100ftplus garde? Prescotts going to compulsory purchase it

Alan Harris
Posts: 497
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 11:46 pm
Location: Hayes, Kent

100 foot gardens

Post by Alan Harris » Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:27 pm

Dear All

Compulsory purchase can be defended and I am sure that worthy uses of gardens would be justifiable alternative use. Society does have common needs when large numbers of people are crammed into a small space and need to be housed. Just the same as transport requires the building of airports when large numbers of our residents desire increased travel abroad for business and pleasure. Workers living far from their jobs simply loose useful time and creat more congestion.

Unfortunately London is a massive centre of business and earns a huge trade surplus for the nation. We could of course move everyone out to the sticks and rely on computers for contact between businesses but it is the out-of-office time in a tight community with diverse skill available at the drop of a hat that makes the profit and which has to be serviced. Land is at a premium and we should as far as possible manage our land resources in "hot" spots so as to make living conditions the best they can be. They should however be proven hot spots only not just a ruse to redistribute land purely out of jealousy of those who are rich.


Alan Harris
Alan is a consulting engineer specialising in subsidence, tree roots, soils and party wall surveying.

Posts: 5610
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 3:19 pm
Location: Andalucía

Post by Conveyancer » Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:35 pm

If the truth appears in The Daily Mail it is usually an accident.

Posts: 74
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 7:47 pm
Location: Suffolk

Post by beagle » Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:57 am

Now that is not really fair is it ?

I am sure they get the date right on at least three days a week !

And as for the actual contents surely no-one expects them to be correct ?!

(I love the fact that the comprehensive school where Alastair Campbell's kids are/were educated have landscaping paid for by the Daily Mail and school gates ditto, known as the Paul Dacre gates. If only they'd bothered to check their facts first - like is ACs father alive or dead, pretty easy one to check I would have thought - they could have saved themselves all that money !).

Posts: 1051
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 2:09 pm

Post by Beech » Tue Apr 25, 2006 6:41 pm

:roll: I know a group of people who have been trying to develop their back gardens for several years, each time it has been blocked the council despite seeking help from the government using the PPG3 regulations.

Posts: 234
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 12:44 am

Post by Janieb » Tue Apr 25, 2006 6:44 pm

I've no idea if the report is true or not but some observations.

1. It seems to say 30 metres - it doesn't actually specify length, width or square metres.

2. Someone could have a garden over 30 metres long but only 5 mtres wide or 100 metres wide.

3. There could be neighbours where some have over 30 metres and others just under. So those with over 30 end up with less garden than the others?

The whole thing seems ill-conceived and badly thought out and wouldn't work in practice. In fact it's not even logical - but his Pathfinder policy isn't logical either. Another way of giving profit to the developers?
"I prefer rogues to imbeciles, because they sometimes take a rest" Alexandre Dumas (fils)

black dog
Posts: 408
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:28 pm

Post by black dog » Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:07 am

It depends upon where you live as to whether it will work or not. Our village has many such ribbon developments in it . the properties on the road front have large orchards/ gardens at the back and stone outbuilding that are easily converted to living accomodation. It would make perfect sense to make the house we own into four properties should this kind of policy be adopted! The 20 metres wide so access past the main house isn't a problem either!

Posts: 16346
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:07 am

Post by despair » Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:45 am

How about a plan to reserve all these"plots " for the exclusive purchase of all those wanting to escape NFH

Covenants in the deeds being tough enough to prevent such hell in future

black dog
Posts: 408
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:28 pm

Post by black dog » Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:10 am

Its too late for that for us . we already have one!

Post Reply