"It is true that foreign demand makes prices rise, but this is linked to the lack of land and planning that has not been adapted in height and densities to allow a more vertical city (Palma, that is). Putting all the responsibility on international buyers is wrong; they are only part of the story. Resident buyers rarely compete for the same product with foreigners who are looking for a second residence."
He says that there have long been differentiated niches in the islands' property market. "Sixty to seventy years ago, there were developments in tourist areas that were dedicated to foreign clients. Foreigners are now singled out for their involvement in the housing market. But the main reason there is no housing at an affordable price – say, between €200,000 and €250,000 – is that it is impossible to build it at these prices. It simply cannot be done."
Of one government initiative to provide more public housing - expropriation from large owners - he is critical of the fact that "the result is 30 homes with which you do not solve the problem". "And with the development of public housing, which is very commendable, you don't solve anything either, considering the amount it creates. The developers estimate that around 20,000 are needed to meet the current housing demand. while the government speaks of 7,000 a year. But production is below 3,000 and continues to decline. We are going in the opposite direction to what is needed. It is an endemic evil that will impoverish us. Ironically so, because at the same time it is what generates 70% of tax revenue."
He points to initiatives elsewhere. "Vienna has had a public housing development for 100 years by which public land is ceded to develop housing for sale or rent. It costs the administration nothing because it is public land. After around 40 years, once the investment cycle is over and when developers have taken their share, buildings become the full property of the city council."
Lenz has strongly condemned the Més proposal to limit the sale of properties to foreigners. "When political parties raise certain things, I think they should have done an in-depth study of the subject beforehand, because they can confuse people and create a confrontation that leads nowhere. Restricting freedoms framed in the European Union is not going to lead to the desired result; it is a dead end. We should have had this debate 20 years ago. We must now provide solutions from a union of the property sector and the government in order to find formulas that produce a type of housing that doesn't exist at present."
5 comments
To be able to write a comment, you have to be registered and logged in
In my opinion greedy people are bond to justify themselves. They usually put the focus somewhere else to avoid awareness of the real situation and the people who are the ones to be blamed for. An island has a limited territory and it must be preserved. Preservation is not provided by building more and more (maybe that's something in which real state agencies and building companies are interested in). There are countries in which the adquisition of properties by foreign people is regulated (even in Europe Mr. Hanz). This man talks about that as "restricting freedoms" but this comment is manipulating our vision of reality: housing is a right, and islanders who are not land owners, should not be" restricted" by the fact that some people want to invest on the Balearic islands, not to live, but to speculate for bussiness. Yes, Mr Lenz, luxurious second residences are something we cannot afford but atract people who make pressure in our territory, forcing more villas to be built and prices to be risen. Although there is not evident, there is indirect cause-consequence relationship between the proliferation of foreign real state agencies and rising housing prices. As an islander I didn' t have time to make numbers to adcquire the house I had rented in the Summer. A foreign man, who had already bought a house in the village, bought the house (another one). Maybe he was thinking to set it as a vacational house. I just wanted my dreamed house to live with my pets as a first residence, not as a second one -let me say-. If government had a good regulation, this kind of practises should be forbidden (anyway I betthis kind of people would find other formulas). Human Rights talk about discrimination for sex, race or religion but the UN didn't mention discrimination for economic reasons. Our salaries cannot compete with salaries from other places in Europe, yes. It is a reality and the weak and vulnerable must be protected: I mean, people from here and the TERRITORY. Why should be build more? Why should be use public land to be built with buildings that, without regulation, will fall in foreign hands as well as a decade goes by? Many of us don't want to live in Indian Reserves. Notes: Hanz Lenz doesn't mention that in Malta and Denmark property laws are quite different from here, are in the EU and "restrict selfish greed" (which he calls freedom -for advantaged people with whom we cannot economically compete-)
The biggest problem from my perspective isn't exactly foreign ownership of property but non-resident ownership. This goes for the large portion of owners from mainland Spain. Essentially, any ownership that results in a property being empty most of the time is a really bad thing. Saying that Palma should go upwards to increase density isn't the answer as would change Palma in a way that wouldn't be positive. We really don't need more… we need to use what we have in a much better fashion. And for what its worth, I am looking to move into something larger and more central to Palma. Foreign buyers have in fact made this task for me significantly more difficult and significantly more costly. To a point where I am reconsidering this action. Sure I won't be the norm for the resident buyer however one needs to be very mindful that while I don't move, the place where I am currently living doesn't then go on the market for someone else who would in fact be the normal resident buyer… and most likely it will go to a foreign buyer. So that's a double whammy!
There is plenty of publicly owned land available. The old prison and guardia civil sites in Palma for example. And there is no need to build on 'green land' as there are plenty of brown field sites available. For some reason all governments and councils of all political parties don't seem capable of building enough social housing. Why? Is it a lack of money? And as has been said elsewhere, there are already thousands of empty and abandoned properties. Who owns them and why are they not being used?
He does have a point. But in addition to new building, there are also thousands and thousands of existing empty properties that could be renovated. Perhaps Andrew has a figure for this? The issue is local councils make it almost impossible to reform. They are incredibly slow taking years to agree simple building reforms and improvements. They also restrict building to such a level it becomes too expensive for the average person. Introducing a fair, quicker and more effective system could free up existing houses for families. It’s certainly not the whole solution - but a mixed approach is probably the best option? And it would have the additional benefit of breathing new life into decaying and crumbling buildings. A win win.
There are many solutions, most are very avant garde compared to the current building activity. Architects, builders and town councils are all complicit in minimum effort for maximum gain, resulting in the same boring uneconomical housing going up every day on this island. They have to think outside the box, please excuse the pun.