Big J on radio 4..

[Richard 1234]

1 hour ago, Big J said:

Not at all. If we were to buy an existing house, not only would we have to settle for something that is likely to be of shoddy construction, but I'd be paying literally double the actual construction/complete project price. The only distinction is that someone in the planning office has decided to grant permission for a dwelling to be built, and as a result of this decision, the value suddenly increases by hundreds of thousands of pounds.

 

Given that the rules regarding planning consent are inconsistent, unfit for purpose, discriminatory and arduous, there is huge scope for reform.

 

An interesting point aside, but the Class Q exemption that allows a barn to be converted to a house I would wager has been exploited tens of thousands of times nationally. I wonder how many of those houses could be considered affordable? My point is that it's the most significant shift in rural planning in the last decade and it exclusively benefits those with much higher than average wealth. 

It’s not just the last decade. I’ve been saving and “moving up” the housing ladder for coming up 25 years to get myself into the same type of property you want to get. I’m at least 5 years away I think but I will get there in the end. I bought my first house when earning £3.60 an hour it took 3 years saving to get the deposit.

its never been easy to get the house you really want

[Big J]

12 minutes ago, aspenarb said:

Its been made very easy J. Most of the bigger developers will buy your old house, arrange a mortgage ,help with legals,stamp duty and the move. None of this is available from smaller builders or private sellers.

 

Bob

All of those scenarios involve the potential homeowner buying a house from someone else, rather than buying a plot and instructing a build themselves. This is the distinction, and because we (as prospective homeowners) are collectively disinterested in self build, we allow the parameters of what constitutes a standard quality house to be dictated to us. By that I mean room sizes, natural light, solar shading, quality of materials, environmental credentials etc. These standards are obviously very low, and are set by local government, which gains enormously from planning gain. The whole system is completely corrupt.

[Big J]

1 minute ago, Richard 1234 said:

It’s not just the last decade. I’ve been saving and “moving up” the housing ladder for coming up 25 years to get myself into the same type of property you want to get. I’m at least 5 years away I think but I will get there in the end. I bought my first house when earning £3.60 an hour it took 3 years saving to get the deposit.

its never been easy to get the house you really want

Agreed.

 

I accept that I'm in a possibly unique position with my wife's profession and me being a semi retired sawmiller. That said, I'd still probably just buy a kit house as it only takes 14 weeks to build! Danwood do some really nice, and reasonably priced houses. We would probably go for their model "Point 227" with a few minor modifications.

[Big J]

13 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

It’s easy to over estimate the net return on those so called diversification opportunities J. 

 

For 1 - Everyman jack is doing it and supply is in danger of exceeding demand. 

 

For 2 - it’s easy to underestimate the Labour (and patience) intensity of these ventures. Customers are horrible, demanding, self opinionated twats and can very easily sap your will to live or sue the ass off you when THEY do something blatantly stupid. 

 

(Maybe it’s just me, I’d want no part of that scenario)

Very true. I am an antisocial (some might go so far as to say grumpy!) bastard, so I'd probably not go for a bunch of screaming children in my woods! I was using that example to illustrate the potential uses. A good friend is a FC ranger in Central Scotland and she runs a class called Tots in Trees some Saturdays and it's really well attended. Building dens, camp fires, walking nature trails etc.

[Richard 1234]

3 minutes ago, Big J said:

Agreed.

 

I accept that I'm in a possibly unique position with my wife's profession and me being a semi retired sawmiller. That said, I'd still probably just buy a kit house as it only takes 14 weeks to build! Danwood do some really nice, and reasonably priced houses. We would probably go for their model "Point 227" with a few minor modifications.

I could get what I want now I suppose but I’m too frightened of the size of mortgage it would need so I’m saving still. If the boys go to university I guess it will be another 10 years?

[harvey b davison]

The problem with self build, is that you still can't have exactly what you want, as it's still dictated by planning / building regs etc.
My parents built their own place 30 years ago, a small bungalow on a small plot of land.
They had to buy the land at market value ( no getting around it) and then make compromises on the style etc to get permission. They then had to pay the going rate to various tradesmen to get the building completed. When they had it valued once completed it was worth more than they put into it, but this is normal with everything. But they still did not have what they first wanted Because they had to make compromises, again no getting away from it.
I myself, want to self build a proper log cabin, and unless I could build one then I wouldn't self build, because what is the point, I wouldn't be getting what I want but what someone else is wanting and allowing me to build. I eventually will probably do it on a small scale in a woodland at some point.
I can see and understand some of big j arguments but in reality there is just no getting around planning /building regs, prices etc, and in some cases these are totally understandable.
Cheers
H.

[Chalgravesteve]

But ultimately, if you got hold of the land as cheaply as you want and build your perfect home, but on the plot next door that you will look at for the rest of your life, the guy builds an absolute shite eyesore, you would want something that stopped him doing that. You cannot surely just be advocating that anyone can build anything anywhere? So you want planning laws that suit you, not the ones that don’t. 

 

And a kit home from Poland, doesn’t sound to me like a self build. That’s a self assembly of a building developers building! 

[Big J]

7 hours ago, Chalgravesteve said:

But ultimately, if you got hold of the land as cheaply as you want and build your perfect home, but on the plot next door that you will look at for the rest of your life, the guy builds an absolute shite eyesore, you would want something that stopped him doing that. You cannot surely just be advocating that anyone can build anything anywhere? So you want planning laws that suit you, not the ones that don’t. 

 

And a kit home from Poland, doesn’t sound to me like a self build. That’s a self assembly of a building developers building! 

 

Anything we built would not be an eyesore. For starters, you would be unlikely to see it as it would surrounded by woodland (that we planted). Secondly, whether it's the German in me or what, but I cannot stand mess. When I ran the sawmill, it was meticulously organised. I would completely understand anyone objecting to an eyesore, but that would not be me.

 

Self build is the administration of the build of your house, according to your specifications. Whether that is you building it yourself, with your own hands, or contracting in someone else to do it. You are still in charge of the build.

 

As regards the kit houses, check out the Danwood website. They have over a hundred different designs, which are highly customisable. You have a choice there that no mass developer here would offer, and very few if any would match the U values.

[LeeGray]

9 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

 

For 2 - it’s easy to underestimate the Labour (and patience) intensity of these ventures. Customers are horrible, demanding, self opinionated twats and can very easily sap your will to live or sue the ass off you when THEY do something blatantly stupid. 

 

Ha, now that’s my life Kev!

[ESS]

12 hours ago, Big J said:

But the increase in the perceived value of land is only serving to accentuate the wealth gap and inequality in the UK. Small holdings are a long standing tradition, and economically viable when correctly managed. For instance, if I planted 10 acres of hybrid poplar, I could realise an annual return of around £9k from thinning operations every 3 years. That is more profitable than many farms operating on the same area. There is also ample potential for income diversification, in terms of forest schools/nurseries, camp sites, glamping etc. 

Since when has 10 acres of poplar been a smallholding? 

Why do you feel everything has to be dictated by profit ? a lot of the smaller farms are bought by people buying a lifestyle, is that wrong?

My parents were farmers, worked very hard all their lives, my Grandfather on my Fathers side died before they any of his children left school, consequently they had to let the family farm go, they had nothing.

I saw the hours Dad worked as a single handed manager on a hill farm , it wasn't easy.

Eventually through hard work they bought their own land , and semi retired to a small farm they bought outright from graft.

He wasn't looking for profit, just spending time on land he had bought with a small amount of stock. There are others that do the same, do we begrudge people that? I don't.