Planning application - advice please...

[Dave_G]

Hi,

I recently objected to a planning application that is linked to the expansion of a secondary school that backs onto the back of our house - I live directly adjacent to the school a matter of a few meters away..

My objection was as follows:

* On the open day held to outline the proposed new build and subsequently published plans on the Council's web site some of the details of the plans outlined at the consultation event have since changed.

* In particular, a temporary car park is outlined between the fence that seperates our garden the boundary of our home, and is planed to take up a significant amount of open green space (48 car spaces)

* The plans I received at the consultation showed car parking spaces in this area extending only to the boundary of a garage next to a protected oak tree (12 spaces).

* The said oak tree (approx 400 years old) boarders the school playing fields and our garden.

* We received assurances at the consultation meeting from the chief architect and the head teacher that there would be no plans to extend any car parking beyond this boundary.

* The architect noted that this was the case because the view from our garden would be detrimentally affected if the car park was extended.

* The plans as detailed on your website indicate that a car park will be built only a few meters from the bottom of our garden.

I am very concerned that whilst this car park is designated as temporary, that once built it will turn into a permanent fixture. Given that the build phase is projected to last several years any “temporary” car park is to all intents and purposes permanent.

I objected to the temporary car park on the basis it will disturb the use of our garden. Our garden backs onto the school playing fields and is currently secluded and peaceful. The build of the temporary car park will create noise and light pollution (as the school is used extensively out of hours) and I consider may even impact on the value of our house.

I am also concerned that the laying of a temporary car park will have a detrimental effect on the roots of a protected ancient tree (the branches currently reach to the ground where the car park is proposed and if built a significant amount of tree surgery will need to take place).

It was also been brought to my attention that a 12 meter high wind turbine will be sited a short distance from my house. Again, this was omitted from the consultation/planning meeting. I have objected on the grounds that a turbine so close will create noise pollution both day and night.

I have been asked to attend a "have your say" meeting in front of a planning committee. Do you think there are any points I should emphasise or indeed play down?

What are views/experience of attending these types of meetings? Any advice on the best approach/tactics? How do I stop them 'hacking' away at this oak tree??

Thanks,

Dave

 

[Adam]

I have been asked to attend a "have your say" meeting in front of a planning committee. Do you think there are any points I should emphasise or indeed play down?

Can't help on the actual process, but I'd suggest two things, A) have a search on google for "planning committee" or "appearing at planning committee" to see if someone else has detailed their experience. And B) get you wife/colleague/partner etc to fire some questions at you about the situation, and see if your answers sound reasonable, quick and to the point.

Adam

 

[mr]

I've been told by a neighbour who recently objected to a planning application for a nearby property that you can't object to planning permission on the basis that proposed plans will have an impact on your "view" or property value. If this is the case then I would imagine your best bet is the fact that the proposal seems to have changed significantly between the time it was dreamed up and the state it appears to be in now.

Mike.

 

[Pete W]

Dave,

I'm no expert but I have some limited experience as a home-owner of fighting (and losing) a couple of these planning battles. Unfortunately, your rights are extremely limited.

First, you have no legal right to a view, nor do you have a legal right to protect the value of your home. Planning committees across the country will discount any objection based on those grounds.

Second, you're likely to have very limited success on the grounds of noise and disturbance during the construction. The company doing the work will promise (and will have to take reasonable steps) to limit the disturbance - not working too early or too late, for example - but otherwise you're stuck with that.

Third, the wind turbine is a sore point but there's a general (government-backed) view in favour of alternative energy. But there are plenty of fights going on up and down the country so a Google search on the subject should tell you what your prospects of fighting that are.

Finally, your best bet will be to concentrate entirely on the fact that the plans have changed and now constitute a much greater development than originally proposed, and on safeguarding a protected ancient tree. Organizations like the Woodland Trust and the Tree Council should be able to give you some advice on that.

You should also be able to find a local solicitor or surveyor with experience of planning law and how to fight proposed developments. It might cost you a few hundred pounds but it would be money well-spent, I think.

 

[innesm]

Third, the wind turbine is a sore point but there's a general (government-backed) view in favour of alternative energy.

It reminds me of Chairman Mao urging the peasants to build backyard blast furnaces to make iron and steel for tools. They ended up melting down iron tools to make unusable lumps of iron. Of course I bet the peasants felt really virtuous while they were doing it.

 

[Anonymous]

Theyre right about the property devaluing thing, I was told the exact same by my former planning dept (sedgfield) -that it was an irelevance if my house lost its value when they allowed 2 mobile mast's near my house (they'll still charge full rate on the poll tax though wont they :wink: :roll: ) And they wouldnt let me take a photocopy of the proposal either (just to make sure the finishhed article was exactly what was proposed, as it happens it was).
Regardless of your personal political prefence's I would say contact your local councillor and grill them. They are sometimes competent and have a grasp of procedure's, they might help especially if they arent that bothered about a school extension or if they have an agenda to be obstructive to senior officials?
I'd focus on the car parking and tree conservation issue's, they are potential to refuse an aplication or force it to be amended. And demand to know why the plans changed so much from PR meeting stage to drawn up stage?? Call the local paper's. If the architect/builder is well in with the council or donates to NL though, your finished anyway.

 

[mr]

Another thing worth looking is, local road infrastructure seeing as the car pak has grown, it would suggest that the development will attract heavier traffic. Can the local roads support the increased traffic levels?

Mike

 

[Slim]

I think you have a good cuase for an objection with the tree. I'd ring English Nature and ask them about their Veteran Tree Initiative, which is supported by DEFRA. They will give you some solid advice, and will also survey the tree for a TPO if it doesn't already have one.

 

[Escudo]

What ho Dave,

I would suggest that you lobby your local town council representative who sits on the planning committee.

Invite this person to have a look.

Do not raise emotive issues as they are unfortunately largely irrelevant eg view, value of house etc.

Try "overbearing impact". Also have a chat with the councils planning officer. If you can get him to refuse the plans it will not go through.

If he approves permission then with your objection and hopefully others it will go to the planning committee (group of local councillors from nearby towns villages) including the chap / or lady from your area.

If you can get them to turn it down or object it will not succeed.

I know all about this because after a four year battle I won planning at my office. Loads of objections from neighbours and failure at planning committee stage (however officer approved on 5 occassions). Went to appeal (public enquiry) and won. Cost me £10,000. but it was worth it.

It was great to smile at all those committee members that tried to stop me. - they didn't like it.

Good luck, Esc.

Ps : If you have the resources you could employ a planning consultant.

 

[Anonymous]

It doesn't sound to me that you've a leg to stand on. You are in danger of coming across to the planning people as a right miserable old sod.

They're going to think 'If he doesn't want to live next door to a school, why did he buy a house next door to a school?'

This is exactly what happened to the residents of Mobberley when they objected to the extension of Manchester Airport. The airport was there before any of them!

I'd accept the inevitable and pitch for a nice big fence to be built for you free of charge.

Sorry!

Cheers
Brad

 

[Scrit]

the wind turbine is a sore point but there's a general (government-backed) view in favour of alternative energy. But there are plenty of fights going on up and down the country so a Google search on the subject should tell you what your prospects of fighting that are.

Beginning to think nil on this one. Tony wants it - so the rest of us will have to have it! We've recently seen our local authority decision to refuse planning permission for yet another wind farm on a peat moor overturned by Whitehall, despite firm evidence that the last one has irrepairably damaged an ecosystem which has been here in the Pennines since the end of the last Ice Age. The next one up for the same treatment will probably be a Blackstone Edge.

To the OP

If you have neighbours who'll be similarly be affected, now's the time to organise. From the point of view of someone who's successfully fought off two planning applications I'd give the OP this advice (in addition to what's gone before):

1. Organise a petition and get your neighbours to sign it

2. Form an opposition body with your neighbours. This may mean burying the hatchet with people you utterly detest, but it needs to be done. Councils tend to listen to groups rather than individuals.

3. Enlist the support of local councillors, or even prospective council candidates from the opposition parties if the party in office won't play ball - if you have a local election in May then that's even better in terms of getting coiverage in the local press and leverage on the politicos. Sitting councillors generally want to remain in post so any threat to their position can result in support. Even better if you can get one to speak to the Planning Committee on your behalf.

4. Start a letter writing campaign to the local newspaper. You need to get at least one letter published each week, so you'll need to get 3 or 4 letters a week written. These must be co-ordinated and from different people, not obviously from the same person with different signatures.

5. Issue press releases. Local journalism isn't what it was so local papers will often print verbatim well written press releases from pressure groups (other than the NF, of course)

6. At the planning meeting normally only one person is permitted to speak on behalf of the objectors, so pick your best speaker and prepare a list of points in advance.

Good luck!

Scrit

 

[Dave_G]

Thanks to all of you who have replied - I would have commented earlier, but I have been busy looking into the many pointers you guys have raised.

With regards to the wind turbine: - As mentioned this was not even identified on the orginal plans presented at a recent consultation. I discovered the proposal for a wind turbine only because I looked at the Council's web site and it was shown on their. I have been to look at the plans at the Council office and the 12 meter high turbine will be exactly 40 meters away from the perimeter of my garden! So only a total of 50 meters away from my living room. So bl**dy close.

I have been in touch with English Nature who indeed have the tree registered as being a protected English oak and stated the Council also have it registered as a protected tree!

The proposed car park according to the plans I have viewed will require branches to be removed, as they currently reach to ground level where the car park is due to be built. I have also discovered the car park will be lower than the current land level (some 2 feet) - so therefore dug out. This is likely to affect the tree's root system.

A specialist from English Nature is contacting me tomorrow to discuss tactics I can take to stop the car park effecting the tree.

Watch this space - I have only until next Tuesday in which to get my case planned.

Cheers,

Dave

 

[Anonymous]

It doesn't sound to me that you've a leg to stand on. You are in danger of coming across to the planning people as a right miserable old sod.

They're going to think 'If he doesn't want to live next door to a school, why did he buy a house next door to a school?'

This is exactly what happened to the residents of Mobberley when they objected to the extension of Manchester Airport. The airport was there before any of them!

I'd accept the inevitable and pitch for a nice big fence to be built for you free of charge.

Sorry!

Cheers
Brad

Its not inevitable, although the planning jobsworths would prefer us all to think it was, their jobs would be so much easier.
Dave might of been in his house before the school was built, it happens. In about 1978 a school was built right next to my parents house; the first they knew was when the jcb's arrived one monday morning to start groundwork's, durham council sprung that one very quietly, they didnt go through charades (PR consultation exercises) back then, just decided and imposed, good old socialist hegemony. Anyway its one thing to live near a school, another thing for it to expand to a point where its facility's and infrastructures start to impinge on surrounding residents property in an unecessarily intrusive or destructive way. Its the ******* deceit though that annoys me most, why do they present one plan fully intending to try to develop a different one? What would the architect and head teacher gain by lying?? :roll: They are more likely to lose whatever trust or credibility they might have had with the local resident's

 

[Anonymous]

Presumably there are good reasons for the school needing to expand its facilities. Capital projects like this do not find funding without very good ones!

I would have thought that the educational opportunities of the local children took priority over the tranquility of one bloke's garden.

My local high school, at which my kids are pupils, secured a few years ago funding for a new sports hall. Owing to the urban situation of the school, it was inevitable that the new development was sited near some residents' houses. So probably a dozen householders, who once looked out over school playing fields from their kitchen windows, now look at a bloody great big brick wall!

Were there complaints and NIMBYism?

No. Instead there was general pleasure and celebration that the school had managed to acheive its ambition and build a state of the art sports facility for the benefit of the local community. Everyone affected either had kids at the school, had done in the past, or would do in the future.

Our planning system has to consider the greater good to have priority over the complaints of a few affected individuals. This is going to be increasingly true with regard to housing.

At the risk of straying into areas political, recent rises in house prices demonstrate that there is a dramatic shortage of housing available on the market. The country needs to build more houses to help bring prices down to affordable levels. This will inevitably mean building on green belt land etc etc

NIMBYism is going to be be under increasing attack in the coming years, and the NIMBYs will lose.

As to the point about plans changing; I have worked over the last few years on many home extensions and a restaurant conversion. In every case, the eventual design bore little resemblance to the initial plans drawn up by the architect and submitted to the council. The design process is an evolving one. I see no reason why this should be any different in big projects like this school development.

Cheers
Brad

 

[Anonymous]

Presumably there are good reasons for the school needing to expand its facilities. Capital projects like this do not find funding without very good ones!

I would have thought that the educational opportunities of the local children took priority over the tranquility of one bloke's garden.

My local high school, at which my kids are pupils, secured a few years ago funding for a new sports hall. Owing to the urban situation of the school, it was inevitable that the new development was sited near some residents' houses. So probably a dozen householders, who once looked out over school playing fields from their kitchen windows, now look at a bloody great big brick wall!

Were there complaints and NIMBYism?

No. Instead there was general pleasure and celebration that the school had managed to acheive its ambition and build a state of the art sports facility for the benefit of the local community. Everyone affected either had kids at the school, had done in the past, or would do in the future.

Our planning system has to consider the greater good to have priority over the complaints of a few affected individuals. This is going to be increasingly true with regard to housing.

At the risk of straying into areas political, recent rises in house prices demonstrate that there is a dramatic shortage of housing available on the market. The country needs to build more houses to help bring prices down to affordable levels. This will inevitably mean building on green belt land etc etc

NIMBYism is going to be be under increasing attack in the coming years, and the NIMBYs will lose.

As to the point about plans changing; I have worked over the last few years on many home extensions and a restaurant conversion. In every case, the eventual design bore little resemblance to the initial plans drawn up by the architect and submitted to the council. The design process is an evolving one. I see no reason why this should be any different in big projects like this school development.

Cheers
Brad

Thats really great Brad that your local school turned out so nice and your community is so nimby free. But if plans change so much between concept and realisation, why bother with them at all. I mean if your neighbour put in a plan to build a 1.8 metre wind turbine in his yard but when it was built it turned out to be 12 metres high you'd be happy about it wouldn't you? Why not just return to 70's style compulsory purhase scenario's, like it or lump it
For example they want to build an abatoirr less than a mile from here, it will be one of the biggest in the UK. The plans show certain details, things that are supposed to be included to prevent vermin/smells/noises/pollution etc. I could accept it (at a push) if all that was strictly adhered to and it stayed within those planned limit's. But if as you said, plans evolve during building, it could be an entirely different facility than what was presented to the planning officer's for approval. I'd be far happier if they were totally up front and honest from the outset instead of conniving.

 

[Chris Knight]

Much as I enjoy a good rant, this thread has the potential of straying into deep political waters and this isn't the place to go swimming..

 

[mr]

On a different note, there are plans for quite a few windfarms round these parts which many of the locals, particularly the second home owners it seems, object to. Personally I quite like wind turbines, I think they're rather attractive in a sort of sci fi industrial kind of way. That probably makes me a bit odd.

Cheers Mike

 

[PaulO]

I have had the misfortune of working on the development of some NHS buildings. New and refurbished buildings have to achieve a certain "NEAT" score (NHS Environmental Assessment Tool). This assessment takes the form of a questionnaire that asks questions like "How many parking spaces will there be?", "Is there a bus stop nearby?". Reducing the number of permanent parking spaces increases your score, and is a way that some buildings achieve the necessary points for approval. Despite the fact that the full number of spaces might be required. The ironic thing is that the further a new facility is from public transport the lower the score it gets, so in turn the less parking spaces they can have.

I wonder if similar forces are at work with your local school, being forced to reduce permanent parking spaces. In which case I would be concerned that the temporary spaces will be used on a permanent basis.

Good luck.

 

[RogerS]

I wonder if similar forces are at work with your local school, being forced to reduce permanent parking spaces. In which case I would be concerned that the temporary spaces will be used on a permanent basis.

Good luck.

Or they really are temporary and needed because the existing carpark is being built-on and they can't build the 'new' permanent carpark until a later stage in the project at which point the temporary car park will cease to exist. On the other hand, in a galaxy far, far away.....

 

[Anonymous]

On a different note, there are plans for quite a few windfarms round these parts which many of the locals, particularly the second home owners it seems, object to. Personally I quite like wind turbines, I think they're rather attractive in a sort of sci fi industrial kind of way. That probably makes me a bit odd.

Cheers Mike

Dont get me wrong I dont have any problems with wind turbine's, I just used that as an example to illustrate my point.
My neighbour has put in to build 2 dwellings on his land. I dont have any problem with it, its a good plan. BUT I would be very annoyed if the plan he presented consequently "evolved" into a 3 story apartment block with a sports hall, helicopter pad and retail complex, felling all the mature trees etc. Its easy to slag others off as Nimby's (until some controversial scheme tries to attach itself to your own community that is), but its basic human nature to want to best protect your own interest's. I dont supose any of the agri businessmen who want the Eye abatoir would be happy to have it close to their home?