Big J on radio 4..

[LeeGray]

13 minutes ago, Big J said:

I'm glad you're paying attention! ?

 

The wage bill is unusually high on this site as it's horrendously steep. Just checked the elevation finder and measured the distance and the slope is 125m from bottom to top and there is a height gain of 60m. 

 

Either way, the strongest argument that I have is that I want to make a productive contribution to the local rural economy but in order to continue developing the business, we need premises. I'm not asking for special treatment, rather to be considered on the same footing as a farm.

You will be if you can demonstrate a need to live on site, as others have said look at the village statements and local planning guidelines, fulfil the requirements in the ways that you can with your business and your sorted. It will take years probably, cause plenty of stress and cost thousands but it is possible.

 

Arguing with planners is pissing in the wind, telling them you understand there situation and helping them justify your application to others is the way to go. Help them build a case for you by doing the legwork. The good ones are there to help  the local area, keep out the developers going under the radar and the others are just lazy. If it’s a lot of work for that type to go up against you stand a greater chance.

[Big J]

Just now, LeeGray said:

You will be if you can demonstrate a need to live on site, as others have said look at the village statements and local planning guidelines, fulfil the requirements in the ways that you can with your business and your sorted. It will take years probably, cause plenty of stress and cost thousands but it is possible.

 

Arguing with planners is pissing in the wind, telling them you understand there situation and helping them justify your application to others is the way to go. Help them build a case for you by doing the legwork. The good ones are there to help  the local area, keep out the developers going under the radar and the others are just lazy. If it’s a lot of work for that type to go up against you stand a greater chance.

I am aware of the present planning law. It is the requirement to live on the land that I regard as (to but it bluntly) bollocks. I've asked this question before, but why should someone who runs a rural business, working in the locality be excluded from the same planning exemptions that permit farmers to build houses on their land? The net effect is the same. Farmers need land, I need (a lot less) land, most farms are not profitable, I am more profitable.

 

You have to look at what a business like mine offers to the area in terms of economic benefit. However, I won't use myself as an example. My primary groundworks subcontractor runs three excavators (3.5t, 9t and 14t) as well as dumpers and a few other machines. He has a firewood business, does fencing and has a little sawmill. He employs people, is damned productive and through the various facets of his business, supports the wider rural community with variety of services that he offers. I guarantee that he is more profitable than many farms and I'd be very surprised if he was in receipt of subsidy. I do not know what the status of his premises is, but suffice to say, I regard him as a very valuable part of the local community and would fully support any planning application he made for a rural dwelling/business premises build.

 

It's all well and good saying that he could just find an industrial yard to rent in, or a farmyard, but with Class Q planning, many of the barns are gone now, and industrial yards are few and far between. Finding industrial units to buy is virtually impossible too.

 

The most likely course of action that we will take is to find a stopgap house/land to get us out of renting. We'll stay there for a few years whilst looking for land and arguing with the planners and then build something that I'll only move out of in a coffin! ?

[ESS]

2 hours ago, eggsarascal said:

I'm going to move to the Staffordshire moorlands, insist that the lanes should be bashed through to create better access for the vehicles I've chosen to buy, that land should be sold off for less than its market value and I should be able to build what I want on said land to accommodate my family and the machinery I have.

Putting it like that makes you sound like you either have entitlement issues, are wrong in the head, or summat.

[LeeGray]

Eventually you’ll either stop arguing with planners and telling them the rules are bollocks and get on with it or give up and not get permission. 

 

I tell our kids there’s no point being right if everybody else thinks your wrong.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

4 hours ago, Conor Wright said:

That's what I used, I went through about a dozen large and small farms, some only receive a few hundred, most a modest few thousand. one was in excess of 50k.

I've used the site before. It can be useful when pricing work for "poor ould farmers" which may not be so poor after all! Some are genuinely struggling but lack of education and lack of willingness to change their practices is a major factor too, as is depression, inability to access funding and pure ignorance. It cant be all about cows and corn.

The difficulty I have is that 'the system' simply doesn't deliver financial support where it is most needed (setting aside for the moment the argument whether support should be provided at all.)  My biggest frustration is that the relative minnows are so passionately addicted to the crumbs which are brushed aside from the table of the big players that they, the ones who should be the most outraged by 'the system', are most often the most enthusiastic supporters and defenders of it - like heroine addicts getting an occasional free baggie from the dealer.

[eggsarascal]

6 minutes ago, ESS said:

Putting it like that makes you sound like you either have entitlement issues, are wrong in the head, or summat.

... And some folk understand sarcasm, others don't but that's the nature of Internet forums.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

4 hours ago, difflock said:

I wonder would "they" produce such helpful figures in respect of the top benefits claiming families, or would that be accused of impinging on their "human rights", so why are farming families fair game then?

Public money = public access to info.  So far as I'm aware, nobody is compelled to take it, but iffum you do, you play by the masters' rules.

 

I do agree however, that there should be a list of welfare recipients too.  

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

1 hour ago, Big J said:

 

That as it may be, it's part of a wider agricultural economy, but as far as planning goes, it is the only rural economy and the only land use that qualifies for the existing planning exemptions. The fact that farms are totally dependent on subsidy to survive exemplifies the need for a broader approach towards supporting rural businesses. According to the figures in the Financial Times *, lowland and upland grazing farms receive more than 90% of their income from farm subsidy, with cereal crops not far behind. Given the pesticide and fertiliser usage of such enterprises, I would argue that they aren't the most environmentally friendly means of making a living, or indeed the most profitable.

 

 

 

* The link doesn't appear to open, though I was able to read it by googling for it. 

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

WWW.FT.COM

 

 

 

I only add this for context, but folks often aren't aware of the comprehensive suite of advantageous trading, tax and regulatory concessions in the ag sector.  I'll list a few of the top of my head:

 

Exemptions from planning regs

Exemptions from inheritance tax

Exemptions from Council tax (farm homes auto reduced by 1 band)

Rebated diesel (regularly misused for other business benefits such as haulage and recreation)

 

Add all of that into the direct financial subsidy and the whole package starts to look wholly unsustainable under the current model.

 

 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

2 hours ago, Big J said:

What you describe regarding a philanthropic land owner isn't a million miles away from what we'd like to do in the medium term building low cost housing in rural communities around us. High quality, well designed, eco friendly houses, built for key workers (teachers, emergency services, rural workers etc) built simply but smartly and brought to market below market rate. This would be partly on account of hopefully finding a land vendor with a philanthropic bent and partly by economising on the build by using modular systems. Such houses could be resold at any stage, but any increase in the asking price could only match overall national house price increases and should they choose to sell at full market rate, the excess profit would go directly to the community. It would be a covenant that would cover that. It's just an idea at this stage.

You don't need the philanthropic land donor for that J.

 

You need a government willing to release state owned land.

 

Easily done if the will were there. 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

1 hour ago, Big J said:

I'm glad you're paying attention! ?

 

The wage bill is unusually high on this site as it's horrendously steep. Just checked the elevation finder and measured the distance and the slope is 125m from bottom to top and there is a height gain of 60m. 

 

Either way, the strongest argument that I have is that I want to make a productive contribution to the local rural economy but in order to continue developing the business, we need premises. I'm not asking for special treatment, rather to be considered on the same footing as a farm.

That WOULD be special treatment!