Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Frank Hovis

Stop Being Self-Sufficient And Tear Down That Shed

Recommended Posts

And now off to France. What stupid planning laws we have, I'm sure the council would have been much happier if they went on the housing register and lived off benefits in a subsidised council house.

'Good Life' couple who lived in shed in a remote field have been ordered to demolish self-sufficient home by council

Couple built the two-bedroom cabin in their field four years ago

Daniel and Lora Newman have now demolished the 5m x 6m cabin

The couple are going to move to France with their two children

article-2474874-18F352E500000578-211_634x423.jpg

article-2474874-18F352D800000578-100_634x352.jpg

article-2474874-18F3520E00000578-890_634x403.jpg

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2474874/Daniel-Lora-Newman-ordered-tear-home-built-permission.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference being, these people owned the land and it appears the dwelling is fairly concealed. This is a world away from a bunch of Romanians setting up camp in the local park and eating the swans. I just don't see the problem with it. And if you've bought some land, why shouldn't you live on it if you choose?

Simple guidelines could be written up to prevent mansions going up and dwellings limited to a couple of rooms. Why not create a rule that stipulates the dwelling must be largely concealed? It says a lot that even in this day and age of "green policy", planning permission is still being used to support house prices and crush anyone who genuinely wants to live an eco friendly existence.

Planning permission stinks in the UK. I honestly hate it :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure of just letting shanty towns crop up everywhere.

I do think land needs to be wrested forcibly away from the Normans and given up to properly planned developments.

What if you saw a picture of a Somali refugee family or gypsies with 13 kids or just ugly people. Would that change your opinion even if you think you are liberal?

Yeah I'm with you,

The reality of a planning free-for-all would be very, very ugly.

The Swiss can do it (apart from in Geneva which is worse than the UK) - land is available and affordable(though not cheap) to private developers, but it's all controlled, you can't build any old sh1te and you must respect the local environment. It's not rocket science. Right now most new builds are rapidly approaching being zero net emissions because all the legislation pushes people in that direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I'm with you,

The reality of a planning free-for-all would be very, very ugly.

The Swiss can do it (apart from in Geneva which is worse than the UK) - land is available and affordable(though not cheap) to private developers, but it's all controlled, you can't build any old sh1te and you must respect the local environment. It's not rocket science. Right now most new builds are rapidly approaching being zero net emissions because all the legislation pushes people in that direction.

I agree there has to be rules to stop shanty towns being built.....I have been to places and it is not a pretty site. :P;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

land is available and affordable(though not cheap) to private developers, but it's all controlled, you can't build any old sh1te and you must respect the local environment.

Have a mate who works in Geneva but bought a plot of land up towards Fribourg !!!. Anyway turned out the plot he bought was too narrow to legally put a house on, so he had to buy another meter from his neighbours! Bet they saw him coming.

Even though he is in the middle of nowhere (there is a branch line that runs to his village though) I didn't get the impression it was a cheap option.

As for the people above, they should have claimed to be Roma Gypsies and got all the human rights groups to defend them. I must say he has a nice skunk weed plantation, doing well under natural sunlight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moving to France to get away from petty bureaucracy? Think they're going to be sorely disappointed :(

At some levels yes, but we have many of the same rules appplied here too.

Having said that the opportunities to disassociate yourself with bubbles and housing limitations is far greater there. Most small towns have development zones where it is possible to pick up a plot for a reasonable price and there are vast numbers of other older properties which can be picked up cheap with land making a more off grid lifestyle possible where you can get out of it pretty much what you put in - not having to pay the price that some bank places on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a mate who works in Geneva but bought a plot of land up towards Fribourg !!!.

Oddly enough am considering something like that. Tired of living in an (extremely expensive) apartment.

You can buy about 800m2 in a pleasant little village for about 150-250k CHF, not cheap by any means but compares pretty favourably with the UK and France when earnings/taxes/climate/quality are considered. Think a C permit is required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moving to France to get away from petty bureaucracy? Think they're going to be sorely disappointed :(

I see your point but for living in a shed on your own land and growing stuff they'll be better off in France.

As long as they don't pick a termite zone :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference being, these people owned the land and it appears the dwelling is fairly concealed. This is a world away from a bunch of Romanians setting up camp in the local park and eating the swans. I just don't see the problem with it. And if you've bought some land, why shouldn't you live on it if you choose?

Simple guidelines could be written up to prevent mansions going up and dwellings limited to a couple of rooms. Why not create a rule that stipulates the dwelling must be largely concealed? It says a lot that even in this day and age of "green policy", planning permission is still being used to support house prices and crush anyone who genuinely wants to live an eco friendly existence.

Planning permission stinks in the UK. I honestly hate it :angry:

As a matter of curiosity why do you feel a small house would be okay but not a mansion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a matter of curiosity why do you feel a small house would be okay but not a mansion?

Because a one level shed or house is not going to be as visible as a mansion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of images I bumped into this morning for reasons completely unrelated to this thread...

2lt57w1.jpg

Yes, pretty horrible looking. And completely avoidable with simple planning legislation that allows small dwellings each surrounded by an area of open land.

The British public sometimes get what they deserve with housing I think. When new ideas are put forward, they reject them outright & throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because a one level shed or house is not going to be as visible as a mansion.

...and when times are hard and bones are weak you could sell off part of your garden for another shed to be built.......you could then build another shed and rent it out for an income/pension....on it goes. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple guidelines could be written up to prevent mansions going up and dwellings limited to a couple of rooms. Why not create a rule that stipulates the dwelling must be largely concealed?

I sympathise and agree that the planning regs in the UK are sometimes perverse. Wasnt there a story recently about some folks who made a hobbit house is Wales or somewhere but were ordered to tear it down for some bizarre reason?

But the problem with saying "lets make something that says some people can do x" is that you pretty quickly end up with legislation thats horrendously complicated and full of loop holes that people with enough money can exploit.

Inevitably, the simple guidelines would end up being nothing more than a loophole that only the big developers can exploit.

Maybe what I'm trying to say is that we should burn the statute books and start again from the ground up rather than tinkering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   209 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.