Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sledgehead

Hammond's plan to make property go up - literally

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, spyguy said:

Why would a planning rule be influenced by the chancellor?

Not his interest.  Ah Telegraph, the new Express.

Osborne changed the planning rules over permitted development. You don't need a degree in architecture or planning - apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's being a deliberate landowner.

If Government want more house building now would be better off saying only bungalows permitted from 2020. Doing the reverse and expecting that to incentivise faster development rather than delay given further uncertainity and optionality is stupid. Doing it and expecting higher density to result in lower land prices is doubly stupid. But they're not stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, whether you think this fake news or not, fact is Osborne's permitted dev changes resulted in a raft of bungalow conversions.

The corollary was predictable: developers put in much higher bids for less developed properties (especially bungalows) knowing they could bolt on a couple of extra bedrooms and turn a profit. Street prices went up. Those yet to buy found themselves further away from owning than ever, as 2 bed bungalows became 4 bed dormas.

And the 'upside'? Well, we've already discussed it on the "Isn't it great living at home with the folks" thread - at least that's how the gov will spin it.

The sociological problems they are storing up are simply unfixable - just ask the Japanese.

Edited by Sledgehead
ask for as

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spyguy said:

Why would a planning rule be influenced by the chancellor?

Not his interest.  Ah Telegraph, the new Express.

The government chucks other stuff into the Budget speech these days, like the announcement that letting agent fees were going to be banned - again nothing to do with the Treasury. I guess they don't have any good tax and spending news for the average voter so this is an attempt to glitter the turd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another day, another sleight of hand from the morally bankrupt UK governments. We've heard the same thing from the Tories before about easing planning restrictions. Big fanfare, some nice speeches for the people, and then nothing actually changes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Sledgehead said:

Well, whether you think this fake news or not, fact is Osborne's permitted dev changes resulted in a raft of bungalow conversions.

The corollary was predictable: developers put in much higher bids for less developed properties (especially bungalows) knowing they could bolt on a couple of extra bedrooms and turn a profit. Street prices went up. Those yet to buy found themselves further away from owning than ever, as 2 bed bungalows became 4 bed dormas.

And the 'upside'? Well, we've already discussed it on the "Isn't it great living at home with the folks" thread - at least that's how the gov will spin it.

The sociological problems they are storing up are simply unfixable - just as the Japanese.

There can be good reasons to relax permissions on building up. But as you say, lower prices is not one of them.

Price drivers aren't well debated by the media & public, including real optionality. They'd probably get away with it again, despite his being a winner from broad planning relaxation: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/chancellor-philip-hammond-could-make-10765588

Relaxing planning incentivises landowners to delay development and hold out for further changes/pricing. Comes down to expectations of future changes to optimal development density and rental prices. I guarantee this is understood within Treasury. (e.g. Urban Land Prices under Uncertainity, 1985 (pdf) - http://digilander.libero.it/vergalli/pdf/17.pdf - The paper models real options in land, the drivers of landowner choice to develop or not, and response of landowners to external conditions).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently you can only fit 15 people in a 2 bedroom bungalow.. building up will ease the housing crisis, possibly be able to double the figure with some stud partition walls and a bit of plasterboard.. add a toilet and a stove in the coridoor for luxury living.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Occupational density is the ultimate determinant of hpi not loan-to-value.

We know what the Tory boys want. Shame on us if we let them get away with it.

article-2306842-19377F61000005DC-876_964

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, macca13 said:

Currently you can only fit 15 people in a 2 bedroom bungalow.. building up will ease the housing crisis, possibly be able to double the figure with some stud partition walls and a bit of plasterboard.. add a toilet and a stove in the coridoor for luxury living.. 

hmm, the games rooms, saunas, kitchen-dinners, summer rooms, walk-in wardrobes, listening rooms, studies and ensuites I've seen in extended properties don't strike me as crisis easers. Just boomer play-things - which I should of course hastily add, and this goes without saying - are also "shrewd investments" (proberty innit).

Edited by Sledgehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, macca13 said:

Currently you can only fit 15 people in a 2 bedroom bungalow.. building up will ease the housing crisis, possibly be able to double the figure with some stud partition walls and a bit of plasterboard.. add a toilet and a stove in the coridoor for luxury living.. 

Could do... Or could just give a set of keys to every adult in the UK for a cage that is built upwards and downwards on mega plots dotted on city outskirts.  Communal toilets per say 20 cages and bath/ showers PAYG.   Subsidised bus or train links to the city.

If you have a house or are on the ladder your alright Jack.. you could even sublet to illegals provided your paying the extortionate fees for luxury extras - possibly also PAYG - from approved suppliers.

Kind of like a basic income income type scheme actually.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Occupational density is the ultimate determinant of hpi not loan-to-value.

Mining towns had some pretty high densities in their day (compared with anything else outside the capital). Now look at them.

Density will only occur where people are willing to pay, and that means where there is work and credit. And where there is work, there is credit.

Density without demand leads to crashes. Just look at the Spanish costas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, zugzwang said:

Occupational density is the ultimate determinant of hpi not loan-to-value.

We know what the Tory boys want. Shame on us if we let them get away with it.

article-2306842-19377F61000005DC-876_964

 

Where is this. Its fucling mess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes I feel positive, sometimes negative about the prospect of house price falls, and also (any) government's willingness to do the right thing and give this country the bad medicine it truly needs.

Any government is facing a really difficult scenario here.  Any policy that leads to significant house price reductions will be immensely unpopular and will be booted out of office before they can say 'Help to Buy'.  The homeowning population might well feel sympathy for the youngsters, and even express it quite vociferously; but when it actually comes down to facing the prospect of real price falls, will they go for it?  I strongly suspect not and will vote accordingly.

There really is a war going on. 

A far far easier strategy for the government would be to attempt to change the way we think about housing primarily hard laboured acceptance of the status quo including the concept of multiple generations living under the same roof (the policy outlined above suggests the start of this sentiment).

We only have ourselves to blame for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to be a Nick Boles idea (former planning minister). His whole plan unveiled in The Sun :

1) Giving councils the power to force-buy green field land at current use value.
2) Forcing developers to sell on at "book value" if they don’t build on land within strict time limits.
3) Ensure the government builds 500,000 affordable homes itself over the next 10 years, funded by a housing bond.
4) Any house owner in a town should be allowed to add one or two more storeys on to it without planning permission, up to a maximum of four storeys, to increase density.

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.

  • 407 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.