Farms (OT)

A recent local case of a "farmer" keeing some horses in a shipping container for 22 hours a day - and other abuse.

Made me think about some farms I have seen.

Some resemble scrapyards. Any animals are likely to be guard dogs.

You see the land and the state of the outbuildings and there is no way that are productive.

Do these people get any sort of financial benefir from being a "farmer", even though the only thing they seem to produce is piles of scrap.

Reply to
DerbyBorn
Loading thread data ...

Farm land tends to be cheaper than any alternative? A farmhouse with outbuildings with no chance of planning permission to develop is going to be a lot cheaper than similar size in a town.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Generally, you're not allowed to develop farm land. You can replace an existing house and add farm buildings though. A similar sized plot within a town would have some chance of getting planning permission - hence a much higher price per square metre or whatever.

So it's not surprising 'pikeys' go for a run down farm.

My brother used to go to a small caravan site on a farm close to where his daughter lived, in the green belt. Nice enough small farm with a decent although plain house, and outbuildings in pretty good condition. The land was all let out as the owner was old. It was sold quite recently, and was surprised how little it made. I'd guess based on the maximum income you could expect from it.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Can you quote specifics Dave? Total acres and price achieved and where ?

(£10-12K per acre round here)

Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Mawson

Milton Keynes area. Fetched something just over a million. Sort of price a pretty average house on a small plot would fetch in central London. Not sure of the exact size acre wise. Had four fields of what I'd call average size as well as the yard area which was quite large, and a wild area. I've a feeling some land had already been sold off years before, as the barns etc looked far too extensive for such a small farm.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

So say 4 fields at 25 acres each (relatively small) gives you 100 acres or £10k per acre gives you your £1M

Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Mawson

Yep, that's the effect of making farms the ultimate in tax shelters - and with the cherry of a subsidy on top :)

Reply to
Robin

Last time I looked MK was not London and prices are not comparable

1M in MK buys you a bloody nice house

tim

Reply to
tim...

I did say MK area. Closest station is Tring. About a 10 minute drive.

But not with that amount of land. If you like very large gardens. ;-)

Dunno planning regs. Would you have problems turning one of the fields into a large garden? For not a vast amount of expense, you could have turned it into a pretty nice country estate with excellent access to London. Assuming you didn't want the vast mansion to go with it.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Maybe, but it's still in MK.

Location, location and location are the three most important things about a house...

Andy

Reply to
Vir Campestris

I did say MK location. There are plenty of nice locations close by. Same as virtually anywhere in the UK. Very few towns and areas that don't have both good and bad not far apart.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

On Wednesday, August 17, 2016 at 5:20:48 PM UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrot e:

Planners don`t like domestic looking acoutrements on agricultural land, pic ket fence may look nice but it ain`t post and wire as approved for use on a gricultural holdings, specifically to stop people buying the field at the b ottom of their garden to extend it.

Having spent, er, sometime looking at this end of the market, for commercia l rather than residential use, few factors come into play.

Lot of farm steadings seem to have gone out of use, as farms amalgamate and everything gets based at a central site.

Big estates don`t want to sell off small parts and sometimes tenants are mo re trouble than their worth.

Old farm buildings may be simply too small or wrong shape for existing mcah inery, but with the fun and expense of disposing of possibly acres of asbes tos cement sheet cladding even just straight demolition isn`t cheap.

Removing existing buidlings in whatever shape , may make redevelopment at l ater date a harder sell to the planners.

Farmer may be able to lease out buldings for non agriculture, forestry or f ishery use, not all of them are having best of times.

Residential development in coutryside can also be tied to support for the l and ,though if you know the right people that can be reversed after the fac t.

Equestrian use appears to be code for useless for growing anything on ;-)

10-12K acre seems to be about cost in central belt Scotland for farmland wi th actual grading for growing things, add outline residential, no matter lo cation, and multiply value by about 10.

That`s ignoring availbilty of services, if they are actually near , hit dou ble bonus multiplier.

Reply to
Adam Aglionby

Do you need PP for a fence (less than 3 feet high)?

tim

Reply to
tim...

Think it might indicate change of use which will fall under planning.

Reply to
Adam Aglionby

In message , Adam Aglionby writes

Couple of instances locally.. one where an agricultural field was

*plotted* sold in small chunks to gullible foreigners. I think the planners put an article 4? directive on it preventing any structures.

The other where a bunch of households backing on to agricultural land have got away with extending their gardens.

Both some years ago now.

>
Reply to
Tim Lamb

On greenbelt land, most would think building a house etc on it - or several in your example - in what was a field goes against the principle. But would they also object in the same way to part of a field being given over to extend a domestic garden? After all, part of a large garden might well grow similar things that a farmer would in a field. But maybe look rather better.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

A field adjacent to ours has had an Article 4 directive applied when the owners tried to split it up into many lots as a housing estate. Looking at the plans at the Land registry it all looks very nice - roads laid out around a central open green space with a central long thin lake.

In practice the field floods regularly every year and the 'long thin lake' was dug by a previous owner to try and get the flood water to clear faster.

The Article 4 directive prevents them erecting anything now including fences.

Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Mawson

Pity they can't make the chancer pay at least the costs of making the Article 4 direction. (AIUI they can be bloody expensive because of all the time spent on them. And further costs follow 'cos they can't then charge fees for planning applications for stuff which would otherwise have been permitted developments.)

Reply to
Robin

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.