PV install - upset neighbours

Ben84

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Life is simply to short to spend it looking at peoples roofs, especially if the purpose of looking is only to provide fuel for complaints and more wasted time.

Basically how I feel about it. Besides, repainting the front door and garage door on many houses would create a bigger visual change based on these being building features the eye is drawn too, usually involving a bigger surface area, and being in a location that is closer to street level. Despite this, I have never thought it normal to feel the need to seek the neighbours' approval on new paint colours or to take them too seriously if they express some dislike of navy bue because it looks 'a bit council estate' or something.

Martyn1981

Ben, your mention of paint colours reminded me off a funny little run in my sister had regarding moaning neighbours.

My sister used to live in a low level conservation area, suburban roads, nice house but nothing particularly special. Before she bought the house there had been tenants, and an absent landlord.

The house opened onto one road, and the side went down another road. The front was at road level, but the back garden was 8ft below road level and was accessed via a staircase. The side wall had collapsed at some point, and given the danger of the drop from the pavement, the council (unable to locate the landlord) built a new 5ft wall themselves. However they decided to build it from bright red bricks, which didn’t match the house (oh well!). Unfortunately, at the front they decided to step the wall up, which became a popular dare for the local (primary/junior school) kids to run up and run along. Also for some strange reason, people used to stop and balance their noses on the wall whilst having a good look into the garden?

My sister got scared that a child would fall the 13ft into her garden and be hurt, and pee’d off with all the on-lookers. My father stepped in, checked with a surveyor friend who confirmed that going higher on those foundations would be risky, so instead he built a series of 18inch 2x2 brick pillars, and remade 6ft fence panels into 18inch panels. Job done.

He also removed the council railings which they’d put in when the original wrought iron had rusted. He took photos of the neighbours original railings, and had his friend, the ‘iron man’ manufacture matching railings with filigree, so they looked original.

Shortly after, the council knocked the door, told my sister that someone had shopped her and said the changes had to go. My father popped over, explained the history, and pointed out that the neighbouring houses were in various stages of disrepair, and his work made it look better. He also pointed out that he had corrected the danger that the council had created with the wall, and neighbouring school.

They backed down, agreed that they were improvements, but told my sister to submit retrospective planning apps for both jobs, £90 fee each, and to re-paint the fence panels dark brown, as opposed to the light brown my father had used (there was no standard colour on any neighbouring properties!). If she didn’t do this they would take action against her.

My father told them that he’d done the work without my sister’s permission or knowledge, so she wasn’t liable. That if they wanted the panels dark brown, they could paint them themselves. And advised them on the likelihood of getting £180 off him. He suggested they take legal action against him, and that he would discuss the matter further in court with them, supported by photos of the neighbours broken, collapsing, overgrown, or even ‘missing’ walls.

12 years on, still not a peep from the council.

Nice of the neighbours to shop her. Maybe they were running a book on when the first kid would be hurt, and were annoyed at my sister for spoiling their game? I think sometimes people complain, just because they can.

Mart.

Ich_2

In a town near here a house owner had a dispute with the council over fitting UPVC windows in a conservation area!
He did discover, however, that the council had no control over paint colours, so as the rendering needed re-painted he did in bright pink with red windows & door.

larkim

Cardew wrote: »

Surely it is!

People have every right to object to the Council if they feel that alterations to neighbouring properties are ugly, and thus 'lower the tone' of the area.

Show me the planning guidelines which enshrine this then?

If I choose to paint one window yellow, another green, another blue and the other red, with a lumimous pink door, do you think my neighbours can appeal to the planners on the grounds that it "lowers the tone"?

Additions which are outside of permitted development rights are rightly under the terms of planning law, but "I don't like that" isn't an argument which will win with the planners.

Matt

EricMears

From
http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/general/faq/faqapplyprocess

What are material considerations?


A material consideration is a matter that should be taken into account in deciding a planning application or on an appeal against a planning decision.

Material considerations can include (but are not limited to):

(I haven't included their very long list)

However, issues such as loss of view, or negative effect on the value of properties are not material considerations.

Cardew

larkim wrote: »

Show me the planning guidelines which enshrine this then?

If I choose to paint one window yellow, another green, another blue and the other red, with a lumimous pink door, do you think my neighbours can appeal to the planners on the grounds that it "lowers the tone"?

Additions which are outside of permitted development rights are rightly under the terms of planning law, but "I don't like that" isn't an argument which will win with the planners.

Matt

Presumably the guidelines this council used.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-2115850/Council-orders-pensioners-remove-solar-panels-worth-13-000-theyre-reflective-obtrusive.html

reasons were:

a council official said: 'The
installation of the panels are seriously detrimental to the visual amenities of
nearby residents and to the area in general by reason of the reflective nature
of the panels.





'The solar panels are not considered
appropriate or sympathetic with the existing dwelling house with the panels on
the roof more at eye levels and more obtrusive.'

I also suspect(note suspect) that the colour scheme you suggest would bring forth objections that the council would uphold.

This whole thread is getting away from the point the OP raises. It is beyond doubt that some people do not like the appearance of panels and consider they are ugly and lower the tone.

I have no idea(and neither has anyone else on this thread) what percentage of the public are in that category, and how strong their objections.

I have conceded earlier in this thread that any formal objection by the OP's neighbours is unlikely to be successful. His dilemma, as I read it, is that people with whom he gets on well, have objected informally to his proposed installation; and he is asking advice. Either to ignore their objections or cancel the order.

larkim

Cardew wrote: »

Presumably the guidelines this council used.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-2115850/Council-orders-pensioners-remove-solar-panels-worth-13-000-theyre-reflective-obtrusive.html

I also suspect(note suspect) that the colour scheme you suggest would bring forth objections that the council would uphold.

Just to continue one more time, the Prestwich case seemed to hang particularly on the fact that the reflection would cause a "serious detrimental" effect. I can understand / appreciate that - having to close your curtains on a sunny day whilst sat in the lounge to avoid blinding light directly into your eyes would seem to me a serious impact.

I disagree about colour schemes - I've certainly never heard of a case where pure aesthetics (in the absence of a conservation area or listed status) were a feature of a planning consideration.

But I do agree - not relevant to the OP's point; that's about how you man-manage the situation, recognising that not everyone likes the look of panels.

Matt

The_Green_Hornet

Can anyone confirm that of the quarter of a million solar PV installations is there really only one solitary case where the council has ordered the householder to remove their panels?

It seems to me that the chances of anyone being asked to remove their panels because their neighbours didn't like them is er 250,000 to 1 and climbing, but then I don't suppose it will stop the anti-solar PV brigade from referencing the same story on here every now and again.

My advice to the OP is to try and get on with your neighbours if you can but don't let them put you off installing solar panels if you want to.

Martyn1981

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

Can anyone confirm that of the quarter of a million solar PV installations is there really only one solitary case where the council has ordered the householder to remove their panels?

Hiya Hornet, can't confirm that there has only been one. But I'm not aware of any other cases making 'big news'. It will also be interesting to see what the final outcome is. I think at present it's not looking too good for the elderly couple.

However, it may be of note, that the number of installs is now more than a quarter mill, it's actually on its way towards a third of a mill. But the databases do tend to run behind a little.

Mart.

Numbnuts

I would tell them to go get a job instead of looking out their window all day. its your house so F them