This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
COMMERCIAL


Office space lends itself to conversion to apartments, and it’s family houses that we need.’


For instance, a half an acre might have an industrial value of £150,000 to £200,000. A high density residential development could create as many as 30 flats on that space, which would have generated £800,000 to £1m at pre-crunch prices, and probably a bit short of that now. Guy Passey points out that commercial


to residential is already a well trodden path. “The trend has already gained momentum over the past couple of years,” he says, “and EA Shaw has been successful in helping developers convert offices that they can’t let. Some of our commercial clients who have never thought about residential before are now looking at it quite seriously.” For example, at Bull Inn Court, Covent


Garden, former office space was converted into 14 residential units, all of which were sold off plan. At 16 Stukeley Street, an adult educational college was converted into ten apartments, unusually, half for rent and half for sale.


A sad building in East London, once a knitwear factory, maybe soon to be


stunning homes.


THE CONCERNS So if conversion from commercial to residential space is already possible, why bother with the change of regulations? Guy Passey says one reason is that


different councils have very different policies on change of use. Westminster, for instance, tends to favour commercial to residential conversions, while Camden sees them as less desirable, which makes the planning process in that borough more difficult and lengthier. So far, conversions have tended to cluster in the ‘easier’ boroughs; a change in legislation would make development more even across the capital. But most conversions would require


In central London you could look at £650 a square foot value –


£1250 for residential.’ GUY PASSEY EA SHAW


changes to the exterior of the building, which would require planning permission even if change of use were permitted. Peter Bolton King of the NAEA says that the devil is in the detail; external works such as shop fronts and fascias, for instance. Philip Stewardson’s experience has been that new windows are often needed, again requiring permission. He is also skeptical about developing


flats above shops; though they sound like a good idea, the fact is that it’s nearly impossible for individuals to source


mortgage finance on them. “Where we develop this type, it’s purely as an investment” for rental income, he says. Another concern is that office space


generally lends itself to conversion to apartments, not houses. The market for apartments is fairly well supplied (in 2008- 9, half the total housing supply was in the form of 1 and 2 bedroom flats, according to Policy Exchange), while it’s single family houses which form the biggest area of shortage. And Philip Stewardson says the apartment market is dead - “Our lender is telling us that no one will be funding apartment schemes for the next five years, except in London.” He believes a much more radical


approach needs to be taken to the definition of land for employment use. For instance, the Austin Rover site in Birmingham is currently defined as for employment use, but he says “Many years after the car factory closed, the vast majority of the site remains unused. I’d be surprised if 5 percent of it is occupied, I drive past it quite regularly. Policy dictates that it’s land for employment use, but businesses now simply don’t employ 10,000 people or need that kind of space.” Redeveloping it for housing, in his view,


PROPERTYdrum APRIL 2012 33


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68