visibility splay of next door development lying on my boundary

moneyistooshorttomention

davidmcn wrote: »

And you'd be completely wrong. It would be the fault of the driver who pulled out into the oncoming traffic.

Maintaining the visibility splay is a condition of your planning permission, so as far as the planners are concerned it's up to you to sort it out - who owns or occupies the land isn't their problem.

Established then = the fault of the driver.

I'm confused by stating it would be a condition of "your" (ie my) planning permission - as I cant force someone else to maintain their land appropriately. I only have control over my own land?? Presumably the visibility splay would be a condition of "their" planning permission (ie because they do have control over this)?

davidmcn

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

I'm confused by stating it would be a condition of "your" (ie my) planning permission - as I cant force someone else to maintain their land appropriately.

So you need to sort that out (e.g. by buying the land) in order to implement your planning consent without breaching the relevant condition. Which is what the OP is talking about.

Your neighbour can't be forced to do something with their land just because you've applied for planning permission.

moneyistooshorttomention

davidmcn wrote: »

So you need to sort that out (e.g. by buying the land) in order to implement your planning consent without breaching the relevant condition. Which is what the OP is talking about.

Your neighbour can't be forced to do something with their land just because you've applied for planning permission.

Would have thought it would be the other way round - in both cases (mine and OP) as we (ie our houses) were here first? Developer came along afterwards in case of OP. House concerned was built after mine on the other hand.

System

Fuzzyness wrote: »

the developer wouldnt be able to go on to the next door neighbour's property and clear their bushes away. they couldnt require the neighbour to keep the visibilty splay clear as their land was not included within the application site. and besides its a bit cheeky expecting them to. if the vis splay isnt achievable without passing through third party land you have to question why permission was granted in the first place.

If the visibility splay is established and the op plants bushes with the intention of blocking the visibility splay, it would be seen as a deliberate act to create a hazard, rather than a cunning plan to get money from a developer!
If the land is currently overgrown or even heavily planted that would be different.If the visibility splay is achievable on site at the moment then there's not a lot of argument from the highways dept - we really don't know anything about the land in question, for example, how much of the splay actually falls within the op's land? Normally highways have around 2m at the edge of the carriageway and the splay is usually 5m from the edge of the carriageway, from the centre of the exit lane, so it's likely to be a tiny area of land in question (unless it's on a bend) - so sometimes there are ways to negotiate the splay requirements depending on the context.
However, the over riding issue here, is that the op has a tiny bit of knowledge and wants to negotiate hard with a developer, who is likely to know the ways around the issues. Do your research, and be prepared to get nothing if you go in heavy handed - an experienced developer is likely to already have a strategy to minimise any ransom payments

davidmcn

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Would have thought it would be the other way round - in both cases (mine and OP) as we (ie our houses) were here first? Developer came along afterwards in case of OP. House concerned was built after mine on the other hand.

Then you (or whoever got the planning permission for your plot) should have taken steps to secure that the visibility splay would remain clear.
The neighbours are only committing a planning breach if their planning consent had a similar condition.

Hoploz

I disagree with the OP's valuation of the back garden section. It is not worth half the amount paid for the main plot. Because this included the ACCESS to the site. The third potential dwelling would be a bonus of course but the development can still go ahead with the two original dwellings with or without the third.

If the finished third dwelling would be worth 500k, it'd cost a good amount to build - £150-200k at a guess - so if he has to pay £200k for the land it's hardly worth the bother.

Have you considered selling your whole plot? This would give the developer more options for a greater number of dwellings on the larger site. And they could be more desirable as one wouldn't be in somebody's back garden!

moneyistooshorttomention

davidmcn wrote: »

Then you (or whoever got the planning permission for your plot) should have taken steps to secure that the visibility splay would remain clear.
The neighbours are only committing a planning breach if their planning consent had a similar condition.

Trying to think what those steps might be - visions of being out there in a mask in middle of night doing some stealthy gardening (on someone else's garden):rotfl:

tim123456789

Hoploz wrote: »

I disagree with the OP's valuation of the back garden section. It is not worth half the amount paid for the main plot. Because this included the ACCESS to the site. The third potential dwelling would be a bonus of course but the development can still go ahead with the two original dwellings with or without the third.

If the finished third dwelling would be worth 500k, it'd cost a good amount to build - £150-200k at a guess - so if he has to pay £200k for the land it's hardly worth the bother.

but those are the exact figures he is using for the firsts two

420k for the land, 2 times 150-200k to build, 2 times 500k when sold.

so on your basis they are hardly worth the bother either

tim