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

Guardian: £60,000 To Build, No Cheaper To Buy

Recommended Posts

OK, this is the headline of the National section of Saturdays Guardian:

"Bolted together and clad in cedar tiles, the house that costs £60,000 to build - but a good deal more to buy".

It goes on to say:

"The £60,000 construction costs will help put up social housing far more quickly and cheaply than before. But the homes will not be sold at such bargain prices, but at market rates. The two-bedroom version of the Newport Pagnell homes will sell for teh same prices as a normal two-bed house in the area. Stephen Stone, chief executive of Crest Nicholson [the developers] said 'The SixtyK house is not going to make us any more profit than we would make in the traditional course of business."

Now, I'm not a financial or social planning genius, but... they build it a lot cheaper. They sell it at the same rate as other houses. But they don't make a bigger than normal profit. Oh, and somehow it's still social housing.

I am totally perplexed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

URL?

Is the 60K the construction cost or the construction cost + the land cost?

Land is the most expensive part of any home since due to the our planning laws making the price for land which you can build homes on artificially astronomically high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

URL?

Is the 60K the construction cost or the construction cost + the land cost?

Land is the most expensive part of any home since due to the our planning laws making the price for land which you can build homes on artificially astronomically high.

The URL of the article is http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1773891,00.html

A BBC article is http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4403080.stm

Costs are construction, so I assume not land prices, but the houses are supposed to be built on public land - near prisons, on landfills, etc. etc.

It's supposed to be low cost housing. But if they sell it at market rates...err.. what's the point except to make more profit for someone in the process...? You can find out more by googling for "SixtyK".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what they are saying is that the Social Houses will be sold to the housing associations (Tony's Cronies) for 60k however Joe Public will have to pay full market value should he be daft enough to purchase a prefab piece of crap erected with just two spanners and a phillips screw driver.

Given that the Architect of this 60k plan has been sacked in disgrace, his paper house should follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what they are saying is that the Social Houses will be sold to the housing associations (Tony's Cronies) for 60k however Joe Public will have to pay full market value should he be daft enough to purchase a prefab piece of crap erected with just two spanners and a phillips screw driver.

Given that the Architect of this 60k plan has been sacked in disgrace, his paper house should follow.

Who was the architect, and why was he or she sacked?

Even if we did build a few new houses with lower construction costs, would this really translate into lower market prices, if just sold on the open market? They would be in direct competition with other housing in the neighborhood. If they were much better places to live in (as the article indicates) they would end up costing more than the others. If they were about the same, they would cost about the same.

If they were worse places to live, there might be lower prices... but in that case is that what we've been reduced to? Building houses worse than the old social housing stock (now occupied by city traders no doubt, in their luxury 2 bed terraces with a north facing patio...)

So it's not really social housing then. Just a scam to rake in some money for someone somewhere while looking like "something is being done!". Forgive my cynicism...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The project was to build a house for 60k, now I can tell you that these houses are 76 Square Meters in floor area. A conventional house in a terrace of 20 as is the case with these can easily be built for 60k and leave a 15% profit in for the builder.

The simple fact is, these houses are built out of crap.

I worked as a Brickie in the early 80's and built piles of prefab, state of the art crap in Basingstoke which at the time was a new town. I can tell you now, they are not standing today and the ones that are still standing represent all that is bad when you allow morons with big ideas about making money into the construction business.

Travel throughout the world and you will find it hard to match the construction standards we have in the UK. However in the last five years those standards have been steadily dropping, new builds today are nothing more than paper houses built out of recycled plastic bottles, and recycled newspaper.

Bricks and Mortar should be just that, solid, stand the test of time, and look like they are fit for the purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cletus VanDamme

The project was to build a house for 60k, now I can tell you that these houses are 76 Square Meters in floor area. A conventional house in a terrace of 20 as is the case with these can easily be built for 60k and leave a 15% profit in for the builder.

The simple fact is, these houses are built out of crap.

Bricks and Mortar should be just that, solid, stand the test of time, and look like they are fit for the purpose.

Laurejon, have you had a look at this house? It's on Store St, off Tottenham Court Road. I know very little about construction but to me it looks a million miles away from prefab buildings of the past.

I urge you to take a look for yourself, and let us know what you think of it then.

I've been to see it and to me it looks pretty good. In terms of energy efficiency and insulation it exceeds anything currently being built in the mainstream.

Surely there are better ways of building houses than laboriously laying one brick at a time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bricks and Mortar should be just that, solid, stand the test of time, and look like they are fit for the purpose.

Maybe builders should provide a 100 year warranty on the homes they build :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laurejon, have you had a look at this house? It's on Store St, off Tottenham Court Road. I know very little about construction but to me it looks a million miles away from prefab buildings of the past.

I urge you to take a look for yourself, and let us know what you think of it then.

I've been to see it and to me it looks pretty good. In terms of energy efficiency and insulation it exceeds anything currently being built in the mainstream.

Surely there are better ways of building houses than laboriously laying one brick at a time?

SIXTYK, not the new solution for first time buyers

Despite the snappy brand these developments offer no solution to the plight of first time buyers. The cost of 60K per unit, without the associated cost of the land, renders the project a non starter. Factor in the cost of the land, just off Tottenham court road, and the mind boggles at the true cost...perhaps 300-400K for each unit would not be too wild an assumption.

Then there`s the issue of square footage, 825 sq ft per 60K, (without land cost), is an abysmal return that can be bettered in most surrounding London districts.

http://firstrung.co.uk/articles.asp?pageid...1933&cat=47-0-0

Edited by Converted Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its strange but in 2001 Barratt could make and sell a 3 bed house in the NW for £85k.

how come suddenly five years later they cant do it for less than £180k.

i didnt see the price of bricks rise so high, nor builders wages.

so why the need for the new costs. what is the extra 95k going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The facts are plain and simple

If you look outside the box and take in what is happening you will see that these homes are another method of controlling the public.

The future is thus..........having screwed the housing market on purpose by fuelling house price inflation the Government are now in a wonderfull position whereby the electorate will have to purchase a 50% share of a property or find themselves homeless. And guess who owns the other 50%, yes its the Government, and again you have an electorate that has to be gratefull for having a roof over their head.

Its all about Control, and if people cannot see it, then I feel very sorry for them.

Family Tax Credits......Overtax the paypacket, return some crumbs = Labour Voter

50/50 House Scheme = Labour Voter

Mass Public Service Employment = Labour Voter

Plain as the nose on the end of your face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The facts are plain and simple

If you look outside the box and take in what is happening you will see that these homes are another method of controlling the public.

The future is thus..........having screwed the housing market on purpose by fuelling house price inflation the Government are now in a wonderfull position whereby the electorate will have to purchase a 50% share of a property or find themselves homeless. And guess who owns the other 50%, yes its the Government, and again you have an electorate that has to be gratefull for having a roof over their head.

Its all about Control, and if people cannot see it, then I feel very sorry for them.

Family Tax Credits......Overtax the paypacket, return some crumbs = Labour Voter

50/50 House Scheme = Labour Voter

Mass Public Service Employment = Labour Voter

Hrm.. I helped vote Labour in originally, at the time I was in the private sector. The Tories were a truly dreadful government, let's not forget it, who decimated vast areas of this country and reduced people to poverty. Trickle down, my *ss.

One of the good things the labour government have done is raise many children out of poverty. You may disagree with the means by which they achieved this (I do - means-testing continuously meddling, incompetent idiots that they are), but the appalling human waste the Tories created shall not be forgotten by those who experienced it.

I'm now in the public sector and I haven't voted for Labour since. Don't believe the hype here. Public sector employees aren't especially grateful to Labour for their jobs, regardless of whether they were responsible for creating those jobs or not. They still can't buy a decent house!

The only difference for me is now I'm older and wiser and have realised that the entire political system needs reform. They are as bad as each other, quite frankly, although in different ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the good things the labour government have done is raise many children out of poverty

Correction, One of their good intentions and policies was to raise children out of poverty, in fact they have achieved the reverse, sending more families below the breadline for decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correction, One of their good intentions and policies was to raise children out of poverty, in fact they have achieved the reverse, sending more families below the breadline for decades.

If you're referring to the curent house price situation (what - discuss house prices on this forum ;) ), then I agree with you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what they are saying is that the Social Houses will be sold to the housing associations (Tony's Cronies) for 60k however Joe Public will have to pay full market value should he be daft enough to purchase a prefab piece of crap erected with just two spanners and a phillips screw driver.

Given that the Architect of this 60k plan has been sacked in disgrace, his paper house should follow.

this isn't about the house..

this is about perception..

controlling perception..

or a stupid way to build a house..

Cheaper then bricks bought in massive development bulk?

You reckon...?? bless em..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correction, One of their good intentions and policies was to raise children out of poverty, in fact they have achieved the reverse, sending more families below the breadline for decades.

Gordon Brown raised hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty in a single day... he simply changed the definition of poverty.

That says it all about NuLabour really, it's all about managing perception. The above housing projects are about managing expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High quality off-site constructed houses are a great idea. Steel framing is the best option in my opinion. The cost can be lower and quality higher that bricks.

HOWEVER, the must be a relaxing of planning laws to reduce the 'tax' on land usage. It is this that causes the massive increase in housing costs.

The perception that building land is expensinve would appear to be associated with ignorance. It would appear much more reasonable to view the false restriction on building land as a tax. The beneficiaries are the local councils.

If the restrictions on the use of land were withdrawn, there would be no shortage of building land at a few thousand pounds per plot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite, concentrating on build costs and materials totally misses the point, they haven't inflated at levels anywhere near the cost of land with permission. The cost of buildable land has inflated ahead of general HPI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ANGER ANGER ANGER

More short-sightedness on the part of the media, government etc etc

Why not use up-to-date technology to revitalise the crap housing in this country? Knock down the tat and re-build decent homes for next to nothing. Oh, and release more land.

GOVERNMENT PLEASE ENGAGE BRAIN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Land is for sure being held back for developement to bolster prices.

If any Government really wanted to fix the housing problem they would simply realeas .001% of the nations land for development and the problem would be solved overnight for three decades.

The fact is that the fat cats are lining the pockets of the likes of Blair and the Labour councils to a degree that make it very unlikely that the Labour party would run with such a policy.

The answer is simple, a peoples revolt en-mass, but then of course we are British we dont do those things do we, in fact we legislate against them and nod our heads approvingly despite the fact we are all victims of this extremist regime that has hijacked the Labour Party and decimated the political and judical system in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

I really don't know why this debate gets dredged up continually. NuLabour/Grodon Brown do not want affordable housing in the short-to-medium term. It is just a smoke screen to talk about affordable housing schemes, greedy developers, problems with planning, etc., etc., Why continually waste time on incorrect debates. Gordon Brown stumbled, several years ago, on a macro-economic policy of demand management based on demand management of housing and encoragement of Mortage equity loaning and borrowing by private citizens to spend through recession and since went on to use it as a method of tax raising. The fact that there are a fair number of Labour MP's who are also in on the BTL scheme was a further bolster. When will a real economy come to take over the batton from housing-MeW and public spending is not so clear, Gordy and NuLab seem so locked into the policy that a plan 'B' doesn't appear to be on the table, bad timing as well that the projected real economic upswing coincided with massive hikes in Oil. Bad timing as well that Gordy cost the nation's reserves about 6 billion pounds with the decision to sell off the Gold a few years back. Still, let's not get distracted with the spin arguments about problems implementing these affordable housing initiatives because that is all it is, there is no will there by Gordon-NuLabour as long as they continue to make unsustainable rises in house prices a central plank of economic and political policy.

Boomer

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.