Objecting to Planning Permission?

ClassicMad

planning_officer wrote: »

ClassicMad, did you find out which detailed matters were considered and approved under the outline permission? (i.e. layout, scale, appearance, landscaping or access).

Hi Planning Officer...
The PO that we saw at the council offices couldn't have been more unhelpful if he tried and I got nowhere with him... however, after sending an email to the planning department yesterday with a question, I now seem to have found a "friend" there.... I've just emailed him and asked the question regarding reserved matters, and this is his answer

All matters were reserved, ie siting, design, landscaping, appearance and means of access.

And it was passed for "a single dwelling and garage"

The proposed build is now for "a 3 bedroom detached house with vehicular access"
There are no plans for a garage, just block paving to the front with room for 1 and bit cars.
Is that a good thing, or a bad thing?

Thanks

ClassicMad

planning_officer wrote: »

Varies from Council to Council - hardly any 2 are the same! Sometimes it's the number of objections, sometimes it's just Councillor interest, sometimes if the Parish Council object... there's no 'national' rules for taking applications to committee.

I now have my objection, plus immediate neighbours, + parish council and hopefully the neighbour the other side too (well his daughter anyway as he's unable to at the moment)

Hopefully that will be enough.

ken_and_dot

Not a particularly strong objection in planning terms - if a development is going to overshadow a primary habitable room window, then yes, a very strong objection.

There's a big difference between sunlight and daylight in planning terms - yes, sunlight has some merit, but loss of daylight to a primary window is a far more weighty issue.

I wish you were my planning officer. I lost two appeals on these grounds even though I used specifically designed software to illustrate that during the four main months of summer the cummulative loss of sunlight on the recreational back garden amounted to less than 3%

Dinah93

The more people you can get to write in to object, the more notice the planning officer will take. Equally if there are a lot of problems with the development, this should make them take notice too. If your local councilor gets involved too, it may be taken to committee who have a tendency to make decisions on a more empathic basis than a planning officer. In my authority 5 letters going against the recommendation the planning officer wants to make will mean it goes to committee, but this varies between authorities. However even if it is only you objecting, it will still be considered. Some developments might only have a detrimental effect on one person, but that effect be so bad it warrants refusal.

I am a planning officer. Any comments made on these forums are informal opinion and should be taken as such. Planning guidelines vary between authorities, and you should consult your local council's planning team for in depth advice.

planning_officer

ClassicMad wrote: »

The PO that we saw at the council offices couldn't have been more unhelpful if he tried and I got nowhere with him... however, after sending an email to the planning department yesterday with a question, I now seem to have found a "friend" there.... I've just emailed him and asked the question regarding reserved matters, and this is his answer

All matters were reserved, ie siting, design, landscaping, appearance and means of access.

And it was passed for "a single dwelling and garage"

The proposed build is now for "a 3 bedroom detached house with vehicular access"
There are no plans for a garage, just block paving to the front with room for 1 and bit cars.
Is that a good thing, or a bad thing?

Thanks

Hi ClassicMad,

The person who emailed you from the Council has got his 'reserved matters' mixed up, as they were changed on 10 Aug 2006, from what he quoted, to: layout, scale, appearance, landscaping, access. However, having just looked at Tendring website again, it seems the outline permission was granted on 2 June 2006, before these changes came into force. There was therefore no requirement for the applicant to provide an 'indicative layout' or 'scale parameters' for the dwelling, as one would now have to if submitting an outline application.

As a result, the outline permission only grants consent for the principle of erecting a dwelling on this site. You are perfectly entitled to object to any of the aspects of the proposed dwelling, such as its design, size in relation to the plot, impact on the street scene and the locality, overlooking to neighbours, loss of daylight, visual intrusion to neighbours, inadequate garden size, lack of off-street parking, etc.

I still think the best objection for you is the overlooking from the dwelling to your property - both into your windows and your garden; and also the visual intusion, i.e. the dwelling will look overbearing and visually intrusive when viewed from your house and garden. Plus possibly a lack of off-street parking, leading to on-street parking in the vicinity (if there's really only room for one car on the drive and no garage).

Here's 3 example reasons for refusal for developments, taken from applications I've refused (bits taken out for anonymity!!)

e.g. 1 - Overbearing & visually intrusive for neighbours:
The proposed dwelling, by virtue of its depth, height, associated bulk and bland design, would appear overbearing and visually intrusive to the occupiers of the adjacent property when viewed from the rear windows and rear amenity areas of the neighbouring dwelling. The proposal would therefore be detrimental to the amenities enjoyed by the occupiers of this property. The proposal therefore fails to comply with Policies ....... of the ...... Local Plan ....

e.g. 2 - Overlooking to neighbours
The side facing first floor window on the proposed south east facing elevation would directly overlook the rear amenity areas of the neighbouring dwelling. This would create an unacceptable degree of overlooking, thus causing a loss of privacy and would be detrimental to the amenities enjoyed by the occupiers of this property. This window is the only window serving the bedroom and it would be unreasonable to require it to be obscure glazed. The proposal therefore conflicts with Policies .... of the .... Local Plan ....

e.g. 3 - Daylight
Due to the close proximity of the proposed dwelling to the ground floor dining room window in the north east flank of the neighbouring property, the proposal would have an overbearing and visually intrusive impact on the outlook from this window, and would reduce the amount of daylight to this window. The proposal would therefore result in a significant detrimental impact to the amenities enjoyed by the occupiers of the adjacent property and would fail to comply with Policies .... of the ....Local Plan ....

Feel free to copy and paste any of these issues into your objection letter - it's a shame there's no plans on the Council's website, then we could provide you with more specific advice!

divadee

here if you get 12 letters objecting it automatically goes to the planning committee and is not decided under delegated powers by the planning officer. Find out how many letters your authority needs.

You can ask your local ward councillor to get it 'called in' basically he will make it go to the planning committee. I had lobbyed my local councillor and he was going to get it called in but as a refusal was issued anyway no need for him to do this.

i would go for the overbearing, privacy, lack of light route in your objections. These are strong arguments as has been proved in my case at the planning appeal. The planning inspectorates main reasons were

The main issues are the effect of the proposal firstly, on the character and appearance of the surrounding area; and secondly, on the living conditions of nearby residents, especially ' ** ******* Road (the divadee household) with particular reference to overbearing presence, visual intrusion and privacy

As regards to what property you could state that a bungalow would not be an issue, BUT make sure you state that permitted development rights would have to be taken away, as you can guarantee as soon as the bungalow was built a loft extension would be in the offing!!!

Dont lose heart, i was like this sep/oct time last year, its been a hard slog but it can be done as proven in my case.

harryhound

This change in the system is very interesting, it dovetails with changes made to the wider planning system.
In the old days everything was left to the last minute, and when the new development was within a year of getting started. So it was very easy to get all the NIMBYs hot and bothered.
So central government set about changing the rules:
1. If it is a road scheme there must be 3 alternatives, no matter how stupid 2 of them are, in the hope of divide and rule, so the NIMBYs can fight each other.
2. Prepare a strategic plan and a local plan 10 years in advance and bring forward as much of the matters as possible; the NIMBYs get very tired fighting something that may never happen BUT when it does it is too late to object 'cos those decisions were made years ago and you should have objected then.
3. Now we have the same thing with outline permission. Apply now and "bank" the permission for 5 years.

Am I being too cynical and have I got my facts right?

Harry.

Mind you the average "Hullo" reading numpty does not realise anything is happening until the bulldosers start rolling.
I wonder where GB is proposing to put all the nuclear waste he favours, which will save us from the oil shock and global warming?

ClassicMad

Thanks everybody for your continuing advice

Here is the letter as it stands now...

**********************************************************
My principal objection is that the proposal appears to be contrary to Local Planning Authority policies, namely

It is the policy of the Local Planning Authority, as contained within Policies QL9, QL10, QL11 and HG9 of the adopted Tendring District Local Plan (2007) that new development should not have a materially damaging impact on the amenities of nearby properties. These sentiments reiterate policy ENV7 of the Draft East of England Plan, incorporating the Secretary of State's Proposed Changes (December 2006) and national policies set out in Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1) and Planning Policy Statement 7 (PPS7). PPS1 in particular states that planning authorities should strive to achieve high quality and inclusive designs for all development, including individual buildings, and that design that is inappropriate in its context, or that fails to improve the character and quality of an area should not be accepted. In addition, PPS1 states that the condition of our surroundings has a direct impact on the quality of life and that planning should seek to maintain and improve the local environment and help mitigate the effects of declining environmental quality.
By reason of the close proximity to our property, *************Way, the entire rear of the proposed property at first floor level (master bedroom, ensuite bathroom stair windows and second bedroom), would result in an unacceptable level of overlooking and loss of privacy, to the detriment of our family. I believe it to be harmful to the amenities of ourselves and that of our neighbours by reason of its size and scale. Specifically, the proposals close proximity to *********** Way exacerbates the adverse impact resulting from the proposals size and scale through over-dominance and an overbearing effect. In this context, the proposal presents an unacceptable loss of amenity to the occupiers of *********** Way and therefore conflicts with the afore-mentioned policies.

As I believe there will be an adverse impact on the current levels of daylight enjoyed both internally and externally on our amenity space then I feel that a daylight/sunlight assessment should be carried out as per the document “Tendring District Council validation checklist under “Details of Local Requirements”
• Daylight/Sunlight assessment
In circumstances where there is a potential adverse impact upon the current levels of sunlight/daylight enjoyed by adjoining properties or building(s), including associated gardens or amenity space then applications may also need to be accompanied by a daylight/sunlight assessment. Further guidance is provided in, for example, BRE guidelines on daylight assessments. (Local authorities may need to explain to applicants that planning permission would not confer any immunity on those whose works infringe another’s property rights, and which might be subject to action under the Rights of Light Act 1959.)

Furthermore in the Design and access statement accompanying the plans submitted, paragraph 2.2.6 considers the properties Abbeyview & Red Tile House and states

“The siting therefore will not affect habitable rooms to any adjacent dwelling”

and in paragraph 2.2.7 states

“The proposed dwelling has no side windows. The layout design successfully avoids overlooking neighbouring properties and ensures the occupants privacy. The proposal has no effect on any amenity space of any of the existing neighbouring dwellings”.

This clearly shows a lack of consideration for those of us to the rear of the development whose properties have had the benefit of privacy and daylight for nearly forty years.

Whilst we object to the proposal of a house on this site, we feel that it would be better suited to a bungalow due to the above noted intrusions. This would not look unduly out of place as there is a mixture of bungalows and houses along Church Road already. As there are no windows to either side of the development, a bungalow would not experience any overlooking from either side (Abbey View or Red Tile House).


As these plans are in direct opposition to Tendring District Councils Local Plan, I feel that my objections are well justified.

*********************************************************
Thanks for your pm Divadee.....

I will add in about permitted development rights too.

Do I have to get it "called in" by a councillor during the neighbour consultation period, or can that happen afterwards (our deadline for objections is Tuesday so I'm rapidly running out of time)... and can it be a local councillor or does it have to be a county councillor?

And neighbour objections... I will be pushed to get more than 2 neighbours to object as that's really as many as it will affect.

And Planning_Officer - thank you too! I think I've already covered the points in your post... mainly thanks to me hearing about a planning refusal at the parish meeting the other night.... My "friend" at the council forwarded me the reasons for refusal, which I've slighted adapted and used as they apply to our case.... another good thing I've discovered from that is that the PO that handled that case is also handling ours.... so hopefully he'll think along the same lines and refuse this one!

I guess it's a good thing that the outline planning application was made when it was then :rotfl:


I've got until Sunday night to do my final version and it will be taken in to the council offices on Monday


Keep it coming!

Thanks

divadee

in our area it is the local councillors that call in planning applications.

Ours will call it in after the decision has been made. If the planning officers decision was to grant the proposal under delegated powers, then the councillor can call it in so it goes to a full hearing. If the recommendation was to refuse then obviously the councillor wont call it in as you have got what you wanted. Admittedly the applicant could lobby the councillor to get it called in and they might do that.

Also in our area if you have more than 12 objections and the recommendation it to grant planning permission from the planning officer, it automatically goes to full planning committe as they have had enough objections. If the planning officer was to refuse permission, then obviously it doesnt go to committee as the concensus of neighbours agree with the planning officers decision.

I would call the council on monday and see how many objections you would need to get it to automatically go to a full planning commitee (every area varies). Also get in touch with your local ward councillor this weekend and inform them of what is going on. You should be able to find there details on teh councils website.

I really think there should be a national standard on these things, its madness to have so much variance on planning issues.

planning_officer

Hi ClassicMad, your letter seems fine and covers most things - I note in the Tendring Local Plan that Policy HG14 states:
"Proposals for detached, semi-detached and end terraced dwellings, including extensions to these dwellings over 4 metres in height, will be required to retain appropriate open space between the dwelling and the side boundaries of the plot:-
(i) to ensure that new development is appropriate in its setting and does not create a cramped appearance; and
(ii) to safeguard the amenities and aspect of adjoining residents and, in the case of undeveloped adjacent plots their satisfactory development at a later stage.
As a guideline a minimum distance of 1 metre will be sought. Where circumstances warrant it, a greater distance will be expected."

If the proposed dwelling doesn't keep a gap of at least 1m to each side boundary, quote this policy too!

Also, Policy HG9 requires the provision of at least 100 square metres of amenity space (garden) for a three bedroomed house - if the applicant is proposing less, could quote this policy as well.

Finally, Policy TR7 relates to car parking standards and states that for dwellings, depending on where the site is within the district, either 1 or 2 spaces will be required. If the site is within a "Main urban area with good access to public transport", 1 space will be required, whereas if it's an “urban location with poor off peak public transport services”, 2 spaces will be required. If the site is within a “rural or suburban location”, 2 spaces will be required for a 3-bed dwelling.

I've no idea how the Council decides which of these categories the site will fall into - and as I don't know the area, I can't hazard a guess! Could try looking at the Proposals Map which accompanies the Local Plan, to see if they are defined. If it's a matter of judgement, which one do you think it falls into?

Just a few additional ideas! Although don't worry too much about going into detail on them, as the Planning Officer will be assessing them anyway when he considers the scheme.