"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 16:01:49 +0100, "mich" wrote:


"IMM" wrote in message
...

"mich" wrote in message
...

"IMM" wrote in message
...

The OP has a 2 acre plot.

And it will sonn be a half acre plot with what - four more houses on the
other one and a half acres?

Why? And in any case, what is wrong with building four houses on two
acres? That's a fair bit of land per house, is it not?

Will that be in keeping with the area?
Does the area have the infrastructure ( health services, roads,
employment,
etc.) to support it? I doubt it.

If it doesn't now, then surely there will be the enticement for others
in the near future to move into the area and set up as doctors,
employers, and thus create the infrastructure. This sounds like a
Nimby argument to me.

Planning rules are there for a reason.

Yes, to put the spanner in the works of anyone who wants to add to the
housing stock, mainly out of spite.

if his two acres are currently
outside the loacal plan devolpment area , its no doubt for a good
reason
and it should remain so. Trying "tricks" - like eco building etc. to
have
that changed is underhand

Why is it a "trick" to discover what kind of house would be preferable
and then trying to appeal to some residual trace of planners' better
nature? Of course, I believe the kind of "trick" they understand is
the one where you offer to build them a new scout hut for free, or
something like that. What the planners mean when they say "no" is not
"We don't like the effect on the environment," but "We don't like you
yuppy types down from Town who can afford to live here when we can't."

and does no one good in the log

Good typo! Maybe it's a log cabin the putative builder should be
proposing!

run ( except the
developer maybe, who no doubt will sell up and run - no doubt a long way
from the mess he creates).

But he will have left behind him TWO houses where once there was only
ONE! In other words, he has contributed to the housing stock and made
it just a tad easier (though infinitesimal, given the lack of new
houses being built) for others to get on to the housing ladder. Every
additional house does this in its own small way. This is why even the
Govt concedes that we should be building more houses.

But he isnt in my back yard , so I dont really care.
I have just stated my observations in my own area.

Ive just bought another field ( 5 acres) in an attempt to keep any of
that
happening near me in my lifetime at least.
But I guess I am a greedy b*stard of another kind. I like to see wildlife
and plants and trees.

I see wildlife and trees everywhere and I live within 40 miles of
Oxford Street. I have a hedgehog in my garden. If you're so concerned
for wildlife, ask farmers up and down the land why they have ripped
out so many thousands of miles of hedging that once offered shelter to
so much wildlife.

good post.