'Ouses, Greenbelt and stuff

rjsterry

Pross said:

Posted in the wrong thread earlier but they're going to do this in cities so they protect the Greenbelt. They're going to achieve it by allowing empty shops to be more easily converted and, somewhat bizarrely, making it easier to get planning for extensions and loft conversions. If they want to build a million more houses in the cities they'd be better CPOing large properties and flattening them to create greater density (or building on public open spaces within the city) which I'm sure will prove highly popular.

At the same time Villiers is vigorously opposing the replacement of a tired underused shopping centre in her London constituency with new housing. Apparently it's over development. MP for South Cambs also vigorously opposing development in Cambridge on the slightly more rational grounds that there is insufficient water supply for the city as it is.

So cities, but not those cities.

surrey_commuter

As a layman who used to live in Kingston/Surbiton for decades and saw a colossal amount of brownfield residential development I now look around Epsom and see a huge amunt of opportunity.

What am I missing?

rjsterry

surrey_commuter said:

As a layman who used to live in Kingston/Surbiton for decades and saw a colossal amount of brownfield residential development I now look around Epsom and see a huge amunt of opportunity.

What am I missing?

Do you mean why has it not been built on already? Weren't you convinced you lived out in the sticks? There's your answer.

Pross

surrey_commuter said:

As a layman who used to live in Kingston/Surbiton for decades and saw a colossal amount of brownfield residential development I now look around Epsom and see a huge amunt of opportunity.

What am I missing?

The Greenbelt obviously. You didn't become successful enough to live in Epsom so that common oiks could get a house nearby did you?

surrey_commuter

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

As a layman who used to live in Kingston/Surbiton for decades and saw a colossal amount of brownfield residential development I now look around Epsom and see a huge amunt of opportunity.

What am I missing?

Do you mean why has it not been built on already? Weren't you convinced you lived out in the sticks? There's your answer.

so it is purely down to being less desirable?

surrey_commuter

Pross said:

surrey_commuter said:

As a layman who used to live in Kingston/Surbiton for decades and saw a colossal amount of brownfield residential development I now look around Epsom and see a huge amunt of opportunity.

What am I missing?

The Greenbelt obviously. You didn't become successful enough to live in Epsom so that common oiks could get a house nearby did you?

all around is greenbelt with the usual arguments raging over it but i mean in town where there are numerous opportunities to infill and convert garages, pubs, offices.

My query stems from what I witnessed elsewhere and why that can not be replicated in all the places like Epsom?

rjsterry

surrey_commuter said:

Pross said:

surrey_commuter said:

As a layman who used to live in Kingston/Surbiton for decades and saw a colossal amount of brownfield residential development I now look around Epsom and see a huge amunt of opportunity.

What am I missing?

The Greenbelt obviously. You didn't become successful enough to live in Epsom so that common oiks could get a house nearby did you?

all around is greenbelt with the usual arguments raging over it but i mean in town where there are numerous opportunities to infill and convert garages, pubs, offices.

My query stems from what I witnessed elsewhere and why that can not be replicated in all the places like Epsom?

I'd have to check the local plan but if the local authority doesn't support such infill development (for good or bad reasons) there's little chance of getting planning consent.

TheBigBean

surrey_commuter said:

Pross said:

surrey_commuter said:

As a layman who used to live in Kingston/Surbiton for decades and saw a colossal amount of brownfield residential development I now look around Epsom and see a huge amunt of opportunity.

What am I missing?

The Greenbelt obviously. You didn't become successful enough to live in Epsom so that common oiks could get a house nearby did you?

all around is greenbelt with the usual arguments raging over it but i mean in town where there are numerous opportunities to infill and convert garages, pubs, offices.

My query stems from what I witnessed elsewhere and why that can not be replicated in all the places like Epsom?

Is it the case that people who live in Epsom would like houses with gardens whereas infill lends itself to flats?

Stevo_666

I saw a lot of this where I used to live (Beckenham). Lots of old Victorian villas had been/were being demolished and either divvied up into plots for smaller houses or a block of flats built on the site. Plenty of scope for infill that way.

Pross

surrey_commuter said:

Pross said:

surrey_commuter said:

As a layman who used to live in Kingston/Surbiton for decades and saw a colossal amount of brownfield residential development I now look around Epsom and see a huge amunt of opportunity.

What am I missing?

The Greenbelt obviously. You didn't become successful enough to live in Epsom so that common oiks could get a house nearby did you?

all around is greenbelt with the usual arguments raging over it but i mean in town where there are numerous opportunities to infill and convert garages, pubs, offices.

My query stems from what I witnessed elsewhere and why that can not be replicated in all the places like Epsom?

You could get a good few by redeveloping the golf courses and still retain a nice bit of public open space.

To be generous, today's announcement might make that sort of infill development more viable but as RJS mention earlier the NIMBY types will still find a reason to object and populist politicians at local and national level will back them irrespective of their official policies.

TheBigBean

House prices falling

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66369695

surrey_commuter

TheBigBean said:

House prices falling

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66369695

I have always wondered how they can calculate that house prices mved by such a precise number

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

House prices falling

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66369695

I have always wondered how they can calculate that house prices mved by such a precise number

lotta data, no?

Pross

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

House prices falling

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66369695

I have always wondered how they can calculate that house prices mved by such a precise number

How they manage to collate the data so quickly is what surprises me. I assume they need the information from Land Registry and then it needs to be processed to ensure it is like-for-like somehow.

rick_chasey

Pross said:

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

House prices falling

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66369695

I have always wondered how they can calculate that house prices mved by such a precise number

How they manage to collate the data so quickly is what surprises me. I assume they need the information from Land Registry and then it needs to be processed to ensure it is like-for-like somehow.

I'd have thought retail banks are pretty good at recording and thus reporting this.

First.Aspect

Isn't it a drop in the year to July rather than just in July.

Anecdotally, as I am house hunting, supply is way down and prices have fallen more than that in some areas. I am looking rurally and they are probably 15% at least down on the 2021-22 wfh mania.

rick_chasey

First.Aspect said:

Isn't it a drop in the year to July rather than just in July.

Anecdotally, as I am house hunting, supply is way down and prices have fallen more than that in some areas. I am looking rurally and they are probably 15% at least down on the 2021-22 wfh mania.

This is a result for someone who will probably have to move further out.

Pross

First.Aspect said:

Isn't it a drop in the year to July rather than just in July.

Anecdotally, as I am house hunting, supply is way down and prices have fallen more than that in some areas. I am looking rurally and they are probably 15% at least down on the 2021-22 wfh mania.

I've been watching my local market for about a year and the supply is also dropping quite a lot. I do a search for the whole county on Rightmoveusing the same criteria and it used to produce about 2 pages of new properties per day whereas it is now more like 1 - 1.5 pages. The pricing continues to baffle me though, I don't know if it is the vendor being optimistic and refusing to take advice or the Agent suggesting a higher price to get themselves appointed but I often see houses in the same area where one is either in far better condition at the same price or far more expensive without being obviously better.

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

Isn't it a drop in the year to July rather than just in July.

Anecdotally, as I am house hunting, supply is way down and prices have fallen more than that in some areas. I am looking rurally and they are probably 15% at least down on the 2021-22 wfh mania.

This is a result for someone who will probably have to move further out.

We are moving south, but yes. We started thinking about it around 2 years ago and when we started looking this spring, we couldn't afford what we wanted. What it is actually doing is bringing things back to where they were, proportionally to our current local market, about 3-4 years ago. Bummer rates have made it twice as expensive instead.

briantrumpet

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

Isn't it a drop in the year to July rather than just in July.

Anecdotally, as I am house hunting, supply is way down and prices have fallen more than that in some areas. I am looking rurally and they are probably 15% at least down on the 2021-22 wfh mania.

This is a result for someone who will probably have to move further out.

We are moving south, but yes. We started thinking about it around 2 years ago and when we started looking this spring, we couldn't afford what we wanted. What it is actually doing is bringing things back to where they were, proportionally to our current local market, about 3-4 years ago. Bummer rates have made it twice as expensive instead.

That's what I was going to ask had happened. It's unfortunate that my late mother's house couldn't be sold a couple of years ago, as I think it would have gone within minutes at a slightly silly price.

First.Aspect

We are seeing huge discrepancies now between equivalent properties, paricularly those just coming on and those that were priced and expectations set at £N50k 6-12m ago. But people who haven't sold at those prices aren't budging, even though the value is now £(N-1)00k.

We are also seeing buyers pull out when they realise they are already paying £50-£100k too much. One we nearly offered on has just fallen through for the second time, but it's back on for the same price as it was in September, more or less.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

House prices falling

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66369695

I have always wondered how they can calculate that house prices mved by such a precise number

How they manage to collate the data so quickly is what surprises me. I assume they need the information from Land Registry and then it needs to be processed to ensure it is like-for-like somehow.

I'd have thought retail banks are pretty good at recording and thus reporting this.

Asking prices are meaningless and I can’t see how data can have been collated for July sold prices.

But my main ask is they can not have like for like comparisons so what do they base it on?

TheBigBean

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

House prices falling

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66369695

I have always wondered how they can calculate that house prices mved by such a precise number

How they manage to collate the data so quickly is what surprises me. I assume they need the information from Land Registry and then it needs to be processed to ensure it is like-for-like somehow.

I'd have thought retail banks are pretty good at recording and thus reporting this.

Asking prices are meaningless and I can’t see how data can have been collated for July sold prices.

But my main ask is they can not have like for like comparisons so what do they base it on?

I googled it for you. Their house price data comes from their mortgage book. They make some adjustments for property type.


https://www.nationwide.co.uk/house-price-index/methodology/

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

House prices falling

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66369695

I have always wondered how they can calculate that house prices mved by such a precise number

How they manage to collate the data so quickly is what surprises me. I assume they need the information from Land Registry and then it needs to be processed to ensure it is like-for-like somehow.

I'd have thought retail banks are pretty good at recording and thus reporting this.

Asking prices are meaningless and I can’t see how data can have been collated for July sold prices.

But my main ask is they can not have like for like comparisons so what do they base it on?

Why would banks know asking prices? Surely they know the rough prices from all the mortgages they hand out? Just look at the mortgage book.

pblakeney

Tbf, asking prices are irrelevant. All that counts is the selling price.

rjsterry

The witless discussion about national grid expansion. Some 'Action' group on the radio this morning lauding the fact that it takes a decade to get new power lines built.
"We recognise the need for expanding power lines but we don't want these decisions to be made too quickly"

Don't worry; there's absolutely no chance of that.

rick_chasey

rjsterry said:

The witless discussion about national grid expansion. Some 'Action' group on the radio this morning lauding the fact that it takes a decade to get new power lines built.
"We recognise the need for expanding power lines but we don't want these decisions to be made too quickly"

Don't worry; there's absolutely no chance of that.

The latest NIMBY line, recoginising they're part of the problem.

"we recognise things need to be built, just not here" well done. Where then? "not here, in my backyard" obviously.

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

The witless discussion about national grid expansion. Some 'Action' group on the radio this morning lauding the fact that it takes a decade to get new power lines built.
"We recognise the need for expanding power lines but we don't want these decisions to be made too quickly"

Don't worry; there's absolutely no chance of that.

I was pleased to see there were at least some proposals to speed things up.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

The witless discussion about national grid expansion. Some 'Action' group on the radio this morning lauding the fact that it takes a decade to get new power lines built.
"We recognise the need for expanding power lines but we don't want these decisions to be made too quickly"

Don't worry; there's absolutely no chance of that.

I was pleased to see there were at least some proposals to speed things up.

Delays in planning are such a colossal waste of everything. Even if the answer is no, it's still to everyone's benefit that it is made quickly. Slow decisions are by definition worse decisions. Ten years later the decision is ten years out of date.

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

The witless discussion about national grid expansion. Some 'Action' group on the radio this morning lauding the fact that it takes a decade to get new power lines built.
"We recognise the need for expanding power lines but we don't want these decisions to be made too quickly"

Don't worry; there's absolutely no chance of that.

I was pleased to see there were at least some proposals to speed things up.

Delays in planning are such a colossal waste of everything. Even if the answer is no, it's still to everyone's benefit that it is made quickly. Slow decisions are by definition worse decisions. Ten years later the decision is ten years out of date.

Yes, but I think building new transmission lines is arguably more important than anything else, and they are long lines, so getting planning permission for 98% of one doesn't really help.