Those wondering quite what Vince Cable meant in the FT last week by “examining innovative ideas, such as land auctions”, might imagine that Allsop is to help ease the national debt by offering thousands of public acres to the public at the Park Lane hotel.
Apparently not: the word is that the business secretary is hatching a cunning two-stage plan to lure councils into boosting housing supply. This will be done by allowing them to option agricultural land, and then reap the huge increase in price conferred by granting permission.
Stage 1: Owners are asked to submit bids showing how much they are willing to accept for their land. The hope is that many a penurious farmer will accept perhaps five times as much as the land is worth to another farmer. Say, £50,000 an acre instead of £10,000.
Stage 2: The council zones the optioned acres for housing: that land is then auctioned to developers and realises £2m an acre. The council pockets £1.95m. What could go wrong? Forget piddling 106 agreements: this way, the council hits the jackpot.
Or not: who would be mug enough to grant an option to an authority with power to increase the land value 40-fold, without demanding substantial overage? But don’t dismiss the idea. It was mooted in the FT in 2007 by Edward Davey. He is now an MP – and a minister under Cable.
Stay, duck, or run?
Every major agent has employees in the Middle East: spare a though for them today. But what will tomorrow bring? Short-term mayhem, long-term, who knows? No doubt CBRE, JLL, DTZ, Savills, Colliers and Cluttons are formulating contingency plans.
But what to do? Stay visible? Duck? Run? A long conversation last week with a member of a delegation of City business folk which visited rulers in Qatar and Bahrain offers a few scant clues.
Here they are, boiled down into scores on a scale of 1 (stay visible) through 5 (duck) to 10 (run): Dubai (1), Qatar (2), Abu Dhabi (4), Egypt (5), Bahrain (6), Saudi (7), Libya (14). But don’t count on them.
The Qataris appeared glad that Mubarak had gone, but seemed pretty relaxed, deploying the old argument that lavishing their own citizens with free public services means they remain submissive and never revolt. An argument also used by the Bahraini rulers
Topland dogfight
Sol and Eddie Zakay must be wishing they had never heard of First Avenue House in Holborn, bought by their company, Topland, from Standard Life in 2003 for £58m. Not only are they being sued for £17.5m by Standard Life, but also for £23m by the tenant, the Department for Constitutional Affairs.
The life company alleges its own agent, LSM Professional, conspired with the brothers to hide the fact that the DCA was happy to take a new lease on the family courts. The DCA alleges that Topland and LSM fooled it into paying too high a rent. Topland says that neither claim has any merit.
A police investigation in 2008 found no conspiracy case to answer. Legal factors forbid further comment. But do keep a watching brief on what could become a property cause célèbre.
Compromised? Moi?
It is time to once again rail uselessly against the propriety of local authorities having their passage to MIPIM oiled with private-sector cash. You might imagine 25% cuts would curb their enthusiasm for jetting to Cannes next month. Quite the reverse: this week, Croydon council boasts it is “pleased to be supported by an entirely privately-led consortium”.Needless to say, the supporters, including Stanhope and Schroders, are looking for council planning support.
Birmingham boasts a list of 20 backers for its “most interactive stand ever”, paid for by Argent, Bruntwood Savills, Hines, Moorfield What on earth is the use in going on?
