Best Way To Object A Planning Application? Hes At It AGAIN!! UPDATED 19/06

Catblue

So he's spent 9 months of his life and a wad of cash for a Planning Consultant to get precisely nowhere?

I'll bet he's fuming!

divadee

Catblue wrote: »

So he's spent 9 months of his life and a wad of cash for a Planning Consultant to get precisely nowhere?

I'll bet he's fuming!

i hope he is :rotfl: :rotfl:

i dont know wether to send a bottle of wine around so he can comiserate with himself!! just stick a label on saying from your lovely neighbours :rotfl:


i just dont think this is the end, why pay to have a fence put up just yesterday? The only thing i can really think is he was that arrogant and sure of himself that he was positive he was going to get it, and maybe he wanted it all ready for the builders to move in soon

even now emotions aside, why would someone who claims they have financial trouble try and get a self cert (hes self employed) self build mortgage with the way the market is going

all i can hope is he goes away and moves.

harryhound

Another MSE member gets the same treatment:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=943287

rapido

. .

hjb123

rapido wrote: »

Hi all,

just requesting some advice. I am manager at a plant nursery; next door also is a nursery but has been closed since December.

Yesterday, I noticed someone doing a survey next door, and had a chat with him. It turns out planning permission has been applied for for the site there.

So I went down the council office to-day. A quick purusal of the application (a huge box full of folders) states that they have basically applied for a gated community of almost 3 dozen four or five bedroom detached houses.

Now I knew that a local investment/development company bought the nursery and left it empty. They claimed there was security on site, but there never ever was any. In those few months, it became a haven for fly-tippers, metal thieves, etc. It was also used by various petty criminals as an access to get into my nursery and nick stuff.

Anyway, I looked at the application, and noticed that in it, they considered that the nursery was a "bad neighbour" (their words) to the local residents. Also there is an environmental survey which basically says that they once saw a grass snake or something.

Briefly, my objections/concerns are:

1) Application lodged as "land off (roads), (village next door)", rather than "(name) Nursery, (this town) and (name) Nursery, (village next door)". Sorry if that seems confusing, but their land comprises 2 nurseries adjoining each other, one in this town and one in the next village. Because of this, the first time I asked at the council they couldn't find it and sent me away claiming that there has been no application lodged and that I would be informed about it if there was.

2) Lack of notification to the neighbours about the application (no site notice posted, neither neighbours nor I received any notification of one).

3) Their environmental survey stated that they never came across badgers or bats. This is bizarre, as this area is swarming with bats at night, and badgers are regular visitors (and often found run over in the road right outside the nurseries!). There are also barn owls nearby, possibly even next door. Plus on the map of the "local plan", it states "protected species" right above their nurseries!

4) It is also green belt land, along with being a "landscape character area", and very near or possibly even adjoining a local wildlife site (it's north of our nursery; their nursery is west of us).

5) the two roads their land is off are single track country lanes which I don't think is appropriate for a residential development of the size (the nearest public transport is half a mile away, I envisage any residents will use their vehicles). One of those roads is the historic boundary of two Saxon kingdoms. Their application rubbishes the idea that there might be anything archaelogically important around, yet up the top of the road in question is an area of archaelogical interest.

Maybe some others that might not be so important - but still!

I wanted to make photostats of their application but it costs a fortune. There apparently is only just over a week and a half to object. The chap at the council stated "it would probably go to committee" but he didn't elaborate.

-regards
rapido

our local council has planning applications online for anyone to look at - is it possible your local one might do the same for you to be able to print them off that way?

rapido

. .

planning_officer

Hi rapido, I'm not sure what you're seeking advice on to be honest, as you don't really ask anything in your post - but I hope my comments are of some help!

rapido wrote: »

my objections/concerns are:

1) Application lodged as "land off (roads), (village next door)", rather than "(name) Nursery, (this town) and (name) Nursery, (village next door)". Sorry if that seems confusing, but their land comprises 2 nurseries adjoining each other, one in this town and one in the next village. Because of this, the first time I asked at the council they couldn't find it and sent me away claiming that there has been no application lodged and that I would be informed about it if there was.

The address won't make any difference to the determination of the application. It will be assessed on its planning merits.

rapido wrote: »

2) Lack of notification to the neighbours about the application (no site notice posted, neither neighbours nor I received any notification of one).

Different councils publicise applications in different ways. All the legislation says is that applications have to be publicised - all the detail of how they are publicised is left to each individual council. So there may be no requirement for a site notice. At my authority, a development of 12 houses would require a site notice as it is classed as major development (over 10 dwellings), but that's not the same everywhere. Are you immediately adjoining the site? I'm surprised that no nighbour notification letter was sent to you.

rapido wrote: »

3) Their environmental survey stated that they never came across badgers or bats. This is bizarre, as this area is swarming with bats at night, and badgers are regular visitors (and often found run over in the road right outside the nurseries!). There are also barn owls nearby, possibly even next door. Plus on the map of the "local plan", it states "protected species" right above their nurseries!

Does the environmental survey say there is no evidence of badgers and bats, or does it say there is no evidence of badger setts or bat roosting? There's a big difference. These animals may pass through the site, or they may live there - only if they live there will it make a difference. If you think they do, I would object on these grounds and challenge their survey conclusions. Do you know what the protected species are that the local plan proposals map refers to (i.e. whether it is in fact these species, or others)?

rapido wrote: »

4) It is also green belt land, along with being a "landscape character area", and very near or possibly even adjoining a local wildlife site (it's north of our nursery; their nursery is west of us).

If it's Green Belt, that will be the biggest constraint on the site - most development is inappropriate in Green Belts, and unless there are some 'very special circumstances' to outweigh the harm caused to the Green Belt by the new houses, I can't see how this developemnt could be allowed in this location (although, don't take that as gospel, as I don't have access to the site history or the application file!)

rapido wrote: »

5) the two roads their land is off are single track country lanes which I don't think is appropriate for a residential development of the size (the nearest public transport is half a mile away, I envisage any residents will use their vehicles). One of those roads is the historic boundary of two Saxon kingdoms. Their application rubbishes the idea that there might be anything archaelogically important around, yet up the top of the road in question is an area of archaelogical interest.

Sounds like a pretty unsustainable development to me - two things here: firstly, if there are likely to be archaeological remains then they should have submitted a full archaelogical survey with the application. Secondly, if the roads are little more than country lanes, the highway authority may well have objections to the intensification of these lanes. Depending on where you are, that will be the County Council or if you are in a metropolitan or unitiary authority, it will be a different department of the same authority.

Debt_Free_Chick

rapido wrote: »

5) the two roads their land is off are single track country lanes which I don't think is appropriate for a residential development of the size (the nearest public transport is half a mile away, I envisage any residents will use their vehicles). One of those roads is the historic boundary of two Saxon kingdoms. Their application rubbishes the idea that there might be anything archaelogically important around, yet up the top of the road in question is an area of archaelogical interest.

I can't see that the single track lane is going to be an issue - IF - if it was previoulsy the access to the nursery. In other words, if it served as access for customers and deliveries to the old nursery, then it's likely to be sufficient for access to 3-5 homes. Does the planning application allow for the access to be improved? Either way, the local Highways Authority will be invited to comment on that aspect of the application.

You will need to be very sure of your facts and object on specific planning grounds. If you reveal the planning authority, we can try and find the local planning policies for you to have a look at. They can provide you with "ammunition" assuming you want to object.

rapido

. .

Mysteron

I believe the protected species is The Great Crested Newt (as advised by a planning officer) and English Nature has loads of guidelines on what has to be considered in planning applications for land containing the newts. I am off to review the planning application for the one shown above, this afternoon, so if this is the development you are questioning, then I may have further information. I was going to object to the application purely based on the intensification of use of the road system that is already a danger to existing traffic (due to the narrowness) and many RTA's have already occurred around the proposed site.

By the way, if we are talking about the same proposed development, a planning officer told me yesterday that there are no provisions in the application to upgrade the roads around the site.