Occupancy Restriction - what does it mean?

princeofpounds

eidand said:

I don't have a problem with the "greenbelt" concept, I very much want that to remain in place. Not everyone wants roads and cement everywhere, with no green in sight.

What I would like to see is more options to buy land and self build on it. Somehow, the big builders are allowed to buy huge amounts of land, build and charge gazillions for it....

Well it's a bit of a false dichotomy, green belt vs. concrete jungle. There are better ways.

Green wedges, for example, have been shown to work much better than belts; they reduce the length of transport links needed for commuters, it brings the average person nearer green space and radial transport routes. There is no reason why we couldn't move to a system more like this in London, and in fact I suspect it will happen by stealth as greenbelt planning controls are slowly relaxed around transport links. 

I'm also a huge fan of commons, something we don't seem to create any more, but parliament was very big on back in the Victorian era when London really began to sprawl. Places like Wimbledon common (and many others) have far more value for society than another bare horse field or golf course for Tarquin and Jocasta*, and possibly for the environment too if they are large enough. Personally I would relax green belt but create much more open access common land where possible. There are other models too, like Epping Forest etc. 

As for how the builders get away with building and no-one else seems to... if you've been through the system you'll understand. It requires staggeringly vast amounts of bureaucracy, much of it requiring specialist expertise from consultants (invariably ex-planners and expensive lawyers), or lobbying of local politicians and officials. The costs are not all that different if you are building one house or one hundred houses, and so the system favours enterprises with the economies of scale and financial resources to ram through the system over a period of years. I could tell you some amusing stories about some experiences in my family with the system, you'd be shocked by the nonsense that goes on.

It's a real tragedy that we do this, and end up with monolithic corporate builders making soulless identikit estates. I used to live on the continent and if you drive through semi-rural villages in France, Belgium or Germany, and there it's very common for people to get plots and build single family homes. They look varied and attractive, and build quality is usually excellent because the developer is usually the person who will live there. Some economies of scale are achieved because whilst your house may not look like any others on the street, there are about 20-30 common styles that use lots of standard components. I don't know enough about how their system works to achieve this model, but the product is so much better than what we do here. 

* my particular bugbear - greenbelt scrapyards and caravan stores that masquerade as farms with a few half-hearted fields of monoculture. You see so many from the train lines, and what value do the have for society or the environment really?

AdrianC

As far as village development and extension goes, remember that many villages have accepted some devolution of the development decisions via Neighbourhood Development Plans. When they've been developed by the community, and then adopted through a referendum, they're legally binding on the planning decision.

eidand said:

Each council has a register for people who want to self build however that amounts to nothing in practice. I've been on that register, where I live, for years and not once was I offered a chance to buy anything. Clearly there is space, as new build estates appear all the time. 

Clue: The council don't sell the land. If the landowner doesn't go to the council to say "Hey, do you know anybody who might be interested if I choose to sell this off in piecemeal plots and build roads?", then the register doesn't mean anything.

OTOH, if a developer is willing to pay FAR more than any individual is going to, and take all the hassle factor of plotting and building roads, then...

princeofpounds said:
It's a real tragedy that we do this, and end up with monolithic corporate builders making soulless identikit estates. I used to live on the continent and if you drive through semi-rural villages in France, Belgium or Germany, and there it's very common for people to get plots and build single family homes. They look varied and attractive, and build quality is usually excellent because the developer is usually the person who will live there. Some economies of scale are achieved because whilst your house may not look like any others on the street, there are about 20-30 common styles that use lots of standard components. I don't know enough about how their system works to achieve this model, but the product is so much better than what we do here. 

Perhaps it's as simple as house buyers in other countries aren't queueing up to throw money at anybody who'll knock up the shonkiest identikit place possible, crammed in as densely as possible, with an opportunity for ongoing revenue on top of the sale...?

Supply and demand. The solution is in the hands of buyers.