, I see an almost continous collection of towns, with not that much space in between them, at least from the Manchester area southwards. It's one of the most depressing things I've ever seen. I was under the impression that typical Japanese cities were more densely populated than ours, with lots of people in shoeboxes that make some of our modern shoeboxes look like mansions, which might explain why it looks like that (it's also much more mountainous, so there's less space to build towns and cities so the ones that do exist are probably going to be far more cramped).

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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 261 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.