Thursday, April 1, 2010

Does the government really want houses built?

Government blocks plans for 9,000 homes on the edge of Northampton

"Housing developers have been dealt a major blow after plans to build more than 9,000 new homes on land between Daventry and Northampton were blocked by the Government." Does the government really want to provide houses or are the trying to keep supply low and prices high?

Posted by thecountofnowhere @ 01:20 PM (1479 views)
Please complete the required fields.



16 thoughts on “Does the government really want houses built?

  • In a word: NO.

    It wants to keep prices as high as possible to mug the nation of double taxation, namely stamp duty and capital gains.

    But hey, ho it means NHS departments can buy lap tops they don’t need to keep their budgets, at the same time PCTs
    delay vital pre-screening that should be there to save [mens] lives.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • We don’t need more houses. What we need is a tax system which incentivises the ones we already have to be lived in by their owners.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • mark wadsworth says:

    The Home-Owner-Ists want supply low and credit creation (false demand) high.

    We could balance this out by either LVT or by relaxing planning or ending bank bail outs or preferably all three. The Home-Owner-Ists oppose all three, of course. Their logic is “Britain is a crowded island [which is not true on the facts] therefore existing land-users should be protected but future land-users should be penalised. But because prices are so high we need more bank bailouts and more credit creation”.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • “The Government decision to block two of the proposed development sites came after inspectors warned the new developments would have a negative impact on both the countryside and the setting of the Borough Hill ancient monument.”

    and things like ALDI distribution warehouse built partly on greenbelt land in cheshire doe not have a negative impact on the countryside?? exactly they dont want houses only supermarkets

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • How can you make a judgement on the basis of the information in this article? Opponents say there aren’t the jobs, schools, roads, transport and shops. If the government funded all or part of this infrastructure there’d be moans about expenditure ans deficits. Are there alternative sites that are more appropropriate? We know that developers have large landbanks which rise substantially in value with planning permission and that they have incentives to build irrespective of local circumstances, so why assume that any proposed development is a good thing?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Look at the electoral map – there’s four Labour held seats in the area that will go Tory on a 5% swing..

    ..there’s your reason..!

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Uncle Tom – excellent theory although I suspect nobody in the current government would be bright enough to figure that out!

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • timmy t,

    It’s the only think they really care about..

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • This area was designated as a sustainable growth area in 2003.So now the plan is:no growth.Strange.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • “the new developments would have a negative impact on both the countryside and the setting of the Borough Hill ancient monument”

    The new developments would have a highly positive impact on the 10,000 families who could have lived there. What’s more important, ten thousand families or a handful of birdwatchers? (no disrespect to the birdwatchers, it’s just a numbers thing)

    I can just about understand the greenbelt arguments. What I don’t understand is why we can’t build upwards? Even small towns in Europe have nice blocks of spacious 3- and 4-bedroom flats, several stories high. Our planners need to realise that if nobody can build out, then at least let us build up. It’s (arguably) greener too.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • tenant super says:

    Building upwards is no bad thing if done well. I like apartment living in the city, a balcony is much more usable (so long as it is pigeon proof) and gardens can be too much trouble. We would want some safe outdoor space if we had children but this can be achieved with communal gardens which are covered by cameras and from which, dogs are banned.

    The biggest draw-back in my experience is the service charge from the freeholder. Mr. TS’ freeholder is Southern Housing and like all HAs they are a greedy incompetent shower, always on the make and hiking the service charges at a rate well above inflation. And flats have to be leasehold in this country. If you are going to build lots of decent apartments, you should sell them as a share of freehold with a tenant and leaseholder managed organisation (TMOs) where the residents themselves manage the service charge budget and allocate service and maintenance contracts.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Without knowing the full facts it’s difficult to comment on this particular case .

    As I’ve tried to say before so long as we have an open door immigration policy it will never be possible to build enough houses .

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • The government under-rights a large proportion of the Nations mortgages – potentially a house price crash could damage the economy and lead to defaults on those mortgages.

    Increased house building at this time could crash prices causing a devastating downward spiral.

    These are difficult times and complex decisions are being made – multi-billion £ Buckeroo.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • I’m sorry TS, flats or apartments may work abroad but in this country you’re never that far from an ars3h0le and if they live in your block they ruin it for everyone.

    I live on a nice estate of 2000 houses surrounded by woods and playgrounds. It really doesn’t take up much space on the grand scale of things. It’s really the best way to squeeze things in when everythings taken into account.

    Apartments are ok, but you need a bit of your own outside space aswell. And you can’t live without a garage for bikes, scooters and fishing tackle etc.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • ts,
    Leasehold isn’t the only way. There’s a new-ish system called commonhold designed specifically for blocks of flats. I agree though, I’d rather live in a large flat than a tiny house.

    str2007,
    Are Brits fundamentally more antisocial than other europeans, or even americans? In America flats usually have underground parking on two or even three floors; I’ve also seen flats with ground-level “junk rooms” for your fishing tackle. Bikes can be parked outside in a bike shelter, like outside an office or school or university.

    I don’t think living in a flat would suit everyone. But for young folk in particular, it has to be better than squashing up in suburban house-shares.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • mark wadsworth says:

    One of Drewster’s bright ideas is to point out that buying a leasehold flat is a mug’s game – why not have the whole block owned by one landlord who just rents out the flats? It can’t be too difficult to have a clause in the lease saying if you behave like an 4rse and annoy other tenants you get chucked out.

    Sure, people like the idea of “owning” a flat because of “capital growth”. If I were in charge there wouldn’t be any capital growth (because of LVT) but even in the absence of that, you can still buy shares in property companies.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



Add a comment

  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>