£75,000 ecohome

Author
Discussion

BoRED S2upid

Original Poster:

19,692 posts

240 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-24813134

So this company can build you a 3 bed eco home for £75k yet there is still a housing shortage because there is no land! why don't the government / councils release land for such houses if it's all about low carbon and econess? This is surley the answer to all the problems is it not?

Lost soul

8,712 posts

182 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Purity14 said:
Id be happy with a house half that size, as I don't have a family.
Although I would need a massive garage/shed.

The drawback I see is if they could, people would fill every available patch of land with houses that up until now would have been off limits and rent them out or sell them for a profit.
Surely Shirley, this would lead to a crash in house prices across the UK.
The right to buy needs to be stopped and BTL needs to be shut down , that would give the market some stability

B17NNS

18,506 posts

247 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
You can build brick and tile 3 bed terraces for £75k.

There is no need for a housing shortage in this country. There is so much brownfield land it's untrue.

A single person earning minimum wage cannot afford to rent a 1 bed flat and live in it even where I live (Staffs). Either the minimum wage is to low or housing is too expensive.

Fittster

20,120 posts

213 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
BoRED S2upid said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-24813134

So this company can build you a 3 bed eco home for £75k yet there is still a housing shortage because there is no land! why don't the government / councils release land for such houses if it's all about low carbon and econess? This is surley the answer to all the problems is it not?
It's hard so view the housing market as working efficiently.

"there are some 400,000 as yet unbuilt houses in the UK with full planning permission."

You can spend ages debating if house builder are using land banking to maintain their profit levels.

bazza white

3,558 posts

128 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
So much land protection its stupid. Other places have more relaxed rules, higher self build fihgues and yet plenty of green and brown space.

Spare tyre

9,563 posts

130 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Isn't it the plot that is the expensive bit, rather than the building

FailHere

779 posts

152 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Part of the problem is that the available land to build houses isn't always where people want or need to live. Conventional houses take up a lot of space and that's before you add gardens and driveways. High-rise can accommodate far more in a smaller space, but don't really suit families. In many areas developers dictate what is built, "family homes" with 3-4 bedrooms en-suites etc. when what is really needed are smaller homes for singles, couples and retired down-sizers; but the developers still build what they feel the market needs and what suits their profit margins. (Not a complaint, businesses need to make a profit.) I know in my area there are plenty of half-built sites which have only just restarted since the 2007 crash; however there are still new sites starting with the same developers within a mile. The government help-to-buy seems to help them shift some. I also note that some developers are hanging onto their part-ex properties and letting them out, rather than selling, presumably to keep the prices up, so that is no different to buy-to-let.

Housing Associations often have to bid against the major developers for the same land so tend to be the under-bidders. (Although you might think that if they do not have to make a profit they could bid higher, sadly mostly their finances are not sufficient to do so.)

I'm not sure how stopping buy-to-let would help, if the buy-to-letter is paying the market rate for the property and letting at the market rate that means someone who can't afford to buy has somewhere to live. I realise that is a simplistic statement, but in some areas what is the alternative.


98elise

26,547 posts

161 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Lost soul said:
Purity14 said:
Id be happy with a house half that size, as I don't have a family.
Although I would need a massive garage/shed.

The drawback I see is if they could, people would fill every available patch of land with houses that up until now would have been off limits and rent them out or sell them for a profit.
Surely Shirley, this would lead to a crash in house prices across the UK.
The right to buy needs to be stopped and BTL needs to be shut down , that would give the market some stability
Neither of those would increase the supply, it would just change the ownership model. There would still be more demand than supply, and houses would be expensive.

In the recent crash (for want of a better word), the availabilty of finance dried, demand dropped, and so did prices. To stabilise prices we need to build enough houses.

Simpo Two

85,404 posts

265 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
BoRED S2upid said:
why don't the government / councils release land for such houses if it's all about low carbon and econess? This is surley the answer to all the problems is it not?
Or stop importing millions of foreigners.

covmutley

3,025 posts

190 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
There isn't much brownfield land and where there is it's in the wrong place. If house builders could build on it and make a profit, then they would.

There isn't enough land because everyone objects - nimbys. I would be one too if I had a field behind my house that was to be developed.

I blame the baby boomers. They got lots of houses built after the war. Now they are living longer so houses no becoming available and object to all new housing schemes because they don't want change.

Immigration is just a side show.

monkfish1

11,049 posts

224 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Indeed. The thing that no one seems to mention, is if you build loads of houses, thus increasing supply, supply and demand logic says the price will go down. But that will simply make it more affordable, so more people from elsewhere in Europe will come as it has now become affordable! Which will push up demand and we end up in the same place. Just with an even bigger population.

I suspect the current high house prices limits the numbers coming here.

elster

17,517 posts

210 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
There is a problem with house building in the UK. People use traditional construction methods that are outdated and inefficient, more importantly more expensive than other methods. Also affordable housing targets for councils are extremely restrictive. York has had a 50% affordable, and surprisingly the number of completed builds is very low and demand is extremely high.


herewego

8,814 posts

213 months

Thursday 24th July 2014
quotequote all
Apparently a third of London houses have only one occupant. Sounds like getting people to live together could solve more than one issue.