thod Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 The solution is simple enough. The councils have the obligation to provide social housing. Atm they simply rent this increasing rents and property prices all around along with council tax. They are happy to do this, the councilors dont want to drop their constituents house prices. In doing these they dont alleviate a housing shortage they simply pass it on in the form of higher prices for private renters. You can only alleviate a housing shortage by building more. Now if they were forbidden from renting they take a whole new outlook. At this point they are obliged to do their duty and build houses for their people. A single field moved to houses removes all the social housing needs. So we lose a field of industrial farmland, the crops have very little value. Heck I would pay the farmer each year what he would have lost in crop production to build. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warwick-Watcher Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 They were built that way in the first instance without any planning regulations. That's why they are so higgledy-piggledy and interesting. Moreover, those villages that remain unspoilt have done so in spite of planning laws, not because of them, imo. Just look how many villages were ruined with the post war building of totally inappropriately designed council houses tacked on to the village outskirts. In the village near where I live, planning consent has ruined the nature of the village; instead of allowing individuals to build individual houses on individual plots, a couple of fields have been given PP and high density estates have been plopped down in the middle of the village. Developers are forced to build high density housing BECAUSE of the artificially high price of land CAUSED by planning permission rules. Remove the planning permission that artificially inflates the value of building land and individuals and developers could return to building decent one-off houses. Developers are forced to build high density because the government has laid down planning laws requiring a certain number of dwellings per hectare. Guess what? Apartment blocks fit the bill nicely, hence the lack of new houses being built compared to the number of wooden framed cräppy apartments. I'd bring in a new law proposing that every village of at least 100 properties be required to allow at least 1 new property per year but that property must be built in character with the existing ones. That way we get gradual expansion in all places without eyesore identikit estates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meow Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 The bane of our society is permission seeking, full stop. Did I say you could say that!?!?! :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Did I say you could say that!?!?! :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methinkshe Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Developers are forced to build high density because the government has laid down planning laws requiring a certain number of dwellings per hectare. Guess what? Apartment blocks fit the bill nicely, hence the lack of new houses being built compared to the number of wooden framed cräppy apartments. Disgraceful! Worse still was including gardens as brownfield sites so that any house with a decent sized garden promtly got a block of flats built in it. Without the gardens, towns are suffering more and more from poor drainage, no birds and bees, and a general reduction in quality of living. John Prescott is to blame for that - fat fool that he is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 How easy do you think it would be to build a massive lovely house for 30k? nice homes for cheap. this is a 2 min google serch im sure you can get better for cheaper if you really looked. http://www.slcd.co.uk/index.php?main_page=...products_id=232 http://www.slcd.co.uk/index.php?main_page=...products_id=242 http://www.slcd.co.uk/index.php?main_page=...products_id=241 http://www.slcd.co.uk/index.php?main_page=...products_id=242 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrowne Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 a massive lovely house would cost no more than 30k if we didnt have retardo planning laws and no more than £300 per month to rent. I simply can't correlate a lovely house with £30k, it's like something out of cloud cuckoo land. What is your definition of "massive"? Would this be for just a shell of a house with crap fittings? What about kitchen, bathrooms, electrics etc. double glazing? heating? Sure you could build a house for £30k, but I very much doubt it would appear under "lovely" in the dictionary. Or massive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Disgraceful! Worse still was including gardens as brownfield sites so that any house with a decent sized garden promtly got a block of flats built in it. Without the gardens, towns are suffering more and more from poor drainage, no birds and bees, and a general reduction in quality of living. John Prescott is to blame for that - fat fool that he is. what is it to you what someone does with their gardon you NIMBY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrowne Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 nice homes for cheap. this is a 2 min google serch im sure you can get better for cheaper if you really looked. Oh come off it! They are nice functional buildings, sure, that can be used as a home and would certainly fulfill a need, but they are are hardly "massive" and "lovely" You can probably get something a similar size and spec already, on a trailer park. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMAC67 Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Replying to "are referees the bane of Premier League football?" As a football fan let me just say that I am outraged that referees are allowed to ruin our beautiful game. We should ban referees and their sidekicks (linesmen/referees assistants) and allow the game to flow freely as an unregulated free market utopia. Just imagine how wonderful the game would be without the pesky referee. I'm thinking of building a nuclear power station in my back garden, I don't see why my neighbours should be allowed to object, we need the power, it's simply BANANA's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 what is it to you what someone does with their gardon you NIMBY It depends how much they paid methinkshe to own it, doesn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 (edited) I simply can't correlate a lovely house with £30k, it's like something out of cloud cuckoo land. What is your definition of "massive"?Would this be for just a shell of a house with crap fittings? What about kitchen, bathrooms, electrics etc. double glazing? heating? Sure you could build a house for £30k, but I very much doubt it would appear under "lovely" in the dictionary. Or massive. 100 M^2 is good for a family, that is "massive" for the average family. £49,700.00 http://www.slcd.co.uk/images/large/talltoppen90_LRG.jpg nice house imo. £50k. Would be less if you spend time looking for a good deal. like i said, 2mins on google bought those up edit: £65K very big house http://www.slcd.co.uk/index.php?main_page=...products_id=341 what would that cost to buy? 200k+ in normal areas. 500k in decent parts of london Edited May 30, 2008 by cells Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Replying to "are referees the bane of Premier League football?" As a football fan let me just say that I am outraged that referees are allowed to ruin our beautiful game. We should ban referees and their sidekicks (linesmen/referees assistants) and allow the game to flow freely as an unregulated free market utopia. Just imagine how wonderful the game would be without the pesky referee.I'm thinking of building a nuclear power station in my back garden, I don't see why my neighbours should be allowed to object, we need the power, it's simply BANANA's. Referees are free market - no one forces anyone to use them. Planning laws are not free market - you use hem or else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DementedTuna Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Planning permission is just a mask for the real problem - leasehold tenure. You pay the money, and you still don't own the land it stands on. Don't give the fatcat landowner estates any more money. Don't buy leasehold! Those are the real cancer in our society... the landowning millionaires who inherited their estates and never have to do a days work in their life. It's high time we started taxing land and giving those evil leeches the boot! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Objective Developer Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 why does one need permission to build a home for himself and his family?a massive lovely house would cost no more than 30k if we didnt have retardo planning laws and no more than £300 per month to rent. This is true, and you can buy a car for £0.38 if it wasn't for all that other cost... Try £1200 sqm build cost and you'll be closer, so a good-sized house would cost about £100k to build, not £30k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Oh come off it! They are nice functional buildings, sure, that can be used as a home and would certainly fulfill a need, but they are are hardly "massive" and "lovely"You can probably get something a similar size and spec already, on a trailer park. look at the bigger ones, they are massive and lovely. compaire the larger ones which cost £60k and are 120 sq meters to anything you can buy for 60k in this country! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methinkshe Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 what is it to you what someone does with their gardon you NIMBY Nothing to do with nimbyism - I live on a farm in the middle of nowhere, so what anyone does in their garden in a town has no effect on me personally. It is do with with the erosion of quality of life and loss of amenity, and especially the loss of natural drainage provided by gardens in large connurbations, that occurs when gardens are built over. As a responsible member of society I have an interest in what happens in our towns and cities even if I don't live in one personally. One of my children or grandchildren may, so it behoves me to take an interest in what goes on in our country as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Objective Developer Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 (edited) Let me tell you all something for nothing here. The world would be one ugly mother without planning. You think that all the new stuff that comes forward now is rubbish? You should see what developers would like to build! I work as a planner, and can tell you that the real issue is that planning lacks the requisite teeth to tell these developers to get stuffed when they bring in a scheme that is utter cack. If you do, then you stand a good chance of loosing at appeal for thwarting Gov’t building targets, and then having costs awarded against you (which is not good value to the tax payer). You all need to remember 3 things: Planners do not ‘plan’ housing estates, architects do. Planners do not build houses, developers do. Planner do not grant planning permission (in most cases), elected members do (i.e. democratic recourse). If you don’t like the way your towns are being build, lobby your local ward member, or if that doesn’t work vote them out. Most people take too little interest in the built environment, and don’t bother to try to understand how it works (many on this thread), so the just look to blame us planners as they’re too ignorant to see who else might be to blame. Edited May 30, 2008 by Objective Developer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 how do you like them apples? http://www.logcabinhome.co.uk/log-cabins-h...elisthomes.html LOVELY MASSIVE 2600 sq foot for £90k SEVEN BEDROOM 4000 sq foot for 130k!!! more modest 3 bed 1400 sq foot for £54,950 1050 sq foot 3 bedder for £40k homes are cheap, but planners and goverment and large landlords have you by the balls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Nothing to do with nimbyism - I live on a farm in the middle of nowhere, so what anyone does in their garden in a town has no effect on me personally. It is do with with the erosion of quality of life and loss of amenity, and especially the loss of natural drainage provided by gardens in large connurbations, that occurs when gardens are built over. As a responsible member of society I have an interest in what happens in our towns and cities even if I don't live in one personally. One of my children or grandchildren may, so it behoves me to take an interest in what goes on in our country as a whole. so a man building himself and concreayting over 100 sq meters of grass is going to devalue the your qulity of life get real it is ultra and pure nimbyism Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Objective Developer Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 homes are cheap, but planners and goverment and large landlords have you by the balls. Sorry, but how do planners 'have you by the balls'? Planning controls protect the public from developers. It may have done a shit job so far, but the other is far worse. We need better controls I'll agree, but the Gov't is too deep into the development industry's pockets to let that happen. Noticed how 'economic' has sneaked into the definition of sustainable development? That wasn't the planners... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrowne Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 (edited) look at the bigger ones, they are massive and lovely.compaire the larger ones which cost £60k and are 120 sq meters to anything you can buy for 60k in this country! We will have to agree to disagree here. I have nothing these cabin type homes, and can't see why there can't be zoned areas for them, but they are not what I would consider being lovely. Of course, remembering my rental days, then yes, they are far, far better than a lot of rental accommodation. Do I remember reading/seeing somewhere that building like this need to be replaced every 10/15 years or so? They are cheaper than an equivalent sized house for a number of reasons: 1. Less solid build materials 2. Land cost not included 3. Water, sewage, electricity, gas, phone hookup are all extra 4. Insurance issues? 5. Labour to put it togther 6. Delivery Edited May 30, 2008 by stevebrowne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Let me tell you all something for nothing here.The world would be one ugly mother without planning. You think that all the new stuff that comes forward now is rubbish? You should see what developers would like to build! I work as a planner, and can tell you that the real issue is that planning lacks the requisite teeth to tell these developers to get stuffed when they bring in a scheme that is utter cack. If you do, then you stand a good chance of loosing at appeal for thwarting Gov’t building targets, and then having costs awarded against you (which is not good value to the tax payer). You all need to remember 3 things: Planners do not ‘plan’ housing estates, architects do. Planners do not build houses, developers do. Planner do not grant planning permission (in most cases), elected members do (i.e. democratic recourse). If you don’t like the way your towns are being build, lobby your local ward member, or if that doesn’t work vote them out. Most people take too little interest in the built environment, and don’t bother to try to understand how it works (many on this thread), so the just look to blame us planners as they’re too ignorant to see who else might be to blame. what gives you the power to tell me or anyone else not to build a home? who gave you that power? where did they get it from? the truth is, that the whole concept of planning permission is an extream form of VI. your argument of no planning = ugly. well perhaps it would be ugly, but we would have more homes and not be rent/mortgage slaves. just look at the links i gave you. a SEVEN BED 4000 sq ft LOVELY HOME for 130k. why cant i buy a field and put that on there instead of pay 200k for a shitty 2 bedder?? ultra pure nimbyism Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Sorry, but how do planners 'have you by the balls'? Planning controls protect the public from developers. It may have done a shit job so far, but the other is far worse. We need better controls I'll agree, but the Gov't is too deep into the development industry's pockets to let that happen. Noticed how 'economic' has sneaked into the definition of sustainable development? That wasn't the planners... bull$hit. ultra bull$shit what makes you think we need "protection from developers". we are not idiots, we pay for our homes and will pay depending on quality amongst other things! so that argument doesn’t have any merit the "sustainable" buzzwords you retardos use is also very pretentious, ignorant , and extremely patronising. why am i, who is not a developer, not permitted to build on "virgin" land? if i own it who the F are you to say NO! i hate planners. VI turds that probably don’t even know they are bowing to VI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Objective Developer Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 what gives you the power to tell me or anyone else not to build a home?who gave you that power? where did they get it from? the truth is, that the whole concept of planning permission is an extream form of VI. your argument of no planning = ugly. well perhaps it would be ugly, but we would have more homes and not be rent/mortgage slaves. just look at the links i gave you. a SEVEN BED 4000 sq ft LOVELY HOME for 130k. why cant i buy a field and put that on there instead of pay 200k for a shitty 2 bedder?? ultra pure nimbyism Utter nonsense. What you are questioning is the organising principle of society as a whole, not just planning. ‘Who gave me the power’? Well, your fathers did, and their fathers, as it was noted that some kind of system was needed (and to those of you who think that thing were better before planning – planning has been going on since the very earliest settlements were formed – the system as we know it was formed rather more recently but all villages were planned and development agreed by the ruling forces, right back to the Roman time). What you are asking is the permission to do whatever you like. Sorry pal, but society (i.e. the collective agreement that individuals surrender certain rights for the good of the whole) doesn’t work like that. What you want is essentially very selfish. I hear your argument about more homes being delivered – but the truth is that the MARKET decides how many homes get built. Think about how many permissions there are that are not being started because the developers don’t want to add units to the market. This is not planning, this is capitalism. What we need is more Gov’t built housing (like the council houses); building that is out of the control of the open market. The open market has failed to deliver, we need to face that fact. You’re not very well read on the whole topic, so I suggest you do some reading and then come back to me. To note, planning has no issue with pre-fab type homes either, the real issue is getting a mortgage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.