Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
OnlyMe

Planners A Dismal Failure

Recommended Posts

Time to sack the planners and get in some people who will do the job properly.

What a mess, so much for economic mobility - stifled and it is accentuating the demographic problem.

Alternative I suppose is to move to a country that does not see the benefit of holding its population over a barrel and making them live in rabbit hutches.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1735220,00.html

Too many homes are just too small

By Joanna Bale

BRITAIN’S homes are just not big enough, according to research that reveals a glut of two-bedroom flats and a shortage of three-bedroom family houses.

Developers are making matters worse by continuing to build too many two-bedroom apartments, it is claimed.

Many developers blame government planning policy, which encourages high-density developments, even outside urban areas. Others say that people cannot afford to buy larger homes so there is no point building them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Time to sack the planners and get in some people who will do the job properly.

What a mess, so much for economic mobility - stifled and it is accentuating the demographic problem.

Alternative I suppose is to move to a country that does not see the benefit of holding its population over a barrel and making them live in rabbit hutches.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1735220,00.html

Too many homes are just too small

By Joanna Bale

BRITAIN’S homes are just not big enough, according to research that reveals a glut of two-bedroom flats and a shortage of three-bedroom family houses.

Developers are making matters worse by continuing to build too many two-bedroom apartments, it is claimed.

Many developers blame government planning policy, which encourages high-density developments, even outside urban areas. Others say that people cannot afford to buy larger homes so there is no point building them.

This p!ss holes will crash in a big way.

I think the future will deal with properties like this and the 2 up 2 down new mews houses that have been piled up also since the mid-90's - and sold in housing association format - in two ways:

1) Buying in adjacent pairs, mostly by investors, to knock through creating single proper sized houses fit for human habitation.

or

2) Complete redevelopment of the sites.

Once land becomes sensibly priced again there will be the opportunity for individuals to see over the building a proper house also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Time to sack the planners and get in some people who will do the job properly.

You were doing well with the first half of the sentence, until you added the second half :).

'Planning' is the problem, not the solution. I don't see how some Glorious People's Central Planning Committee can possibly make better decisions than the people who choose whether or not to buy a house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You were doing well with the first half of the sentence, until you added the second half :).

'Planning' is the problem, not the solution. I don't see how some Glorious People's Central Planning Committee can possibly make better decisions than the people who choose whether or not to buy a house.

Err, yes you are right.

Put it this way with so much of the economy reliant on the property industry you could say our economy will be knackered unless they sort this out.

My bet is that they don't sort it out, all attempts will be made to hold prices at or around this level, buildiong will be dense and unattractive in design and transactions will plummet once the last few desperado's unwillling to wait take the plunge, then all the money that would normally spin round the system as people move and spend will dissipate leading to recession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You were doing well with the first half of the sentence, until you added the second half :).

'Planning' is the problem, not the solution. I don't see how some Glorious People's Central Planning Committee can possibly make better decisions than the people who choose whether or not to buy a house.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. Its builders that are the problem not planners. The housing density requirements are based around large Victorian terrace houses that still exist in places like Derby, Faversham....

Sensible designed you can easily build an estate of 4 bed homes and easily meet the density criteria. Unfortunately you cannot also provide parking for 4 cars and the same number of houses so builders are left with flats or rabbit runs as the only alternative.

Oh and planners only either approve or disapprove what a builder brings to the drawing board. They can recommend and advice but if the builder won't listen nowt can be done (apart from refusing, winning his appeal attempt and hoping that the next plans are somewhat better).

Edited by eek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its builders that are the problem not planners.

Something like 93% of the UK is not built on. Were it not for the need for 'planning permission', builders' decisions would be largely irrelevant: anyone could buy a piece of land and have their house built to their specification.

The whole 'planning permission' scam keeps the supply of houses artificially low and the cost artificially high: the only people who benefit are those who make money from high house prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Something like 93% of the UK is not built on. Were it not for the need for 'planning permission', builders' decisions would be largely irrelevant: anyone could buy a piece of land and have their house built to their specification.

The whole 'planning permission' scam keeps the supply of houses artificially low and the cost artificially high: the only people who benefit are those who make money from high house prices.

And that you can blame on the Conservative Government of 1955. You may also wish to visit Northern Ireland and witness what your wish actually looks like (although you cannot just pick a site and build on it, you need to find an old house / wreck and replace it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've said this before and I'll say it again. Its builders that are the problem not planners. The housing density requirements are based around large Victorian terrace houses that still exist in places like Derby, Faversham....

Sensible designed you can easily build an estate of 4 bed homes and easily meet the density criteria. Unfortunately you cannot also provide parking for 4 cars and the same number of houses so builders are left with flats or rabbit runs as the only alternative.

Oh and planners only either approve or disapprove what a builder brings to the drawing board. They can recommend and advice but if the builder won't listen nowt can be done (apart from refusing, winning his appeal attempt and hoping that the next plans are somewhat better).

I agree with your hypothesis concerning builders to some extent but consider that all of thoses well built Victorian houses had cellars. Big cellars. Big enough for a double garage and another two cars on a drive gently sloping down.

Fact is, builders do it on the cheap (sounds like a sexual innuendo car sticker!) and could easily construct a modern Victorian three story plus cellar garage semi if they wanted.

Like everything else in today's society, we only get offered the lowest common denominator...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

93% is not build on

i hope it stays that way.

the problem is one of quality not of density.

for instance who wouldnt love one of they georgian or victorian terrace houses the like of central london has, there beautifull looking houses that are built to last, and there as densly packed as anything else.

Or take a look at edinburgh with the stone tenanments and row upon row of old solid built flats that look quite lovley.

its the crappy brown stone cladded concrete block hell holes that are the problem, if they built these new properties in the traditional way we would all want to live in them, there would be enough room for all.

They do this in cumbria, there houses have to be built in the traditional manner to fit into the scheme of things, and because of this they have avoided the pitfalls of most areas.Go to cumbria today and you can hardly tell the diffrence in quality or design from a house built in 2000 to one built in 1900.

its not density thats the problem, its quality

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The whole 'planning permission' scam keeps the supply of houses artificially low and the cost artificially high: the only people who benefit are those who make money from high house prices.

Another group who benefit are those who have land to sell with planning permission. Can someone please tell me who these people are?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 301 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.