As we drive round Italy, especially in the South, we see many unfinished buildings ... often concrete skeletons without roofs or walls. What economic forces encourage so much construction to be started and so readily abandoned? Are people staking claims to plots of land? Is there some weird tax incentive?
Posts: 966 | Location: West Sussex, England | Registered: 08 February 2007
In Abruzzo these structures are neither abandoned nor were they built illegally. Property taxes are very low so it costs next to nothing to hold onto a shell over the years. Also, historically real estate has been a relatively safe place to put your soldi. Perhaps most importantly, many of these shells were built with the idea that they would someday be inhabited by the owner's children, grandchildren, nieces and nephews, etc etc.
It's like Nick says except that you need to save a LOT of money and buy the land.... then save a LOT MORE money to build the shell and finally (if you live long enough!) put together a WHOLE LOT more money to finish it off!!! At that point YOU die and your children (grown adults by then!) enjoy it...
Around the Mediterranean and in Central and South America I've seen a lot of homes that are finished and occupied, but have concrete reinforcement bar of various lengths sticking out of the top floor. I always have assumed they plan to add on another floor some day if they need it or can afford it, and aren't concerned about the look of the re-bar.
________________ When life gives you lemons, make limoncello.
We've been watching my wife's cousins building new homes for over 10 years. One of them finally finished and it is a thing of beauty....just what you would expect when everything is hand built to owner specs.
The other set of cousins is probably still 2 or 3 years away from finishing, but the whole family plugs away at the construction and it must be quite a special feeling to live in a home that was truly family built (probably just like the 200 year old home they now live in)
Posts: 724 | Location: Northern Virginia | Registered: 22 May 2006
I used to think they were just abandoned, but then I learned that in a lot of cases it is as Nick pointed out. Sometimes they have a very long wait, as my friends did that I wrote about in my article, The House That Patience Built.
I also recall being told that there used to be tax advantages for construction - that needed you to start, but not finish. Not sure if this is still the case.
regards
Ian
Drink coffee, do stupid things faster
Posts: 306 | Location: UK | Registered: 20 September 2008
I'm glad to see this question posted. We wondered about this when we visited the south of Italy in 2005. I think there must be something more than just families building slowly..otherwise you would see it just the same in the north and we didn't.
The unfinished buildings were so numerous and seemed to me to be at about the same stage of construction. It makes more sense to me that there was some local tax situation or building code requirement that encouraged this.
Originally posted by LynK: I think there must be something more than just families building slowly..otherwise you would see it just the same in the north and we didn't.
The north is nearly 2 times richer than the south, "up there" they start and they finish.
quote:
Originally posted by LynK: It makes more sense to me that there was some local tax situation or building code requirement that encouraged this.
I asked my boss if she knows about a tax law that could explain this. Answer: "Today no, it's quite the opposite. Maybe once there was some post-war law made to help people during the contruction. I don't know, I'm not so old. Anyway, why aren't you doing what you're paied for?". We agreed that: 70% of the cases Nick z is right.
20% they were building where they couldn't. The city stopped the works and ordered demolition, the owner appelead... and now they are all waiting for a judge to speak.
9,999% they hope that some day in the future local zoning will be changed from "agricolture only" to "residential" or "industry". If so, the land would double its value and they'd finish the building.
Consider also the hypotesis of some buildings being public. Public works are awarded by an auction procedure, the firm offering to do the work for the lowest price gets the job. A firm asks a very low and probably irrealistic price, they get the job. They begin, and after some time they "discover" that some modifications to the original project are necessary, thus raising the price. Jobs are stopped till the new price is approved, and again after a while some modifications are required, a new price, and so on. By careful planning a local politician may delay works for almost an infinite time, probably getting some soap money behind the scenes at regular intervals from the firm getting the raises. And building the thing takes forever.
Maybe the wealth of the north is the reason this isn't the situation there, but I don't recall seeing buildings like this at all in the north. It just doesn't ring true to me that if this is a "family building slowly" situation that just being 2X wealthier would completely eliminate the practice from the north. Not everybody who wants to build a house is going to be 2X wealthier.
The unfinished buildings in the south all seemed to be at a similar stage of development...lots of concrete foundations and floors built, but no walls, etc. If families were completing them slowly they would naturally be in different phases, wouldn't they?. These just looked so abandoned at about the same stage.
My husband wondered if there was some deal where the people who own the concrete companies in the south pushed somehow to get a lot of structures started to sell the concrete.
I was told that the landowners were being farsighted. Every so often there is an amnesty for illegal buildings so, if they want to build sometime in the future or maybe sell it as a development property, it is in their interest to have some sort of construction on the site and so be covered by the amnesty. It's easier and cheaper than going through the planning process.
