Hands Off Our Land

29 Mar 2012

Quote by Ben_Minx
Yeah like I said NIMBYs.

Like I said, I feel you are wrong, For instance, it is not my back yard is it, I already live in a town dunno

I thought green belts usually surrounded towns.
Are you coming to any point? Or just taking the pee?

29 Mar 2012

The important thing for me is this campaign has had an effect and a good result.
I suspect that the Chancellor was asking business for things he could do to get the economy moving and they all listed the now-defunct planning regime as their top problem. Add in a grievous undersupply of affordable housing and a stagnant housing market, and it makes sense that a new planning framework would 'prioritise growth'. The failure was for the Government to take its eye off the countryside concern, and then to lash out when that failure was exposed.
As the title of this article suggests (with full credit to George Orwell) the quickest way for Clark and co to dig themselves out of the hole they had dug was to concede defeat, and it is no mean feat that they did so yesterday in a manner that has drawn praise from most quarters.
However the countryside must not go back to being ignored. According to figures from the Rural Shops Alliance, rural shops are closing at a rate of around 33 per month across the UK, with around 12% of independent shops closing in 2010 alone. Rural primary schools are closing at the rate of one a month because of a lack of affordable housing for families, and around 900 rural pubs closed last year. Figures from the Countryside Alliance found that rural drivers are paying over 4p more per litre at the pump than those in urban areas, and the cost of commuting to work adds at least an extra £17 onto the family bills each month. Rates of fuel poverty are much higher in the countryside and the average broadband speed pails in comparison to Britain's towns and cities.
Getting our planning laws right was a big issue to ensure we protect our green spaces. But the countryside is not just pretty fields and forests; it is a living, breathing environment and the people who live there need to be listened to on all the issues, not just those that make prime time.

Planning minister Greg Clark has said there should be a presumption against the building of more out-of-town shopping centres, and insisted the green belt would continue to be protected, as he announced the biggest shakeup of the planning system for more than half a century.
The National Planning Policy Framework replaces more than 1,000 pages of planning rules put in place by successive governments with a single, 50-page document intended to simplify the system and kickstart more housebuilding and other development to create jobs.
The new guidelines, which came into force immediately, are built around a "presumption in favour of sustainable development", which planners are told should balance the needs of the environment, economic sustainability, social needs, good governance and sound science.
In concessions to opponents of last year's draft document, the new framework stipulates that brownfield sites should usually be developed before greenfield sites, and town centres before out-of-town sites. It recognises the "intrinsic value and beauty" of the wider countryside, specifically protects playing fields, and bars "garden grabbing" for development.

:thumbup: Happy days :thumbup:

29 Mar 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009
Hands off whose land ? are the government planning to input compulsory purchase orders to build whatever it is they plan to build ? they do this a lot in the towns and cities so I just wondered if this is what this thread is about, or are they just planning to relax planning laws and utilise the land owned by ALL the taxpayers of the UK to make more room for our expanding population.
Has anyone living in the Countryside ever objected to the masses of building, compulsory purchase orders, land fill or anything else that happens in our urban areas, why if we need the land for other purposes should we not be allowed to use it, is there a law that says it is only for those in that area to dictate what is done with it, don't get me wrong I love the countryside and would love to keep it as it is, but needs as must and I am a realist, if we need it then we need it just as things are used in urban areas. Lately there are a few threads about those living in sparcely populated areas, well those living in urban areas have problems too, take fuel, it may cost more in rural areas but when it's in the tank you get to use it moving around not use it like urbanites do stuck in traffic jams for hours on end, slow crawling to and from work everyday, changing gear and stopping n starting every few minutes making consumption higher for like for like distance journeys. We have health hazards in pollution and germ transference abounding.
People in the countryside have the option to move to the urban areas, people in urban areas do not have the option to move to the countryside unless there are new planning laws as are being implemented now. Food for thought perhaps

Build away then until your heart is content, short sighted in my view though.
The population can not continue to expand for ever. I was born in the countryside but sadly unable to afford to live there now, had to move to a more urban area, but I would still not support short sighted planning laws just to get a house in the countrysideblue, the population in europe is not expanding, it's contracting. there will be no building expansion until the creators of credit, banks, begin to lend again at a greater rate than the contraction of credit. your/our land ? the countryside ? soon, none of us will be able to afford to go there.

30 Mar 2012

Quote by gulsonroad30664
Hands off whose land ? are the government planning to input compulsory purchase orders to build whatever it is they plan to build ? they do this a lot in the towns and cities so I just wondered if this is what this thread is about, or are they just planning to relax planning laws and utilise the land owned by ALL the taxpayers of the UK to make more room for our expanding population.
Has anyone living in the Countryside ever objected to the masses of building, compulsory purchase orders, land fill or anything else that happens in our urban areas, why if we need the land for other purposes should we not be allowed to use it, is there a law that says it is only for those in that area to dictate what is done with it, don't get me wrong I love the countryside and would love to keep it as it is, but needs as must and I am a realist, if we need it then we need it just as things are used in urban areas. Lately there are a few threads about those living in sparcely populated areas, well those living in urban areas have problems too, take fuel, it may cost more in rural areas but when it's in the tank you get to use it moving around not use it like urbanites do stuck in traffic jams for hours on end, slow crawling to and from work everyday, changing gear and stopping n starting every few minutes making consumption higher for like for like distance journeys. We have health hazards in pollution and germ transference abounding.
People in the countryside have the option to move to the urban areas, people in urban areas do not have the option to move to the countryside unless there are new planning laws as are being implemented now. Food for thought perhaps

Build away then until your heart is content, short sighted in my view though.
The population can not continue to expand for ever. I was born in the countryside but sadly unable to afford to live there now, had to move to a more urban area, but I would still not support short sighted planning laws just to get a house in the countrysideblue, the population in europe is not expanding, it's contracting.
Another one of your quite baseless claims Gulson?

30 Mar 2012

Quote by Max777
Hands off whose land ? are the government planning to input compulsory purchase orders to build whatever it is they plan to build ? they do this a lot in the towns and cities so I just wondered if this is what this thread is about, or are they just planning to relax planning laws and utilise the land owned by ALL the taxpayers of the UK to make more room for our expanding population.
Has anyone living in the Countryside ever objected to the masses of building, compulsory purchase orders, land fill or anything else that happens in our urban areas, why if we need the land for other purposes should we not be allowed to use it, is there a law that says it is only for those in that area to dictate what is done with it, don't get me wrong I love the countryside and would love to keep it as it is, but needs as must and I am a realist, if we need it then we need it just as things are used in urban areas. Lately there are a few threads about those living in sparcely populated areas, well those living in urban areas have problems too, take fuel, it may cost more in rural areas but when it's in the tank you get to use it moving around not use it like urbanites do stuck in traffic jams for hours on end, slow crawling to and from work everyday, changing gear and stopping n starting every few minutes making consumption higher for like for like distance journeys. We have health hazards in pollution and germ transference abounding.
People in the countryside have the option to move to the urban areas, people in urban areas do not have the option to move to the countryside unless there are new planning laws as are being implemented now. Food for thought perhaps

Build away then until your heart is content, short sighted in my view though.
The population can not continue to expand for ever. I was born in the countryside but sadly unable to afford to live there now, had to move to a more urban area, but I would still not support short sighted planning laws just to get a house in the countrysideblue, the population in europe is not expanding, it's contracting.
Another one of your quite baseless claims Gulson?
See now I was born in the Lake District and love the countryside, the best place I have ever lived is the Alps of Switzerland where my lounge sat at a mere 5000feet, I didn't say I did not like the Countryside, I never said build on the best of it, but there is a lot of barren countryside around that would lend itself to being used, a lot of it owned by the Ministry of Defence, some of which could be spared, I am very much a realist, if we do indeed need it then we should.
Blindly believing we should build on it just because it's there is silly, allowing the rich who can afford to buy it to build on it because they can afford it is silly, but hanging on to every bit of it because "it's countryside is silly too".
I live in Stoke on Trent, we have some lovely parks within walking distance of my home, wild parks and kept parks, we have countryside just 10 mins drive away and we are on the edge of one of the great National Parks that we can visit within a 15 min drive.
We don't pay premium prices for "countryside" property nor do we pay premium prices for bieng one of the big cities, my home has 4 double bedrooms, a very large dining room and large kitchen, a nice lounge and two bathrooms, it also has 3 basement rooms, front and rear gardens, off road parking and a garage that will house 3 cars or be partioned into 4 more rooms, I can see the Wrekin in Wellington/Telford from my Kitchen Window (unaided) we are half an hour from Manchester, half an hour from the M1, 10mins fromthe M6, 3/4 of an hour from Birmingham, the current market price £120,000.
I sometimes wonder why people are willing to pay incredible prices for homes that basically offer less to the buyer but are "in the city or in the countryside".

30 Mar 2012

No idea why you quoted me Midscouple as I said absolutely nothing about building anywhere. My comment was about Gulson's non sensical claim that the population of Europe is contracting.

30 Mar 2012

Quote by MidsCouple24
Hands off whose land ? are the government planning to input compulsory purchase orders to build whatever it is they plan to build ? they do this a lot in the towns and cities so I just wondered if this is what this thread is about, or are they just planning to relax planning laws and utilise the land owned by ALL the taxpayers of the UK to make more room for our expanding population.
Has anyone living in the Countryside ever objected to the masses of building, compulsory purchase orders, land fill or anything else that happens in our urban areas, why if we need the land for other purposes should we not be allowed to use it, is there a law that says it is only for those in that area to dictate what is done with it, don't get me wrong I love the countryside and would love to keep it as it is, but needs as must and I am a realist, if we need it then we need it just as things are used in urban areas. Lately there are a few threads about those living in sparcely populated areas, well those living in urban areas have problems too, take fuel, it may cost more in rural areas but when it's in the tank you get to use it moving around not use it like urbanites do stuck in traffic jams for hours on end, slow crawling to and from work everyday, changing gear and stopping n starting every few minutes making consumption higher for like for like distance journeys. We have health hazards in pollution and germ transference abounding.
People in the countryside have the option to move to the urban areas, people in urban areas do not have the option to move to the countryside unless there are new planning laws as are being implemented now. Food for thought perhaps

Build away then until your heart is content, short sighted in my view though.
The population can not continue to expand for ever. I was born in the countryside but sadly unable to afford to live there now, had to move to a more urban area, but I would still not support short sighted planning laws just to get a house in the countrysideblue, the population in europe is not expanding, it's contracting.
Another one of your quite baseless claims Gulson?
See now I was born in the Lake District and love the countryside, the best place I have ever lived is the Alps of Switzerland where my lounge sat at a mere 5000feet, I didn't say I did not like the Countryside, I never said build on the best of it, but there is a lot of barren countryside around that would lend itself to being used, a lot of it owned by the Ministry of Defence, some of which could be spared, I am very much a realist, if we do indeed need it then we should.
Blindly believing we should build on it just because it's there is silly, allowing the rich who can afford to buy it to build on it because they can afford it is silly, but hanging on to every bit of it because "it's countryside is silly too".
I live in Stoke on Trent, we have some lovely parks within walking distance of my home, wild parks and kept parks, we have countryside just 10 mins drive away and we are on the edge of one of the great National Parks that we can visit within a 15 min drive.
We don't pay premium prices for "countryside" property nor do we pay premium prices for bieng one of the big cities, my home has 4 double bedrooms, a very large dining room and large kitchen, a nice lounge and two bathrooms, it also has 3 basement rooms, front and rear gardens, off road parking and a garage that will house 3 cars or be partioned into 4 more rooms, I can see the Wrekin in Wellington/Telford from my Kitchen Window (unaided) we are half an hour from Manchester, half an hour from the M1, 10mins fromthe M6, 3/4 of an hour from Birmingham, the current market price £120,000.
I sometimes wonder why people are willing to pay incredible prices for homes that basically offer less to the buyer but are "in the city or in the countryside".
Just a personal choice thing I would guess

31 Mar 2012

I don't know either Max wink

I guess I clicked on the wrong "quote" button, it does get confusing at times with lot's of quotes, well it does to me anyway lol

Personal choice I understand, but make a personal choice then moan about all the disadvantages I find confusing :lol:

31 Mar 2012

Quote by Max777
No idea why you quoted me Midscouple as I said absolutely nothing about building anywhere. My comment was about Gulson's non sensical claim that the population of Europe is contracting.

As an aside and by way of clarification ... the figure I found is from 2010 and is for a net growth of % (this includes those migrating to the E.U.) Given how small a number this is I'm sure that different readings of the statistics give negative and positive growth rates.

31 Mar 2012

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
No idea why you quoted me Midscouple as I said absolutely nothing about building anywhere. My comment was about Gulson's non sensical claim that the population of Europe is contracting.

As an aside and by way of clarification ... the figure I found is from 2010 and is for a net growth of % (this includes those migrating to the E.U.) Given how small a number this is I'm sure that different readings of the statistics give negative and positive growth rates.
the figure you quote is included in the table provided in the following link.

The increase in 2010 is the lowest increase for the past 7 years but it is still an increase. Gulson claims the European population is contracting. It clearly is not. The growth may be slowing but it is still growth.
Have a look at the following for the projected EU27 population growth.

2 Apr 2012

Quote by Max777
No idea why you quoted me Midscouple as I said absolutely nothing about building anywhere. My comment was about Gulson's non sensical claim that the population of Europe is contracting.

As an aside and by way of clarification ... the figure I found is from 2010 and is for a net growth of % (this includes those migrating to the E.U.) Given how small a number this is I'm sure that different readings of the statistics give negative and positive growth rates.
the figure you quote is included in the table provided in the following link.

The increase in 2010 is the lowest increase for the past 7 years but it is still an increase. Gulson claims the European population is contracting. It clearly is not. The growth may be slowing but it is still growth.
Have a look at the following for the projected EU27 population growth.

So, expansion, not contraction then :thumbup:

2 Apr 2012

The expansion seems to be contracting to the point where contraction will begin and then the contraction will expand.