1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Brixton news, rumours and general chat - January 2018

Discussion in 'Brixton' started by editor, Jan 2, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bimble

    bimble noisy but small

    Makes me wonder (again) who actually owns that space a few doors down that is just full of very dusty cars?
     
  2. David Clapson

    David Clapson Well-Known Member

  3. MissL

    MissL Well-Known Member

    I actually can't help saying this in a northern accent. Come in, love.
     
    brixtonblade likes this.
  4. Angellic

    Angellic Well-Known Member

    That's useful to know. I'm happy with 38.00 and, as you say, hanging on to the TV for a little bit longer.
     
  5. Angellic

    Angellic Well-Known Member

    And upper and lower case is better for visually impaired people. Also less SHOUTY.
     
  6. friendofdorothy

    friendofdorothy it is so much worse than Thatcherism now

  7. Twattor

    Twattor Well-Known Member

    Too simplistic. The value of land changes with planning. You don't know what the value of a piece of land is until you have planning, so there is a gamble. Making viability a material consideration was a political decision to encourage construction by de-risking it for developers simply because in times of housing shortages some (albeit mostly private) housing is better than no housing.
     
  8. CH1

    CH1 "Red Guard"(NLYL)

    I find it difficult to estimate, but assuming he has been there since 2010 as implied in the particulars, and given the work done on it, it would not be surprising if the price in 2010 was £250,000 IMHO. Of course you could pay £3 and find out from the Land Registry.
     
  9. teuchter

    teuchter je suis teuchter

    I've got zero faith in local authority planning departments having the negotiating power or ability to make sure the quotas agreed are determined by genuine viability rather than the skills of the developers' lawyers.
     
  10. spitfire

    spitfire Toast

    Well there you go. Never seen that before, good to know but as David says, bit weird.
     
  11. northeast

    northeast Active Member

    I agree, why do they go giving public support? Only reason i could see someone verbally supporting an development is to keep a developer happy which suggests they have a relationship of some sort.
     
    editor likes this.
  12. northeast

    northeast Active Member

  13. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    Twattors post reminds Ive posted up about this before. No I don't think planning officers have special relationship with developers. Here is my old post:

    Let's make this clear "viability assessments" , which were brought in to planning policy in 2012 were intended to reduce local authorities ( ie the ordinary people) ability to get planning obligations from property developers to increase supply of affordable homes.

    Given that using planning obligations on new build private development to increase affordable homes in a locality was one of the few ways left for local authorities to get affordable homes the introduction of "viability assessments" was the Tories way of getting rid of this "loophole" in planning in favour of there chums the property developers. Nothing unintended about it. The language it's written in sounds reasonable but it's not. Developers haven't been using this "aggressively" or in ways that have been unintended. They have just being using viability assessments according to National Planning policy as laid out by central government. This isn't the fault of local authorities.

    Local authorities could be blamed for not contesting viability assessments enough. They are however up against a well organized private sector who aren't averse to getting top legal advice on this issue.

    It's not as if planning obligations to build social housing will make developers go bust. The argument in viability assessments is that it will reduce there profits. Poor dears.

    To add in London I see no justification for viability assessments. The economic crisis was years ago now. Viability assessments might have been justified for a year or so. But the question is when will they be ended? This looks like a temporary measure made permanent.
     
    friendofdorothy and editor like this.
  14. teuchter

    teuchter je suis teuchter

    I don't think there's any need to invoke conspiracy. The LA will have in mind the potential for legal challenge if they take too hard a negotiating stance, because as Gramsci says it's written into planning law that they have to take heed of these viability reports. And because LAs don't have big budgets for expensive lawyers or which can cover the cost of losing a big case, they are naturally going to be cautious.
     
  15. teuchter

    teuchter je suis teuchter

    I think I agree with you on this.

    At the same time I think you have to recognise that affordable housing quotas do have an impact on viability. If it's set too high then there just won't be enough incentive to develop certain sites. It also has an impact on housing prices generally.
     
  16. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Angellic likes this.
  17. alex_

    alex_ Well-Known Member

    Not Brixton but...

    Ghost towers: half of new-build luxury London flats fail to sell

    “hundreds of Asian investors who had bought London developments off-plan in 2015-16 in the hope of making a quick profit by selling apartments on closer to completion have instead lost hundreds of thousands of pounds. “They intended to flip [buy and sell on] the apartments and make big profits, but it hasn’t worked out like that, and now they are trying to get out at the smallest possible loss.””
     
  18. CH1

    CH1 "Red Guard"(NLYL)

    Don't you think this is very similar to Spain around 2005? And for the same reason actually.
    In London property boomed because of QE and very low interest raters.
    In Spain property boomed because Spain joined the Eurozone and their original higher interest rates were replaced by near zero Eurozone ones inherited from the Deutschmark.

    But this is interesting news - and I'm glad to know that property developers may have to consider real Londoners as customers in future rather than foreign speculators.

    Jeremy Corbyn was mild about this sort of thing this morning on Marr. He talked of giving councils powers to house homeless people and to force properties not to stand empty.

    If the government gave powers to Lambeth Council I can't seem anything happening at all. Except they might get some consultants in to consult the public about it.
     
    Gramsci likes this.
  19. David Clapson

    David Clapson Well-Known Member

    The Chinese rushed to buy the new waterfront developments partly because they thought the English were undervaluing them. The waterfront adds luck and prestige for Chinese buyers, they didn't care that the sites were charmless brownfield locations with no shops or infrastructure.
     
    friendofdorothy and Angellic like this.
  20. snowy_again

    snowy_again Slush

    No shops? I was surprised by the number of new Chinese kids strolling around the new Vauxhall Sainsbury’s last week. All in house slippers and filling up trolleys. UCL students I guess.
     
    friendofdorothy likes this.
  21. alex_

    alex_ Well-Known Member

    Yes, that’s an interesting similarity.

    I’ve got friends who live in cheap properties in Spain ultimately funded by whoever wrote off their loans when the developer went bust.

    Turning super high spec flats into lower spec denser properties will still be quite expensive and a lot of the costs are irretrievable - eg a five year old warranty expired Miele kitchen probably cost 20k but is worth fuck all.

    The other problem with these properties will be that the service charges will be horrific, which won’t get fixed without a change of freeholder and work to reduce running costs, removal of pool, gym, fountains etc.

    This problem isn’t going to be fixed without the developers going bust.

    Alex
     
  22. teuchter

    teuchter je suis teuchter

    Depends if they actually are super high spec, or just regular flats sold off for super high prices.
     
    friendofdorothy and Nivag like this.
  23. Angellic

    Angellic Well-Known Member

    New?
     
  24. alex_

    alex_ Well-Known Member

    The latter would explain why they aren’t selling, but I suspect most are at least superficially the former.

    Alex
     
  25. Angellic

    Angellic Well-Known Member

    'Luxury' seems to bandied about a lot.
     
    editor likes this.
  26. alex_

    alex_ Well-Known Member

    smart-assed ness removed
     
    editor likes this.
  27. Angellic

    Angellic Well-Known Member

    Thank you. Seems I corrected my post as you were correcting me.
     
    editor and alex_ like this.
  28. peterkro

    peterkro Greasin' on American Express card.

    Southbank tower is just behind me and seems to have few residents those it does have can be seen in the little Waitrose which is attached they appear to be mostly Singaporean and Malaysian to me but some could easily be Chinese.
    I don't like them or the building (a fucking hurricane whips around it nearly all the time) to forestall claims of racism prices for a three bed flat start at £6.35 million.
     
  29. alex_

    alex_ Well-Known Member

    Search results | CBRE

    Amenities - 24 Hour 5 Star Concierge and Porter service |12,000 sq ft Roof Terrace with Residents Lounge | 20m Swimming Pool and Spa | Fully fitted Gymnasium | Cinema Room | Business Suite |

    I think we can conclude that this is high spec.

    Alex
     
  30. peterkro

    peterkro Greasin' on American Express card.

    I walk past it several times a day and it's mostly deserted as far as coming and going goes.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page