Surprise Planning Application Query
Discussion
Hi all
Hopefully I can get some guidance from the resident PH planning gurus.
I was idly looking through the town council meeting agendas and was surprised to find a planning application being discussed later today for a new property to be built close to one of our boundaries. Sod's law, I'm unable to attend the town council meeting tonight due to work commitments.
The planning application states that 4 neighbours have been consulted, but oddly the one which is most impacted by this application (i.e. us) has only discovered this by accident.
My initial concern is about the proximity to the boundary. Are there any rules which govern this ? I thought that there should be a minimum of 1 metre distance from boundaries.
The measurements on the drawings seem to be out of whack with the reality (which I measured today & marked up the roof drawing).
The scale on the block plan suggests the gap to fence is a small one. Perhaps the 1m is from wall to boundary, rather than roof/gutter edge....
Planning application URL - http://plantech.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk/PLANTEC...
The proximity of the new build would have the impact that we'd loose what little light we have in our living room - and go from having a view of the setting sun and trees to a pitched roof. There will be the loss of privacy too.
Frustratingly we were waiting for the property which is being split to come on to the open market, with a view to buying it as a BTL and extending our garden. The property is occupied by an elderly widow, and the couple took equity release some years ago - which might account for what is happening now.
So, the main questions are:
- what limits should be adhered to here with regard to boundary proximity,
- would there be a mechanism to try and get the build more centrally located within the subdivision to mitigate the impact upon ourselves,
- should I be getting in contact with the Case Officer to get qualified answers before raising any objections,
- should I make my concerns known to the Town Clerk for possible inclusion within the planning meeting tonight.
- any other ideas ?
Thanks
Chris
Hopefully I can get some guidance from the resident PH planning gurus.
I was idly looking through the town council meeting agendas and was surprised to find a planning application being discussed later today for a new property to be built close to one of our boundaries. Sod's law, I'm unable to attend the town council meeting tonight due to work commitments.
The planning application states that 4 neighbours have been consulted, but oddly the one which is most impacted by this application (i.e. us) has only discovered this by accident.
My initial concern is about the proximity to the boundary. Are there any rules which govern this ? I thought that there should be a minimum of 1 metre distance from boundaries.
The measurements on the drawings seem to be out of whack with the reality (which I measured today & marked up the roof drawing).
The scale on the block plan suggests the gap to fence is a small one. Perhaps the 1m is from wall to boundary, rather than roof/gutter edge....
Planning application URL - http://plantech.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk/PLANTEC...
The proximity of the new build would have the impact that we'd loose what little light we have in our living room - and go from having a view of the setting sun and trees to a pitched roof. There will be the loss of privacy too.
Frustratingly we were waiting for the property which is being split to come on to the open market, with a view to buying it as a BTL and extending our garden. The property is occupied by an elderly widow, and the couple took equity release some years ago - which might account for what is happening now.
So, the main questions are:
- what limits should be adhered to here with regard to boundary proximity,
- would there be a mechanism to try and get the build more centrally located within the subdivision to mitigate the impact upon ourselves,
- should I be getting in contact with the Case Officer to get qualified answers before raising any objections,
- should I make my concerns known to the Town Clerk for possible inclusion within the planning meeting tonight.
- any other ideas ?
Thanks
Chris
Riley Blue said:
I'd be seeking a deferment on the grounds that you were not consulted. It'll give you time to compose your concerns correctly.
Thanks, I've fired off an email to the case officer to identify why I was not notified and to the town clerk to see if the discussion could be deferred due to the absence of notification. Important to note here that the town council is just a consultee not a lot different to the notified neighbours. They have no decision making powers.
It’s the district council you need to be talking to but there are rules about neighbour notification and it’s sometimes a bit perverse, so if they’ve been followed they’re unlikely to change the timelines.
Good news is you’re likely to have time to object via the district or unitary council so I’d hire a planning consultant asap and get on with that
Ps I’d be surprised if the town clerk defers it, that would have to be up to the chair of the meeting who will be a councillor. Unless they’ve delegated certain things.
It’s the district council you need to be talking to but there are rules about neighbour notification and it’s sometimes a bit perverse, so if they’ve been followed they’re unlikely to change the timelines.
Good news is you’re likely to have time to object via the district or unitary council so I’d hire a planning consultant asap and get on with that
Ps I’d be surprised if the town clerk defers it, that would have to be up to the chair of the meeting who will be a councillor. Unless they’ve delegated certain things.
Pheo said:
Important to note here that the town council is just a consultee not a lot different to the notified neighbours. They have no decision making powers.
Thanks, I understand what you're saying, but I'd like to think that their comments carry more weight than that of an individual. The fact I've been in contact may get an honourable mention during the meeting and draw more attention to the application. Pheo said:
It’s the district council you need to be talking to but there are rules about neighbour notification and it’s sometimes a bit perverse, so if they’ve been followed they’re unlikely to change the timelines.
I expect that this is the case - that they've notified people who are on the same road as the property to be sub-divided - but not myself who is most affected.Pheo said:
Good news is you’re likely to have time to object via the district or unitary council so I’d hire a planning consultant asap and get on with that
Ps I’d be surprised if the town clerk defers it, that would have to be up to the chair of the meeting who will be a councillor. Unless they’ve delegated certain things.
Yes, it's a bit of a scattergun approach - I've put it forward that I would like to observe the discussion and have not received sufficient planning notification to do so.Ps I’d be surprised if the town clerk defers it, that would have to be up to the chair of the meeting who will be a councillor. Unless they’ve delegated certain things.
I'm on good speaking terms with the town mayor, who's on the planning committee. Hopefully I'll bump in to him today to see if I can glean any information.
Chris Type R said:
It looks like the plans are right on the limit if the limit is 1 metre from boundary to outside wall.
So, I think the next question is 'how likely is it to be able to influence the positioning such that it's less impactful'.
Have you established whether this 1m limit actually exists in your planning authority?So, I think the next question is 'how likely is it to be able to influence the positioning such that it's less impactful'.
In my experience, it is usually possible to build to the full extent of the property boundary, subject to the relevant permissions and consents.
I think you're focussing on the wrong thing with the 1m thing. The bigger issue here in my eyes is that the proposed dwelling is extremely close to your property, and the principle of development in this location needs to be thoroughly considered by the case officer.
You need a planning consultant to prepare an objection properly for you. When neighbours write in saying 'NIMBY' they are often pretty much ignored. It may cost you a good few hundred pounds but you really have no other choice unfortunately.
Do you know anyone on the town council? Can you get in touch with anyone on the council and voice your concerns about lack of notification? They are a consultee and depending on the individual council and the political situation their views can carry a fair amount of weight, and you're correct that their comments and views do carry more weight than individual objectors.
Different councils have different rules about how far delegated powers can go (that means the case officers right to make a decision independently) and under what circumstances the application should go to planning committee. If it isn't going to be refused outright, then you should discuss with your planning consultant how you can force the application to go to committee, and then get on the case of the planning committee members, and you can speak (or your consultant on your behalf) at the meeting to voice your concerns (which should be grounded in policy reasons, not because you don't want it there).
HTH
You need a planning consultant to prepare an objection properly for you. When neighbours write in saying 'NIMBY' they are often pretty much ignored. It may cost you a good few hundred pounds but you really have no other choice unfortunately.
Do you know anyone on the town council? Can you get in touch with anyone on the council and voice your concerns about lack of notification? They are a consultee and depending on the individual council and the political situation their views can carry a fair amount of weight, and you're correct that their comments and views do carry more weight than individual objectors.
Different councils have different rules about how far delegated powers can go (that means the case officers right to make a decision independently) and under what circumstances the application should go to planning committee. If it isn't going to be refused outright, then you should discuss with your planning consultant how you can force the application to go to committee, and then get on the case of the planning committee members, and you can speak (or your consultant on your behalf) at the meeting to voice your concerns (which should be grounded in policy reasons, not because you don't want it there).
HTH
Make sure you're up to date with the Local Plan also.
If you decide to object, it must be on material planning reasons, not just on loss of a view.
https://centralbedfordshire.app.box.com/s/m0skego6...
(if in doubt, use a proper planning consultant, Equus of this parish may be able to advise of who to use).
If you decide to object, it must be on material planning reasons, not just on loss of a view.
https://centralbedfordshire.app.box.com/s/m0skego6...
(if in doubt, use a proper planning consultant, Equus of this parish may be able to advise of who to use).
Mammasaid said:
Make sure you're up to date with the Local Plan also.
If you decide to object, it must be on material planning reasons, not just on loss of a view.
I think this is where I will require a professional. It's hard for me to know how to express a material planning reason concern when the issue is the closeness of the development. It's too easy to be taken for a NIMBY. If you decide to object, it must be on material planning reasons, not just on loss of a view.
The objection here would not be to the site being developed, but to the manner in which it's being done & the impact upon ourselves. It does seem that this development could have been planning more considerately.
Mammasaid said:
https://centralbedfordshire.app.box.com/s/m0skego6...
(if in doubt, use a proper planning consultant, Equus of this parish may be able to advise of who to use).
Thanks for linking the local plan - I'll have a look through it. Unfortunately CBC seem intent on carpet bombing the county with rabbit-warren developments and it seems even worse in Stotfold as this is right on the county border.(if in doubt, use a proper planning consultant, Equus of this parish may be able to advise of who to use).
Hopefully if Equus does see this, he might be able to recommend someone.
Edited by Chris Type R on Wednesday 12th January 11:39
Edited by Chris Type R on Thursday 13th January 00:33
The cynic in me makes me feel the property is sited like that so once its approved that can build a second one between the parking spaces and the original house! If definitely needs an expert to look at.
Incidentally might be worth speaking to the people living it to see if you can buy it now subject to them having a lease. If they can then repay the equity release.
Incidentally might be worth speaking to the people living it to see if you can buy it now subject to them having a lease. If they can then repay the equity release.
Application went in a few days before Xmas, seems a bit slippery to me. Siting of bungalow is a joke , absolutely no consideration for neighbour (op), virtually a declaration of war. . It is less than 20ft from your property even if it is only 1 storey. Probably be applying to turn it into 3 storey towerhouse in future. Leylandiis on standby.
Which neighbours were informed? You seem the only one severely compromised so im not surprised they didnt tell you. I bet the official notices went up on Hitchen rd not your street.
The detached bungalow as planned has no rear or side gardens.
Which neighbours were informed? You seem the only one severely compromised so im not surprised they didnt tell you. I bet the official notices went up on Hitchen rd not your street.
The detached bungalow as planned has no rear or side gardens.
Chrisgr31 said:
The cynic in me makes me feel the property is sited like that so once its approved that can build a second one between the parking spaces and the original house! If definitely needs an expert to look at.
Incidentally might be worth speaking to the people living it to see if you can buy it now subject to them having a lease. If they can then repay the equity release.
The cynic in me suspects that once the "access road" is developed it potentially unlocks access to a couple more gardens of people who are elderly and do not use them a great deal. The sweep of the access into the two parking places (shown in the OP first image) looks far too much like it could be extended.Incidentally might be worth speaking to the people living it to see if you can buy it now subject to them having a lease. If they can then repay the equity release.
The point you're making for the spacing on the property alone is a good one though. Also, once the property is initially constructed, I expect it could then be extended using dormer extensions or a full ground floor extension.
Edited by Chris Type R on Thursday 13th January 00:21
konark said:
Application went in a few days before Xmas, seems a bit slippery to me. Siting of bungalow is a joke , absolutely no consideration for neighbour (op), virtually a declaration of war. . It is less than 20ft from your property even if it is only 1 storey. Probably be applying to turn it into 3 storey towerhouse in future. Leylandiis on standby.
Which neighbours were informed? You seem the only one severely compromised so im not surprised they didnt tell you. I bet the official notices went up on Hitchen rd not your street.
The detached bungalow as planned has no rear or side gardens.
The planning officer responding to my email at 17:30 to say a letter dated Jan 6th had been posted and 'must have been delayed in the post'. Which neighbours were informed? You seem the only one severely compromised so im not surprised they didnt tell you. I bet the official notices went up on Hitchen rd not your street.
The detached bungalow as planned has no rear or side gardens.
The detached bungalow will be a pretty dark and uninviting build. The South facing prospect will be 1 metre from any future boundary fence, ditto east facing. North facing has no windows iirc. With it being a bungalow, the eaves are more effective at blocking natural sunlight than would be the case of a double story build.
I've been through the planning statement and this could be picked apart - especially with regard to the property which they're citing as having set precedent.
Edited by Chris Type R on Thursday 13th January 00:23
What’s the betting the bungalow is for the old lady?
Op you need to track given the pher called Equus. But in the meantime it may be worth you writing to the chair of the planning committee and your local councillor stating that you were not consulted but are the most affected property. Including the suggestion that you could be considering a Judicial Review may help them focus.
I am afraid I don’t have time at the moment to go through the plans, but gut feeling based on the drawings posted here is that it will be approved unless a few people make a lot of noise. You might get a minor change with a small movement from the boundary, but tbh, you are lucky it’s single storey.
Op you need to track given the pher called Equus. But in the meantime it may be worth you writing to the chair of the planning committee and your local councillor stating that you were not consulted but are the most affected property. Including the suggestion that you could be considering a Judicial Review may help them focus.
I am afraid I don’t have time at the moment to go through the plans, but gut feeling based on the drawings posted here is that it will be approved unless a few people make a lot of noise. You might get a minor change with a small movement from the boundary, but tbh, you are lucky it’s single storey.
blueg33 said:
What’s the betting the bungalow is for the old lady?
Op you need to track given the pher called Equus. But in the meantime it may be worth you writing to the chair of the planning committee and your local councillor stating that you were not consulted but are the most affected property. Including the suggestion that you could be considering a Judicial Review may help them focus.
Op you need to track given the pher called Equus. But in the meantime it may be worth you writing to the chair of the planning committee and your local councillor stating that you were not consulted but are the most affected property. Including the suggestion that you could be considering a Judicial Review may help them focus.
It might be for her - if it is then I suspect that what will follow will be a renovation and possibly extension to the original property. It's an odd situation as my understanding when I approached them a few years ago to buy part of their garden was that they'd done an equity release. To my knowledge she's still alive.
I've messaged him, thanks.
Edited by Chris Type R on Thursday 13th January 08:10
There are no set rules about proximity to the boundary, it falls under general amenity considerations. This is what I would argue:
-The applicant has provided little to no evidence regarding the character in the area to address the policy that seeks to resist backland development. There is a clear and strong pattern of development along the road, with dwellings fronting the road with rear gardens. The existence of some development behind the 'line' of development does not detract from this overriding character, which is easily understood in the streetscene.
-Was this policy even in place when those backland development were approved? Are they conversions/redevelopments of previous development? The applicant has not evidenced this. National planning policy used to class gardens as brownfield land, but no longer does, so again, has the applicant considered this policy change when relying on other developments presumably previously granted permission (its not clear) when seeking to use these as justification.
-Impact on amenity due to being close to the boundary, resulting in an overbearing impact and loss of privacy and disturbance from the cooking smells/extraction from the proposed kitchen.
The above is based on me spending literally 2 minutes to scan their Planning Statement and look at the location plan, and so I could well have got things wrong. However, food for thought for you hopefully
-The applicant has provided little to no evidence regarding the character in the area to address the policy that seeks to resist backland development. There is a clear and strong pattern of development along the road, with dwellings fronting the road with rear gardens. The existence of some development behind the 'line' of development does not detract from this overriding character, which is easily understood in the streetscene.
-Was this policy even in place when those backland development were approved? Are they conversions/redevelopments of previous development? The applicant has not evidenced this. National planning policy used to class gardens as brownfield land, but no longer does, so again, has the applicant considered this policy change when relying on other developments presumably previously granted permission (its not clear) when seeking to use these as justification.
-Impact on amenity due to being close to the boundary, resulting in an overbearing impact and loss of privacy and disturbance from the cooking smells/extraction from the proposed kitchen.
The above is based on me spending literally 2 minutes to scan their Planning Statement and look at the location plan, and so I could well have got things wrong. However, food for thought for you hopefully
covmutley said:
There are no set rules about proximity to the boundary, it falls under general amenity considerations. This is what I would argue:
-The applicant has provided little to no evidence regarding the character in the area to address the policy that seeks to resist backland development. There is a clear and strong pattern of development along the road, with dwellings fronting the road with rear gardens. The existence of some development behind the 'line' of development does not detract from this overriding character, which is easily understood in the streetscene.
-Was this policy even in place when those backland development were approved? Are they conversions/redevelopments of previous development? The applicant has not evidenced this. National planning policy used to class gardens as brownfield land, but no longer does, so again, has the applicant considered this policy change when relying on other developments presumably previously granted permission (its not clear) when seeking to use these as justification.
-Impact on amenity due to being close to the boundary, resulting in an overbearing impact and loss of privacy and disturbance from the cooking smells/extraction from the proposed kitchen.
The above is based on me spending literally 2 minutes to scan their Planning Statement and look at the location plan, and so I could well have got things wrong. However, food for thought for you hopefully
Thank you for doing this - is this something you do in a professional capacity ? -The applicant has provided little to no evidence regarding the character in the area to address the policy that seeks to resist backland development. There is a clear and strong pattern of development along the road, with dwellings fronting the road with rear gardens. The existence of some development behind the 'line' of development does not detract from this overriding character, which is easily understood in the streetscene.
-Was this policy even in place when those backland development were approved? Are they conversions/redevelopments of previous development? The applicant has not evidenced this. National planning policy used to class gardens as brownfield land, but no longer does, so again, has the applicant considered this policy change when relying on other developments presumably previously granted permission (its not clear) when seeking to use these as justification.
-Impact on amenity due to being close to the boundary, resulting in an overbearing impact and loss of privacy and disturbance from the cooking smells/extraction from the proposed kitchen.
The above is based on me spending literally 2 minutes to scan their Planning Statement and look at the location plan, and so I could well have got things wrong. However, food for thought for you hopefully
The precedent they're claiming is against another property which is truly rectangular rather than what is claimed within the the planning statement "The property has a generous rear garden in an orthodox rectangular shape. ". The map image has been sufficiently zoomed out and boxed to hide the reality which is that they're trying to build in the narrowest section, furthest away from the established building. In fact that make much of the fact that they're leaving a 28m "gap". The aerial view of the precedent property shows that this was built with good space away from other buildings and was for a 1 bedroom property.
Using the power of MSPaint, the proposal could be sited with a more even spacing between buildings with minimal impact. Doing this moves the property away from the existing hedge on the north which borders a recreation ground. Is there mileage in drawing attention to the ecological impact of building up to this boundary and the likelihood of having to destroy a habitat which is home to birds, hedgehogs, spiders etc ?
Thread update.
We engaged Equus's services and his company created and lodged an objection letter on our behalf. He was very helpful and patient answering many questions. I worked with the next door neighbour who also submitted an objection.
The local town council objected to the proposal, with the ward member calling it to committee should it have been approved by the planning officer.
The applicant withdrew their planning application and pulled out of the purchase.
We took over the sale at that point and have today exchanged contracts, to complete end of month.
We'll be splitting the property to add to our own back garden and then either BTLing or reselling the new property. This leads to a number of permutations of which way to go and how much to invest. Currently the advice from the EA is to do nothing and market as broadly as possible to proceedable buyers. The house and outbuilding(s) are in dire need of renovation. Recent sales of similar properties have been reassuring. Ultimately we might break-even or make a small loss to cover the additional garden space.
We engaged Equus's services and his company created and lodged an objection letter on our behalf. He was very helpful and patient answering many questions. I worked with the next door neighbour who also submitted an objection.
The local town council objected to the proposal, with the ward member calling it to committee should it have been approved by the planning officer.
The applicant withdrew their planning application and pulled out of the purchase.
We took over the sale at that point and have today exchanged contracts, to complete end of month.
We'll be splitting the property to add to our own back garden and then either BTLing or reselling the new property. This leads to a number of permutations of which way to go and how much to invest. Currently the advice from the EA is to do nothing and market as broadly as possible to proceedable buyers. The house and outbuilding(s) are in dire need of renovation. Recent sales of similar properties have been reassuring. Ultimately we might break-even or make a small loss to cover the additional garden space.
Edited by Chris Type R on Friday 10th June 13:07
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff