Opposing Planning Permission

System

You'd be surprised. On both counts

moneyistooshorttomention

!!!!!! wrote: »

You'd be surprised. On both counts

Sounds like you know a "tale to be told" on that one???

Oh go on....do tell us....we might as well know what extent Council inefficiencies can go to...:cool:

sheramber

!!!!!! wrote: »

Unless they are working on the theory of 'I own to the centre of the road'

Although on paper it may be the case, if the roadway is adopted then owning to the centre will no longer have any bearing as everybody will have the right to pass and repass

Since the alleyway is a dead end and there was a commercial property at the top, the alleyway may have belonged to the commercial property ( as it was their access way) and therefore now belongs to the developer and is part of the scheme.

If it belongs to council who own the area where the houses are proposed, again it could be part of the sale to the developer.

System

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Sounds like you know a "tale to be told" on that one???

Oh go on....do tell us....we might as well know what extent Council inefficiencies can go to...:cool:

It's the old story of planners only look at planning issues and other departments that comment on plans fail in the due diligence stakes and miss things

System

sheramber wrote: »

Since the alleyway is a dead end and there was a commercial property at the top, the alleyway may have belonged to the commercial property ( as it was their access way) and therefore now belongs to the developer and is part of the scheme.

If it belongs to council who own the area where the houses are proposed, again it could be part of the sale to the developer.

But if it has been adopted which can happen even if owned by the council then they can not just unadopt it without notifying/consulting all other affected parties.

Also there is a problem of if it now belongs to the developer then the OP may have already gained a ROW across for their access

It needs the OP to check the status of the alley to put this question to bed.

RAS

In this area it is common for back lanes/alleys to be owned by the adjecent houses, up to the midpoint. OP - check your deeds.

These may specify that the owners have to allow access/ a right of way to those owning the other side. Does this allow a vehicle to pass on your side of the alley?

ruggedtoast

Well, this thread is a veritable NIMBY's charter isn't it?

The dreams of three modest homes for three families crushed before they have begun.

You cant have a home here its by a footpath, you cant have it there Mrs Miggins will have to see it when she goes to her garage. Not there we'd have to cut down a tree.

Enough of NIMBYS.

Homes for people not plans.

fairy_lights

kinger101 wrote: »

I can't work out if they are giant cars or tiny houses.

I might be being incredibly dumb here but I can't work out if those cars are not drawn to scale, or if they are, and each room of the new houses genuinely will be car sized

single_lonely

!!!!!! wrote: »

It needs the OP to check the status of the alley to put this question to bed.

Thanks all for the response and the questions you have bought up.
I have access only to the electronic copy of the deeds and it does not mention it in there.
The previous owner said we both own the alleyway. obviously if the driveway were to be made then the cars would have to reverse out as the other is a dead end (unless they drive onto the pavement up a gradient which joyriders have done in the past!).

Also if he owned half and I the other, I could park my car on my side and not give the skips /wagons access to drop/collect waste (which they need atm as they haven't even finished one commercial building yet!)

Davesnave

Highways must have input, and as the lack of a turn space would scupper proposals for a detached house with parking, I cannot see any logical reason why this should be different here, especially with a school across the road.

I don't believe that you could block the lane, if another party has acquired a right of way over it through historic usage. Rights of access are separate matters from ownership.