Planning rejected by highways

[Badger]

They already dont speak to us haha!! I am actually living in my mums house at the moment so this is what really got my goat when they said an extra house will create more traffic!! As there are 2 families on there now.

[Jeremy Harris]

It's very, very difficult to get double yellow lines, even when there have been several accidents at a spot that would have been prevented had cars been prevented from parking so as to allow better visibility.  We fought for around 15 years to get parking restrictions imposed on the road outside our old house, to no avail.  Even when a Discovery hit another car coming out of the adjacent junction and overturned the local authority still won't authorise a parking restriction, and that's despite several requests from the police that having such a restriction would reduce the high accident rate at the junction.

 

Looking at the plans I can see the issue, it is that building to the South of the entrance, that is right on the boundary.  The fact that you're living with your parents makes no difference at all, as you're applying for planning permission for a new dwelling, so the planner must assume that means a new family as well, as you could sell the plot as soon as you get PP (that's how they will think, I'm afraid).  Personal circumstances very rarely have any weight when it comes to planning policy, you have to make the case within the policy that applies for your local authority area, plus the NPPF.

 

In this case I think you stand a good chance at appeal, but an appeal has to be focussed on the precise reasons given for refusal, and must address those with evidence that will satisfy a planning inspector that the reasons given for refusal are not adequate.  There is a presumption in favour of approval in the planning process, even though it seems at times that it's the other way around, so all you need to do is provide enough evidence to undermine the specific reasons for refusal that have been given.

 

You may well benefit from paying for a planning consultant with specific experience of dealing with highways and access issues, as that could prove to be money very well spent.  I rarely suggest, or support, paying for help related to self-build, but planning is one area where the inside knowledge that a good planning consultant will have is really worth it.  Often planning consultants are former planning officers, and although this shouldn't make any difference, the fact that they may be former colleagues of current planning officers, and probably known to the planning inspector, does seem to make a significant difference.

[Badger]

I have checked out the 2.4m splay and it is well in!!

[bassanclan]

Assuming that the only reason for refusal is the highways issue, I would check what the council's highway requirements are, show how you are going to meet them and resubmit your application to the local authority. (I think it will be free).

Halfway through the 8 week period ring up and find out the lay of the land and if it is likely to be refused again, then send in your appeal.

Or you could appeal and resubmit simultaneously.

 

[Jeremy Harris]

1 hour ago, Badger said:

I have checked out the 2.4m splay and it is well in!!

 

In that case then I suspect that it may well be that there's been a misunderstanding, or there are politics at work within the local authority.  Never underestimate the influence one or two people can have on the system - I've seen cases first hand where it was blindingly obvious that "undue influence" had been brought to bear.  It shouldn't happen, but it can, and in my experience it is very difficult to prove that this is what has happened.

 

A free resubmission, with a clear section included in your new Design and Access Statement that spells out, in words of one syllable, that the access complies with section XXX, paragraph YYY of the planning policy, that the road is category ZZZ or whatever and that the visibility splay requirements have been fully complied with, should do the job.  However, as previously mentioned, check to make sure that every single reason for refusal is adequately rebutted.  Again, the D&A is the ideal way to do this, as you can include photos, lots of text, etc, that makes it harder for the planners to refuse the application.  I'm a big fan of writing a comprehensive D&A with an application, with the proviso that you need to take a bit of care to not make a rod for your own back by including things in it that you might wish to change later, as the D&A may well become a part of the approval!

[Badger]

Had the highways officer out today to visit the site, his issue is that the access drive is too narrow and that if a vehicle coming in meets a vehicle coming out then it could lead to a car reversing out onto the carriageway blind. Our driveway is 3m wide at the gate and then 10m in goes to 3.7m and the whole dtiveway is 20m long. I did tell him that we have a rule that the in coming vehicle has priority over outgoing and that they will reverse back. So we'll see how it goes he gives us his decision on Wednesday but i'm not holding my breath!!!

[Jeremy Harris]

That same argument could be applied to most of the drives in the UK, as very few are wide enough to allow two cars to pass side by side in opposite directions.  It smacks of grasping at straws to me, as I can't see anything in any planning guidance that suggests that a private access has to be wide enough to let two cars pass side by side.

 

If he continues to object, get it in writing that the reason is that two cars can't pass side by side, then appeal.  It will get through at appeal I'm sure, simply because the reason given doesn't seem to be valid.

[Badger]

I thought the same he stated that the width they expect is 4.2m wide for a driveway for two properties but as i said to him that still wouldn't enable a car to pass!!

[Ferdinand]

I wonder if he has evidence that reversing out there is a problem.

[Badger]

No there has never been an issue there. There was horses there and horseboxes before us and more people coming and going as the previous owner rented the stables out.