MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Some of the public objecting to planning proposals - most don't seem to have a case - quite irrational and ridiculous! They just want no change whatsoever. Some make a good case however.
Then the council planners presiding over the conflicts.
One councillor has the tag "The Iron Lady" and she said she likes to put her two penneth worth in "to stop them getting what they want" - a megalomaniac if ever there was one.
After the thousands of architectural abortions the nation's councils have presided over, I wouldn't even trust any of them to practically and visually asses a plate of cucumber sandwiches!
The Iron Lady is not what would be considered diplomatic...... 😯
The Iron Lady is not what would be considered diplomatic......
No, she seemed to enjoy the label. Makes her feel powerful I guess.
And a hypocrite to boot.
And she has a blatant social bias against the better off.
Great viewing isn't it.
Don't spoil it for me, ive had to pause it as the wife has left the room soooo angry (live 5 miles from the Cheltenham one and yes that's what their all like) 😆
Vile woman. For that light issue, she wasn't bothered about that so she made up her own objection!
What's your view about large developments?
Personally, I hate them because:
1) house builders bring nothing to the local economy
2) they make huge profits out of the economy of scale constructing standardised boxes
3) they construct a tree style infrastructure that concentrates all traffic via one entrance to the highway
4) they build with too higher density which means inadequate parking and cramped access roads
5) the density of buildings means local traffic issues, pressure on schools, medical services etc
6) the homogenised boxes with cheap cues of properties of the past are architecturally bland and completely inappropriate to the vernacular. They significantly detract from the identity of an organically evolved settlements - architectural and civic vandalism!
I would advocate a percentage increase in housing stock to all hamlets, villages, towns and cities, with no large developments. A strong bias towards small builders and individuals wishing to enable a sensitive improvement to the place that they live in, employing local people to do the construction.
What spongebob says.
6) the homogenised boxes with cheap cues of properties of the past are architecturally bland and completely inappropriate to the vernacular. They significantly detract from the identity of an organically evolved settlements.
This. These boxes suck the imaginations of the occupants leaving us with a population that can't think for itself.
I would advocate a percentage increase in housing stock to all hamlets, villages, towns and cities
Disagree to an extent on this, as it depends on the location - you're increasing the load on local facilities, so if the local schools, doctors surgeries etc. are all at capacity, then you're putting them under intolerable pressure, when you would [i]arguably[/i] be better creating a single newtown in the area with new school, doctors and other facilities under a section 106 agreement.
One thing I hope they build which they have been talking about is more terraces. They can be very efficient to heat rather than the semis or detached that they build now with a foot between the walls
Terraces and semis are hopeless for noise intrusion.
A property with full airtight insulation, triple glazing, that uses the sun's heating energy and has a heat reclamation system barely needs any artificial heating. They do not need to be in adjoining other dwellings. So small detached houses are my ideal property.
Given the funny attitudes to property design, it will be a long time before such an Eco house will evolve. Big house builders hold the key to producing exciting and genuinely sustainable homes, yet they continue to churn out cheap shXt because they know that one of their single units often appeals to buyers because its new and in some cases, prettier than the alternative badly bodged, badly decorated, badly maintained architectural carbuncles of the 50's, 60's and 70's.
A property with full airtight insulation, triple glazing, that uses the sun's heating energy and has a heat reclamation system barely needs any artificial heating.
Won't these houses that are heated by the (non existent) winter sun, also going over heat in the (non existent) summer sun.
Regarding terraces, didn't the Swindon Triangle show us that green homes can be built to a budget and to a design that is good enough to develop a community.
Big house builders hold the key to producing exciting and genuinely sustainable homes, yet they continue to churn out cheap shXt because they know that one of their single units often appeals to buyers because its new and in some cases, prettier than the alternative badly bodged, badly decorated, badly maintained architectural carbuncles of the 50's, 60's and 70's.
Unfortunately that's what their market demands - and what the markets of the 50s, 60s and 70s demanded at the time. There are some more 'discerning' buyers but the majority of people interested in buying a house on a volume hb site are happy with the pap that gets served up.
Vile woman.
The Iron Lady is not what would be considered diplomatic..
Just a typical power mad, petty, arrogant and rude Tory* councillor
*I'm presuming she's a Tory from her behaviour, could be wrong but I doubt it
In my opinion, new developments or whatever should have facilities such as shops, proper pavements and bike lanes etc and should positively limit/discourage car use. I am horrified that developments seem to start from the assumption that everyone does and will drive and pedestrians just get lip service at best.
In the new estates they have built round here, they seem to assume no cars and are suprised when everyone then parks on the pavements.
The old battleaxe was an utterly vile woman. It takes quite something to make you start feeling sorry for an HR company owner who should frankly should just buy a smaller car and learn to drive properly.
Good choice of maddening programmes running side by side last night. Channel 5 had 'dangerous drivers' school' which had a collection of halfwits who shouldn't be allowed within a mile of a car.
Sponge, I agree but they usually cost a lot more (although an architect I know has built a passivhaus for only a fraction over the cost of standard build), and terraces and semis can be noisy.
But they give you more density of housing. They need to look at the rooms that adjoin in terraces. The small amount of outside wall area makes them great. So triple glaze them, heat recovery and properly insulate, district heating as the load would be too small for any boiler.
There is the problem though because to properly insulate you need people to take care and pride in their work and not be price driven but quality driven. You only have to read on here how much people hate paying tradesmen to realise it's not happening any time soon.
I've recently been in a house looking at some faults (think it sold for nearly £3m) and there is no loft insulation! This is a new build!
I work in the world of property and thought the program was excellent was expecting some bias either way but that is just how it is. Difficult decisions to be made and a real hit and miss process. The work of professionals, on both sides developers/planning officers, ends up at the mercy of local politicians some of which are nutters and not fit for a job in real life.
What was not shown is the appeals process where the majority of appeals are won as planning rules are essential there to guide development not block it. Many councillors think there job is to block as much as possible. The large development at the end went through on this basis, the locals and councillors would all want to block it but the reality is if it is broadly in line with planning guidelines it will go through one way or the other.
I favour the approach of:
1 Designate land for building, ie residential, commercial, industrial or mixed
2 Build anything you like as long as its built to a high/eco spec
3 What it looks like, is irrelevent
4 A view isn't owned