[DanaC]

Final points then I'll stop I promise ;p

You have to remember that the UK is not the same as America. If you 'Go West' here, you'll hit the sea in a day. Greenbelt building restrictions were hard won. They protect the nation's landscape. Those people may own the piece of land on which they build, but the landscape they affect belongs to all of us.

The same regulations preventing that young couple from building that lovely little house for their children, also protect their landscape from other, less welcome incursions. A line has to be drawn and that is where it was drawn. Everybody knows that's where it was drawn, everybody knows you cannot build in greenbelt land without a fight. This was a victory (or rather a series of victories) won by those concerned with the over development of the countryside and the loss of untouched land, for future generations as well as the present. Often against the opposition of moneyed land developers and big business.

This is a lovely little house and pushes the envelope on environmentally safe building. But one of the reasons land in the countryside is so cheap to buy is because it is so heavily restricted in development terms. They took advantage of that and then built anyway.

I really, really hate when people build on greenbelt without permission and arbitrarily change the landscape for everyone. The system as it is imperfect and is currently being rewritten (again) to take greater account of local need for areas with serious housing shortages (as an example). But it is there to protect all of us. Without those protections in place we'd have lost many more places of outstanding beauty or environmental importance.

It matters. If we build on all the fields and valleys, then we have stolen the green and pleasant land from under our children's feet.

I know many, many people who had to change their plans or sell the plot they'd bought and try and find somewhere else to develop, because they played by the rules that are in place to protect us all. I also know of major developments which have had the wherewithall and resources to push planning authorities over a barrel on exceptions and special need and got their own way in the face of largescale popular opposition. Something that is much harder to do for an individual.

But those people knew what they were doing. You cannot live in the UK and not know that building in the countryside is heavily restricted. There are other options. Land which has been used for residences in the past and has returned to green land, but is not considered 'green belt' is often made available for development, but restricted in terms of the density: this is exactly the sort of project which would sit favourably in that kind of area.

But, as far as I can tell, they chose to use untouched land in an agricultural part of the green belt. That is about as close to hanging a sign on the door saying 'please demolish me' as makes no difference.


[eta] and planning departments know all this too. In my experience, planning officers will go to enormous lengths to help an applicant find a way to make their project happen. They will liaise with applicants and agents and architects, assist them in finding alternative sites, and scour the regulations to find a way to allow useful and environmentally helpful buildings to be built. And anyone with an application can go to their local councillor and request it be heard at a planning committee, where the decision is made by vote by elected members, as indeed any application which requires a complex planning decision. These meetings are open to the public. Appeals can be taken to a national authority which can rule against the council.