Extensions

Ali · September 2012

<P>Anyone rushing out to build 8 meters onto the back of their houses ?</P> <P>I guess this is going to be a field day if neighbours don't need to be consulted, can wait for the "shocking" stories that are bound to turn up in the papers just before the election. All for a few "White Van" man votes when the time comes.</P> <P>Seriously does anyone think this is a good idea as I have never tried to build an extensioin to a house ?</P> <P>Or is it just the worst government in 80 years getting more desperate as time goes on ?</P>

miss annie · September 2012

Almost every house where my mum lives - just outside of London, has an extension. It's the same all around the suburbs, you see them from the trains, a lot of people build over their garages. Much cheaper and more straightforward than moving house. My mum did it when we were nippers to give us an extra room to spread out in, it's a great idea if you have don't want to move and just need an extra room.

graeme · September 2012

<div>But doesn't relaxing the land use regulations lower the value of the land? Isn't that good for the population?</div><div><br></div><div>Builders are sitting on land banks, keeping the price of land high (because they bought it at peak, and want to keep it there until they can get their return). With the relaxing of planning laws, the value of this land will fall (supply up, prices down) - wouldn't that bring down the price of property etc. for the ordinary voter? </div><div><br></div><div>Rather than concentrating on what snesationalism might appear in the Islington Gazette about Mr and Mrs. Jones and the ancient light laws, maybe there is a greater benefit on the whole for this policy?</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div> </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div>

Arkady · September 2012

It’s a terrible idea that will have ugly, ugly consequences. Happily it does not apply to conservation areas, and thus to most of Stroud Green. But watch the shops on the Islington side of Stroud Green Road suddenly acquire lean-to storage shanties on the back.

yagamuffin · September 2012

It is a terrible idea. All it means is that homeowners will be able to increase the value of their existing homes. It will do nothing to ease the housing crisis.<div><br></div><div>What is needed is incentives for unused buildings and brownfield sites to be redeveloped. Not giving people the ability to add ugly gargoyles to the 30s semi.</div>

miss annie · September 2012

I'm not sure that the average householder does it to increase value. I think it's usually to give more space for expanding families. Some people buy a house as a home, not just as a financial investment, and want to stay where they are but have a bit more space. I hate this modern idea of thinking of money before everything else.

Arkady · September 2012

I hate the idea of people considering themselves before everyone's else's aesthetics for all time, but what can you do.<br>

yagamuffin · September 2012

@miss annie - I hate it too, but sadly this is the society we have created for ourselves.<div><br></div><div>This policy is just another example of the Tories ignoring what is in the best interest of the country as a whole and just doing what they can to shore up their own vote.</div>

miss annie · September 2012

@Arky agreed. I hope that the council planners will still take aesthetics into consideration too, but I think I'd rather see sympathetic extension to the back of properties than new basements which cause damage to or hideous new blocks of flimsy looking flats.

Ali · September 2012

<P>seems like the governmnet is going to be changing planning rules for braodband roll out:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <UL> <LI>broadband street cabinets and other infrastructure can be installed without the need for prior approval from the local council (except in Sites of Special Scientific Interest); <LI>broadband companies will face less cost and bureaucracy in laying cables in streets; and <LI>broadband cables and cabinets can be installed on or under private land without the bureaucratic burden of long-running negotiations. </LI></UL></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Exceptional circumstances would be considered on a case-by-case basis, the DCMS said.</P> <P>Private landowners will also be told that fibre can be laid under or above their land, with the government doing away with "the bureaucratic burden of long-running negotiations".</P> <P>The DCMS added that overhead broadband lines can also be installed in any area without providers needing to first seek planning permission from local councils.</P> <P> </P>

NorthNineteen · September 2012

This isn't policy, merely announcing it will go out to consultation. If the policy is implemented within 12 months I'd be amazed. And if you feel that strongly against it I suggest you listen out for the consultation and respond/lobby your MP.<br>

kreuzkav · September 2012

Thanks Ali for the heads up. More bad news for people on main roads.

ADGS · September 2012

" <span style="font-family: 'lucida grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', tahoma, sans-serif; line-height: 20.78333282470703px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">But watch the shops on the Islington side of Stroud Green Road suddenly acquire lean-to storage shanties on the back."</span><div><span style="font-family: 'lucida grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', tahoma, sans-serif; line-height: 20.78333282470703px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'lucida grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', tahoma, sans-serif; line-height: 20.78333282470703px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">I can see the backs of a few shops on the Islington side of SGR from my bathroom window, and trust me, the situation back there can't get much uglier. Where there is any open space, it's a picture of dereliction, and as is they're mostly just storying rammel in dismal yards. </span></div>

Ali · September 2012

<P>I measurred the 26 feet ysterday and I was surprised just how big a space it took up in the garden, reduced it to half a postage stamp !. If people around heer do it in any scale it is garden grabbing in no other words, I hope the neighbours don't try it. </P>

NorthNineteen · September 2012

You can only take up 50% of the garden space (that policy will remain) with the extension.<br>

ADGS · September 2012

Another thought, which I've not seen raised yet in coverage of this idea: where gardens are grass, covering them over reduces the soil's capability to absorb rainfall. So more extensions will mean more droughts *and* more flash-floods. Yep, definitely the way to get the economy back on track.

gardener-joe · September 2012

@ADGS: and in this area more housing subsidence ... as the ground - bereft of access to rain - dries out.

fothers · February 2013

<P>It feels very much like you can build what you like in this area anyway, if you can grease the right planning officials palm. You should see what next door managed to get passed... </P>

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Top Posters

Extensions

Comments