[lachlanandmarcus]

The planners mind set is also not made more positive by the 000s of (full time) farmers who, having the old farmhouse without a planning tie to the farm it belongs to (since it was built before they were used) , flog that off for £££££££ and then apply for PP for a new farmhouse saying that they have no farmhouse ! - and they do get away with it, the planners have little choice but to permit the new farmhouse (with a tie this time of course).
It just makes it harder for new entrants to get permission when people play the system.

[SallyintNorth]

Oh, yeah, farmers are the bad guys here alright 

I think not!

There are a plenty of folks trying to make a buck on this badwagon right now.  (I can see the typo but decided it was better than the word I meant to type!  )

• folks who buy bungalows with agricultural ties, for over the odds, then try to sell it for waaaayyy over the odds and fail, then use their failure to sell at this inflated price as evidence that there are no prospective purchasers around who comply with the restrictions of the tie, get the tie lifted - and guess what, agricultural workers can't afford to live local to their work any more, or to retire to a bunglalow with a little bit of land, near to the grandkids, which is all most retiring farmers want in the world 
• folks who buy a plot of ground, and that book that tells you how to use an alpaca-based business to get planning permission to build a house there, buid the house then sell off the alpacas

to name just two that I know of.

As to farmers rebuilding farmhouses... farmers farm for generations, and repair and renew as a part of that.  Old-fashioned farm buildings are no longer suitable for farming.  If we demolish them we're historical vandals, if we redevelop them as holiday or fulltime accommodation we're in it for the money.  Note that we're having to build modern sheds, and that money needs to come from somewhere...

Equally, old houses get to the stage where they need gutting and rebuilding. Our choices are to try to live and work from a caravan while the farmhouse is redeveloped, or do the same as we would with the old farm buildings.  Sell off the outdated delapidated ones to people who will love to make a modern non-farming home out of them, and build a newer one that's more suited to the modern farming family.  Again, we have to find the money for the rebuild, and it has to come from somewhere. 

[lachlanandmarcus]

I didnt say 'farmers' as a generality are bad guys and neither has anyone else? -  just that those who exploit the planning system, not because their house is unsuitable (in which case it would be completely fine) but simply for profit make it harder for others to get PP for a farmhouse in the first place. Including the people you express (correctly) sympathy for.
I lived in a caravan for a year while our farmhouse was renovated. Not sure it is that outrageous an idea, really? Quite normal for major renovation even in our exposed wild location.
If you saw the replacement houses built in these scenarios there is no way you would be able to describe them as either small, or bungalows......... Southfork would more readily spring to mind....
 
 
 

[SallyintNorth]

Uh, what you said wasn't far from it, llm.  As of 2006, there were 152,000 full time farmers in the UK.  So

The planners mind set is also not made more positive by the 000s of (full time) farmers who...

does sound rather like making a generalisation to me, yes!

And, although a grand building a la Southfork wouldn't be our choice, I actually don't see why a farmer shouldn't build a good-sized, imposing house for himself and family and, it would be hoped, the next 7, 8, 9 or more generations. 

However, back on topic and off hobby-horses  , what you're telling me is that farmers selling off old farmhouses and building new, more suitable ones is causing some problems in the planning system, which is penalising genuine people who want to live and work on their land.

So what could we propose as a change to the way pp is given to reduce that negative impact?

[Backinwellies]

I am a little concerned .... if you get planning on the rented land and then go to buy it you will have to pay the value of land with planning which is likely to be a huge amount of money compared to buying the land (owner gains £1000's whilst you foot the bill for getting planning and have all the worry and hastle ... ).  Would it not just be easier to find another piece of land with a dwellling already on it?   

Or swap houses with daughter?

[katie]

Is it possible to get PP on rented land?

[lachlanandmarcus]

Uh, what you said wasn't far from it, llm.  As of 2006, there were 152,000 full time farmers in the UK.  So

The planners mind set is also not made more positive by the 000s of (full time) farmers who...

does sound rather like making a generalisation to me, yes!

And, although a grand building a la Southfork wouldn't be our choice, I actually don't see why a farmer shouldn't build a good-sized, imposing house for himself and family and, it would be hoped, the next 7, 8, 9 or more generations. 

However, back on topic and off hobby-horses  , what you're telling me is that farmers selling off old farmhouses and building new, more suitable ones is causing some problems in the planning system, which is penalising genuine people who want to live and work on their land.

So what could we propose as a change to the way pp is given to reduce that negative impact?

It wasnt intended to be a generalisation, as I have already explained. Im just concerned as planners here tear their hair out as they get complaints from non farmer residents about houses in this scenario popping up in the countryside and it makes them (I perceive) less willing to take the positive intentions of new farming entrants at face value and interpret the rules in their favour. ie its because I would like to see new young full time farmers (who dont necessarily have muggins turn at a family farm) be able to set up (including building a house)  that the other issue is of any concern - it doesnt worry me re the houses themselves as we cant see any neighbours, we are in the middle of our land on top of a hill!
Im not sure how the planning system can helps but I suspect the issue if there is one is self limiting since all more recent farmhouses will normally have a tie and these replacement farmhouses will have a tie to the farm.
Im not anti farmer in any way :ALL of our friends here are farmers shepherds, and craftspeople and I spend all my time on our 40 acre holding. We are all pro farming here - you will just have to take my word for it as Im not sure what else I can say

[bluejules]

Hmmm, some interesting considerations here...

The thing about the rented land being worth more if it has PP - we've looked into this and it's a bit more complicated than that. As the initial PP would only be for a timber structure and would be on the condition that we (and no-one else) are running that business, it appears that it wouldn't actually up the value of the land very much at all. If we moved off before the three years was up then the next occupants would have to start again with the PP application and business plan etc. But we do intend to buy the land as soon as the PP for the timber structure is given, ie, before PP for a permanent structure is given. If our neighbour/landlord decided to up the price, then yes, we would simply move off to somewhere else, leaving them with no income from either the rent or the sale.

Daughter's house is very tiny indeed - plus, she wouldn't be able to afford the mortgage on our current house. The whole mortgage thing is driving me crazy, what with negative equity and all that. I am well and truly fleeced.

[katie]

But the three year business plan thing doesn't exist any more?

[bluejules]

But the three year business plan thing doesn't exist any more?

Well, it shouldn't. But many LPAs are still applying the guidelines from PPS7 even though they really shouldn't.

[colliewoman]

Just one question - does any ever get planning permission for a temporary dwelling without suffering high levels of stress, huge financial loss and massive amounts of time being wasted?

I don't think I've heard of one case where things have just been straightforward and the permission has been granted. Is the system geared to put people off applying?

Yep I know one lady near us who applied and got a 5 year permission straight away

[bluejules]

[/quote]
Yep I know one lady near us who applied and got a 5 year permission straight away
[/quote]

Blimey. That's encouraging. First one I've heard of!

[doganjo]

A friend of mine has been sitting for 8 years with 0.7 of a person permission given for her 20 acres with a big barn already on it.  How they work out .7 of a person I don't know.

[bluejules]

Most of the time I feel like I'm only 0.5 of the person I should be, I'm so knackered!

[katie]

Planning issues are so draining. We're about to put in for PP on our land. Having fought two bitter battles already - one for a mobile home and 3 years, one for a polytunnel (worse than for the mobile home! ) at least we know what we're in for. It's horrible. You feel like a social pariah but hang on in there. We've one two, now going for the third. It's been a real eye-opener for me - I used to naively  think that most people were nice!
By the way, don't bother with Field to Farm. It's out of date now.