"strongest" planning application objections
Discussion
We have a developer wishing to put the most ludicrous development up near our house. Everyone in the cul de sac is preparing letters of objection to go in, but what I'd like to know is what subjects of objections carry most weight, what carry least and what will actually be damaging to the objection?
It's a 60 bed care home with 15 parking spaces, access to the (commercial) bins only via a side entrance to be located in the cul de sac (and used 3 times a week!!!) plus a "conservative" estimate of 180 car movements per day. A big arse commercial venture, basically, being sited on a VERY quiet residential area. All services and staff points are sited to cause the worst possible impact on the residence.
It's a 60 bed care home with 15 parking spaces, access to the (commercial) bins only via a side entrance to be located in the cul de sac (and used 3 times a week!!!) plus a "conservative" estimate of 180 car movements per day. A big arse commercial venture, basically, being sited on a VERY quiet residential area. All services and staff points are sited to cause the worst possible impact on the residence.
Davi said:
We have a developer wishing to put the most ludicrous development up near our house. Everyone in the cul de sac is preparing letters of objection to go in, but what I'd like to know is what subjects of objections carry most weight, what carry least and what will actually be damaging to the objection?
It's a 60 bed care home with 15 parking spaces, access to the (commercial) bins only via a side entrance to be located in the cul de sac (and used 3 times a week!!!) plus a "conservative" estimate of 180 car movements per day. A big arse commercial venture, basically, being sited on a VERY quiet residential area. All services and staff points are sited to cause the worst possible impact on the residence.
You need to get a copy of the local plan from your local planning authority, carefully study the plan and look for areas where the application specifically is in breach of the plan.It's a 60 bed care home with 15 parking spaces, access to the (commercial) bins only via a side entrance to be located in the cul de sac (and used 3 times a week!!!) plus a "conservative" estimate of 180 car movements per day. A big arse commercial venture, basically, being sited on a VERY quiet residential area. All services and staff points are sited to cause the worst possible impact on the residence.
A rejection of the application should only be made on 'material grounds' - that means the application does not comply with the local plan, as opposed to everyone in the vaccinity not liking it!
A link to the planning application on the councils web site might help
Things like rights of light, over looking and being out of context compared to the scale and mass of the surround buildings are often strong arguments, I expect the vehicular movements will be assessed by the council.
Removal of any substantial trees may also be an issue.
if the development ruins individuals views from their homes this isn't a planning consideration
Things like rights of light, over looking and being out of context compared to the scale and mass of the surround buildings are often strong arguments, I expect the vehicular movements will be assessed by the council.
Removal of any substantial trees may also be an issue.
if the development ruins individuals views from their homes this isn't a planning consideration
I've done a few of these with local neighbours, mostly successful including a very similar sounding care home that has just been also rejected on appeal.
You need to find out your local council's equivalent of a 'Unitary Development Plan' - basically the rules they work by when considering applications. You then specifically reference which sections of the plan the planning application breaches and why. PM me if you want some sample letters.
It may also be better to respond as a residents 'committee' than as individuals.
You need to find out your local council's equivalent of a 'Unitary Development Plan' - basically the rules they work by when considering applications. You then specifically reference which sections of the plan the planning application breaches and why. PM me if you want some sample letters.
It may also be better to respond as a residents 'committee' than as individuals.
andye30m3 said:
A link to the planning application on the councils web site might help
Here ya go!http://publicaccess.southampton.gov.uk/PublicAcces...
Am intending to pour over it extremely carefully tomorrow when I'm not in a room full of paint fumes LOL
I would ask why the parking/ servicing arrangements have been placed on that side of the proposal (presumably to protect the trees!).
I have only looked at the site plan. The may have produced a AIA (Arboricultural Impact Assessment) so check this in the tab "reports"
Noise pollution from vehicular movements would be a good case to argue from No. 5s point of view!
I have only looked at the site plan. The may have produced a AIA (Arboricultural Impact Assessment) so check this in the tab "reports"
Noise pollution from vehicular movements would be a good case to argue from No. 5s point of view!
One area you might want to delve into (not literally!) is the bins.
Given the nature of the proposed facility, waste will likely include high levels of hazardous and biological waste, the storage, collection and transportation of which is regulated and controlled exceptionally robustly. This includes it's proximity to residential areas and transport routes.
The containment of waste is something many property developers overlook considering there to be simply the need for somewhere to store the bins.
Won't get the application rejected on its own but if they haven't followed guidance it will be a major league thorn in their sides and add weight to other objections.
Given the nature of the proposed facility, waste will likely include high levels of hazardous and biological waste, the storage, collection and transportation of which is regulated and controlled exceptionally robustly. This includes it's proximity to residential areas and transport routes.
The containment of waste is something many property developers overlook considering there to be simply the need for somewhere to store the bins.
Won't get the application rejected on its own but if they haven't followed guidance it will be a major league thorn in their sides and add weight to other objections.
Davi said:
Huntsman said:
look for areas where the application specifically is in breach of the plan.
Could you expand on that a bit more please? not sure what you mean!These policies will apply to specific areas on the local plan maps. i.e. there will be areas designted for low cost housing, some area for retail, some for industry etc etc.
What is being suggested is to find where what is being proposed conflicts with the 'masterplan' as laid out by the planners/council, and use this as the basis for the objection.
This way, you are using the councils/planners own words to rebuff the application, rather than your own.
60 bed is huge.
15 parking spaces sounds a little light.
How many staff? They need parking spaces. (have read they think that 15 spaces is enough, I think there is a guide on how many there should be..)
Size of plot? Size of building? Remainder, as amenity space? What sort of ratio?
Just had a look at the docs. They've done quite a number on there.
Mention the S106, developer contribution, this should be sizeable.
Fire Regulations, but you might want to keep that one under your hat as long as possible.. Whilst not strictly planning, there doesn't seem to be any consideration to means of evacuation from the first floor. Ideally there should be an external stairway provided or two.
Some of the First Floor rooms look a little on the small side, with reduced headroom indicated but not given... There is a minimum size for rooms of around 12m2.
15 parking spaces sounds a little light.
How many staff? They need parking spaces. (have read they think that 15 spaces is enough, I think there is a guide on how many there should be..)
Size of plot? Size of building? Remainder, as amenity space? What sort of ratio?
Just had a look at the docs. They've done quite a number on there.
Mention the S106, developer contribution, this should be sizeable.
Fire Regulations, but you might want to keep that one under your hat as long as possible.. Whilst not strictly planning, there doesn't seem to be any consideration to means of evacuation from the first floor. Ideally there should be an external stairway provided or two.
Some of the First Floor rooms look a little on the small side, with reduced headroom indicated but not given... There is a minimum size for rooms of around 12m2.
eps said:
60 bed is huge.
15 parking spaces sounds a little light.
How many staff? They need parking spaces. (have read they think that 15 spaces is enough, I think there is a guide on how many there should be..)
Size of plot? Size of building? Remainder, as amenity space? What sort of ratio?
Just had a look at the docs. They've done quite a number on there.
Mention the S106, developer contribution, this should be sizeable.
Fire Regulations, but you might want to keep that one under your hat as long as possible.. Whilst not strictly planning, there doesn't seem to be any consideration to means of evacuation from the first floor. Ideally there should be an external stairway provided or two.
Some of the First Floor rooms look a little on the small side, with reduced headroom indicated but not given... There is a minimum size for rooms of around 12m2.
there will be min' 20 full time staff at a time cycled in three shifts each day, meaning twice a day there will be at least 40 staff there on changeover, that does not include any of the "total care" element offered.15 parking spaces sounds a little light.
How many staff? They need parking spaces. (have read they think that 15 spaces is enough, I think there is a guide on how many there should be..)
Size of plot? Size of building? Remainder, as amenity space? What sort of ratio?
Just had a look at the docs. They've done quite a number on there.
Mention the S106, developer contribution, this should be sizeable.
Fire Regulations, but you might want to keep that one under your hat as long as possible.. Whilst not strictly planning, there doesn't seem to be any consideration to means of evacuation from the first floor. Ideally there should be an external stairway provided or two.
Some of the First Floor rooms look a little on the small side, with reduced headroom indicated but not given... There is a minimum size for rooms of around 12m2.
Not a very big plot, and they've designed it so that all the residential gardens back onto one of the busiest, nosiest roads into southampton... Some nice tips in there, thank you!
The ironic thing is, if they'd kept it a reasonable size, provided parking, better site access and turned it around so all services were situated toward the busy main road, the residents would have welcomed it!
V8mate said:
blindswelledrat said:
Sympathies mate. That sound horrific
+1. Must be awful having the threat of loads of quiet, old people moving into the neighbourhood hanging over you.Davi said:
V8mate said:
blindswelledrat said:
Sympathies mate. That sound horrific
+1. Must be awful having the threat of loads of quiet, old people moving into the neighbourhood hanging over you.Davi said:
V8mate said:
blindswelledrat said:
Sympathies mate. That sound horrific
+1. Must be awful having the threat of loads of quiet, old people moving into the neighbourhood hanging over you.Rights of light are NOT a planning issue
Blocking views from a property is NOT a planning issue
Reduction in value is NOT a planning issue
What you need to do is look at Local Plan policies and see if the development is in breach of any of them. You need to do the same with National Planning Policy Guidance (google this)
Some subjective issues do have bearing eg
Massing
Height
Density that is out of character for the area
Pretty musch anything else like highways, school spaces, drainage etc can be dealt with by the developer if he has the will and financial flexibility to do so.
Davi said:
The ironic thing is, if they'd kept it a reasonable size, provided parking, better site access and turned it around so all services were situated toward the busy main road, the residents would have welcomed it!
Maybe they've deliberately pitched an OTT application which they expect to be rejected and then they'll "compromise" by submitting revised plans which you'll all cheer?My Mum's in a care home and I've visited a few others and there's really not a lot of activity around these places.
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff