Planning application objection

kenzie123

Hello,

We live in a London borough and own a terraced home. Our property is on a row of three, directly facing a large detached house that has a large front space. 

We've heard via our neighbour that the the owner of the detached house is planning to build 2 new houses on his land, one of which would be directly in view of from our home. We have not been officially notified by the council ourselves but have now seen the details of the planning application on the website. There is a consultation period that started 10 days ago so we have lost time in not being notified sooner by the council. 

These plans would drastically alter the view from our house and is of great concern for a number of reasons:

• Shadowing/sunlight
• View
• Loss of privacy

We are aware that planning officers do not take into consideration decreasing property prices but obviously this is of paramount concern to us as homeowners.

The person behind the plans is in the property industry and his application is very very well researched and extensive. It really feels like a David vs Goliath fight.

Is there any advice that can be given on what grounds we would be able to object to this application? Can we also complain that we have not been notified?

davidmcn

Complaining about not being notified is always kind of pointless, as you have in fact found out about the application. At best you sometimes get the period for objections extended.

Overshadowing and loss of privacy are legitimate planning grounds on which to make objections - obviously we don't know whether they are all that relevant in your case. "View" isn't really, unless e.g. it's a particularly notable skyline being blocked. You'll get a fair idea of other likely objections from looking at the planning officers' reports on other applications.

Doozergirl

This is across the road from you? 

If you are going to object, they need to be valid planning reasons.  That means that the proposal is contrary to the local plan or the national planning policy framework.  

Loss of a view is not a valid planning reason. If you want to keep a view, you need to purchase it. 

Loss of value definitely isn't a valid reason and it rarely ever affects values negatively, considering the premiums new build developers charge. 

If these houses are on the same building line as the other houses across the road, loss of light and privacy are not likely to be valid either, however, you can check this.  

Your local authority will have planning guidance  on their website.  My local one is called 'supplementary planning guidance' but it could be a design guide or similar.   It will detail what the requirements are locally for building.  It will cover distances between buildings etc.  In my local area it's 21m for two storey buildings, face to face, less if on an angle. In London it will almost certainly be less than that. 

It will cover things like ridge height, building lines, spacing, density etc.  and it's there that you would have to find your argument. 

What you've currently said is a typical emotional reaction, but not an objection based on the actual rules.  

Titus_Wadd

Other more "important" points to the Planning Authority might include adequate parking.  Depending on the road would there be enough off-road parking in the developer's plans for the extra housing units proposed.  There may be other local policies worth researching that could apply, but providing enough parking is a common planning issue in most towns and cities.  Other solutions might be requesting frosted and unopening windows if they over-shadow your rooms and look into your living and bedrooms from above, that kind of thing.  They may get planning permission but if you offer the LPA ways to temper the intrusion of other negative effects you will be listened to.  Petitions and "pitchforks at dawn" reactions aren't effective.  Let us know how in goes, even if it takes months.

Keep your comments factual and calm - type it out then review it the next day and edit out any ranting; your point of view will be taken more seriously if it sounds measured and considered.

AdrianC

Titus_Wadd said:

Other more "important" points to the Planning Authority might include adequate parking.

It's London. "No parking" might actually be viewed by the LA as a positive - there are active moves to dissuade people from having cars, for fairly obvious reasons in a city so well served by public transport.

OP... You don't say which borough, but here's one borough's list of valid objections:
https://www.richmond.gov.uk/what_is_a_valid_objection_to_a_planning_application

Bear in mind every local authority has an obligation placed upon them by central government (and the GLA, in London) to increase supply of new properties. Your objection is going to have to carry some serious merit to override what you describe as a well-researched and -written application. Given that there's plenty of precedent in your road for higher housing density than the site in question (indeed, you live in part of that precedent...), I think you're going to struggle on what you've said so far.

Browntoa

My local council has minimum requirements for off road parking for new developments . It's dependent on the number of bedrooms etc and is per each unit. 

We've used those rules locally to stop the conversion of a property from 4 to 5 bedrooms ( it helped that he had illegally converted half the garage into Living space thus leaving the property with only 1 space with no on road parking allowed ) .

Some councils also now Frown on any loss of garden space to developing. 

Accept the possibility of redevelopment and again aim at sustainability , push up their costs with insisting that charging points for hybrid cars are Installed , solar panels , triple glazing etc . Again the councils planning documents may have minimum requirements for this .
Access problems to the site if there are any , for example lorries would need to unload by blocking the road . Conditions can be attached to planning permissions

Salemicus

It annoys me that this kind of NIMBYism is being assisted on this board.

If previous residents had acted like you, you would not have a home there, because your house would never have been built. Be grateful that this developer is helping make London housing more affordable (on the margin!) and find a more productive use of your time than engaging in negative-sum pleading to the local planning authority. 

Ashworks

As others have said, you need to find valid planning reasons to object, so read your Local Plan and any supplementary guidance and refer to them in your letter, citing reasons why this development does not meet them. Keep your letter factual and steer clear of things like house value which aren't valid reasons for objection. Loss of light, privacy and residential amenity are valid, but you will need to check how these are defined by your council. However as others have said if the house is in line with existing properties on the other side of the road from you it may be difficult to prove harm.

Doozergirl

Salemicus said:

It annoys me that this kind of NIMBYism is being assisted on this board.

If previous residents had acted like you, you would not have a home there, because your house would never have been built. Be grateful that this developer is helping make London housing more affordable (on the margin!) and find a more productive use of your time than engaging in negative-sum pleading to the local planning authority. 

No one is assisting NIMBYism.  We are educating.  If the plans meet legislation, there is nothing that can be effectively complained about. 

In that case, I'd keep my mouth shut.  Because that would make me a NIMBY.  Pointing out where the proposals fail isn't that.  

Davesnave

Salemicus said:

It annoys me that this kind of NIMBYism is being assisted on this board.

People here generally try to help enquirers understand the rules relating to planning, not show them some underhand ways to dodge them, or alternatively,  bring them to bear more forcefully. Your argument has no merit.