Log cabins?

Dinah93

Very accurate advice from planning_officer. As a planning officer myself I can back up what he's saying, and also add with regards to 'not being found out', if a disgruntled neighbour/postman/ex sees what you're doing, or even just the binman noticing there is more rubbish than you can fit in the one residential bin and putting two and two together, they can report you, and take enforcement action against you. If the cabin is on agricultural land, not residential, this would be considered a change of use, which has a 10 year expiry on it, and you would have to be able to prove it had been in use as a seperate residential dwelling for that time eg utility bills, council tax bills etc

Snooze

Dinah93, planning_officer,

Your knowledge of the planning regs and the law is highly commendable. :T

It's a pity that you apparently can't be arsed putting your rule books and heavy hands into action when it comes to all the gypo sites that are cropping up on every street corner. :rolleyes:

Nuff said.

Rob

prudryden

Snooze wrote: »

Dinah93, planning_officer,

Your knowledge of the planning regs and the law is highly commendable. :T

It's a pity that you apparently can't be arsed putting your rule books and heavy hands into action when it comes to all the gypo sites that are cropping up on every street corner. :rolleyes:

Nuff said.

Rob

That's a bit harsh> Where else can we go to get our driveways done for £20,000?

gotnodosh

I think that the people that built this house http://www.channel4.com/4homes/ontv/grand-designs/houses/K/kent.html
got away without planning permission because they had lived on the land in their parents garden for so long. But I am not 100% sure. If I remember correctly they lived in the back of his workshop.

planning_officer

Snooze wrote: »

Dinah93, planning_officer,

Your knowledge of the planning regs and the law is highly commendable. :T

It's a pity that you apparently can't be arsed putting your rule books and heavy hands into action when it comes to all the gypo sites that are cropping up on every street corner. :rolleyes:

Nuff said.

Rob

I've just spent about 30mins writing a response to that, only to find the forum logged me out and I've lost everything I wrote... how frustrating... grrrr

Ok, a quicker response now: I understand exactly how you feel Rob, but it's just a incredibly frustrating for us, I promise. The sad fact is that the gypsies know exactly how to play the system.

Using one site in my district as an example, we visited the site on the Monday morning following gypsies moving in over one weekend. The relevant enforcement notice and stop notice were prepared and served within days - as quickly as they could possibly have been. However, this was 3 years ago and the gypsies are still there. Why? Because, firstly they appeal, which takes months and we are powerless in the meantime, then the Government announced that every LPA must allocate sufficient gypsy/traveller sites for their district/area, otherwise gyspies would have a real upper hand at appeal - they can just argue that the LPA hasn't planned enough sites, and the Appeal Inspector will let them stay (as with several recent appeal decisions). It takes ages to analyse the need for additional sites, at least a couple of years, sometimes more, by which time the gypsies can play the human rights card, when their kids are settled at the local school etc.

So it's a not a case of 'not being arsed' - it is just as frustrating, I promise!

cells

PasturesNew wrote: »

Planning permission would be required in a field for most purposes.

If you're thinking "buy a field, bung on a log cabin and live in it", no chance. If it were that easy thousands will have been doing it for the last 20 years at least.

assuming you own the field, why is it not that easy, what right does the goverment have to stop you providing shelter for yourself and your family.:mad:

cells

Snooze wrote: »

Dinah93, planning_officer,

Your knowledge of the planning regs and the law is highly commendable. :T

It's a pity that you apparently can't be arsed putting your rule books and heavy hands into action when it comes to all the gypo sites that are cropping up on every street corner. :rolleyes:

Nuff said.

Rob

perhaps if the planners let us build more we would have no gypos

cells

planning_officer wrote: »

I've just spent about 30mins writing a response to that, only to find the forum logged me out and I've lost everything I wrote... how frustrating... grrrr

Ok, a quicker response now: I understand exactly how you feel Rob, but it's just a incredibly frustrating for us, I promise. The sad fact is that the gypsies know exactly how to play the system.

Using one site in my district as an example, we visited the site on the Monday morning following gypsies moving in over one weekend. The relevant enforcement notice and stop notice were prepared and served within days - as quickly as they could possibly have been. However, this was 3 years ago and the gypsies are still there. Why? Because, firstly they appeal, which takes months and we are powerless in the meantime, then the Government announced that every LPA must allocate sufficient gypsy/traveller sites for their district/area, otherwise gyspies would have a real upper hand at appeal - they can just argue that the LPA hasn't planned enough sites, and the Appeal Inspector will let them stay (as with several recent appeal decisions). It takes ages to analyse the need for additional sites, at least a couple of years, sometimes more, by which time the gypsies can play the human rights card, when their kids are settled at the local school etc.

So it's a not a case of 'not being arsed' - it is just as frustrating, I promise!

how about you punks actually let the country build more homes, then we would not have so many people living in cramped conditions and so many living in caravans and so many paying extreamly high rents thanks to planners stopping builds

planners are the scum of the earth

Geenie

cells wrote: »

perhaps if the planners let us build more we would have no gypos

Cells, elucidate your thinking on this statement! And to help because I know this is a big word for you .......

elucidate
Verb
B]-dating[/B], [B]-dated[/B to make (something obscure or difficult) clear [Late Latin elucidare to enlighten] make free from confusion or ambiguity; make clear; "Could you clarify these remarks?"; "Clear up the question of who is at fault"

cells

Geenie wrote: »

Cells, elucidate your thinking on this statement! And to help because I know this is a big word for you .......

elucidate
Verb
B]-dating[/B], [B]-dated[/B to make (something obscure or difficult) clear [Late Latin elucidare to enlighten] make free from confusion or ambiguity; make clear; "Could you clarify these remarks?"; "Clear up the question of who is at fault"

take a look at the price to rent a modest home in this country, or to buy a modest home. it is 50% or more of take home pay.

look at other european or asian countries, the amount of take home pay spent on housing your family is far less.

this means one thing and one thing only, we do not have enough homes. now we have the skills to build the homes, we have the capital, we have the will. what we do not have is an unbiased fair system to which we can build homes.

the current system keeps the rich landlords v.rich. and everyone else in relative poverty.


now i repete, why should a planner, or anyone else in goverment be able to stop you from building a home for yourself and your family?

now if you will excuse me, i need to get up in the morning to pay the dam rent which thanks to planners and stupid goverment is a v.high % of my take home pay!