I have a 2 acre plot in rural Suffolk. We do not live within the
village development boundary. The planning office has already
informally said they would not recommend permission for a new house.

However, I might still give it a bash... but I need an angle.

Here are some plus points:

* Part of my back garden is already fenced off and has been for years
- it looks like another plot.

* It has seperate access via a track which is well established.
Although the track crosses the village green, vehicles *are* permitted
along it because it's also used by another cottage.

* There are two unsightly delapidated barns (steel/asbestos) which the
house would replace

* If the house was a bungalow, it would probably not be visible from
the road.

* I have plans for an eco friendly house using solar water heating,
passive solar space heating with thermal storage, wood burning stoves,
eco friendly building materials and maybe some photovoltaic panels
etc.

* There is plenty of room for more than just one extra house, I could
offer a plot to put a couple of low-cost houses on, sold to the
council at cost.

What do you think my chances are?

Nick

NickW wrote:
I have a 2 acre plot in rural Suffolk. We do not live within the
village development boundary. The planning office has already
informally said they would not recommend permission for a new house.

However, I might still give it a bash... but I need an angle.

Here are some plus points:

* Part of my back garden is already fenced off and has been for years
- it looks like another plot.

* It has seperate access via a track which is well established.
Although the track crosses the village green, vehicles *are* permitted
along it because it's also used by another cottage.

* There are two unsightly delapidated barns (steel/asbestos) which the
house would replace

* If the house was a bungalow, it would probably not be visible from
the road.

* I have plans for an eco friendly house using solar water heating,
passive solar space heating with thermal storage, wood burning stoves,
eco friendly building materials and maybe some photovoltaic panels
etc.

* There is plenty of room for more than just one extra house, I could
offer a plot to put a couple of low-cost houses on, sold to the
council at cost.

What do you think my chances are?

Nick

explain to me how wood burning stoves are eco-friendly?

John

"John Smith" wrote in message
...


explain to me how wood burning stoves are eco-friendly?

John

Because they are fuelled by a carbon-neutral, renewable resource which
can be produced on site and hence not subject to fuel expended to
discover, extract and transport it?

Wood as a fuel is essentially a long-term storage facility for solar
energy.

Neil

explain to me how wood burning stoves are eco-friendly?

Provided that the fuel is obtained from a renewable forest, it is carbon
neutral, unlike fossil fuels which release carbon dioxide. Of course, it
isn't entirely carbon neutral, as I'm sure the forestry equipment and
transportation uses plenty of diesel, but it is probably better than burning
oil directly.

Christian.

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message .net...
explain to me how wood burning stoves are eco-friendly?

Provided that the fuel is obtained from a renewable forest, it is carbon
neutral,

Yep, I have 200 ash trees (arguably the best firewood) onsite which
could be coppiced.

If the passive solar heating works as planned, I wont use the
woodburners much anyway.

Nick

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 10:25:22 +0100, John Smith wrote:

explain to me how wood burning stoves are eco-friendly?

Duh, they are not burning a finite resource like oil or gas! Hint: You
can grow more wood...

MM

Mike Mitchell wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 10:25:22 +0100, John Smith wrote:


explain to me how wood burning stoves are eco-friendly?


Duh, they are not burning a finite resource like oil or gas! Hint: You
can grow more wood...

MM

Where does oil and gas come from? If you know the answer then you will
also know the it is not finite.

"NickW" wrote in message
om...

I have a 2 acre plot in rural Suffolk. We do not live within the
village development boundary. The planning office has already
informally said they would not recommend permission for a new house.

However, I might still give it a bash... but I need an angle.

Here are some plus points:

* Part of my back garden is already fenced off and has been for years
- it looks like another plot.

* It has seperate access via a track which is well established.
Although the track crosses the village green, vehicles *are* permitted
along it because it's also used by another cottage.

* There are two unsightly delapidated barns (steel/asbestos) which the
house would replace

* If the house was a bungalow, it would probably not be visible from
the road.

* I have plans for an eco friendly house using solar water heating,
passive solar space heating with thermal storage, wood burning stoves,
eco friendly building materials and maybe some photovoltaic panels
etc.

* There is plenty of room for more than just one extra house, I could
offer a plot to put a couple of low-cost houses on, sold to the
council at cost.

What do you think my chances are?

Nick

Firstly, seek advice on a planning consultant in your area.

Building a house to replace the existing one is fine. They can't do much
there, apart have a say in the style and size. Do you want to have two
houses, and keep the existing house?

Pushing an eco house is a great lever to some authorities. They all spout
eco credentials and like to be seen doing something in that area (few do).
If you state: renewable materials, the house will follow the local
vernacular (or made of wood) and all the eco and low to zero energy aspects
as you have stated, they may bend towards you. They can then use your house
as an e.g., of their eco credentials.

A 100% eco house is what they want in their area. Many of them partially
apply eco aspects on building which are not obviously visible. Say that the
house will have temperaure sensors to monitor its performance and that local
colleges and uni's will be invited along for presentations of the
construction and design and the performance data freely given to them. As a
bigger lever, see one of the local uni architects depts and get some of
their involvement, no matter how minor. All this adds up to someone caring
for the environment and the local community, not just a selfish person who
wants to save on fuel bills and locks himself up in his smart house.

Speak to them again with some hard outlines of an eco house design and the
prime eco functions. But after you have done the above.

Firstly, seek advice on a planning consultant in your area.

Building a house to replace the existing one is fine. They can't do much
there, apart have a say in the style and size. Do you want to have two
houses, and keep the existing house?

Pushing an eco house is a great lever to some authorities. They all spout
eco credentials and like to be seen doing something in that area (few do).
If you state: renewable materials, the house will follow the local
vernacular (or made of wood) and all the eco and low to zero energy aspects
as you have stated, they may bend towards you. They can then use your house
as an e.g., of their eco credentials.

A 100% eco house is what they want in their area. Many of them partially
apply eco aspects on building which are not obviously visible. Say that the
house will have temperaure sensors to monitor its performance and that local
colleges and uni's will be invited along for presentations of the
construction and design and the performance data freely given to them. As a
bigger lever, see one of the local uni architects depts and get some of
their involvement, no matter how minor. All this adds up to someone caring
for the environment and the local community, not just a selfish person who
wants to save on fuel bills and locks himself up in his smart house.

Speak to them again with some hard outlines of an eco house design and the
prime eco functions. But after you have done the above.

Thanks, sounds like good advice. I hope Mid Suffolk DC is eco mad...!

I could do with some more ideas of eco friendly ideas. The ones I've got so far a

- Super insulated - insulation from recycled materials
- wood frame - ?
- passive solar wall space heating
- solar domestic hot water
- wood burners with onsite ash coppice
- low energy lighting throughout

What else? I don't know so much about the eco friendly materials side of things.

Nick

"NickW" wrote in message
m...

Thanks, sounds like good advice. I hope Mid Suffolk DC is eco mad...!

I could do with some more ideas of eco friendly ideas. The ones I've got
so far a

- Super insulated - insulation from recycled materials
- wood frame - ?
- passive solar wall space heating
- solar domestic hot water
- wood burners with onsite ash coppice
- low energy lighting throughout

What else? I don't know so much about the eco friendly materials side of
things.

The Building Structu

- A light framed superinsulated structure (Minimum of 400mm of Warmcell in
the roof, 250-300mm in the walls, heavy foam in the floor if a concrete
slab).
- Face the house south to capture passive solar energy.
- Calculate the pitch of the roof for maximum insulation at your latitude.
- Calculate the roof overhangs to keep the sun off the windows and walls in
summer.
- Have the north side with few windows.
- Triple glazed with low "e" glass.
- Eliminate thermal bridges. These tend to be where the walls meet the
ground and the roof, or one material meets another. Use nylon tie bars if
cladding in brick
- Use SIP panels or TJI "I" beams. The void in the "I" beams can be filled
with Warmcell cellulous insulation (re-cycled newspaper). The Warmcell makes
the structure air-tight.
- Have all of the south facing roof being a solar panel heating water from
the sun. That is a large surface generating much heat.
- Could have a full width conservatory on the south side. Better if full
width and full height. This will help but not essential. Nice to have
though as bedrooms could have a balcony opening into the conservatory.
- No letterbox in front door. All doors heavily insulated and sealed (the
Swedes do the best doors).
- Specify a study for home working.

Heating, Vent, Thermal Storage:

- Store the heat in a large thermal store, which would have to be sized to
suit. Better have a battery of small cylinders, so if one leaks it is an
easy and cheap job of replacing.
- The heavy thermal stores can be at ground level. They could even be in a
separate building with superinsulted underground pipes between it and the
house if need be. The thermal store should hold enough energy to heat the
building over 3 or 4 cloudy days.
- Use "very" low temperature underfloor heating.
- In winter not a lot of very hot water will be generated, but hot enough
for very low temp underfloor heating.
- This low temperature water can act as a preheat for DHW.
- If hot water is generated, hot enough for domestic hot water, then this
water should be suitably stored for ready use rather than merging into a
large low temperature water store.
- The controls will be off the shelf and all be using the odd pump here and
there.
- A backup heat source can be incorporated when cloudy days extend over 3 or
4 days.
- The water system is understandable by any intelligent plumber.
- As underfloor heating is being used, bets have an extract only vent
system. Heat recovery is expensive. The thermal store should store enough
energy for the heating system to compensate for vent losses.

Water reclamation:

- There are large water tanks that fill from the roof available ready made.
The BENELUX countries have these as standard in new builds.
- The water tank is under the garden.
- The water is used to water the garden and flush toilets, reducing water
consumption drastically.

PV Cell:

- Don't bother as they are still super expensive with very long payback
times. If the hosue done as above then little elecricity will be used.

Low Energy Appliance:

- These tend to be German like AEG, etc. Find out which of these is the
most economical in energy and water consumption and put these in the spec.

Comms:

- Wire the place out in CAT 5 to accomodate computers and home working.

The above is the basic concept. Then, depending on site, size of house, etc,
it is a matter of applying numbers to size up the thermals store, heat loss,
How much energy the solar roof will generate, sizing a "very" low temp
underfloor heating system, etc.

Best of luck. I hope you get it and you build the house. We need more people
like you around.

On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 16:48:08 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

Best of luck. I hope you get it and you build the house. We need more people
like you around.

I hope he's got plenty of money, as the kind of spec you just came up
with will cost a fortune! Probably half a million to build, I reckon.

MM

"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 16:48:08 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

Best of luck. I hope you get it and you build the house. We need more
people
like you around.

I hope he's got plenty of money, as
the kind of spec you just came up
with will cost a fortune! Probably half
a million to build, I reckon.

You reckon? On what do you base this groundless assertion? Zero heating
houses cost no more to build than any other. It is primarily design and
selecting the correct materials.

The Building Structu

- A light framed superinsulated structure (Minimum of 400mm of Warmcell in
the roof, 250-300mm in the walls, heavy foam in the floor if a concrete
slab).
- Face the house south to capture passive solar energy.
- Calculate the pitch of the roof for maximum insulation at your latitude.
- Calculate the roof overhangs to keep the sun off the windows and walls in
summer.
- Have the north side with few windows.
- Triple glazed with low "e" glass.
- Eliminate thermal bridges. These tend to be where the walls meet the
ground and the roof, or one material meets another. Use nylon tie bars if
cladding in brick
- Use SIP panels or TJI "I" beams. The void in the "I" beams can be filled
with Warmcell cellulous insulation (re-cycled newspaper). The Warmcell makes
the structure air-tight.
- Have all of the south facing roof being a solar panel heating water from
the sun. That is a large surface generating much heat.
- Could have a full width conservatory on the south side. Better if full
width and full height. This will help but not essential. Nice to have
though as bedrooms could have a balcony opening into the conservatory.
- No letterbox in front door. All doors heavily insulated and sealed (the
Swedes do the best doors).
- Specify a study for home working.

Heating, Vent, Thermal Storage:

- Store the heat in a large thermal store, which would have to be sized to
suit. Better have a battery of small cylinders, so if one leaks it is an
easy and cheap job of replacing.
- The heavy thermal stores can be at ground level. They could even be in a
separate building with superinsulted underground pipes between it and the
house if need be. The thermal store should hold enough energy to heat the
building over 3 or 4 cloudy days.
- Use "very" low temperature underfloor heating.
- In winter not a lot of very hot water will be generated, but hot enough
for very low temp underfloor heating.
- This low temperature water can act as a preheat for DHW.
- If hot water is generated, hot enough for domestic hot water, then this
water should be suitably stored for ready use rather than merging into a
large low temperature water store.
- The controls will be off the shelf and all be using the odd pump here and
there.
- A backup heat source can be incorporated when cloudy days extend over 3 or
4 days.
- The water system is understandable by any intelligent plumber.
- As underfloor heating is being used, bets have an extract only vent
system. Heat recovery is expensive. The thermal store should store enough
energy for the heating system to compensate for vent losses.

Water reclamation:

- There are large water tanks that fill from the roof available ready made.
The BENELUX countries have these as standard in new builds.
- The water tank is under the garden.
- The water is used to water the garden and flush toilets, reducing water
consumption drastically.

PV Cell:

- Don't bother as they are still super expensive with very long payback
times. If the hosue done as above then little elecricity will be used.

Low Energy Appliance:

- These tend to be German like AEG, etc. Find out which of these is the
most economical in energy and water consumption and put these in the spec.

Comms:

- Wire the place out in CAT 5 to accomodate computers and home working.

The above is the basic concept. Then, depending on site, size of house, etc,
it is a matter of applying numbers to size up the thermals store, heat loss,
How much energy the solar roof will generate, sizing a "very" low temp
underfloor heating system, etc.

Best of luck. I hope you get it and you build the house. We need more people
like you around.

Some good stuff there. Just one thing though, the walls are the best
solar collectors (for space heating) due to the angle of the sun in
winter. So you'd have small windows on the south side too but the
walls would be built using glass on the outside (or maybe
polycarbonate), and a black collector surface behind. The heat that
builds up here would (by convection) be collected in another cavity
behind the first wall which contains drums of water as a thermal
store.

This article on solar closets explains it better than I can:

http://www.ece.vill.edu/~nick/

Nick.

On 7 Jun 2004 00:17:48 -0700, (NickW) wrote:

...... which contains drums of water as a thermal
store.

A pretty good case for Legionnaires's Disease, if you ask me. Er, how
long does the water remain tepid?

MM

"NickW" wrote in message
om...
The Building Structu

- A light framed superinsulated structure (Minimum of 400mm of Warmcell
in
the roof, 250-300mm in the walls, heavy foam in the floor if a concrete
slab).
- Face the house south to capture passive solar energy.
- Calculate the pitch of the roof for maximum insulation at your
latitude.
- Calculate the roof overhangs to keep the sun off the windows and walls
in
summer.
- Have the north side with few windows.
- Triple glazed with low "e" glass.
- Eliminate thermal bridges. These tend to be where the walls meet the
ground and the roof, or one material meets another. Use nylon tie bars
if
cladding in brick
- Use SIP panels or TJI "I" beams. The void in the "I" beams can be
filled
with Warmcell cellulous insulation (re-cycled newspaper). The Warmcell
makes
the structure air-tight.
- Have all of the south facing roof being a solar panel heating water
from
the sun. That is a large surface generating much heat.
- Could have a full width conservatory on the south side. Better if full
width and full height. This will help but not essential. Nice to have
though as bedrooms could have a balcony opening into the conservatory.
- No letterbox in front door. All doors heavily insulated and sealed
(the
Swedes do the best doors).
- Specify a study for home working.

Heating, Vent, Thermal Storage:

- Store the heat in a large thermal store, which would have to be sized
to
suit. Better have a battery of small cylinders, so if one leaks it is an
easy and cheap job of replacing.
- The heavy thermal stores can be at ground level. They could even be in
a
separate building with superinsulted underground pipes between it and
the
house if need be. The thermal store should hold enough energy to heat
the
building over 3 or 4 cloudy days.
- Use "very" low temperature underfloor heating.
- In winter not a lot of very hot water will be generated, but hot
enough
for very low temp underfloor heating.
- This low temperature water can act as a preheat for DHW.
- If hot water is generated, hot enough for domestic hot water, then
this
water should be suitably stored for ready use rather than merging into a
large low temperature water store.
- The controls will be off the shelf and all be using the odd pump here
and
there.
- A backup heat source can be incorporated when cloudy days extend over
3 or
4 days.
- The water system is understandable by any intelligent plumber.
- As underfloor heating is being used, bets have an extract only vent
system. Heat recovery is expensive. The thermal store should store
enough
energy for the heating system to compensate for vent losses.

Water reclamation:

- There are large water tanks that fill from the roof available ready
made.
The BENELUX countries have these as standard in new builds.
- The water tank is under the garden.
- The water is used to water the garden and flush toilets, reducing
water
consumption drastically.

PV Cell:

- Don't bother as they are still super expensive with very long payback
times. If the hosue done as above then little elecricity will be used.

Low Energy Appliance:

- These tend to be German like AEG, etc. Find out which of these is the
most economical in energy and water consumption and put these in the
spec.

Comms:

- Wire the place out in CAT 5 to accomodate computers and home working.

The above is the basic concept. Then, depending on site, size of house,
etc,
it is a matter of applying numbers to size up the thermals store, heat
loss,
How much energy the solar roof will generate, sizing a "very" low temp
underfloor heating system, etc.

Best of luck. I hope you get it and you build the house. We need more
people
like you around.

Some good stuff there. Just one thing though,
the walls are the best solar collectors (for space
heating) due to the angle of the sun in
winter.

A full south facing roof as a solar collector, angled correctly is as good,
and the walls are not impeded by glass. The house can then look pretty much
how you like it. The roof can be angled to the optimum angle on the south
side and at a shallower angle on the north side, which allows cold north
winds to blow over the house more easily.

So you'd have small windows on the south side too but the
walls would be built using glass on the outside (or maybe
polycarbonate), and a black collector surface behind. The heat that
builds up here would (by convection) be collected in another cavity
behind the first wall which contains drums of water as a thermal
store.

This article on solar closets explains it better than I can:

http://www.ece.vill.edu/~nick/

I am not that enthused, although I'm sure it works. It is an air system,
nothing wrong with that, operating by gravity. This restricts the house
design. You need an expensive strong structure to hold all that tonnage of
water in the loft. That ramps up build prices. So straight away two
problems.

Solar air heaters get very hot and scorch marks occur at the top of them
which makes them unsightly. Storing the thermal mass (water in large
cylinders) at ground level is cheap in structure costs, and using a large
full roof solar collector means you have house design freedom. No large
glass areas on the walls.

Storing the heat in a thermal store and then pumping it into a "very low
temperature" UFH system means you have far more control of the comfort
conditions. No far too hot or far too too cold situations. You can also
use a conventional boiler to heat the UFH directly (do not store its heat in
a large thermal store) when the thermal store is exhausted of heat after a
week of cold cloudy conditions.

The problem with passive solar designs is that you live inside the heat
generator itself, so it can get a little too hot inside the house at times.
With my spec you don't even need to us passive solar as long as
superinsulation is used, as the heat is stored and used as you dictate. But
using passive solar is a great bonus as should be used. Shades can go some
way to preventing unwanted heat entering the house. Although this situation
would be very rare as the roof overhangs would take care of unwanted sun in
summer. It has been said that all house are solar houses as all have the
sun on some part of them. It is a matter of harnessing that sun. This could
be via a solar attic in some houses that do not have a south facing
elevation.

The spec I have outlined is cost effective and easy to build using materials
that are cheap and readily available with ready available skills that can
also work with them. It is a matter of getting the "design" right, which is
not expensive at all, and can be zero cost.

I could do with some more ideas of eco friendly ideas. The ones I've got
so far a

- Super insulated - insulation from recycled materials
- wood frame - ?
- passive solar wall space heating
- solar domestic hot water
- wood burners with onsite ash coppice
- low energy lighting throughout

Probably not of much relevance unless you can get the principal of
development agreed. Take a look at the local plan on the Mid Suffolk DC
website at

http://www.mid-suffolk-dc.gov.uk

I wish my local authority would do a similar thing on their site!

What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none. Current planning guidance from central
government is that there should be no new development outside the
development limits or in open country. Go and take a look at the local plan
for details that is available at your local council offices.

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none. Current planning guidance from central
government is that there should be no new development outside the
development limits or in open country. Go and take a look at the local plan
for details that is available at your local council offices.


Good advice. And also don't forget Capital Gains Tax. If you build this
additional house and sell one of them you'll have to pay 40% of the proceeds to
IR.

"Peter Taylor" wrote in message
...

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none. Current planning guidance from
central
government is that there should be no new development outside the
development limits or in open country. Go and take a look at the local
plan
for details that is available at your local council offices.


Good advice. And also don't forget Capital Gains Tax. If you build this
additional house and sell one of them you'll have to pay 40% of the
proceeds to
IR.

40% maximum, there are ways of reducing that

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"Peter Taylor" wrote in message
...

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none. Current planning guidance from
central
government is that there should be no new development outside the
development limits or in open country. Go and take a look at the local
plan
for details that is available at your local council offices.


Good advice. And also don't forget Capital Gains Tax. If you build this
additional house and sell one of them you'll have to pay 40% of the
proceeds to
IR.

40% maximum, there are ways of reducing that

Please explain

"Peter Taylor" wrote in message
...

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"Peter Taylor" wrote in
message
...

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none. Current planning guidance from
central
government is that there should be no new development outside the
development limits or in open country. Go and take a look at the
local
plan
for details that is available at your local council offices.


Good advice. And also don't forget Capital Gains Tax. If you build
this
additional house and sell one of them you'll have to pay 40% of the
proceeds to
IR.

40% maximum, there are ways of reducing that

Please explain

There are a few web site around explaining it (the IR may have it on theirs)
If you have occupied the house for x number of years the rate goes down,
etc, etc.

"Peter Taylor" wrote in
message ...

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"Peter Taylor" wrote in
message
...

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none. Current planning guidance
from
central
government is that there should be no new development outside
the
development limits or in open country. Go and take a look at the
local
plan
for details that is available at your local council offices.


Good advice. And also don't forget Capital Gains Tax. If you
build this
additional house and sell one of them you'll have to pay 40% of
the
proceeds to
IR.

40% maximum, there are ways of reducing that

Please explain

This is all from memory and so the figures are probably wrong - the
principle is OK though:-

For starters you don't pay CGT on the proceeds, you pay CGT on the
profit, so you can deduct the cost of the land, the cost of getting
planning permission, the cost of building the house and the cost of
selling it.

Any assets owned before April 1998 (I think) are subject to indexation
relief which reduces the chargable gain.

After April 1998 you get taper relief which reduces the chargable gain.

You get a CGT allowance of IIRC £7500, which is also lopped off the
chargable gain. If you are married you can double this by giving half to
your spouse before the sale.

CGT is charged at your marginal rate, so unless you are a higher-rate
tax payer you will be charged up to the 40% band at 20% and 40%.

So unless you are an unmarried higher-rate tax payer who already has at
least £7500 capital gains this year, you will pay less than 40% on the
profit.

Even then, you can sell your principal private residence tax free, so
you could build the new house and sell the old one without having to pay
any CGT at all.

Or, build the new house, move in to it for a while and nominate it as
your PPR. Then sell it and move back into your old one (a bit dodgy
this, so you might have to show there was a valid reason why you moved
out of and back into your old house, such as letting it to generate some
income).

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none.

I certainly hope you are correct on that!

"mich" wrote in message
...

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none.

I certainly hope you are correct on that!

Why? What is wrong with demolishing ugly farm buildings and building a
state-of-the-art eco house? The whole country should be spattered with eco
house.

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"mich" wrote in message
...

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none.

I certainly hope you are correct on that!

Why? What is wrong with demolishing ugly farm buildings and building a
state-of-the-art eco house? The whole country should be spattered with
eco
house.

It makes for the slums of the future for those who are unfortunate enough
to live by them quite often.

Its happened round my area in several places. When it was only one in a
"back garden" it want noticable, ( well it was actually , but no one said
anything) but then the precident was set and several others started doing
it and suddenly it was slum land.

More than that the liberty takers arrived and started buying houses with
large gardens and then building two or three on the sites ( one was little
more than a lay by!). These were not sold as affordable homes, so the locals
were still homeless and priced out of the market. And yes, I have seen the
eco builders even bigger pounds in pockets when they sell - and no one in
the locality benefits , and in a few years all the "eco" has been planned
out and changed with "alterations" to the house.

I think planning committes need to be more careful and vigilent on this - I
hope they are being.

"mich" wrote in message
...

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"mich" wrote in message
...

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none.

I certainly hope you are correct on that!

Why? What is wrong with demolishing ugly farm buildings and building a
state-of-the-art eco house? The whole country should be spattered with
eco
house.

It makes for the slums of the future
for those who are unfortunate enough
to live by them quite often.

On what do you base this ridiculous assertion?

Its happened round my area in several places.

How many eco houses around you then?

When it was only one in a
"back garden" it want noticable, ( well it was
actually , but no one said
anything) but then the precident was set and
several others started doing
it and suddenly it was slum land.

Eco houses in all your back gardens?

More than that the liberty takers arrived
and started buying houses with
large gardens and then building two
or three on the sites ( one was little
more than a lay by!). These were not
sold as affordable homes, so the locals
were still homeless and priced out of
the market. And yes, I have seen the
eco builders even bigger pounds in
pockets when they sell - and no one in
the locality benefits , and in a few years
all the "eco" has been planned
out and changed with "alterations" to the house.

What you have is a big chip. You want affordable housing in your area.
Stopping people from building houses will not achieve that. In fact the
reverse will happen.

I think planning committes need to be
more careful and vigilent on this - I
hope they are being.

The OP has a 2 acre plot. hardly cramming in the back gardens. The solution
is allow people to build on the unused subsidised fields. We have a land
surplus. You are looking at the matter from the wrong direction. Stopping
people from building on subsidised fields, from our taxes, will prevent over
development in existing built up areas?

On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 15:33:26 +0100, "mich" wrote:

I think planning committes need to be more careful and vigilent on this - I
hope they are being.

Have no fear! The jobsworths are always vigilant when it comes to
preventing entrepreneurs who want to make or build something! Because
they couldn't, no one else is allowed. I call it the Verboten
mentality.

In any case, why must the locality benefit? What business is it of
"the locality" that someone has the nous to move there and pay someone
money to buy their property or utilise a plot of waste ground that
will otherwise contribute nothing to the environment, given that it
has only a couple of ramshackle eyesores of barns on it? It's like we
must all do "the locality" a favour for having the good grace to allow
us to live in their community. Maybe would-be builders should adopt
the approach of certain Muslim pilgrims and crawl the last few hundred
yards to the council offices on their stomachs, just to make everyone
aware of how committed they are to "the locality".

MM

On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 14:37:25 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"mich" wrote in message
...

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none.

I certainly hope you are correct on that!

Why? What is wrong with demolishing ugly farm buildings and building a
state-of-the-art eco house? The whole country should be spattered with eco
house.

I agree. I just don't think they need to quite so high-spec as your
ideal type to be valuable to the environment as well as being nice to
live in.

MM

"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 14:37:25 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"mich" wrote in message
...

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
What do you think my chances are?

Two chances really: slim and none.

I certainly hope you are correct on that!

Why? What is wrong with demolishing ugly farm buildings and building a
state-of-the-art eco house? The whole country should be spattered with
eco
house.

I agree. I just don't think they need to quite so high-spec as your
ideal type to be valuable to the environment as well as being nice to
live in.

The spec was not high. It was a superinsulated house (a normal house with
high insulation levels) and a solar roof, and a large water store. Not
rocket science.

"NickW" wrote in message
om...
I have a 2 acre plot in rural Suffolk. We do not live within the
village development boundary. The planning office has already
informally said they would not recommend permission for a new house.

However, I might still give it a bash... but I need an angle.

Here are some plus points:

* Part of my back garden is already fenced off and has been for years
- it looks like another plot.

* It has seperate access via a track which is well established.
Although the track crosses the village green, vehicles *are* permitted
along it because it's also used by another cottage.

* There are two unsightly delapidated barns (steel/asbestos) which the
house would replace

* If the house was a bungalow, it would probably not be visible from
the road.

* I have plans for an eco friendly house using solar water heating,
passive solar space heating with thermal storage, wood burning stoves,
eco friendly building materials and maybe some photovoltaic panels
etc.

* There is plenty of room for more than just one extra house, I could
offer a plot to put a couple of low-cost houses on, sold to the
council at cost.

What do you think my chances are?

Nick

It depends on the council, of course, but it's quite likely that they
won't want to deviate from the local plan so if you want to develop
outside the designated envelope you will probably have quite a fight on
your hands. It also depends on whether they have identified sufficient
development sites to cover the predicted new housing requirements of the
area - if so you could also be in trouble.

One of the reasons that they can deviate from the plan is if there is a
lack of affordable housing for local residents in the area. Your
low-cost housing is a good bit of planning gain but I doubt that the
council will want to own them - have a word with a local housing
association instead.

An eco house was built near where my parents live - it's almost
completely burried in the ground. I think the original application was
rejected by the city council but it was granted planning permission on
appeal to Prezza - the eco credentials plus the minimal impact on the
vicinty (it is barely visible) made the case.

Neil

NickW wrote:

I have a 2 acre plot in rural Suffolk. We do not live within the
village development boundary. The planning office has already
informally said they would not recommend permission for a new house.

However, I might still give it a bash... but I need an angle.

Here are some plus points:

* Part of my back garden is already fenced off and has been for years
- it looks like another plot.

* It has seperate access via a track which is well established.
Although the track crosses the village green, vehicles *are* permitted
along it because it's also used by another cottage.

* There are two unsightly delapidated barns (steel/asbestos) which the
house would replace

* If the house was a bungalow, it would probably not be visible from
the road.

* I have plans for an eco friendly house using solar water heating,
passive solar space heating with thermal storage, wood burning stoves,
eco friendly building materials and maybe some photovoltaic panels
etc.

* There is plenty of room for more than just one extra house, I could
offer a plot to put a couple of low-cost houses on, sold to the
council at cost.

What do you think my chances are?

Extremely good if you can find the right group of people to bribe.
I never did, but it mst be possble because developers etc seem to e
doung it all over the place.



Nick

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
NickW wrote:

I have a 2 acre plot in rural Suffolk. We do not live within the
village development boundary. The planning office has already
informally said they would not recommend permission for a new house.

However, I might still give it a bash... but I need an angle.

Here are some plus points:

* Part of my back garden is already fenced off and has been for years
- it looks like another plot.

* It has seperate access via a track which is well established.
Although the track crosses the village green, vehicles *are* permitted
along it because it's also used by another cottage.

* There are two unsightly delapidated barns (steel/asbestos) which the
house would replace

* If the house was a bungalow, it would probably not be visible from
the road.

* I have plans for an eco friendly house using solar water heating,
passive solar space heating with thermal storage, wood burning stoves,
eco friendly building materials and maybe some photovoltaic panels
etc.

* There is plenty of room for more than just one extra house, I could
offer a plot to put a couple of low-cost houses on, sold to the
council at cost.

What do you think my chances are?

Extremely good if you can find the right group of people to bribe.
I never did, but it mst be possble because developers etc seem to e
doung it all over the place.

Where are these developers doing it? Last year was the lower house building
figures since the early 1920s, yet the big builders made record profits. The
government launched an investigation, via Kate Barker, as to why so few
houses are being built. It seems the developers are bribing people not to
build houses.

Where are these developers doing it?

Round our way, the developers seem to be bullzozing any Victorian houses or
villas in sight and placing faceless blocks of flats on the plots. It's like
the 1960s all over again.

Christian.

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
. net...
Where are these developers doing it?

Round our way, the developers seem to be bullzozing any Victorian houses
or
villas in sight and placing faceless blocks of flats on the plots. It's
like
the 1960s all over again.

It has been happening where I live too - but not budozing Victorian
terraces, simply putting up two or three houses under the guise of making
one affordable home ( what affordable at 180K for a 2 bed box with 20ft of
garden in rural Cornwall?) and the council had been allowing it.

Its just greed.

It has been happening where I live too - but not budozing Victorian
terraces, simply putting up two or three houses under the guise of making
one affordable home

That I could stomach. I don't mind some phosphate and nitrate polluted
farmer's field succumbing to houses. It is the permanent loss of some of the
most beautiful Victorian Gothic houses that I'm angry about.

Christian.

"mich" wrote in message
...

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
. net...
Where are these developers doing it?

Round our way, the developers seem to be bullzozing any Victorian houses
or
villas in sight and placing faceless blocks of flats on the plots. It's
like
the 1960s all over again.

It has been happening where I live too - but not budozing Victorian
terraces, simply putting up two or three houses under the guise of making
one affordable home ( what affordable at 180K for a 2 bed box with 20ft of
garden in rural Cornwall?) and the council had been allowing it.

Its just greed.

It is not greed. The country is short of millions of homes. The problem is
that we are not allowed to build on subsidised fields. That is the problem.
If we were allowed to build on boring fields then garden in-fills and the
likes would not happen.

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 15:46:46 +0100, Christian McArdle wrote:

Where are these developers doing it?

Round our way, the developers seem to be bullzozing any Victorian houses or
villas in sight and placing faceless blocks of flats on the plots. It's like
the 1960s all over again.

Christian.

Large Victorian house around our way has just gone via auction. Waiting to
see what happens to it (Worcs).I suspect that it will be going to new
flats.

Dave

On 4 Jun 2004 02:14:31 -0700, (NickW) wrote:

I have a 2 acre plot in rural Suffolk. We do not live within the
village development boundary. The planning office has already
informally said they would not recommend permission for a new house.

However, I might still give it a bash... but I need an angle.

Here are some plus points:

* Part of my back garden is already fenced off and has been for years
- it looks like another plot.

* It has seperate access via a track which is well established.
Although the track crosses the village green, vehicles *are* permitted
along it because it's also used by another cottage.

* There are two unsightly delapidated barns (steel/asbestos) which the
house would replace

* If the house was a bungalow, it would probably not be visible from
the road.

* I have plans for an eco friendly house using solar water heating,
passive solar space heating with thermal storage, wood burning stoves,
eco friendly building materials and maybe some photovoltaic panels
etc.

* There is plenty of room for more than just one extra house, I could
offer a plot to put a couple of low-cost houses on, sold to the
council at cost.

What do you think my chances are?

My first thoughts are that in my opinion most local councillors and
planning officials who get to make a decision on what is built are a
bunch of old fogies driven by nimbyism, oneupmanship and sour grapes.
If they set their minds against you, for any reason, hell will freeze
over until these petty jobsworths with the power of Fidel Castro to
change their minds, or have it changed for them by higher powers.

I would never bother myself. I have heard of several examples where
there were perfectly good proposals to even just replace an existing
property, let alone build a new one next door, and the
council/planning authorities have just said, no, you may not. One
would have better luck getting on Schindler's List.

The way things are planned in this country is archaic. It is one of
the reasons why so few properties are being built and why there is no
cheap housing any more for the lower paid to get on to the housing
ladder.

However, you might consider selling the land instead to one of the
larger builders, who would probably know which strings to pull and
palms to grease, as that what it comes down to with our marvellous
system from the middle ages.

MM

In article , Mike Mitchell
writes
My first thoughts are that in my opinion most local councillors and
planning officials who get to make a decision on what is built are a
bunch of old fogies driven by nimbyism, oneupmanship and sour grapes.
If they set their minds against you, for any reason, hell will freeze
over until these petty jobsworths with the power of Fidel Castro to
change their minds, or have it changed for them by higher powers.

I would never bother myself. I have heard of several examples where
there were perfectly good proposals to even just replace an existing
property, let alone build a new one next door, and the
council/planning authorities have just said, no, you may not. One
would have better luck getting on Schindler's List.

The way things are planned in this country is archaic. It is one of
the reasons why so few properties are being built and why there is no
cheap housing any more for the lower paid to get on to the housing
ladder.

However, you might consider selling the land instead to one of the
larger builders, who would probably know which strings to pull and
palms to grease, as that what it comes down to with our marvellous
system from the middle ages.

If this is speaking from personal experience it sound like you have gone
at this like a bull in a china shop, planning procedures can be
manipulated by anyone you just have to understand them. It also sounds
like you're a bit out of touch, most planning applications go through
despite the wishes of the local community especially that we now have
ppg3. If what you're referring to is development outside of permitted
boundaries then that is more than a LPO will have sole responsibility
over anyway, whilst on the matter its worth also mentioning the large
land banks that developers have, its the developers that decide as and
when these are built on and developers are only interested in one thing,
and its not the greater good

--
David