Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
shindigger

Permission Impossible

Recommended Posts

they're alright jack.... and also all over 60

Yep...never seen such a collection of me me me old gits in one place. utterly incapable of putting themselves in anyone else's position.

You'd think theyve all got terminal cancer of something the way they moan, rather than having to 'endure' someone daring to have somewhere to live near them. Complete scum.

Bet they've all got very nice pensions paid for by the very people they're denying homes to as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last resort of the embattled NIMBY...

Bring out that barn owl!!

Who will promptly be shot to dust by the local "vermin" shoot.

Vermin loosely defined as something that ******s up the mass production of tame pheasants to blow out of the sky next year.

Signed

An ex "Beater".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the show all the right decisions were made, it actually sounded like the new govt rules stop stupid planning rejections.

I'd have the objectors pay the cost of opposition and bankrupted where necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watching this on iplayer now. It would be nice to see some opinion from embers of the public that support more house building. A load of old codgers objecting because they have nothing better to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watching this on iplayer now. It would be nice to see some opinion from embers of the public that support more house building. A load of old codgers objecting because they have nothing better to do.

But their families have been living there 400 years (the woman who looked like an extra from league of gentlemen) or since 1991 (the tenant farmer)

I wonder if the local woman told the tenant farmer to bugger off back in 1991 too?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* Planners recommend new development 'cause there's no reason to reject it

* Councillors driven to site in a bus paid for by taxpayers but refuse to get out and look at site 'cause "I don't do rain"

* Councillors vote against application 'cause "I used to go to school near there and I'm upset"

* Steve Morgan (Redrow boss) says "I sell my houses to future NIMBYs"

* NIMBYs object to new builds despite themselves living in a houses which is clearly only 20 or so years old

If you thought MPs were a load of c0cks, you ain't seen nothing until you've heard a local councillor open their gob. Breathtaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who will promptly be shot to dust by the local "vermin" shoot.

Vermin loosely defined as something that ******s up the mass production of tame pheasants to blow out of the sky next year.

Signed

An ex "Beater".

HA!!!!! A recent planning app. i viewed mentioned the elusive 'barn owl'

Howeverm , the silly NIMBY mare even ticked the 'support' the application box such was her furious state of mind...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think people would complain so much if lower density estates were legally allowed? You know like the ones the NIMBY's live on.

I have seen some horrendous estate built since 2004 - the reason is the government enforced planning LAW saying that you must build high density estates, this is true even if you are building in a small country village where land use is not an issue. Obviously it make sense in and around cities.

The law needs changing to allow building of low density estates outside of major urban areas - you would quickly see NIMBYism diminish.

Admit it, who really wants a densely populated Barrats estate next door?

Now who would object at a development of 10 house per hectare built next door?

When you cut through the overblown emotional clap trap you can clearly see that it's the law that is creating the house building issues. the con-dems reform didn't touch this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On now BBC2

Watching some "retired Insurance executive" in his 60's objecting to a restaurant (nowhere near his house) increasing the size of their smoking area. He is a serial objector apparently - "time to get out the pen again"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think people would complain so much if lower density estates were legally allowed? You know like the ones the NIMBY's live on.

I have seen some horrendous estate built since 2004 - the reason is the government enforced planning LAW saying that you must build high density estates, this is true even if you are building in a small country village where land use is not an issue. Obviously it make sense in and around cities.

The law needs changing to allow building of low density estates outside of major urban areas - you would quickly see NIMBYism diminish.

Admit it, who really wants a densely populated Barrats estate next door?

Now who would object at a development of 10 house per hectare built next door?

When you cut through the overblown emotional clap trap you can clearly see that it's the law that is creating the house building issues. the con-dems reform didn't touch this issue.

Exactly.

It seems that every new build estate is packed like sardines now and have higher elevations (even though they are still only 2 story, and they don't sit well with the existing housing stock especially in rural areas.

I agree that there would be far far less opposition if housing was built at lower densities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any kind of anti-NIMBY association?

If not, shall we start one?

My favourite NIMBY case got thrown out of the high court recently - couple bought a house next to Mildenhall USAF base on the final approach flight path for huge transport planes. There is a a motorcross track and a speedway / stock car stadium up the road that has been there since the 1970s, so naturally, they are OK with the planes coming over at all hours of the day and night, but want the track closed to prevent it disturbing their peace for a few hours a week, as that is entirely logical. Hope something heavy falls off a plane and flattens their house when they are out - nasty, selfish, calculating NIMBY scum.

Edited by disenfranchised

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On now BBC2

Watching some "retired Insurance executive" in his 60's objecting to a restaurant (nowhere near his house) increasing the size of their smoking area. He is a serial objector apparently - "time to get out the pen again"

On the plus side all the NIMBY's will be dead soon and the under 50s can built whatever they want wherever they want at whatever density to their hearts content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the plus side all the NIMBY's will be dead soon and the under 50s can built whatever they want wherever they want at whatever density to their hearts content.

ha, theres a constant turnover of them. I dont think its a generational (ie boomer) thing, rather just an ever present pensionable age group with too much time on their hands who get a bee in their bonnet over something inconsequential. Many of them probably had quite senior positions during their career and cant cope without being 'listened to' or having an impact on decision making.

. Whenever ive read local newspapers and theres been articles about car vandals, its more often than not a little scrote, but the rest of the time some old git annoyed someone dared park in front of their house (on the public highway of course). Or every so often a cat gets poisoned because dear little maureen thinks it took a shit on her ever so important flower bed. Theres actually a little old lady on my street every one knows about, she's threatened to sue every neighbour for stuff like a bush from their property having a branch growing through her fence. One guy painted his garage door and one drop of paint went on her driveway. She involved the lawyers for that too. Shes also taken to erecting dozens of 'no ball games' on the open space :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of them probably had quite senior positions during their career and cant cope without being 'listened to' or having an impact on decision making.

Can understand that.

My Grandfather was a company director, retired, expects peace and quiet - but no! Grandmother has had years of 'me time' at home all day on her own, feels put out, so now the happy retirement becomes a hell of being constantly nagged and shooed about in the house you worked to put over you both - made him go a bit batshit, I could easily see how 'enraged of tunbridge wells' or NIMBY syndrome could develop. I keep telling my Dad that we'll get Mum signed off and sent away somewhere if she does it to him, I think the poor man is terrified of retirement already to be honest :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ha, theres a constant turnover of them. I dont think its a generational (ie boomer) thing, rather just an ever present pensionable age group with too much time on their hands who get a bee in their bonnet over something inconsequential. Many of them probably had quite senior positions during their career and cant cope without being 'listened to' or having an impact on decision making.

. Whenever ive read local newspapers and theres been articles about car vandals, its more often than not a little scrote, but the rest of the time some old git annoyed someone dared park in front of their house (on the public highway of course). Or every so often a cat gets poisoned because dear little maureen thinks it took a shit on her ever so important flower bed. Theres actually a little old lady on my street every one knows about, she's threatened to sue every neighbour for stuff like a bush from their property having a branch growing through her fence. One guy painted his garage door and one drop of paint went on her driveway. She involved the lawyers for that too. Shes also taken to erecting dozens of 'no ball games' on the open space :blink:

banksy_tottenham_2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of them probably had quite senior positions during their career and cant cope without being 'listened to' or having an impact on decision making.

King Lear Syndrome?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think people would complain so much if lower density estates were legally allowed? You know like the ones the NIMBY's live on.

I have seen some horrendous estate built since 2004 - the reason is the government enforced planning LAW saying that you must build high density estates, this is true even if you are building in a small country village where land use is not an issue. Obviously it make sense in and around cities.

The law needs changing to allow building of low density estates outside of major urban areas - you would quickly see NIMBYism diminish.

Admit it, who really wants a densely populated Barrats estate next door?

Now who would object at a development of 10 house per hectare built next door?

When you cut through the overblown emotional clap trap you can clearly see that it's the law that is creating the house building issues. the con-dems reform didn't touch this issue.

This is exactly the problem. For years around me, the only houses that got built were the 5-bed executive McMansions, which no local could possibly afford. Now, they want to plant several hundred hutches in the vicinity which would overwhelm the local infrastructure, and of course, owners of said McMansion are not happy, let alone the locals who still won't be able to afford the new houses.

Sane planning would have allowed incremental growth which would have been well-integrated into the locality. Now TPTB propose catch-up by ruining the aesthetics completely, rubbishing all those decades of "green-belt" policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   205 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.