Mr. President of the Assembly of the Republic,
Dear Members of Parliament,
As is well known, changes have recently been made to the Legal Framework for Territorial Management Instruments (RJIGT), which allow construction on rustic land and its reclassification according to a simplified procedure.
The changes now introduced will not solve the housing problem, but rather fragment rustic land and worsen territorial disorder, without reducing the cost of housing.
In fact, on the one hand, the regime now introduced allows construction carried out under it to be excluded from any control of the sale price by 300/1000 of the area under construction; and, on the other hand, the definition of the criterion of the moderate value of the dwelling as “any dwelling in which the price per m2 of gross private area does not exceed the value of the median selling price per m2 of dwelling for the national territory or, if higher, 125% of the value of the median selling price per m2 of dwelling for the municipality in which the property is located, up to a maximum of 225% of the value of the national median” will, in practice, mean an increase in the average price of housing and, consequently, the difficulty/impossibility of access to ‘decent and affordable’ housing for the majority of the population will be maintained.
What's more, this regime runs completely counter to national public interests and the principles that govern land use planning (as the President of the Republic has also emphasized) and, in particular, the objectives set out and enshrined in the RJIGT, which expressly adopted as a paradigm the containment of urban areas and the preservation of rural land, in line with international agreements and the objectives of combating climate change, regenerating land and protecting nature to which the Portuguese state is bound.
Let's be clear: the (cyclical) housing crisis is due to the real estate bubble that has been developing. It is not a structural crisis and does not result from the lack of properties on the market. It is simply the result of the price that these properties, in very specific urban areas (particularly in the metropolitan areas of Lisbon and Porto), have been acquiring, as a result of real estate speculation and the mechanisms for attracting foreign investment that have been in place, particularly over the last 15 years (e.g. gold visas and NHR).
No country that values sustainability (economic, environmental, intergenerational) can allow the destruction of rustic areas (forest and agricultural) and their conversion into urban land, with the impacts on biodiversity that this will bring, allocating plots of rustic land even in agricultural and ecological reserve areas to housing, and allowing, on top of that, a 20% increase in construction on these plots (of which only 700/1000 should be for sale at a moderate cost). To allow this, especially when we are living in a climate emergency, is to mortgage the future.
The use, as justification, in the preamble to the new law, of the argument that “data from the National Statistics Institute, I. P., for 2024, confirm an overall negative trend in the number of dwellings completed in new construction for family housing, which, for example, in 2002, were around 125,000 dwellings, as opposed to around 22,000 dwellings in 2022” is a fallacy: the completion of this number of homes in 2002 took place after a cycle of international economic growth and low interest rates, unlike 2022, the year in which the impact of the covid-19 pandemic ended, and in which not only is the scenario in terms of interest rates different from that of 2002, but conflicts, international tensions and rising raw material costs have generated a markedly diverse/adverse economic environment in recent years. In addition, the resident population in Portugal has grown very moderately (as a result of positive migratory growth), and the number of properties far exceeds the needs of the resident population. Furthermore, although the growth of the housing stock between 2011 and 2021 slowed down, what did increase significantly was the number of overcrowded family dwellings, which grew by 17.1%. This is not due to a shortage of properties: even in urban areas there is no shortage of properties for sale and many of those that are sold remain unoccupied. It's due to the lack of purchasing power of the majority of the Portuguese population, whose incomes remain low and have in no way kept up with the growth in housing prices, resulting both from the increase in the price of construction materials and raw materials, and from external demand.
The application of the Moderate Value criterion (allowing the sale price to be higher than the municipal and/or national average) will only aggravate this inability of the majority of the population to access housing, due to the general increase in housing prices, even in areas where this price was previously lower than the municipal or national median. In other words, it will extend the problem geographically instead of reducing it.
The changes now enshrined do not control the cost of building materials; they do not set limits on the prices practiced in the market in general (and, consequently, do not prevent the average price from rising); they do not regulate prices in the rental market; they do not establish restrictions on the purchase of properties by citizens from outside the European Union; they do not eliminate tax exemptions for non-permanent residents (who have average income levels much higher than those of the Portuguese population); they don't create a public housing stock; they don't create tax mechanisms to support and encourage renting or home ownership for the majority of the population; and, as a result, they will only allow real estate speculation, the squandering of agricultural and forest land and the destruction of (what little) remains of land use planning.
What's more, the new regime seems to be aimed only at real estate developers, benefiting them, since it will hardly be applicable to a private individual who owns rustic land and wants to develop it for himself.
What's more, this decree-law makes pari passu use of totally vague and indeterminate concepts and allows certain urban criteria to also be subject to a simplified procedure for amending territorial management instruments, without any reason being given for this. This is the case with changing the number of floors and the maximum height of buildings and various other criteria mentioned in points b) to g) of paragraph 1 of the new wording of Article 123, which have nothing to do with the issue of increasing the number of plots of land for housing construction. These changes will only contribute to worsening the disorder of the national urban landscape.
In Cascais (and particularly in Carcavelos) we have seen the practical application of what this regime extends to the whole territory, without any effect on reducing the price of housing.
According to data from the last Census, between 2011 and 2021, the resident population in Cascais increased by 3.7% (from 206,479 to 214,134 inhabitants), the average monthly earnings of employees remained close to €1,200 throughout this period, and the price of a m2, which was €1,833/m2 in January 2015, rose to €5,259/m2 in December 2024, and may already exceed €8,000/m2 in many cases.
In other words, allowing construction in ecologically sensitive areas, in areas that are already densely urbanized and in all interstitial areas or areas adjacent to urban land, with total disregard for environmental values and the quality of life of present and future populations, has had no positive impact on housing prices. On the contrary, it has worsened significantly.
These political choices have irreversible and catastrophic consequences for the landscape and the environment, permanently compromising the balance and quality of urban and natural space. This is the case with Quinta dos Ingleses and all the other significant green areas in the municipality within the urban perimeter.
So let's repeat: increasing supply does not contribute to lower housing prices. As it stands, it will only aggravate real estate speculation, worsening imbalances, jeopardizing land use planning and contradicting the principles and goals needed to combat global warming.
he need to preserve our “common home”, the climate emergency we are experiencing, the principles of sustainability and the recent events in Los Angeles and Valencia demand that we look at the territory in a diametrically opposed way to that enshrined in this law and that it be repealed.
The housing crisis cannot be solved by destroying land and hastily converting rural land into urban land. Let the Assembly of the Republic understand this and guarantee compliance with the rules and principles to which Portugal is bound internationally, in the light of a humanist paradigm worthy of the current millennium and not merely speculative visions.
Carcavelos, January 16, 2025,
The Board
1) See the United Nations reports, the Nature Restoration Act, the proposal for a European Soil Monitoring Directive, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Habitats Directive and the Bern Convention, in addition to the Basic Law on the Environment and the principles enshrined in the RJIGT.
5) Much lower than the European average.
6) A significant reduction in the tax on income from urban rentals would be enough to bring many currently unoccupied properties onto the market and for there to be a significant transition to the traditional rental market for properties currently operated under the LA regime.
7) There is no definition of, for example, “cases in which the purpose is residential or related to residential purposes and complementary uses”, “demonstrated needs to safeguard values of public interest that are relevant in environmental, patrimonial, economic and social terms”, “burdens of urban operations, (... ) and the conditions for redistributing benefits and burdens, considering all the urban costs involved”, ‘The consolidation and coherence of the urbanization to be developed with the existing urban area is ensured’, ‘General and local infrastructures exist or are guaranteed, as well as the necessary collective use equipment and adequate green spaces to cover the needs arising from the new uses’, “the necessary measures must be planned and implemented to safeguard the preservation of fundamental natural values and functions, as well as the necessary measures to prevent and mitigate risks to people and property”, ‘depends on the existence, in the continuity of the area covered, of a land use regime that allows for harmonious unity’.