Jump to content

Recommended Posts

0.6 acres, all of which has a street frontage. That's valuable land. The 'shed' is irrelevant (in fact, it would have been figured in by the buyer as a cost for demolition, not an asset.)


A better question would have been why Southwark don't build a number of properties itself on the site.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 0.6 acres, all of which has a street frontage.

> That's valuable land. The 'shed' is irrelevant (in

> fact, it would have been figured in by the buyer

> as a cost for demolition, not an asset.)

>

> A better question would have been why Southwark

> don't build a number of properties itself on the

> site.


Wot Loz said. Sounds cheap actually

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> A better question would have been why Southwark

> don't build a number of properties itself on the

> site.


Had the same thought. They could probably have built 3 houses and sold a lease on one to pay for the build. Councils are struggling to make budgets balance and provide social housing yet they squander assets in this way. Is there something which prevents this from happening?

What I find alarming is the statement saying the property has been siting empty since 2002.


I once spotted a property in SE1, checked with HMLR, asked Southwark Council about it and they didn't know they even had it. They then sold it. So perhaps this piece of land is another one like that. I will find out. Asset management in such massive councils is an issue.

"A better question would have been why Southwark don't build a number of properties itself on the site"

Loz, spot-on.


The BBC News report states:


"The council said the property had been sold without planning permission for demolition, but that did not stop the new owners applying for it.

Mr Livingstone added the money would be used to fund its housing investment programme which includes building 11,000 new properties in the borough by the 2040s."


Perhaps Councillor Richard Livingstone could explain the economics.


MarkT

This is not a 'shed' but a 1940s pre-fab - post-war housing meant to last 10 years but (some) still sound after 70. They are well proportioned and soundly built (although out of asbestos sheeting, frequently) - my grandparents lived in one after they were bombed out of 3 houses in the war. They were built on a decent sized plot (with gardens) and, for the time, were well appointed with good indoor plumbing etc. As bungalows they were ideal for older occupiers. With asbestos cladding they were warm (and, of course, fire-proof!). They are part of our London heritage - although use of the site can now be 'improved' - in terms of occupancy rates - these 'sheds' provided real comfort to many, and a limited few still do. There were quite a number in Underhill 20-25 years ago, sadly most (bar one, I think) now gone.
From what I've read the plan is to sell off high value sites and develop in lower value areas. Why develop a few flats on a plot of land worth 1 million quid when you can sell the land and use that 1 million quid to develop much more housing on cheaper land elsewhere in the borough. If they actually do it, its of course the most effective way of developing the greatest amount of social housing. The main drawback is it reduces socio-economic diversity in affluent / gentrifying areas.

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Why

> develop a few flats on a plot of land worth 1

> million quid when you can sell the land and use

> that 1 million quid to develop much more housing

> on cheaper land elsewhere in the borough.


Where is this cheaper land?

There is plenty of money to be made! Its the LAND they bought and it wasn't actually 1 million, slightly under. A Bargain if you ask me. Yet they don't seem to have planning yet - which i guarantee they WILL get, the council will allow it as if the owner can build 3 homes if not more (which I expect 5) they will gain 5 points of council tax!!!! Although its a shame to see an old prefab from the war be demolished what else is supposed to happened to it. ?950,000 is cheap as chips in my eyes they should have sold it for more!!!!!!! Some people clearly have No clue on the value of the land they sit upon!

Do you think Peckham Rye has the cheapest land values in all of Southwark?



edhistory Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LondonMix Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Why

> > develop a few flats on a plot of land worth 1

> > million quid when you can sell the land and use

> > that 1 million quid to develop much more

> housing

> > on cheaper land elsewhere in the borough.

>

> Where is this cheaper land?

LondonMix Wrote:


> > Why

> > develop a few flats on a plot of land worth 1

> > million quid when you can sell the land and use

> > that 1 million quid to develop much more

> housing on cheaper land elsewhere in the borough.


> Where is this cheaper land?

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Or as someone said above, the council could have

> built new homes on it and sold a couple privately

> to pay for the homes to rent.


I don't think that would be a good move. More economical to develop larger sites.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I've used just about all the locally available supermarkets for deliveries over the years, and I now  use Waitrose for deliveries, for various reasons. They have a good range of the things I eat, their food is good quality and their "essentials" range is generally good value (except the tissues, which suddenly became so thin as to disintegrate immediately. I was mainly buying them for the nice plain boxes, so now I just put other tissues into the old Waitrose boxes 🤣) It is very rare for something I've ordered to not be available on the day. Their delivery drivers  are genuinely friendly and helpful. Their customer service is very good. On the rare occasions I've had issues, they have refunded me without quibbling. They often have special deals on some of the things I buy often, so I stock up when they are cheaper. I do occasionally compare prices with other supermarkets, and overall I really don't think Waitrose is more expensive, but obviously they might be for things I don't personally buy. I absolutely hate Sainsbury's, would use Lidl for some things but they don't deliver, Iceland has a very small range of things I eat, and I can't remember why I don't use Tesco or Asda any more. I recently checked out Ocado because there was some offer which seemed good value, but they just didn't have enough things I wanted to buy to make it worth using the offer. M&S don't deliver ( to the best of my knowledge) but in any case they seem to be still badly suffering from the recent hack into their system. Apologies, I have just remembered this thread is about shopping at actual physical stores, but probably many of the issues are the same.
    • Since I am of a certain vintage now, not sure if what I am going to suggest is even still around but here goes… use to be able to buy “dummy/mock papers on line and also had mini synopsis of Shakespeare plays specifically covering students wanting to gain a better understanding of play before taking mocks/ exams. Only know this as many many moons ago, struggled with English Literature and Language and this was the avenue-my parents went down. Also was at this point in my life, educated abroad as part of my fathers job.  
    • Love your comment about “shoehorned” - put a smile on my face..! As for comment about “Little Waitrose” ummmm - never really thought about it. Personally, could not care less. But guess Sainsbury Local and Tesco Express are to you more acceptable.. Ultimately, when I think about it, I actually don’t care what they call themselves - been lured by partially branding and partially convenience and what they offer in groceries.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...