Food Industry on Brink of Collapse
Andrea Jones
http://www.news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/10/23/nfarm23
.xml detailing a study carried out by Deloitte and Touche which says that
British farmers stand to lose £8 per acre this year. You'll have to
register at the Telegraph site to read it or there's a summary at
http://www.ukfoodserviceinfo.com/default.asp
Andrea Jones
pea...@swallowfarm.fsnet.co.uk
Hello,
On 2002-10-27 age...@hjones-sons.co.uk said:
>out by Deloitte and Touche which says that British farmers stand to
>lose £8 per acre this year.
The nfu has put out a statement that they are being too pessamistic, I
wonder what they are up to this time.
Best wishes, Tony Pearce
email, pea...@swallowfarm.fsnet.co.uk
Jim Webster
<pea...@swallowfarm.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:apigjq$gim$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> Hello,
> On 2002-10-27 age...@hjones-sons.co.uk said:
> >out by Deloitte and Touche which says that British farmers stand
to
> >lose £8 per acre this year.
>
> The nfu has put out a statement that they are being too pessamistic, I
> wonder what they are up to this time.
trying to reassure the banks?
the last thing the NFU want is to have the banks decide to write farming
off and pull the plug.
--
Jim Webster
"The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind"
'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami'
David G. Bell
j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk "Jim Webster" wrote:
> <pea...@swallowfarm.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:apigjq$gim$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> > Hello,
> > On 2002-10-27 age...@hjones-sons.co.uk said:
> > >out by Deloitte and Touche which says that British farmers stand
> to
> > >lose £8 per acre this year.
> >
> > The nfu has put out a statement that they are being too pessamistic, I
> > wonder what they are up to this time.
>
> trying to reassure the banks?
>
> the last thing the NFU want is to have the banks decide to write farming
> off and pull the plug.
The last thing the banks want is for all their security to vanish, yet
one of the problems for British farming is land prices (and thus rents)
which grossly exceed the earning capacity at current produce prices.
--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
"Let me get this straight. You're the KGB's core AI, but you're afraid
of a copyright infringement lawsuit over your translator semiotics?"
From "Lobsters" by Charles Stross.
Oz
>The last thing the banks want is for all their security to vanish, yet
>one of the problems for British farming is land prices (and thus rents)
>which grossly exceed the earning capacity at current produce prices.
Look, the banks have a continual stream of farm accounts (admittedly a
year out of date) coming in from their clients. They know what the
prices were then, they know what they are now, they know how little can
be pared away (national ave).
They (or their ag research dept) probably has had a pretty good feel
about the position for at least the last six months.
--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.
Jim Webster
Oz <aco...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:cAoIoBCU...@btopenworld.com...
> David G. Bell <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> writes
>
> >The last thing the banks want is for all their security to vanish,
yet
> >one of the problems for British farming is land prices (and thus
rents)
> >which grossly exceed the earning capacity at current produce prices.
>
> Look, the banks have a continual stream of farm accounts (admittedly a
> year out of date) coming in from their clients. They know what the
> prices were then, they know what they are now, they know how little
can
> be pared away (national ave).
>
> They (or their ag research dept) probably has had a pretty good feel
> about the position for at least the last six months.
I suspect that the one thing they are not sure about is whether there is
enough demand to underpin land prices. Obviously it varies by region and
access to SE, but should that demand start to drop, are the banks going
to try and cut their losses and offload, or will the fact that the
demand is firm encourage them to cash farms in to get their money back?
--
Jim Webster
"The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind"
'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami'
>
swroot
> Oz <aco...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:cAoIoBCU...@btopenworld.com...
> > David G. Bell <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> writes
> >
> > >The last thing the banks want is for all their security to vanish,
> yet
> > >one of the problems for British farming is land prices (and thus
> rents)
> > >which grossly exceed the earning capacity at current produce prices.
> >
> > Look, the banks have a continual stream of farm accounts (admittedly a
> > year out of date) coming in from their clients. They know what the
> > prices were then, they know what they are now, they know how little
> can
> > be pared away (national ave).
> >
> > They (or their ag research dept) probably has had a pretty good feel
> > about the position for at least the last six months.
>
> I suspect that the one thing they are not sure about is whether there is
> enough demand to underpin land prices. Obviously it varies by region and
> access to SE, but should that demand start to drop, are the banks going
> to try and cut their losses and offload, or will the fact that the
> demand is firm encourage them to cash farms in to get their money back?
Factor in the likelihood that planning regs will be relaxed to allow
more development (housing, etc) on greenfield sites. I don't know the
timescale, but it's inevitable.
regards
sarah
--
"Propose to an Englishman any principle, or any instrument, however
admirable, and you will observe that the whole effort of the English
mind is directed to find a difficulty, a defect, or an impossibility in
it." Charles Babbage, 1852
Oz
>Factor in the likelihood that planning regs will be relaxed to allow
>more development (housing, etc) on greenfield sites. I don't know the
>timescale, but it's inevitable.
Some may even happen this millennium.
That's not how planners do it.
They find a generally unloved and depressed town with a good name (say,
like slough) and decide it's going to be their development area. They
pour all the houses into this area, usually with very little long-term
planning and are then surprised when it all starts going wrong.
They are astonished to find the schools can't cope when the population
goes from 3000 to 30,000. They find the hospitals can't cope, there
aren't enough pubs or roads or leisure facilities. After all leisure
facilities (cinemas and so on) are profit earners, and we can't have
that. Eventually they shoehorn them in on tiny sites scattered round the
mess of a new town (where nobody knows where they are) and are surprised
when they fail. This is called 'town planning'.
Pah!
Jim Webster
swroot <swr...@farm-direct.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1fkruhp.w75f5ig1rl8eN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk...
> > > They (or their ag research dept) probably has had a pretty good
feel
> > > about the position for at least the last six months.
> >
> > I suspect that the one thing they are not sure about is whether
there is
> > enough demand to underpin land prices. Obviously it varies by region
and
> > access to SE, but should that demand start to drop, are the banks
going
> > to try and cut their losses and offload, or will the fact that the
> > demand is firm encourage them to cash farms in to get their money
back?
>
> Factor in the likelihood that planning regs will be relaxed to allow
> more development (housing, etc) on greenfield sites. I don't know the
> timescale, but it's inevitable.
That is going to be an interesting can of worms when it is eventually
opened. Ignoring such things as new towns and infill between town edge
and byepass, what seems to happen is that the farm buildings are
developed into a hamlet, the land is sold off to another farm. We end up
with little commuter hamlets as islands within seriously large farms.
Now that IS going to be an interesting clash of cultures. Mind you it
may well be that the farm at that size can justify employing its own
inhouse PR staff.
Oz
>That is going to be an interesting can of worms when it is eventually
>opened. Ignoring such things as new towns and infill between town edge
>and byepass, what seems to happen is that the farm buildings are
>developed into a hamlet, the land is sold off to another farm. We end up
>with little commuter hamlets as islands within seriously large farms.
>Now that IS going to be an interesting clash of cultures. Mind you it
>may well be that the farm at that size can justify employing its own
>inhouse PR staff.
Not really. All new units of whatever sort are always sited as far away
from settlements as possible. Modern man (yuppie) wants countryside, not
places that smell, are dusty, have lorries and might even work hours
other than 9-5 five days a week.
As for slow, dirty, smelly tractors well: UGH!.
I'm not entirely sure planners have grasped this yet, though.
swroot
Alternatively, that type of farm has a captive population of relatively
wealthy incomers who might be interested in oh, riding lessons, livery,
upmarket country clothing, farm shops ... a little nest of
diversification opportunities. But it does almost nothing to solve the
housing crisis which is responsible for the relaxation of planning
regulation.
swroot
> swroot <swr...@farm-direct.co.uk> writes
>
> >Factor in the likelihood that planning regs will be relaxed to allow
> >more development (housing, etc) on greenfield sites. I don't know the
> >timescale, but it's inevitable.
>
> Some may even happen this millennium.
>
> That's not how planners do it.
>
> They find a generally unloved and depressed town with a good name (say,
> like slough) and decide it's going to be their development area. They
> pour all the houses into this area, usually with very little long-term
> planning and are then surprised when it all starts going wrong.
>
> They are astonished to find the schools can't cope when the population
> goes from 3000 to 30,000. They find the hospitals can't cope, there
> aren't enough pubs or roads or leisure facilities. After all leisure
> facilities (cinemas and so on) are profit earners, and we can't have
> that. Eventually they shoehorn them in on tiny sites scattered round the
> mess of a new town (where nobody knows where they are) and are surprised
> when they fail. This is called 'town planning'.
>
> Pah!
seconded. Alternatively you could have new towns built a considerable
distance from existing centres of employment and without sufficient
shopping facilities or other public amenities, thus ensuring every
resident family has two cars and uses both of them every day.
David G. Bell
aco...@btopenworld.com "Oz" wrote:
> swroot <swr...@farm-direct.co.uk> writes
>
> >Factor in the likelihood that planning regs will be relaxed to allow
> >more development (housing, etc) on greenfield sites. I don't know the
> >timescale, but it's inevitable.
>
> Some may even happen this millennium.
>
> That's not how planners do it.
>
> They find a generally unloved and depressed town with a good name (say,
> like slough) and decide it's going to be their development area. They
> pour all the houses into this area, usually with very little long-term
> planning and are then surprised when it all starts going wrong.
>
> They are astonished to find the schools can't cope when the population
> goes from 3000 to 30,000. They find the hospitals can't cope, there
> aren't enough pubs or roads or leisure facilities. After all leisure
> facilities (cinemas and so on) are profit earners, and we can't have
> that. Eventually they shoehorn them in on tiny sites scattered round the
> mess of a new town (where nobody knows where they are) and are surprised
> when they fail. This is called 'town planning'.
I wouldn't claim that Sim City was ever an accurate model, in any
version, but it is remarkable how many little habits of the planners
will cause you to "lose" that game.
Old Codger
>
> Some may even happen this millennium.
>
> That's not how planners do it.
>
> They find a generally unloved and depressed town with a good name
(say,
> like slough) and decide it's going to be their development area.
They
> pour all the houses into this area, usually with very little
long-term
> planning and are then surprised when it all starts going wrong.
>
> They are astonished to find the schools can't cope when the
population
> goes from 3000 to 30,000. They find the hospitals can't cope, there
> aren't enough pubs or roads or leisure facilities. After all leisure
> facilities (cinemas and so on) are profit earners, and we can't have
> that. Eventually they shoehorn them in on tiny sites scattered round
the
> mess of a new town (where nobody knows where they are) and are
surprised
> when they fail. This is called 'town planning'.
>
> Pah!
When we moved here in 1966 the population was around 400 and children
were taken to the nearest primary school in a small green County
Council van, seating about 9. Work started on three estates in 1968,
one opposite us, with houses priced about right for young couples with
young children. By 1970 the van was doing about 6 trips to take all
the children and complaints grew. The County Education department did
a site visit and expressed surprise at the number of new houses. The
van was replaced by a coach. We now have our own village primary
school and a double decker bus takes the children to secondary school.
--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field
Oz
>I wouldn't claim that Sim City was ever an accurate model, in any
>version, but it is remarkable how many little habits of the planners
>will cause you to "lose" that game.
Quite, so bloody obvious even a computer can figure it out.
Tim Lamb
<aco...@btopenworld.com> writes
>Jim Webster <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> writes
>
>>That is going to be an interesting can of worms when it is eventually
>>opened. Ignoring such things as new towns and infill between town edge
>>and byepass, what seems to happen is that the farm buildings are
>>developed into a hamlet, the land is sold off to another farm. We end up
>>with little commuter hamlets as islands within seriously large farms.
>>Now that IS going to be an interesting clash of cultures. Mind you it
>>may well be that the farm at that size can justify employing its own
>>inhouse PR staff.
>
>Not really. All new units of whatever sort are always sited as far away
>from settlements as possible. Modern man (yuppie) wants countryside, not
>places that smell, are dusty, have lorries and might even work hours
>other than 9-5 five days a week.
>
>As for slow, dirty, smelly tractors well: UGH!.
>
>I'm not entirely sure planners have grasped this yet, though.
Or that the tackle required to operate an extended farm with minimal
staff becomes ever larger such that the steep banked roads are no longer
suitable for both public and agricultural access.
However, our farsighted government may eventually overcome this by
exporting production to flat areas with a low density car owning
population.
regards
>
--
Tim Lamb
Andrew
> >
> > They find a generally unloved and depressed town with a good name (say,
> > like slough) and decide it's going to be their development area. They
> > pour all the houses into this area, usually with very little long-term
> > planning and are then surprised when it all starts going wrong.
> >
> > They are astonished to find the schools can't cope when the population
> > goes from 3000 to 30,000. They find the hospitals can't cope, there
> > aren't enough pubs or roads or leisure facilities. After all leisure
> > facilities (cinemas and so on) are profit earners, and we can't have
> > that. Eventually they shoehorn them in on tiny sites scattered round the
> > mess of a new town (where nobody knows where they are) and are surprised
> > when they fail. This is called 'town planning'.
> >
> > Pah!
>
> seconded. Alternatively you could have new towns built a considerable
> distance from existing centres of employment and without sufficient
> shopping facilities or other public amenities, thus ensuring every
> resident family has two cars and uses both of them every day.
Deeply unfair - at least historically. I'm proud to say that I worked
for a Development Corporation until it was wound up ten years ago. We
were almost entirely autonomous reporting directly to DoE at ministerial
level. The strategic planning was first class.
Schools appeared at the appropriate stage, as did hospitals (just about
- interface with NHS bureacracy was "interesting") and more pubs,
cinemas, leisure facilities, etc. than you could shake a stick at, but
carefully planned so they could stay in business. We made a massive
profit every year thanks to the simple combination of compulsory
purchase and granting ourselves planning permission - and paid for all
the frighteningly expensive infrastructure (including millions of trees
each year - now hundreds of miles of superb linear habitat).
New towns have an undeserved reputation, especially in the strategic
planning sense. There was much to commend centralised planning,
*provided that* delegation to the local level worked sensibly. Can't see
that happending today.
Jim Webster
Tim Lamb <t...@marford.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ORajqJAH...@marford.demon.co.uk...
> In article <LLY9qJDU...@btopenworld.com>, Oz
> <aco...@btopenworld.com> writes
> >Jim Webster <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> writes
> staff becomes ever larger such that the steep banked roads are no
longer
> suitable for both public and agricultural access.
>
> However, our farsighted government may eventually overcome this by
> exporting production to flat areas with a low density car owning
> population.
>
the Ukraine?
swroot
> The message <1fks4zh.4bbmjrip0ibN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>
> from swr...@farm-direct.co.uk (swroot) contains these words:
>
> > Alternatively, that type of farm has a captive population of relatively
> > wealthy incomers who might be interested in oh, riding lessons, livery,
> > upmarket country clothing, farm shops ... a little nest of
> > diversification opportunities. But it does almost nothing to solve the
> > housing crisis which is responsible for the relaxation of planning
> > regulation.
> > sarah
>
> Housing crisis ?? Are you sure there is one ?
The government thinks there is, and is planning accordingly. There
certainly is a housing shortage in the south/southeast, but I understand
the vacancy rate rises as prices decrease further north. Other
reasons/solutions for the shortage may suggest themselves to those able
to see beyond the ends of their noses.
swroot
No insult intended -- that's the point. The older 'New Towns' work well,
but the current crop seem less well-planned. Admittedly there are more
NIMBYs and other constraints on location, and 'people today' are perhaps
more accustomed to having all facilities available from the start.
Over the years I've spent some time talking to mid-level County Council
employees about life, the universe and everything; most of those who
*wanted* to work for the public good have now left or are so
disillusioned they're simply putting in the time. Most/all public
services are so underfunded that they can't meet existing needs, let
alone plan for future provision.
regards
sarah
Jill
> Gerald L R Stubbs <stu...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Housing crisis ?? Are you sure there is one ?
>
> The government thinks there is, and is planning accordingly. There
> certainly is a housing shortage in the south/southeast, but I understand
> the vacancy rate rises as prices decrease further north. Other
> reasons/solutions for the shortage may suggest themselves to those able
> to see beyond the ends of their noses.
certainly one up here in north Argyll
very few houses for sale
and plenty of demand
--
Jill Bowis
http://www.poultryscotland.co.uk http://www.henhouses.co.uk
http://www.domesticducks.co.uk http://www.poultry-books.co.uk
http://www.kintaline.plus.com/welshcottage
Oz
>No insult intended -- that's the point. The older 'New Towns' work well,
>but the current crop seem less well-planned. Admittedly there are more
>NIMBYs and other constraints on location, and 'people today' are perhaps
>more accustomed to having all facilities available from the start.
The old 'new towns' were exactly that, ie planned as new towns from the
outset.
The new 'new towns' are not. They are simply 'areas zoned for housing'.
As each tranche gets planning permission, usually in 20+ Ha blocks, so
they go in. Usually only with required infrastructure like drainage and
roads.
The town council has to sort out schools, hospitals and make the overall
plans of the various developers (all with different blocks and plans)
stitch together to make an overall plan for a (very) much larger
settlement.
Except they don't.
Andrew
None taken :-)
> >The older 'New Towns' work well,
> >but the current crop seem less well-planned. Admittedly there are more
> >NIMBYs and other constraints on location, and 'people today' are perhaps
> >more accustomed to having all facilities available from the start.
>
> The old 'new towns' were exactly that, ie planned as new towns from the
> outset.
>
> The new 'new towns' are not. They are simply 'areas zoned for housing'.
> As each tranche gets planning permission, usually in 20+ Ha blocks, so
> they go in. Usually only with required infrastructure like drainage and
> roads.
>
> The town council has to sort out schools, hospitals and make the overall
> plans of the various developers (all with different blocks and plans)
> stitch together to make an overall plan for a (very) much larger
> settlement.
>
> Except they don't.
Can't help but go along with that. Market forces seem extremely unlikely
to get this one right...
swroot
> "swroot" <swr...@farm-direct.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1fkt1az.s7dhrnw7c02N%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk...
> > Gerald L R Stubbs <stu...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > Housing crisis ?? Are you sure there is one ?
> >
> > The government thinks there is, and is planning accordingly. There
> > certainly is a housing shortage in the south/southeast, but I understand
> > the vacancy rate rises as prices decrease further north. Other
> > reasons/solutions for the shortage may suggest themselves to those able
> > to see beyond the ends of their noses.
>
> certainly one up here in north Argyll
> very few houses for sale
> and plenty of demand
What proportion of the demand is generated by Southerners
retiring/semi-retiring to the area?
Paul Poornan
>What proportion of the demand is generated by Southerners
>retiring/semi-retiring to the area?
>
>regards
>sarah
>
Paul.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DUSTY OLD BOOKS Ltd, 7 Pear Tree Farm, Marsh Gibbon, Oxon, OX27 0GB, UK.
Tel 01869 278 160, Fx 01869 278 163. http://www.dustyoldbooks.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Old and out-of-print books: Photos of every book.
Agriculture, Animal Nutrition, Architecture, Medicine, Science,
Trade catalogues, Business, History (national & local), Travel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
David P
direct.co.uk says...
> Gerald L R Stubbs <stu...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > The message <1fks4zh.4bbmjrip0ibN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>
> > from swr...@farm-direct.co.uk (swroot) contains these words:
> >
> > > Alternatively, that type of farm has a captive population of relatively
> > > wealthy incomers who might be interested in oh, riding lessons, livery,
> > > upmarket country clothing, farm shops ... a little nest of
> > > diversification opportunities. But it does almost nothing to solve the
> > > housing crisis which is responsible for the relaxation of planning
> > > regulation.
> > > sarah
> >
> > Housing crisis ?? Are you sure there is one ?
>
> The government thinks there is, and is planning accordingly. There
> certainly is a housing shortage in the south/southeast,
*Is* there a housing shortage? or is it that people do not want to live
in the properties that are already there?
I can't check but there were some stats out that showed that the number
of vacant properties was relatively high [from memory up to 10% even in
London and SE] as a percentage of total dwellings. Problem is that most
of the vacant properties were in public sector tower blocks where no-one
wanted to live; or else in other similar non-desirable locations.
There is a large estate that I know of. Housing built in the 1970's to
higher standard than private sector [lower density/better quality &
size]; it had a fortune spent on it a few years back and it still has a
high vacancy rate. The problem is the people who live there not the
housing. No-one wnats to join them and yet IMHO the estate itself is
very attractive once you get around the vandalism etc.
--
David
Visit http://www.farm-direct.co.uk for your local farmgate food supplies.
FAQ's, Glossary, Farming Year and more!
Hamish Macbeth
> Factor in the likelihood that planning regs will be relaxed to allow
> more development (housing, etc) on greenfield sites. I don't know the
> timescale, but it's inevitable.
>
I do hope so, the increase in house prices is going to end in tears if
something is not done to stop it.
If the banks think Farms are a risk on their books, see what will happen if
house prices continue ti rise and then the interest rates double? Which will
be about 6 months after the UK joins the Euro and the first Euro crises
kicks in.
Hamish Macbeth
>
> New towns have an undeserved reputation, especially in the strategic
> planning sense. There was much to commend centralised planning,
> *provided that* delegation to the local level worked sensibly. Can't see
> that happending today.
They are designed by one social group for another. Large estate, one pub
in center as social focus.
Popular 1960s design.
New families move in lots of babies. 15 -20 years later police want pub
closed as it is the focus of all the rival youth gangs in the estate.
High rise flats, another wonder of 60s central planning. Get a central
planner to show you a plan of his house, won't be a bit like what he designs
for the rest of us.
David P
Ham...@buddenbrooks.fsnet.co.uk says...
>
>
> High rise flats, another wonder of 60s central planning. Get a central
> planner to show you a plan of his house, won't be a bit like what he designs
> for the rest of us.
>
Also many planners are low paid and live in what may be considerd by some
to be very undes. res's.
Gosh, I must be ill. I'm defending planners.
Hamish Macbeth
"Gerald L R Stubbs" <stu...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:200210282...@zetnet.co.uk...
> The problem with land values, to my mind, is
> that now there are buyers other than farmers,
> who are more cash-rich than farmers.
>
What is sale price of a 100 acre farm with no chance of planning permission
in the foreseeable future?
What is the sale price of a 100 acre farm with a 1/10 chance of planning
permission in the next 10 years?
David P
Ham...@buddenbrooks.fsnet.co.uk says...
100acres is a 'big garden' in many parts of the UK now. The value is
driven by the value of the house as a residence and not the value of the
farm land.
A 'pure' Ag Holdings rAct rent is likeley to be c£45-60/acre. Expect a
yield of say 6% so multiply the rent by around 15 to get tthe ag. capital
value in the range o f £675 - £900/acre.
Only place you are likely to find this level of value is Hill farms in
remotest Wales, North Country, Scotland.
Anywhere near a population will have values in excess of £2500 acre as
'pure ag' excluding house.
Hamish Macbeth
"David P" <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.182a17834...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> Also many planners are low paid and live in what may be considerd by some
> to be very undes. res's.
>
> Gosh, I must be ill. I'm defending planners.
> --
Perhaps this is the case at the detail end of central planning. At the top
there are people who want to put the rest of us in postage stamp house plots
or window boxed high rises while haveing
an acre or two around their own homes.
Andrew
> > planning sense. There was much to commend centralised planning,
> > *provided that* delegation to the local level worked sensibly. Can't see
> > that happending today.
>
> They are designed by one social group for another. Large estate, one pub
> in center as social focus. Popular 1960s design.
Not in places that really thought it through. Pubs alongside community
centres, primary schools, shops, doctor's surgeries, small parks, etc.
Called a "Local Centre" (planning cliche!) not focused on one part of
the community but aiming to meet all local needs in one place.
> New families move in lots of babies. 15 -20 years later police want pub
> closed as it is the focus of all the rival youth gangs in the estate.
>
> High rise flats, another wonder of 60s central planning. Get a central
> planner to show you a plan of his house, won't be a bit like what he designs
> for the rest of us.
I'd fully accept that '60s planning came up with some poor solutions.
I'd defend '70s and '80s planning more strongly.
Hamish Macbeth
"Andrew" <a.hi...@uea.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:a.hickley-D7A6F...@cpca14.uea.ac.uk...
.
>
> Not in places that really thought it through. Pubs alongside community
> centres, primary schools, shops, doctor's surgeries, small parks, etc.
> Called a "Local Centre" (planning cliche!) not focused on one part of
> the community but aiming to meet all local needs in one place.
Unfortuneatly the Jets and the Sharks are better permitted to have
entertainment venues where they do not need to meet.
swroot
My understanding is that there is vacant housing (usually council) in
(some?) cities in the midlands and further north. Down here I think
everything that can be redeveloped for resale has been done; ISTR
hearing they're rehousing council tenants from the southeast into the
west midlands. There are undoubtedly estates with bad reputations around
here, but I don't know of any with high vacancy rates. Final
negociations are underway to build another new settlement ASAP.
swroot
I agree about the mortgage burden ending in tears, regardless of the
soothing statements I've heard from lenders. But development of
greenfield is a Bad Thing. This is a tiny country, and it's silly to put
houses over what is often prime agricultural land. The logical way
forward is to build *good* multiple occupancy buildings, highrise or
lowrise, and encourage people to enjoy urban living. It is possible to
live in comfort or even luxury in a flat -- I've seen it in North
America.
This is serious thread convergence with uk.food+drink.misc... anyone
want to talk about Borough Market? :-))
David P
swr...@farm-direct.co.uk says...
> David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > In article <1fkt1az.s7dhrnw7c02N%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>, swroot@farm-
> > direct.co.uk says...
> > > Gerald L R Stubbs <stu...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The message <1fks4zh.4bbmjrip0ibN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>
> > > > from swr...@farm-direct.co.uk (swroot) contains these words:
> > > > > diversification opportunities. But it does almost nothing to solve the
> > > > > housing crisis which is responsible for the relaxation of planning
> > > > > regulation.
> > > > > sarah
> > > >
> > > > Housing crisis ?? Are you sure there is one ?
> > >
> > > The government thinks there is, and is planning accordingly. There
> > > certainly is a housing shortage in the south/southeast,
> >
> > *Is* there a housing shortage? or is it that people do not want to live
> > in the properties that are already there?
> >
> > I can't check but there were some stats out that showed that the number
> > of vacant properties was relatively high [from memory up to 10% even in
> > London and SE] as a percentage of total dwellings. Problem is that most
> > of the vacant properties were in public sector tower blocks where no-one
> > wanted to live; or else in other similar non-desirable locations.
> >
>
> My understanding is that there is vacant housing (usually council) in
> (some?) cities in the midlands and further north. Down here I think
> everything that can be redeveloped for resale has been done; ISTR
> hearing they're rehousing council tenants from the southeast into the
> west midlands. There are undoubtedly estates with bad reputations around
> here, but I don't know of any with high vacancy rates. Final
> negociations are underway to build another new settlement ASAP.
>
I think the vacancy rates in the north are considerably higher than you
would anticipate. Again I speak from memory . . but in public sector
housing [incl HA etc] rates can be up to 20% in some areas and,
surprisingly [maybe] in private sector the rates can be up to 45%. I
accept that the latter is in very run down areas of towns/old mining
villages and so on but the fact is that the dwellings are there. Wrong
type, wrong place - maybe. But that is merely a result of the general
perception that the north as a whole is flat cap and whippets. If one
takes Leeds as an example tho' then it can be demonstrated that Leeds has
the highest 'population' of the financial/legal sector outside London.
Manchester runs it a close second.
Now, what you will find in both those cities are the sink estates where
no will will go to live and, almost next door to them, high cost urban
yuppie conversions of old warehousing. The gentrification of such areas
mirrors what has happened in London but I suspect that the decline of the
sink areas is actually greater than has happened in LOndon. The sheer
pressure of demand in the SE will not allow such a decline in areas [but
I have no practical expereince so merely hypothesise from what I have
seen reported. I still hold by my view that there is, nationally, no
housing shortage albeit areas do have pressure points. Even then there
are a significant number of voids that could be taken up if resources
were properly allocated to do so. Note, this does not always mean that
money has to be pumped into them. A significamt degree of social
engineering also has to occur. At that point I start to get out of my
depth.
Oz
>I can't check but there were some stats out that showed that the number
>of vacant properties was relatively high [from memory up to 10% even in
>London and SE] as a percentage of total dwellings. Problem is that most
>of the vacant properties were in public sector tower blocks where no-one
>wanted to live; or else in other similar non-desirable locations.
>
>There is a large estate that I know of. Housing built in the 1970's to
>higher standard than private sector [lower density/better quality &
>size]; it had a fortune spent on it a few years back and it still has a
>high vacancy rate. The problem is the people who live there not the
>housing. No-one wnats to join them and yet IMHO the estate itself is
>very attractive once you get around the vandalism etc.
IIRC some of the 'no-hope' tower blocks were sold off.
The developer refurbished them, added security and probably a few other
things and they became luxury flats. They sold out very rapidly.
David P
says...
> David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
> >I can't check but there were some stats out that showed that the number
> >of vacant properties was relatively high [from memory up to 10% even in
> >London and SE] as a percentage of total dwellings. Problem is that most
> >of the vacant properties were in public sector tower blocks where no-one
> >wanted to live; or else in other similar non-desirable locations.
> >
> >There is a large estate that I know of. Housing built in the 1970's to
> >higher standard than private sector [lower density/better quality &
> >size]; it had a fortune spent on it a few years back and it still has a
> >high vacancy rate. The problem is the people who live there not the
> >housing. No-one wnats to join them and yet IMHO the estate itself is
> >very attractive once you get around the vandalism etc.
>
> IIRC some of the 'no-hope' tower blocks were sold off.
> The developer refurbished them, added security and probably a few other
> things and they became luxury flats. They sold out very rapidly.
>
up here when values justify it.
Hamish Macbeth
"Oz" <aco...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message > IIRC some of the 'no-hope'
tower blocks were sold off.
> The developer refurbished them, added security and probably a few other
> things and they became luxury flats. They sold out very rapidly.
>
I seem to remember that a developer built two basically similar
towerblocks, one for a London council the other as luxuary flats. The two
buildings differed in internal layout, quality of finish, security
and internal arrangements to keep areas available for common access to a
minimum. The cost also selected people inclined to maintain the value of the
property.
The biggest problem with social housing in tower blocks is that it does not
take many anti-social individuals to destroy the environment for the
majority, the majority generally do not have workable sanctions against the
disruptive minority.
David G. Bell
Ham...@buddenbrooks.fsnet.co.uk "Hamish Macbeth" wrote:
And the quality of their songs has declined significantly.
--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
"Let me get this straight. You're the KGB's core AI, but you're afraid
of a copyright infringement lawsuit over your translator semiotics?"
From "Lobsters" by Charles Stross.
Jim Webster
Hamish Macbeth <Ham...@buddenbrooks.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:apovvi$3dq$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
a week ago I was talking to a chap who on Black Monday (or when we
crashed out of the erm) put on the radio and heard the chancellor had
stuck interest rates up to 17% (from memory, It was very high for about
an hour) and realised he, his wife and two young children, were
effectively homeless. An hour later he caught the next news broadcast
and they announced the rates had dropped again. It is an afternoon he
never wants to repeat.
S C Rawlings
a.hi...@uea.ac.uk (Andrew) wrote:
> New towns have an undeserved reputation, especially in the strategic
> planning sense. There was much to commend centralised planning,
> *provided that* delegation to the local level worked sensibly. Can't
> see that happending today.
In spite of the fact that I reside just outside Telford and have
experienced much stupidity and hassles whils it has been built, I do agree
with you. The abomination of a quango that the Govt left us with is
interested soley in maximising income from selling land for housing and
sod any thoughts of infrastructure. Local councils then have to sort out
the mess that is left!
Steve Rawlings
S C Rawlings
L R Stubbs) wrote:
>
> The problem with land values, to my mind, is
> that now there are buyers other than farmers,
> who are more cash-rich than farmers.
A common enough phenomonon over the ages, think how many wealth
industrialists bought land in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Steve Rawlings
swroot
> In article <1fkvp5u.131eevwqjv5wsN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>,
> swr...@farm-direct.co.uk says...
[-]
It's apparently possible to ship council tenants north to occupy vacant
council housing, but then it's unseemly for them to complain when
they're being housed by the state :-/
Others are moving away from the southeast, but very slowly as in many
cases it's not just one business that has to move, it's one business
plus several subsidiary/ancillary businesses. I'm not certain it's the
'flat cap and whippets' image that discourages movement of prospective
employers, more the (no longer valid) images of disconsolate
ex-industrial workers who aren't regarded as retrainable for high-tech
industry. I'd guess the current crop of businesses developing in the
north are employing the next generation -- the children of the
industrial age.
David P
swr...@farm-direct.co.uk says...
> David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > In article <1fkvp5u.131eevwqjv5wsN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>,
> > swr...@farm-direct.co.uk says...
>
> [-]
>
> > > My understanding is that there is vacant housing (usually council) in
> > > (some?) cities in the midlands and further north. Down here I think
> > > everything that can be redeveloped for resale has been done; ISTR
> > > hearing they're rehousing council tenants from the southeast into the
> > > west midlands.
> > >
> > would anticipate. Again I speak from memory . . but in public sector
> > housing [incl HA etc] rates can be up to 20% in some areas
>
>
> council housing, but then it's unseemly for them to complain when
> they're being housed by the state :-/
I'm not sure that is the case. You seem to be implying that people are
being moved against their will? I am by no means an expert on social
housing provision but am not aware that this is the case.
A person can *exchange*/ within or between Authorities and can also,
providing they are not voluntarily homeless seek housing provision in
another Authority but all this is by choice not decree.
> I'm not certain it's the
> 'flat cap and whippets' image that discourages movement of prospective
> employers, more the (no longer valid) images of disconsolate
> ex-industrial workers who aren't regarded as retrainable for high-tech
> industry. I'd guess the current crop of businesses developing in the
> north are employing the next generation -- the children of the
> industrial age.
Maybe. The impression is more than the big professioanl firms see that
it is so much cheaper all round to relocate and that they then form a
sufficient attraction to others to do the same.
Hamish Macbeth
> Maybe. The impression is more than the big professioanl firms see that
> it is so much cheaper all round to relocate and that they then form a
> sufficient attraction to others to do the same.
A lot of firms are run by directors who have ideas about where they wish
to live.
This is probably a major force in keeping companies where they are.
Jim Webster
> > It's apparently possible to ship council tenants north to occupy
vacant
> council housing, but then it's unseemly for them to complain when
> they're being housed by the state :-/
> Others are moving away from the southeast, but very slowly as in many
> cases it's not just one business that has to move, it's one business
> plus several subsidiary/ancillary businesses. I'm not certain it's the
> 'flat cap and whippets' image that discourages movement of prospective
> employers, more the (no longer valid) images of disconsolate
> ex-industrial workers who aren't regarded as retrainable for high-tech
> industry. I'd guess the current crop of businesses developing in the
> north are employing the next generation -- the children of the
> industrial age.
>
going to be possible to built "executive" developments in the SE, which
will of course jack up the prices of those already built.
Tim Lamb
<j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> writes
>also, if two jags Prescott gets his way over planning, it is no longer
>going to be possible to built "executive" developments in the SE, which
>will of course jack up the prices of those already built.
How does he intend to implement this?
AFAIK the original figure of 10/acre was intended as a maximum and not
easy to achieve with other regulations like 60' between facing windows.
If I have an acre of land with road frontage and houses either side
there is a good chance that the planners will permit frontage
development at a similar density to existing. If I try to put 12 houses
on the land, Highways will say that I must have visibility splays of 90m
to 4.0m back from the verge. If this is not achievable the application
will be refused.
What is to stop someone wishing to build a mansion only applying for
consent on the actual land area needed, say 1/12acre?
Prescott's mouth extends beyond his knowledge.
regards
--
Tim Lamb
Old Codger
Or moving them to somewhere else.
When Bob Telford, who had been MD of the Marconi Company since the GEC
takeover in 1968, retired (I think around 1980) Arthur Walsh was
appointed the new MD. The headquarters immediately moved from
Chelmsford to Stanmore.
--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field
Jim Webster
Tim Lamb <t...@marford.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:buKWlBA7...@marford.demon.co.uk...
> In article <aps596$g6$2...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>, Jim Webster
> <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> writes
> >also, if two jags Prescott gets his way over planning, it is no
longer
> >going to be possible to built "executive" developments in the SE,
which
> >will of course jack up the prices of those already built.
>
> How does he intend to implement this?
>
> AFAIK the original figure of 10/acre was intended as a maximum and not
> easy to achieve with other regulations like 60' between facing
windows.
>
> If I have an acre of land with road frontage and houses either side
> there is a good chance that the planners will permit frontage
> development at a similar density to existing. If I try to put 12
houses
> on the land, Highways will say that I must have visibility splays of
90m
> to 4.0m back from the verge. If this is not achievable the application
> will be refused.
from memory, it will only apply to developments of more than a couple of
acres.
>
> What is to stop someone wishing to build a mansion only applying for
> consent on the actual land area needed, say 1/12acre?
>
> Prescott's mouth extends beyond his knowledge.
>
of course, but then how does he differ from virtually every other
minister? :-((
--
Jim Webster
"The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind"
'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami'
> regards
> --
> Tim Lamb
swroot
But down here we're not suffering from a shortage of executive homes --
the things are everywhere. We need housing for people who actually do
work.
swroot
> In article <1fkw24y.1h53ftj6hj0jeN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>,
> swr...@farm-direct.co.uk says...
> > David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <1fkvp5u.131eevwqjv5wsN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>,
> > > swr...@farm-direct.co.uk says...
> >
> > [-]
> >
> > > > My understanding is that there is vacant housing (usually council) in
> > > > (some?) cities in the midlands and further north. Down here I think
> > > > everything that can be redeveloped for resale has been done; ISTR
> > > > hearing they're rehousing council tenants from the southeast into the
> > > > west midlands.
> > > >
> > > I think the vacancy rates in the north are considerably higher than you
> > > would anticipate. Again I speak from memory . . but in public sector
> > > housing [incl HA etc] rates can be up to 20% in some areas
> >
> >
> > It's apparently possible to ship council tenants north to occupy vacant
> > council housing, but then it's unseemly for them to complain when
> > they're being housed by the state :-/
>
> I'm not sure that is the case. You seem to be implying that people are
> being moved against their will? I am by no means an expert on social
> housing provision but am not aware that this is the case.
>
> A person can *exchange*/ within or between Authorities and can also,
> providing they are not voluntarily homeless seek housing provision in
> another Authority but all this is by choice not decree.
Not against their will, no. I daresay it's possible some at least would
prefer to stay in the southeast, but if memory serves they're offered a
cash lump sum as incentive to make the move. While I'm fairly certain my
memory of this is accurate as far as I've written, I'll try to check the
details somehow.
> > I'm not certain it's the
> > 'flat cap and whippets' image that discourages movement of prospective
> > employers, more the (no longer valid) images of disconsolate
> > ex-industrial workers who aren't regarded as retrainable for high-tech
> > industry. I'd guess the current crop of businesses developing in the
> > north are employing the next generation -- the children of the
> > industrial age.
>
> Maybe. The impression is more than the big professioanl firms see that
> it is so much cheaper all round to relocate and that they then form a
> sufficient attraction to others to do the same.
I wonder what incentives were offered by the victorious local
authorities? :)
swroot
> In article <aps596$g6$2...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>, Jim Webster
> <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> writes
> >also, if two jags Prescott gets his way over planning, it is no longer
> >going to be possible to built "executive" developments in the SE, which
> >will of course jack up the prices of those already built.
>
> How does he intend to implement this?
>
> AFAIK the original figure of 10/acre was intended as a maximum and not
> easy to achieve with other regulations like 60' between facing windows.
Not seen that in new developments up here!
> If I have an acre of land with road frontage and houses either side
> there is a good chance that the planners will permit frontage
> development at a similar density to existing. If I try to put 12 houses
> on the land, Highways will say that I must have visibility splays of 90m
> to 4.0m back from the verge. If this is not achievable the application
> will be refused.
>
> What is to stop someone wishing to build a mansion only applying for
> consent on the actual land area needed, say 1/12acre?
I'd regard such an application as an insult to my intelligence were I on
a planning committee :). They've got local knowledge, and will know the
score. It't not unusual for planning to be refused on grounds of
insufficient density around here, at least -- the 'executive'
development proposed across the road from us was forced from five houses
to eight, including one multiple occupancy. The plot extends back from
the road, with access to the road defined by existing buildings to be
preserved; if the developer/planners were so minded there'd be little
difficulty in building at even higher density -- and the Parish Council
would be better pleased about the matter if they did.
Jim Webster
> Jim Webster <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote:
> But down here we're not suffering from a shortage of executive
homes --
> the things are everywhere. We need housing for people who actually do
> work.
probably a function of prices. If you get 5 £300,000 houses to the acre
or 21 £70,000 houses.
I know which I would rather build.
--
Jim Webster
"The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind"
'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami'
>
Jim Webster
> > Maybe. The impression is more than the big professioanl firms see
that
> > it is so much cheaper all round to relocate and that they then form
a
> > sufficient attraction to others to do the same.
>
> I wonder what incentives were offered by the victorious local
> authorities? :)
>
you wouldn't believe
I have heard of some development agencies offering to ensure build golf
courses convenient for Japanese companies
I suspect if you moved often enough you could have a permanent rates
holiday
Hamish Macbeth
"Jim Webster" <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aptpik$89m$3...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> I have heard of some development agencies offering to ensure build golf
> courses convenient for Japanese companies
>
I heard that after all the efforts in WW2 to protect Australia against the
Japanese that it is now being sold to them, one golf course at a time.
swroot
> swroot <swr...@farm-direct.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1fkxtob.os2va11u6mf0aN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk...
> > Jim Webster <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote:
> > But down here we're not suffering from a shortage of executive
> homes --
> > the things are everywhere. We need housing for people who actually do
> > work.
>
> probably a function of prices. If you get 5 £300,000 houses to the acre
> or 21 £70,000 houses.
> I know which I would rather build.
I'd rather just build one and have a nice big garden.
Tim Lamb
<swr...@farm-direct.co.uk> writes
>> What is to stop someone wishing to build a mansion only applying for
>> consent on the actual land area needed, say 1/12acre?
>
>I'd regard such an application as an insult to my intelligence were I on
>a planning committee :). They've got local knowledge, and will know the
>score. It't not unusual for planning to be refused on grounds of
>insufficient density around here, at least -- the 'executive'
>development proposed across the road from us was forced from five houses
>to eight, including one multiple occupancy. The plot extends back from
>the road, with access to the road defined by existing buildings to be
>preserved; if the developer/planners were so minded there'd be little
>difficulty in building at even higher density -- and the Parish Council
>would be better pleased about the matter if they did.
I had to check the map to be sure but you are in Cambridgeshire!
I would be grateful for any details you have on this application. The
last time I met South Cambs planners, they were adamantly opposed to
*backland* development particularly where it involved building close to
the periphery of the village envelope.
regards
--
Tim Lamb
David P
> >
> > Maybe. The impression is more than the big professioanl firms see that
> > it is so much cheaper all round to relocate and that they then form a
> > sufficient attraction to others to do the same.
>
> I wonder what incentives were offered by the victorious local
> authorities? :)
In the case of Leeds I am not aware of any incentives being offered.
It was more a process of regional firms [Law initially] being taken over
by the London ones, then the accountancy firms went through a similar
process and then the London lot realised just what the benefits were in
relocating to Yorkshire.
It has certainly boosted house prices up here over the last decade. We
moved up about 12 yrs ago now <vbg>. Once you are here then moving
*within* the locality as we did is not so painful.
Old Codger
>
> swroot <swr...@farm-direct.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1fkxtob.os2va11u6mf0aN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk...
> > Jim Webster <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote:
> > But down here we're not suffering from a shortage of executive
> homes --
> > the things are everywhere. We need housing for people who actually
do
> > work.
>
> probably a function of prices. If you get 5 £300,000 houses to the
acre
> or 21 £70,000 houses.
> I know which I would rather build.
I think that is the driver for small developments. Little profit
putting up a few "low cost" high density houses. Better, for the
developer, to build one or two "superior Executive" homes instead.
This is a real problem in rural areas where there is a requirement for
low cost housing but strong feelings against large estate
developments.
I understand the builder who purchased a local farm is likely to
obtain permission to redevelop the farmyard instead of just the road
frontage. The argument being that the revised (building) boundary
will now take in all the garden of existing properties and the
farmyard is the farm equivalent of a garden (might have been
influenced by an offer to give the parish council ground for playing
fields, etc). The plans show 10 executive houses priced probably
around £400K. The developer made clear that high density low cost
housing was not a profitable proposition. The remainder of the farm
will be sold as agricultural land but with a reservation that the
original farmer gets a cut of any future "development" value.
swroot
Sorry, but this isn't backland development -- it's redevelopment of a
light industrial site within the village boundary. The original proposal
provided access (wider gap between two houses) for future backland
development behind the industrial site; the Parish Council hit Warp 8
when they realised this, and I don't know whether the access remains in
the current plan. The most likely area for backland development here is
on land owned by the County Council -- I'll let you know if/when/how
anything happens. I think it's likely, but not in the near future.
regards
sarah
--
I'm not from here, I just live here
grew up somewhere far away
came here thinking I'd never stay long
I'd be going back soon someday
swroot
> In article <1fkxton.tvkr2hyahmpsN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>, swroot@farm-
> direct.co.uk says...
> > David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Maybe. The impression is more than the big professioanl firms see that
> > > it is so much cheaper all round to relocate and that they then form a
> > > sufficient attraction to others to do the same.
> >
> > I wonder what incentives were offered by the victorious local
> > authorities? :)
>
> In the case of Leeds I am not aware of any incentives being offered.
>
> It was more a process of regional firms [Law initially] being taken over
> by the London ones, then the accountancy firms went through a similar
> process and then the London lot realised just what the benefits were in
> relocating to Yorkshire.
>
> It has certainly boosted house prices up here over the last decade. We
> moved up about 12 yrs ago now <vbg>. Once you are here then moving
> *within* the locality as we did is not so painful.
I was tempted to ask what our likely mortgage+deposit would purchase,
but frankly we're too old to be flitting about the country unless we
have to...
Are you feeling any better? I do hope so.
David P
swr...@farm-direct.co.uk says...
> David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> > It has certainly boosted house prices up here over the last decade. We
> > moved up about 12 yrs ago now <vbg>. Once you are here then moving
> > *within* the locality as we did is not so painful.
>
> I was tempted to ask what our likely mortgage+deposit would purchase,
> but frankly we're too old
but . . . . LIAR!!!!
> to be flitting about the country unless we have to...
4 bed detached house on estate £285K in 'commuter belt'
3 bed semi d house in a village £190K
2 bed s/d bungalow in a village £175K
2[I think] maybe 3 bed det bung on *tight* plot in village at bottom
£260k
Town prices are cheaper than the villages.
Maybe you could get a small 4bed d/h for around £160 ish on the poorer
estate in town.
I am aware that these prices could look very cheap to other readers.
>
> Are you feeling any better? I do hope so.
>
Thank you, Yes [crosses fingers] Nausea seems to have gone since
Wednesday and dizziness is now far more under control. More of a general
light headedness with the occassional unexpected spin.
Old Codger
> Jim Webster <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > swroot <swr...@farm-direct.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:1fkxtob.os2va11u6mf0aN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk...
> > > Jim Webster <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote:
> > > But down here we're not suffering from a shortage of executive
> > homes --
> > > the things are everywhere. We need housing for people who
actually do
> > > work.
> >
> > probably a function of prices. If you get 5 £300,000 houses to
the acre
> > or 21 £70,000 houses.
> > I know which I would rather build.
>
> I'd rather just build one and have a nice big garden.
For £300,000 I would expect a large garden. Sadly, even at that price
gardens are not generally large. A £70,000 house (probably around
£120,000 in this area) would probably have a total plot size of less
than 2,000 sq ft.
Michelle Fulton
>
> 4 bed detached house on estate £285K in 'commuter belt'
> 3 bed semi d house in a village £190K
> 2 bed s/d bungalow in a village £175K
> 2[I think] maybe 3 bed det bung on *tight* plot in village at bottom
> £260k
> Town prices are cheaper than the villages.
> Maybe you could get a small 4bed d/h for around £160 ish on the poorer
> estate in town.
> I am aware that these prices could look very cheap to other readers.
Cheap :-o Where are you talking about? Is your economy THAT good, or is
it just that space is so precious?
M
Hamish Macbeth
"Michelle Fulton" <mhful...@prodigy-nospam.net> wrote in message
news:zZFw9.473$Fp.11...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
> Cheap :-o Where are you talking about? Is your economy THAT good, or is
> it just that space is so precious?
>
No, the British are totally insane when it comes to house prices.
House prices going up at unsustainable rates make people happy, if they own
one.
If the price of bread went the same way there would be riots.
Jim Webster
Michelle Fulton <mhful...@prodigy-nospam.net> wrote in message
news:zZFw9.473$Fp.11...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
or is
> it just that space is so precious?
small island with very very strict planning regulations.
--
Jim Webster
"The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind"
'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami'
>
> M
>
>
greymaus
> Jim Webster <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> swroot <swr...@farm-direct.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:1fkxtob.os2va11u6mf0aN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk...
>> > Jim Webster <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote:
>> > But down here we're not suffering from a shortage of executive
>> homes --
>> > the things are everywhere. We need housing for people who actually do
>> > work.
>>
>> probably a function of prices. If you get 5 £300,000 houses to the acre
>> or 21 £70,000 houses.
>> I know which I would rather build.
>
> I'd rather just build one and have a nice big garden.
>
> regards
> sarah
>
Thats creating massive problems in Ireland where, for a long time, it
was possible to get planning permission for a house in a 3+ acre field
by claiming to be a farmer. These people spend their time cutting
massive amounts of grass and sumping it, either in the corner to rot,
or much worse, in a landfill. crazy. The plots are far too small to
justify anyones time putting in stock, and if ponys (Mrs Bucket "space
for a pony") are kept, the land becomes horse sick after a few years.
--
Greymaus;
Follow up, don't e-mail, my killfile is savage;
greymaus
There is a golf course in Adare Co. Limerick , about 20 miles from
Shannon Airport. Reports say that Japs fly there and play golf for
less than in Tokyo.
Hamish Macbeth
"Michelle Fulton" <mhful...@prodigy-nospam.net> wrote in message
news:zZFw9.473$Fp.11...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
> it just that space is so precious?
>
swroot
> In article <1fkz2bs.4oskp41ga6j9cN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>, swroot wrote:
> > Jim Webster <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> swroot <swr...@farm-direct.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> news:1fkxtob.os2va11u6mf0aN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk...
> >> > Jim Webster <j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote:
> >> > But down here we're not suffering from a shortage of executive
> >> homes --
> >> > the things are everywhere. We need housing for people who actually do
> >> > work.
> >>
> >> probably a function of prices. If you get 5 £300,000 houses to the acre
> >> or 21 £70,000 houses.
> >> I know which I would rather build.
> >
> > I'd rather just build one and have a nice big garden.
> Thats creating massive problems in Ireland where, for a long time, it
> was possible to get planning permission for a house in a 3+ acre field
> by claiming to be a farmer. These people spend their time cutting
> massive amounts of grass and sumping it, either in the corner to rot,
> or much worse, in a landfill. crazy. The plots are far too small to
> justify anyones time putting in stock, and if ponys (Mrs Bucket "space
> for a pony") are kept, the land becomes horse sick after a few years.
I believe you; I suspect the same happens here. I, however, would create
a magnificent landscaped terrain incorporating natural habitats and a
folly. I've always fancied a folly :-)
swroot
> In article <1fkzlnm.1vqsgdo1iet1a6N%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>,
> swr...@farm-direct.co.uk says...
> > David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > It has certainly boosted house prices up here over the last decade. We
> > > moved up about 12 yrs ago now <vbg>. Once you are here then moving
> > > *within* the locality as we did is not so painful.
> >
> > I was tempted to ask what our likely mortgage+deposit would purchase,
> > but frankly we're too old
> I think this is the first time I have *ever* called anyone this on usenet
> but . . . . LIAR!!!!
It's not often that being called a liar is flattering. And from such a
distinguished, intelligent gentleman too!
> > to be flitting about the country unless we have to...
>
> 4 bed detached house on estate £285K in 'commuter belt'
> 3 bed semi d house in a village £190K
> 2 bed s/d bungalow in a village £175K
> 2[I think] maybe 3 bed det bung on *tight* plot in village at bottom
> £260k
>
> Town prices are cheaper than the villages.
>
> Maybe you could get a small 4bed d/h for around £160 ish on the poorer
> estate in town.
>
> I am aware that these prices could look very cheap to other readers.
Those are about 3/4 the prices around here -- 4 beds are usually over
300K, 350K is not unusual. But we have no major estates to start people
on the housing ladder -- there are a couple of roads of council houses
in each village, no more.
> > Are you feeling any better? I do hope so.
> >
> Thank you, Yes [crosses fingers] Nausea seems to have gone since
> Wednesday and dizziness is now far more under control. More of a general
> light headedness with the occassional unexpected spin.
hmm. Some people would pay good money for that sensation, but I daresay
choosing it is different from having it thrust upon you, as it were.
swroot
> Michelle Fulton <mhful...@prodigy-nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:zZFw9.473$Fp.11...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
> > Cheap :-o Where are you talking about? Is your economy THAT good,
> or is
> > it just that space is so precious?
>
> small island with very very strict planning regulations.
and the divorce rate is rising. And the English have a deep-seated
hunger to own their own land. I suspect this is in large part a function
of the Enclosures (other Europeans[1] are in general quite happy to
rent) but there's also a rampant desire to make some money by buying
cheap and selling dear. Not that this really does 'make money', as with
everyone else doing the same thing you have to spend much more money to
buy a house a little nicer than the one you're selling (which is why
we're still in the nice little house we're in). But the gain looks good
on paper until interest rates rise and homeowners can't meet their
mortgage payments.
regards
sarah
[1] =>>
Oz
> No, the British are totally insane when it comes to house prices.
>House prices going up at unsustainable rates make people happy, if they own
>one.
>If the price of bread went the same way there would be riots.
I'm not so sure, over a few decades, that bread hasn't gone up as
quickly as house prices. Wheat at the farmgate, though, has fallen.
--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.
AJH
<j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Michelle Fulton <mhful...@prodigy-nospam.net> wrote in message
>news:zZFw9.473$Fp.11...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
>> Cheap :-o Where are you talking about? Is your economy THAT good,
>or is
>> it just that space is so precious?
>
>small island with very very strict planning regulations.
Same is true of other countries, Boston suburbs an of street parking
space next to a wooden condo adds USD75k to a USD150k one bedroom
flat.
In fact land is so valuable they dig basements and throw the spoil
into the bay to make more land.
AJH
Oz
>I've always fancied a folly :-)
Don;t you usually have plenty on the go at any one time anyway?
swroot
> swroot <swr...@farm-direct.co.uk> writes
>
> >I've always fancied a folly :-)
>
> Don;t you usually have plenty on the go at any one time anyway?
My husband's been talking. I'll have to have a word with him...
Jim Webster
which would bring you smack bang into collision with the planners. In
some areas they would demand that you apply for change of use before
taking it out of agriculture (which would mean you would be wise to keep
a few sheep to graze your environments) all would doubtless demand
planning permission be applied for for the folly, and some would
undoubtedly try and charge you rates on the whole thing :-((
--
Jim Webster
"The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind"
'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami'
>
David P
mhful...@prodigy-nospam.net says...
I'm told that the UK as a whole is about the same size as Oregon; does
this put it in perspective for you? Oregon meant nothing to me.
Go on, silence us - what would we have to pay in your neck of the woods?
I may become an international realtor <vbg>
Chris Mead
from "Hamish Macbeth" <Ham...@buddenbrooks.fsnet.co.uk> contains
these words:
But purchase prives of housing are much less than in Switzerland
where most people rent.
--
Chris Mead, Hilborough, Norfolk
chris...@zetnet.co.uk or chris...@farm-direct.co.uk
Visit http://www.farm-direct.co.uk/ to find your local farm gate outlets
Visit http://www.birdcare.com/birdon for bird information
And http://www.bto.org/migwatch to log bird migration and see it happen
David P
> David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > In article <1fkzlnm.1vqsgdo1iet1a6N%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>,
> > swr...@farm-direct.co.uk says...
> > > David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > It has certainly boosted house prices up here over the last decade. We
> > > > moved up about 12 yrs ago now <vbg>. Once you are here then moving
> > > > *within* the locality as we did is not so painful.
> > >
> > > I was tempted to ask what our likely mortgage+deposit would purchase,
> > > but frankly we're too old
> > I think this is the first time I have *ever* called anyone this on usenet
> > but . . . . LIAR!!!!
>
> It's not often that being called a liar is flattering. And from such a
> distinguished, intelligent gentleman too!
See, I was right - liar , liar ; pants on fire.
>
> >
> > I am aware that these prices could look very cheap to other readers.
>
> Those are about 3/4 the prices around here -- 4 beds are usually over
> 300K, 350K is not unusual. But we have no major estates to start people
> on the housing ladder -- there are a couple of roads of council houses
> in each village, no more.
>
One thing that struck me when we were down was just how small all the
towns/villages are. Now, we have small villages as well but they are
much closer to large centres of population.
I got the impression that Cambridge was geographically around the size of
York, Wakefield, Doncaster, Harrogate. Take a look at a road map and see
how close those are to much larger conurbations. Cambridge is only
really close to London; can't think why values are so high...
The villages around here are similar to yours in terms of social housing
provision the house prices are more difficult to judge as the villages
don't have estates per se - but more so than we saw in Cambridgeshire.
Jörk Oppermann
> David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> 4 bed detached house on estate £285K in 'commuter belt'
>> 3 bed semi d house in a village £190K
>> 2 bed s/d bungalow in a village £175K
>> 2[I think] maybe 3 bed det bung on *tight* plot in village
>> at bottom £260k
>
> Those are about 3/4 the prices around here
...and 3 to 4 times the prices around here.
--
Jörk Oppermann,
Shetland.
Jim Webster
Jörk Oppermann <j...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:103624093...@demeter.uk.clara.net...
> swroot wrote:
3 bed semi, ex council house £55K reasonable area (large garden and it
is safe to leave your car parked in the street safely
3 bed detached in nice area of Barrow £140K
4 bed detached semi £85K (surprisingly cheap, new housing on decent
estate with decent school)
2 bed detached bungalow £85K, nice area
4 bed detached £128K on new development, good area.
New 3 bed detached, £70K, (not bad area but school not brilliant, but
still adequate.)
2 bedroom terrace, £9,500, some drug problem in the area, but Police
presence constant. You are not going to be mugged. House is double
glazed etc.
2 bed terrace (needs updating) £4,500 (probably derelict)
Oz
>
>But purchase prives of housing are much less than in Switzerland
>where most people rent.
Whilst 'prives' isn't a word, I think it really should be.
Oz
>Go on, silence us - what would we have to pay in your neck of the woods?
>I may become an international realtor <vbg>
OK let's rephrase.
30 miles from downtown of a large city, 3 bedrooms, brick built, minute
garden/backyard, one garage.
No more than 1/2 hr to trains or freeway.
====================
then 60miles, then 100 miles.
Oz
>4 bed detached house on estate £285K in 'commuter belt'
>3 bed semi d house in a village £190K
>2 bed s/d bungalow in a village £175K
>2[I think] maybe 3 bed det bung on *tight* plot in village at bottom
>£260k
My area, which might be considered commuter belt despite being about 1hr
away from london on high speed train (125mph).
In village.
3bed semi, moderate/small garden: 180-250k
4bed detached, moderate garden: 350-450k
olde-worlde on modestlga plot: 500k-1m.
Large farmhouse with adjacent land
and range of buildings on big site: 2.2m
Sometimes I wish I had a large farmhouse with adjacent land and a range
of brick buildings on a big site .....
A few olde-worlde wouldn't go amiss either, come to that.
Jill
>
> Jörk Oppermann <j...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:103624093...@demeter.uk.clara.net...
> > swroot wrote:
> 3 bed semi, ex council house £55K reasonable area (large garden and it
only 5 properties for sale in the Oban Times this week
covers the whole of Argyll and beyond
1 -3 bed [1 ensuite] bungalow some way from Oban central heating DG ; garage
etc £110k
2 - Upper floor in town 4 bed; outbuildings and garden £68k
3 - on Isle of Mull 4 bed no price
4 - group of stone former agricultural and mill buildings - "potential";
woodland and paddocks to 5 acreslisted buildings back end of nowwhere £110k
there *is* definately a housing shortage around here
--
Jill Bowis
http://www.poultryscotland.co.uk http://www.henhouses.co.uk
http://www.domesticducks.co.uk http://www.poultry-books.co.uk
http://www.kintaline.plus.com/welshcottage
Hamish Macbeth
"greymaus" <gray...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:slrnas5v90....@maus.org...
I like the thought of lots of Japanese golphers returning home with a
taste for Limericks :)
Michelle Fulton
"Oz" <aco...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:guunDgAw...@btopenworld.com...
> David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>
> >Go on, silence us - what would we have to pay in your neck of the woods?
> >I may become an international realtor <vbg>
>
> OK let's rephrase.
>
> 30 miles from downtown of a large city, 3 bedrooms, brick built, minute
> garden/backyard, one garage.
>
> No more than 1/2 hr to trains or freeway.
>
> ====================
>
> then 60miles, then 100 miles.
It will get less expensive incrementally, as you get further from town, and
it depends which direction from downtown. Housing valuation has gone up
dramatically in the last few years, in the area I live in, and if fact, in
the whole Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex. I've included a snippet of an
article at the end of my post that helps explain that a little. My house as
an example:
3 Bedrooms, 2 Baths, 2 Car Garage, 1/8 acre (typical even for much larger
houses): I paid $72K 7 years ago and the tax man values it at $94K this
year, which is approximately what the estimator said when I refinanced last
year to take advantage of the lower interest rates. I live about 5 minutes
from the freeway and 20 - 30 minutes from downtown (15 miles), depending on
traffic and speed of course. Mind, mine is a small version of a 3 bed, 2
bath, only 1325 sq ft. The average would be a bit larger, around 1500 sq
ft. say, and all the ones I know of that have sold around me in the last
year have sold between $100 - 140K, but we are in one of the fastest growing
areas of town (industry and housing). Most of the new houses going up now
are huge (2,700-5,000 sq ft) and priced around $200K I think. I just want
to know how so many people have so much money?????
New home are going for more than older ones of course, and then they still
range from very reasonable in nice areas ($85K) to ridiculous in nicer areas
($200K) for the same size house. Of course if you go to "silicon valley"
(San Francisco, California area), or New York City, the prices are probably
more like what David P was giving. Demand is the word of the day...
This ad doesn't include a house but I thought you might be interested in
farm land prices (40 acres, $40K). It is about 100 miles south of Fort
Worth http://www.farm-and-ranch.com/40fallscounty.html . You could probably
put a house the size of mine on it for about $80K.
The following site is our local newspaper real-estate search engine (pretty
nifty), where you can select the county, town and size, then peruse ads
(some have pictures). I live in Tarrant County, City of Keller, for
perspective, if you wanted to look.
http://www.homefinder.com/dfw/ftworth/index_map.jhtml;jsessionid=SV031B4I5LK
5ZLAZGJGHBNA?parms=st%3D14%7Cmr%3D1000%7Csbt%3DN%7Cgc%3D%28%28srch_area_id+%
3D+72866%29+AND+%28%28%28srch_area_id+%3D+65900%29+OR+%28srch_area_id+%3D+66
576%29%29+OR+%28srch_area_id+%3D+66694%29%29%29%7Cfc%3D%28%28%28pa_type_id+%
3D+%2716%27%29+AND+%28generic_intgr_lvl_02+%3E%3D+2%29%29+AND+%28generic_int
gr_lvl_01+%3E%3D+3%29%29%7Cso%3Dsorting_num+desc%2Camenity_count+desc%2Cgene
ric_dcml_lvl_01+desc%2Cpa_basic_srch_id+%7Cai%3D72866%7C&_requestid=17205
(Ridiculous link. I hope it works.)
**********part of an article written recently*************
QUESTION OF THE MONTH: Is Tarrant County's housing bubble about to pop? This
seems to be all I'm reading about in both national and local news - the
housing bubble. Andrea Jares sums up the 'housing bubble' in her report in
the Tuesday, August 13th edition of 'Tarrant Business': "So far, the
metroplex housing market seems far removed from the combination of an
oversupply and lukewarm demand that stops a home from appreciating in price.
Instead, look for housing prices to rise at a slower rate than in recent
years, probably in the range of 2 percent to 4 percent a year, or about half
the rate of a year ago." Bob Mahalik, Senior mortgage analyst with the
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
As some people leave our market due to job cuts, others are entering the
market due to historically low interest rates. John Baen, a UNT real estate
professor says, "This dichotomy could create a bubble in the upper price
ranges and pockets of the market that have an abundance of houses priced at
more than $240,000. The market for homes priced below that is as strong as
goat's breath".
Nationwide, the 6.3 percent gain in home prices in 2001 was the highest in
14 years, according to figures from NAR. But the association forecasts that
home prices will end 2002 up 5.5 percent over last year. In 2003, NAR
expects home prices to rise 4.5 percent. On average, Tarrant County area
homes sold for 15 percent more in June 2002 than they did in January 2000,
according to an analysis of figures from NTREIS.
Across the metroplex in June, home sales were down 1 percent from June 2001,
according to NTREIS. Generally, home prices are rising 2 percent to 3
percent compared with the same month a year ago. In the prime spring selling
months last year, Metroplex home prices were rising 6 percent to 9 percent.
So, with buyers being more picky, home prices are rising at a slower rate.
But that doesn't mean that there is a housing bubble out there about to pop.
The median price of homes sold in the Ft. Worth-Denton area for June was
$136,411.
*******************************************
Michelle Fulton
http://www.homefinder.com/dfw/ftworth/index_map.jhtml
Jim Webster
> Chris Mead <chris...@zetnet.co.uk> writes
> >
> >But purchase prives of housing are much less than in Switzerland
> >where most people rent.
>
> Whilst 'prives' isn't a word, I think it really should be.
I first read it as privies and had this mental picture of a nation where
you purchased your own privy but rented the house.
--
Jim Webster
"The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind"
'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami'
> --
Hamish Macbeth
I paid $72K 7 years ago and the tax man values it at $94K this
> year,
Why is the taxman interested? Do you pay tax on the increased value?
swroot
> In article <1fl0hkq.1vwarr5wzxxz4N%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>,
> swr...@farm-direct.co.uk says...
> > David P <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <1fkzlnm.1vqsgdo1iet1a6N%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>,
> > > swr...@farm-direct.co.uk says...
[-]
> > > >
> > > > I was tempted to ask what our likely mortgage+deposit would purchase,
> > > > but frankly we're too old
> > > I think this is the first time I have *ever* called anyone this on usenet
> > > but . . . . LIAR!!!!
> >
> > It's not often that being called a liar is flattering. And from such a
> > distinguished, intelligent gentleman too!
>
> See, I was right - liar , liar ; pants on fire.
Bah, humbug.
> > > I am aware that these prices could look very cheap to other readers.
> >
> > Those are about 3/4 the prices around here -- 4 beds are usually over
> > 300K, 350K is not unusual. But we have no major estates to start people
> > on the housing ladder -- there are a couple of roads of council houses
> > in each village, no more.
> >
> One thing that struck me when we were down was just how small all the
> towns/villages are. Now, we have small villages as well but they are
> much closer to large centres of population.
>
> I got the impression that Cambridge was geographically around the size of
> York, Wakefield, Doncaster, Harrogate. Take a look at a road map and see
> how close those are to much larger conurbations. Cambridge is only
> really close to London; can't think why values are so high...
The Cambridge Effect. It's Silicon Valley in the Fens, a hotbed of
high-tech business. Gates is building a research facility here and a
host of other companies are scrambling to get space in the research
parks around the city. Despite the dotcom disasters, ISTR house price
increase matches or exceeds London, villages within commuting distance
were restricted to infill-only development in order to protect the Green
Belt and are now full, so one new settlement was built (Cambourne), one
is planned (Longstanton) and another is peeking over the horizon
(somewhere between Cambridge and Royston). And yet rural northern
Cambridgeshire reels from the effects of the agricultural depression.
The social fabric must be wearing thin in the villages north of the
city, as a tidal wave of incomers with (relatively speaking) money to
burn purchase everything and anything that looks like a house.
> The villages around here are similar to yours in terms of social housing
> provision the house prices are more difficult to judge as the villages
> don't have estates per se - but more so than we saw in Cambridgeshire.
I don't think there was much need for social housing here until
relatively recently -- there was a housing shortage after the war, but
that was dealt with by the 60s. Here there are/were no mines, no
industry, just communities employed on the farms or in businesses
supporting farming. Housing for the elderly (to allow them to stay in
the community where they were born) was still the priority when we
arrived in the late 80s; now the call is for affordable housing for
younger people born in the village. Every year or so South Cambs
conducts a housing needs survey in the village to assess the true level
of need, as they have funds to provide such housing when required.
David G. Bell
<1fl0hi3.1hpqgr5150edsaN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>
swr...@farm-direct.co.uk "swroot" wrote:
Another Rollover this weekend....
I'd go for a comfortable, energy-efficient, house, in easy-to-maintain
grounds, with plenty of room for friends to visit.
Bag End looks nice....
--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
"Let me get this straight. You're the KGB's core AI, but you're afraid
of a copyright infringement lawsuit over your translator semiotics?"
From "Lobsters" by Charles Stross.
swroot
> On Saturday, in article
> <1fl0hi3.1hpqgr5150edsaN%swr...@farm-direct.co.uk>
> swr...@farm-direct.co.uk "swroot" wrote:
>
> > greymaus <gray...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
[-]
> > > Thats creating massive problems in Ireland where, for a long time, it
> > > was possible to get planning permission for a house in a 3+ acre field
> > > by claiming to be a farmer. These people spend their time cutting
> > > massive amounts of grass and sumping it, either in the corner to rot,
> > > or much worse, in a landfill. crazy. The plots are far too small to
> > > justify anyones time putting in stock, and if ponys (Mrs Bucket "space
> > > for a pony") are kept, the land becomes horse sick after a few years.
> >
> > I believe you; I suspect the same happens here. I, however, would create
> > a magnificent landscaped terrain incorporating natural habitats and a
> > folly. I've always fancied a folly :-)
>
> Another Rollover this weekend....
>
> I'd go for a comfortable, energy-efficient, house, in easy-to-maintain
> grounds, with plenty of room for friends to visit.
>
> Bag End looks nice....
Low ceilings, though. And there'd been a lot of sheep on the roof.
David P
Ham...@buddenbrooks.fsnet.co.uk says...
paid on the value of the property. A bit similar to the current Council
Tax but with annual revaluations.
Jim Webster
"David G. Bell" <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:20021102.11...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk...
> Another Rollover this weekend....
>
> I'd go for a comfortable, energy-efficient, house, in easy-to-maintain
> grounds, with plenty of room for friends to visit.
>
> Bag End looks nice....
not that I'm cynical but I suspect that your chances of the rollover are
perhaps the same as being able to buy Bag End.
Jim Webster
> "David G. Bell" <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > Bag End looks nice....
>
> Low ceilings, though. And there'd been a lot of sheep on the roof.
>
talking about low ceilings, now my Dad can no longer walk, we got Mum a
care allowance and she has a firm supply care assistance. One turned up
on Friday, he stands 6'8" and had been here less than half an hour
before he smacked his head on the top of the door. I had to take him to
casualty to get the wound stapled. Of such petty chores are the working
day made up.
Give him whiskers and a pointy hat and Gandalf in Bag End springs
irresistably to mind.
AJH
<j...@freeserve.spam.co.uk> wrote:
>
>2 bed detached bungalow £85K, nice area
Gissusajob
I could rent mine and still pay 100% mortgage on this if I had work up
there.
AJH