Young couple build beautiful cottage to escape rent slavery and live quietly

Ionkontrol

Wil the council make them tear it down? Possibly.

Will Lambeth Council make Barret Homes tear down their almost finished development in Coldharbour Lane, Brixton, after gaining planning permission subject to providing 30% social housing and now reneging on the deal? Definitely not.

Who is the worst offender?

lostinrates

prowla wrote: »

It is not about haves and have nots (money-wise) it is about the rules of building a property, which requires planning permission.

I couldn't just extend my house (if I had the money); I would have to go through the correct procedures first.

That said, I do hope they get to keep it.

This is pretty much how I feel. I do think its lovely (though the wood looks unfinished to me).

I think one of the frustrations felt by landowners though is that the rules are not equitably applied as regards planning. One road near me has a large number of settled travellers whose planning has been granted for chalets and statics, while a similar chalet proposal is turned down on the same stretch of road by a landowner wanting to build a similar chalet for her son as being ' not in keeping'.

ILW

lostinrates wrote: »

This is pretty much how I feel. I do think its lovely (though the wood looks unfinished to me).

I think one of the frustrations felt by landowners though is that the rules are not equitably applied as regards planning. One road near me has a large number of settled travellers whose planning has been granted for chalets and statics, while a similar chalet proposal is turned down on the same stretch of road by a landowner wanting to build a similar chalet for her son as being ' not in keeping'.

How can you have settled travellers?

lostinrates

ILW wrote: »

How can you have settled travellers?

People who identify as travellers/gypsies but now no longer travel.

ruggedtoast

MobileSaver wrote: »

You mean a world where the highest earners in this country PAY MORE TAX IN ONE YEAR than the average person pays in their entire lifetime?



So we should all be able to build whatever we want where ever we want and totally ignore the laws of the land?

You do not understand the economics of wealth.

The highest earners do not fire golden eggs out of their a$$es with which to enrich the grateful proles. They manipulate the financial system to their own ends and cheat the workers out of the majority of the wealth they create, in order to bring about the perverse state of affairs that you seem so happy about; whereby they can pay more tax in a year than an average person in a lifetime.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

I do agree that planning laws need to allow for sensible, small scale independent building.

If you think there should be planning laws, it doesn't make you some kind of grey bureaucratic oligarch baby boomer mass murderer, or whatever the OP is implying.

Is it really sensible to build so close to a pond in a country where it never stops raining?

ILW

ruggedtoast wrote: »

You do not understand the economics of wealth.

The highest earners do not fire golden eggs out of their a$$es with which to enrich the grateful proles. They manipulate the financial system to their own ends and cheat the workers out of the majority of the wealth they create, in order to bring about the perverse state of affairs that you seem so happy about; whereby they can pay more tax in a year than an average person in a lifetime.

So why don't the workers get off their backsides and do the same. Any body can start a business in this country.

Itismehonest

ruggedtoast wrote: »

How dare they try and not pay thousands of pounds year to some dreadful spiv with a buy to let mortgage or some ghastly bank run by David Cameron's mates?

How dare they not spend two thirds of their life slaving in a call centre just to make ends meet?

Never mind that 1% of the population of this egalitarian country owns 70% of the land.

http://www.progress.org/revwob.htm

God forbid any of the privileged elite should have to suffer, better keep crushing the dreams of the young.

So what would happen if there were no planning regs?
I'll tell you. Those that have or could afford to buy land would build on it wholesale. They could then sell the new houses to anyone who can pay the price.
How exactly would that improve the lot of those who can't afford to buy?

Planning laws can be a pain, particularly in certain areas. but anyone who builds a property without planning permission knows they're likely to have to pull it down. The bigger or more out of character for an area the harder the line the authority will take.

Andy_L

ruggedtoast wrote: »

That really isn't the point tbh.

To an extent it is. "Ricketyness" would be a consideration in planning permission & building control

ruggedtoast

N1AK wrote: »

Yes you were but I won't lose sleep because of it. Incivility, without sufficient intellect, just makes the poster look bad. In future I suggest you don't repeat your rude behaviour and avoid:

• Accusing someone of lacking imagination
• Assuming that you know what someone is thinking when you clearly don't
• Implying someone is part of a problem when you clearly cannot know it

Until such time as you learn to be civil in discussion I feel no need to waste time with pleasantries in return. In short: if you shouldn't attempt to give it out if you aren't willing to receive it.

Angry.

....