Fighting Planning Decision

Holmbury

Thank You Davesnave and yes spot on redundant building. Thanks for the info will read.

AFF8879

Holmbury wrote: »

We are opposed to it because it is overdevelopment of a rural site. It has planning condition in place to used as agricultural storage only and already has been altered so in breach. It is completely overlooking one property (ours) and others to a lesser degree. We will loose all privacy. We are not just disgruntled objectioners!!.
We have emails between our councillor and the case officer discussing the fact that is was going to committee and when that was likely to be and even informing us what we needed to do to speak.... we had everything in hand with representation. We are waiting responses (since Monday) before we can go any further.

If anything it will likely actually increase the value of your property, new developments are generally positively favoured by potential buyers as it shows people want to invest in the area.

As I think someone has already pointed out, very few properties have complete privacy though I too would be a bit disgruntled if that was taken away - but still, it doesn't feel like a valid reason to pack up and leave unless you were thinking of doing so anyway.

I'd be interested to see any pictures or plans of the local area, if for example it was a set of thatched cottages / listed buildings in the Cotswolds and the plans were to stick some red brick semi detached houses right in front of them, I can't imagine that would ever have been approved. Are the plans in keeping with the local area?

Davesnave

Holmbury wrote: »

Thank You Davesnave and yes spot on redundant building. Thanks for the info will read.

If Class Q is the case, then the development should not extend beyond the footprint of the original building(s)

Holmbury

AFF8879 wrote: »

If anything it will likely actually increase the value of your property, new developments are generally positively favoured by potential buyers as it shows people want to invest in the area.

As I think someone has already pointed out, very few properties have complete privacy though I too would be a bit disgruntled if that was taken away - but still, it doesn't feel like a valid reason to pack up and leave unless you were thinking of doing so anyway.

I'd be interested to see any pictures or plans of the local area, if for example it was a set of thatched cottages / listed buildings in the Cotswolds and the plans were to stick some red brick semi detached houses right in front of them, I can't imagine that would ever have been approved. Are the plans in keeping with the local area?

Yes in keeping with the style (barns). The history on this particular one is that when the original 7 were converted it was to be destroyed 'to protect the amenities of...' the applicant applied to have this clause removed which it was, new clause ~ only to be used for storage. We have been very niave and should have picked up on this when the sides were starting to be filled in!

The building is parallel to ours and approx 16m away, 9m of which is our garden. One condition was only one window to go in facing our property and frosted glass. all of our windows face this building. Our garden will not be private (unless we put a panel fence up at present post and rail which is in keeping with the surroundings and allows us some view (which is why we bought the property in the first place). OK we were aware the building was there but knew the planning clause was in place (naive again?!) it has hardly ever been used apart from occasional stabling.
I think we realise that this will not be reversed but at least we can fight the way the admin has been handled, as it just not add up (still waiting for response).

Davesnave

Holmbury wrote: »

OK we were aware the building was there but knew the planning clause was in place (naive again?!) it has hardly ever been used apart from occasional stabling.

Look on the bright side, farmers who have a need for a new barn may put one up without even seeking planning permission, so anyone living in the countryside might find a large structure being erected close by.

And while filling-in the sides may have helped the owner gain permission, this isn't certain. I've seen Dutch barns with no substantial sides gain planning in the last two years or so.

The irony is that you live in a converted barn; probably from a different era, but a barn nonetheless.