How to approach the neighbours?

[Gimp]

So I've recently completed on the purchase of a building plot in Wales, this week actually. An exciting time for me  It will be my first new self-build project.

 

Down to business though and one of the first items on the agenda is how to get on with the neighbours?

 

I personally don't think planning permission should be a problem whether the neighbours are onside or not. Its a plot of land with pre-existing outline planning permission for a very small dwelling which of course was never built. So I will be looking to apply for outline planning permission with my own plans for a house that will fill most off the site since it is a small plot (A nice house though, at least I think). Even filling the small plot the house won't be large, but it really needs to fill most of the plot or it will be ridiculously small. The current outline planning permission was quite detailed with Design & Access statement and plan & elevation of the proposed build, though I disagree on the proposal it just doesn't make common sense.

 

Anyway apparently there was no objections to it but I know the guy lived along the road at the time, no  longer though. Now I know the new Housing Bill gives me a lot off clout to see past any objections from neighbours. The plot itself has a large gap to the neighbours next door (mostly their land though) and their houses look away from my plot of land. Realistically I see the plot I have just bought as having a lot of plus points that will make it difficult to be turned down from neighbours objections.

 

However, as I intend to live there I would prefer if at all possible to get on with the neighbours, though if I can't I would have to accept this. I know that development tends to upset many people which I can understand and a lot I think can be brought about by non-communication with the neighbours and resentment building up. I would prefer to avoid this and yet I am not particularly socially skilled. I would prefer to avoid long term animosity as its not a great feeling, I would prefer to be on friendly terms.

 

I've briefly saw a couple of the neighbours in their front garden as I viewed the plot, I don't think they saw me as a distance away, they looked easy going enough but you never know. A couple in their middle age going towards retirement age, probably no children I would guess as their home is quite small even though the plot they are on is quite large.

 

So my question is, how should I approach them about my proposal, if indeed you think I should approach them at all, but of course I would prefer to meet the neighbours some time anyway, but of course I don't wish to immediately run headlong into objectionable situation if I can help it and cause a situation which might have otherwise not have arisen. Any thoughts?  

 

[ProDave]

Just go and say hello?

 

Ours was a bit different, our first plot was large enough to have a static caravan on to live in during the build. The first time we met the neighbours was when we had just completed the purchase and came up for a week and stayed on the plot in our touring caravan. 
 

[jack]

The main potential issue for me is that if there are enough objections, it gets called into committee.  While you should, in theory, not be any worse off, I suspect it'll be easier, cheaper and less stressful if you don't get the planning committee involved.  If they get it wrong, you have to appeal, which is more money and time, even if you're in the right.

 

So basically I'm all for reducing objections as a general principle.

 

I posted something on this general point in the last few weeks.  I'll see if I can dig it out over the weekend, but the essence of it was to be careful about being too open with your neighbours about your plans.  The last thing you want to do is try and keep everyone happy by listening to their feedback on your detailed plans, then realise it's literally impossible to keep everyone happy because they all want different things.  Then you've by definition seriously annoyed one or more of them by not implementing the feedback you asked them for, so they object.  I think it's better to gradually get them used to the idea of development in a social context, then slowly allow the general to become more specific over time.  By the time you submit your planning application, everyone around you more or less knows what's coming and there are no surprises. 

 

We got a bit lucky, but this was the approach we took and we had no objections to our plans to knock down a small bungalow and build a large, very modern two storey house with three times the floor area!

[Gimp]

14 hours ago, Sensus said:

 

Which 'new housing bill' are you referring to, that you think gives extra clout?

 

The Housing & Planning Act 2016 (sorry I forgot its now an Act rather than a Bill)

 

Which will apparently, along with other planning reform measures to speed up planning:

• support the doubling of the number of custom-built and self-built homes to 20,000 by 2020

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/landmark-housing-and-planning-bill-receives-royal-assent

 

 

So, it looks like the gov are trying to increase housing provision by every which way possible from this Act, though of course many are aimed at social housing and housebuilders.

[Gimp]

14 hours ago, jack said:

The main potential issue for me is that if there are enough objections, it gets called into committee.  While you should, in theory, not be any worse off, I suspect it'll be easier, cheaper and less stressful if you don't get the planning committee involved.  If they get it wrong, you have to appeal, which is more money and time, even if you're in the right.

 

So basically I'm all for reducing objections as a general principle.

 

I posted something on this general point in the last few weeks.  I'll see if I can dig it out over the weekend, but the essence of it was to be careful about being too open with your neighbours about your plans.  The last thing you want to do is try and keep everyone happy by listening to their feedback on your detailed plans, then realise it's literally impossible to keep everyone happy because they all want different things.  Then you've by definition seriously annoyed one or more of them by not implementing the feedback you asked them for, so they object.  I think it's better to gradually get them used to the idea of development in a social context, then slowly allow the general to become more specific over time.  By the time you submit your planning application, everyone around you more or less knows what's coming and there are no surprises. 

 

We got a bit lucky, but this was the approach we took and we had no objections to our plans to knock down a small bungalow and build a large, very modern two storey house with three times the floor area!

These are very important points, thank you Jack, I'm most appreciative of this input. Yeah, you're right I should hold back on the detail, I'm not really looking for their input anyway as I'm pretty certain of what I want and it would mess with my plan/vision for the site. It's not going to be that close to them anyway and I'm avoiding putting windows that look directly onto their houses since I don't wish to see them, just the open countryside around the site and the village it overlooks as the plot is up on a hillside .

 

I think the most objections I am likely to get are from the two neighbouring properties either side, their are no properties directly in front or behind and I think the site is not in such a prominent position so as to cause a local scandal. That said of course you never know where objections may come out of the woodwork from those further along the road or elsewhere in the village that are just objectionable type to anything. I think in general though from what I recall it usually just the immediate neighbours that are notified of the proposed plans.

 

I think you're right though, keep it light, simple & brief conversation on the development as going more into it in detail in order to make them aware of all instances will probably be likely to wind many a person up more than reassure them. The development I have in mind is going to be reasonably sensible I think anyway (for sure they may not see it that way) but I try not to impose anything that is out of keeping too much with the buildings in the surrounding area while also trying to do something decent looking and unique, it is a self build after all so I don't see the point doing anything too mundane (not too far out either I hope). I think while keeping it simple I'll try and not mislead them on anything as I know this can get on peoples goat a bit if something is way of the mark that was put across to them. So yes in the initial instance I will just try and be as friendly as I can mention the build but not focus too much on it. Many thanks Jack   

[Gimp]

5 minutes ago, Sensus said:

 

I thought that might be the case... you  might wish to be aware that it is English legislation, and does not apply in Wales. The recent 'Self Build and Custom Housing Act' is the same.

 

 

Cheers Sensus, looks like you're right, didn't realise that, its just crazy. It goes all the way through the UK parliament yet it just applies to England. Creates more confusion & mess I think. Things were more straight forward when we just had one parliament, another thing we can blame Tony Blair for, lol. 

 

Will, just have to push through as is I think then, I think I will have a pretty sound application but will be better if I can get the neighbours on side I think.

[Gimp]

48 minutes ago, Sensus said:

Yes, it is getting a bit messy. The frustrating thing is that the two systems are very similar indeed, but then go and introduce slight differences, seemingly for the sake of it!

 

Shouldn't make any difference in practice, so long as you don't go in thumping the table with an intransigent Welsh Planner and try quoting English legislation at them!

LOL Yeah, or the neighbours, glad you mentioned this or I could have made myself look like a right tit! 

[PeterW]

1 hour ago, Gimp said:

That said of course you never know where objections may come out of the woodwork from those further along the road or elsewhere in the village that are just objectionable type to anything

 

I did a commercial development in the green belt a few years ago - an activity centre - and we had 3 objections. First was the immediate neighbour which we expected, but we had two from the neighbouring village where the site was over the brow of a hill and over a mile away  who both objected to the visual aspect of the build - despite it being in the middle of a wood ..!!!

 

Thankfully all were ignored and it didn't even go to committee but I'm sure you will get someone who doesn't like it..!

[Bitpipe]

I approach most of our neighbours at speed, if they don't leap out of the way then it's too bad...

[ToughButterCup]

A brief cautionary tale;

We live in a chocolate box cottage in chocolate box hamlet in a chocolate box village in a chocolate box part of Lancashire. And we wanted a chocolate box house in our cottage garden. Outline PP, no problem.

 

And then we discovered passivhaus. And a good architect. Over a year later, we no longer wanted a chocolate box design, we wanted green apples. The local reaction was a  lot of chewing and spitting.

 

But the planners loved it: waxed lyrical.

 

Here's the point

You can talk to people about why you want your house designed like it is  until you're blue in the face. They don't listen.

Edited September 18, 2016 by recoveringacademic
sense

[SteamyTea]

7 minutes ago, recoveringacademic said:

we wanted green apples

Paint it green then

[jack]

We've had a few thinly veiled criticisms of our house from one or two neighbours who don't like "modern" houses, but I genuinely couldn't give a stuff. 

[Oz07]

I still think parish councils should lose their 106 contributions if they take you to committee and lose. Around here they take you to committee on grounds which are not even really valid. Then you get a full vote for permission at committee but delay of 2/3months. 

[ToughButterCup]

Pushing on an open door with me, hence:  The Best Invalid Objection You have Heard

 

I wouldn't mind so much if the Chair of our PC would bother to do just a teeny weeny bit of background reading, 

such as this from the government's own website

 

That page gives a simple, clearly expressed list of objections which cannot be considered.

 

'... I cannot believe that you are only going to have two bedrooms in a house with parking for five cars...' said one senior Councillor in public at  our local PC meeting. No wonder nobody with any authority takes Parish Council feedback seriously.

 

[Gimp]

Hmmn well, I can see why some people might take joy out of people that are overly uptight, or have a certain style of building they prefer. I have never really got why some planners seem overjoyed with granting permission to a modernist box in the middle of a quaint village or the like. Perhaps they are modernists that wish to advance their tastes and cross the professional line of bringing their tastes/values into the planning process. To me it doesn't make sense to be out of context with an area to the extreme. Things move on and some difference will crop up compared to what's around in most locations but those defined for a particular set of buildings you would think they would want to hold onto that otherwise it would spoil the aesthetic view of the area.

 

Perhaps a clash of aesthetics doesn't register with some people and their visual awareness, if they have one, I don't know.

 

Myself I wouldn't dream of going too far out of context of the surrounding build - not necessarily keeping to the same style, but usually at least including similar materials. I think the only reason I would deviate if there was a pleasing visual impact from a counterpoint between two different styles. I think too many times style contrasts are immediately thought of as desirable these days when they are often more than otherwise. Just my thoughts on it though others may differ.

 

I can see why some are NIMBY I think many of us probably reach a point where we want to safeguard our interests it natural to do so. I know some in our local area that have taken it too far, one person sent flyers around trying to whip up support against someone's conversion of their garage into a room. Stuff like that doesn't interest me, some of the development around the neighbouring houses where my parental home is, is not particularly well done but sometimes comes with benefits of blocking out other unsightly scenes.

 

For me I think my development shouldn't raise too high a profile on the NIMBY alert senses but you never know I guess, I will try to put it in the best light possible when I submit the design & access statement while trying to be objective I think and hope it goes down ok. Generally its a modern house with some nice traditional features which I think will fit in with the rendered terraces that are neighbouring it. Should be interesting at least.    

[Gimp]

I appreciate the reply Sensus. I know I think in some cases people get ideas that are ridiculously out of their time perhaps even culture, like some rich guys who do mock Georgian manor houses. Though by the same token if its an estate of mock Georgian houses then it some how doesn't look too bad as the odd one or two in an area of other house styles. The village area where I have my plot there are the odd new build mock Victorian/Tudor/Georgian house around and they stick out from the regualr terraces in not too good a way I think. There's no real reason for them to be there other than the clients choice and the oddity of it is apparent.

 

The question I guess comes with how to handle new build in say an area of quaint village thatch cottages. Sure there is a phoney element to recreating in an age where there is no rationale for doing so (other than heritage deference to the past) but I think some sort of a 'fitting in' is needed even if the house style is fundamentally different. Some modernist designs seem so much of a visual distortion of what's already there it kind of ruins the feel of the place as a whole. Possibly there is no easy answer to this and its a toss up between going with phoney or distortion and I guess everyone has a preference. I've seen places where the phoneyness is too much to stomach but equally places where the distortion of a modernist box amongst curvy quaint cottages is just a gut wrenching eye sore.

 

I guess my tendency is towards the phoney end a bit of traditional and just take in the pleasing aesthetics however needless. It is interesting to know where the modernist drive comes from in developing in this area though so thank you for your input.   

[ToughButterCup]

4 hours ago, Sensus said:

Good design should be 'of its time'.

 

Try telling that to neighbours who don't want their chocolate box disturbed. They don't need to engage with 'difference'. All they need to do is 'feel'

'Ah know  wut ahhhh laaak lad, 'n 'at's reet shaeet'

Our current houses were built in the 1600s and then messed about by the Victorians (as so often happened).

 

This is the 2000s,  Designed to fade with time to look like many of the local barns (called 'shippons' oop 'ere)

[Gimp]

4 hours ago, Sensus said:

 

The question is even more pronounced on listed buildings, of course, and the 'fashion' in Planning terms has literally swung though 180 degrees on that, in recent years. In the earlier part of my career, an extension to a listed building would be expected to be absolutely sympathetic to the original, using identical materials, detailing and construction techniques. These days, most Conservation Officers will tell you that extensions (as opposed to alterations) to a listed building are better if they tell the 'story' of the building, and can be dated as clearly and distinctly different.

 

Which I would generally go along with but I still think the build should be somewhat sympathetic to the original build rather than a stark contrast offered up which clashes so horribly with the existing build just to be in no doubt that the new part is distinct. So a distinctly modern style say but using some of the materials of the original build and trying to make it work with the original build rather than an awkward looking add on. Just my thoughts. Possibly some areas may need to be on a case by case basis of what is best.

[ProDave]

6 hours ago, Sensus said:

 
 

 

Vernacular styles develop - and change over the ages - for very clear practical and socio-economic reasons. An architectural historian will be able to point to any feature on a distinctive local vernacular and tell you why it's there. I wrote a comprehensive guide to the Cotswold vernacular for an erstwhile employer of mine, which was an exercise I found fascinating in this respect.

 
 

 

 

 

Up here it would seem the planners are trying to push the local vernacular back in time.  When i built my present house 13 years ago there was no trouble getting planning for a house that generally followed the local vernacular but used concrete tiles on the roof.  This time round the planners pushed me hard wanting real slate on the roof and I had to fight for the one and only concrete tile that looks a bit like slate that they would accept.
 

[Ferdinand]

Yes.

 

Something built with modern, and perhaps local, materials in sympathy with the locality (which might be pink render in Lakeland) IS the local vernacular. The issue is that Planners interpolate the local venacular from the past.

 

On S106 etc, you can never overestimate the cynicism of large developers or disbelieve their financial arguments sufficiently. The larger they are, the worse they are.

 

I have alluded occasionally to the housing estate plot we have just sold on the old family small holding. We put in a Unilateral Declaration which is like an S106 but you don't have to negotiate as painfully, in line with local requirements to get PP. The developer that bought it has just applied for a new PP with zero S106, densification increased significantly, and a lower affordable housing burden, on grounds of 'viability'.

 

Bearing in mind that the sale price of the land with outline was well under 10% of the GDV, and it is a relatively easy project, I think someone is trying it on a little.

 

I reckon they may get 1 out of 3 of those.

 

Ferdinand

 

 

[Oz07]

19 hours ago, recoveringacademic said:

 

'... I cannot believe that you are only going to have two bedrooms in a house with parking for five cars...' said one senior Councillor in public at  our local PC meeting. No wonder nobody with any authority takes Parish Council feedback seriously.

 

 

Ha! Bet they'd like it the other way round then?!

[jack]

10 hours ago, Sensus said:

if I've explained my views well enough, hopefully you'll at least admit that my alternative opinion is valid even if you don't share it yourself. In which case, why should people who hold your view (objectors) be allowed to hold sway over people who hold my view (the applicant), or vice versa?

 

Bang on.  If I see one more boring rectangular box with hung clay tiles on the top half because it's the "local vernacular", but with the cheapest uPVC windows you can buy, I'll scream.  They seem to fly through planning around here.  

 

[gravelld]

I'd far rather see a modern well designed house in stark contrast to the "vernacular" than some ersatz volume builder house with fake bricked up windows and a dummy chimney.

 

But aren't the planning officers just following orders?

[AliG]

I wanted to talk to my neighbours as I don't like conflict.

 

My architect was absolutely adamant that to engage with them would only start negotiations on how they thought my house should look and would allow them to argue about things that they think are irrelevant but planners would throw out as non material objections. And they could be two faced and object anyway.

 

It is unlikely that anything the neighbours say will make a difference so it may be easier just to apply and forget about them.

 

[Bitpipe]

1 minute ago, AliG said:

I wanted to talk to my neighbours as I don't like conflict.

 

My architect was absolutely adamant that to engage with them would only start negotiations on how they thought my house should look and would allow them to argue about things that they think are irrelevant but planners would throw out as non material objections. And they could be two faced and object anyway.

 

It is unlikely that anything the neighbours say will make a difference so it may be easier just to apply and forget about them.

 

 

We spoke to our neighbours either side only when the design was complete and submitted to planning, ahead of the notices going up. Both raised objections, some valid (ridge height) some dismissed (brick vs our chosen render, position on plot etc). When we finally got planning I put all of that behind us and made sure they were fully informed about the build process itself - thats the bit that's really going to annoy them on a day to day basis.

 

Our unashamedly modern house on a 50's road was not loved at the planning process but I have now lost count of the number of passers by (of all ages) that complement us on it.