american recession

[BDG]

(1 January 2013, 03:32)ObongoPox Wrote: Ok for those who can afford land purchase( inc legal costs).Up against the buying power of the pony-paddock crowd as well.UK planning law currently makes no distinction between a hermit's shack and an 'executive-style home' development.
Most of these theoretical BOLs we hear so much about seem lacking in substance to me.Not 'reality-proof'.

Was a guy on TV a few months ago on a program called Amazing Spaces - he brought to my attention that you could build a 'shed' on woodland if that shed was to be used for the upkeep of the woodland - he had a bunk and a wood burner in his.

There is a bit of a crack down on horsies. A lot of the ag land I see for sale local authorities will not grant PP for stables or allow change of use to equestrian - you can still keep a horse on the land for grazing, but it makes it a bit more unattractive.

As for places people do not know about, I know a bothy the bothy club does not know about - and from what I found inside it it had no one in for decades. I also know of what must of been cottages for workers involved in an industry in a rural area that must have ceased between the wars. Both are in a little disrepair, but more importantly, both are hidden by topography and both have no roads or footpaths nearby. In the case of the cottages this is because the access must have been plough up and part of a forest planted on top of it.

I have only come across such places pretty much by accident.

There must be plenty of areas like this, not to mention what is on MOD land that we do not no about.

---

(1 January 2013, 11:49)Barneyboy Wrote: dont worry about me my friend im doing ok ,but one man owning 20.000 acres in a small country like UK is not on ,most of the posh land owners in scotland are not bloody scots its not on

If he is going to own it and look after it, better that than it not being looked after or abused.

What you think about land ownership is neither here nor there, it is the way it is.