Neighbours Objecting the planning application after the expiry of standard neighbour consultation period 21 days

[Achu]

Hello, I'm going through a very stressful time right now since my neighbours have submitted objections to my planning application after the usual period for neighbour consultation has passed.
 

I am living in end terraced house and I have submitted a proposal to park my car on back of my garden by making an opening from the side road( that road is a different road ) because I have recently converted my Garrage in to a habitable place. The application was retrospective and both applications were submitted together.( the access for parking 1 no of car at the back garden and approval of converting Garrage in to habitable space)

The application was validated on 23 rd Of February and the neighbours consultation expiry date was on 6/04/2023.

one neighbour raised an objection on 18/03/2023 and said that the approval for the application will affect the parking because most of the people living on that road doesn’t have off road parking.

On 15/04/2023 the planning officer did a site visit and the planning officer was convinced with the parking proposal and the highway authority also submitted a report saying there is no safety issues and similar parking arrangements have been made in the same road previously.so I was very positive with the application and was expecting the decision notice which was to be due by 21/04/2023.

But when I checked the status of the application i have noticed that the neighbours living in that road started raising objections one by each day. There are total 11 objections now . All the objection were they will loose one parking space while making an opening in to our garden and it will make huge parking issues and also questioning why Someone living on another road taking their parking space. 
After seeing all these objections we have contacted the case officer and she said as these objections were received after the expiry so it won’t go for a planning committee.

one more thing I have noticed today is Standard expiry date is 16/05/2023. I don’t know what does it mean and what’s the difference between neighbour consultation expiry and standard consultation expiry.

 

Sorry for the long message and apologies for the grammar mistakes.

What you guys think about this situation.

I am so much stressed out now 😞 

 

Edited May 2, 2023 by Achu

[RichardL]

Your planning officer line seems fine to me - won't affect the application.

The issue is - you've pissed off all your neighbours - or at least one who is organising against you.
Question is does that affect you in the long term - do you care if you fall out with them?

[Achu]

Hi Richard thanks for the reply. 

we just bought this house last year and I don’t know any of them, they are living next road. I don’t care anyone to be honest.

 

[joe90]

You have to be tough, if the planners etc give you permission the neighbours will have to live with it. Just because people complain it does not mean their view is valid. It’s called NIMBY (not in my back yard). Crack on 👍

[Dave Jones]

thick complaining neighbours really don't effect anything as they rarely complain about relevant planning matters. They are just moaning so can be ignored.

[Marvin]

1 hour ago, Dave Jones said:

thick complaining neighbours really don't effect anything as they rarely complain about relevant planning matters. They are just moaning so can be ignored.

Hi @Achu

 

Yes mostly the complaints are about what people do, or don't, want you to do with your property but nothing to do with conflicting with planning permission rules.

 

Let them whine! It sounds like no one can come up with a planning rule reason why you shouldn't have what you want. Even the planning officer and highways feel it's OK.

 

Ignore it all. Move on. Sort out the garden. Paint the house red. and stay polite.

 

M

 

 

 

 

[Kelvin]

Does it present a problem where a disgruntled neighbour might park across your new access out of spite? 

[saveasteading]

12 hours ago, Achu said:

All the objection were they will loose one parking space while making an opening in to our garden and it will make huge parking issues 

I made this argument, officially  on behalf of the parish, as creating one crossover was going to reduce on street parking by 2 or 3, where there is already a shortage.

The planners couldn't understand it, even with a diagram,  and didn't care.

So I doubt you have any problem.

[Achu]

57 minutes ago, Kelvin said:

Does it present a problem where a disgruntled neighbour might park across your new access out of spite? 

I don’t think so probably I could request the council to put a white line across once I get the approval.

[Achu]

12 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

I made this argument, officially  on behalf of the parish, as creating one crossover was going to reduce on street parking by 2 or 3, where there is already a shortage.

The planners couldn't understand it, even with a diagram,  and didn't care.

So I doubt you have any problem.

I don’t know what will happen in my case.

However, every objection came in after the deadline. The planning officer suggested that a planning committee might not be necessary, but I've heard that they will take objections into account if they are received before granting planning permission. Why the standard consultation date is listed as May 16, 2023, when the standard neighbour consultation expired on April 6, 2023, is a mystery to me.

Are you aware of the distinction between these two standard consultation and neighbour consultation.My agent responded that no date had been requested or agreed  for an extension when I questioned him about it.

 

[jack]

7 minutes ago, Achu said:

However, every objection came in after the deadline. The planning officer suggested that a planning committee might not be necessary, but I've heard that they will take objections into account if they are received before granting planning permission. Why the standard consultation date is listed as May 16, 2023, when the standard neighbour consultation expired on April 6, 2023, is a mystery to me.

Are you aware of the distinction between these two standard consultation and neighbour consultation.My agent responded that no date had been requested or agreed  for an extension when I questioned him about it.

 

My recollection is that the neighbour consultation date is nominal, and that they still have to take into account any (relevant!) objections received in time for consideration before a decision is made.

 

Of possible interest is the question of bringing the application into committee. Our rules say an application is brought into committee if it receives a certain number (5, I think) objections. It may be that the consultation deadline is a factor in whether the number of objections triggers a committee review. Makes sense that would be the case.

[Achu]

Is it bad if the application goes for a committee review ? 

[Alan Ambrose]

Well they may have a point of course. I don't know what parking is like in your area - but here it's hard and, over the years, 50% of the public parking spaces have been removed by the council and for at least 25% of the remaining, you will get a nail in your tire if you park there (nice area huh).

 

So, work with highways to reduce the impact i.e. attempt to remove only one space rather than 2 or 3.

 

If it comes to committee, point out that yes, you will be removing one space, but then again you will be taking one car off of the roadway by parking on your own land. You could make the same argument to your neighbours directly to attempt to reduce future friction.

 

Did you free up a parking space when you made your garage residential, or are you still holding onto that?

Edited May 3, 2023 by Alan Ambrose

[jack]

13 minutes ago, Achu said:

Is it bad if the application goes for a committee review ? 

 

The main issue with committees is that a lot of people sitting on them are at best ignorant of planning law, and at worst know the law but intentionally subvert it to suit their personal agendas. They needn't be a bad thing, it's more that the introduce unpredictability.

[saveasteading]

26 minutes ago, jack said:

At worst know the law but intentionally subvert it to suit their personal agendas.

I've been to lots of planning committees.

They have all been run very correctly, including severe guidance to any councillors ( from chair or the chief planner) who go off piste.

Most members turn up without any preparation and take the lead from any councillor who speaks for or against. In truth they don't care much about 1 crossover outside their constutuency.

I do feel that the councillors can be influenced by personal statements, and so they should as our representatives.

 

Therefore it is important for either side to make use of the 3 minutes to speak.  

 

[Achu]

1 hour ago, Alan Ambrose said:

Well they may have a point of course. I don't know what parking is like in your area - but here it's hard and, over the years, 50% of the public parking spaces have been removed by the council and for at least 25% of the remaining, you will get a nail in your tire if you park there (nice area huh).

 

So, work with highways to reduce the impact i.e. attempt to remove only one space rather than 2 or 3.

 

If it comes to committee, point out that yes, you will be removing one space, but then again you will be taking one car off of the roadway by parking on your own land. You could make the same argument to your neighbours directly to attempt to reduce future friction.

 

Did you free up a parking space when you made your garage residential, or are you still holding onto that?

our proposal was for parking one car only.

The road which I live doest have any restrictions any one can park anywhere same as the other road. When we remove our car from the front of our road anyone can park their car on that space

[Achu]

Just now, Achu said:

our proposal was for parking one car only.

The road which I live doest have any restrictions any one can park anywhere same as the other road. When we remove our car from the front of our house anyone can park their car on that space

 

[Achu]

50 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

I've been to lots of planning committees.

They have all been run very correctly, including severe guidance to any councillors ( from chair or the chief planner) who go off piste.

Most members turn up without any preparation and take the lead from any councillor who speaks for or against. In truth they don't care much about 1 crossover outside their constutuency.

I do feel that the councillors can be influenced by personal statements, and so they should as our representatives.

 

Therefore it is important for either side to make use of the 3 minutes to speak.  

 

My agent spoke with the planning officer and he said this might go for planning committee due to large number of objections received. Our agent advised me to withdraw the application and go for the approval for the Garrage only. May be we can submit a new application for just the parking in the backyard later on. The planning officer said he will get back to us before this weekend . 

I really don't have any idea how this planning committee works. I have noticed two houses on other road took parking access through the road where I live, so I hope I can point out that as well to the council.

[saveasteading]

I will drop out of this now as my views are quite strongly against converting a garage to habitation, then asking for more more parking, to the detriment of others.

My instinct if a councillor would be "refuse", but the rules and precedents may be otherwise.

[jack]

3 hours ago, saveasteading said:

I've been to lots of planning committees.

They have all been run very correctly, including severe guidance to any councillors ( from chair or the chief planner) who go off piste.

 

I did say "at worst".

 

I'm basing that part of my comment on experiences several BuildHub members have shared over the years.

[saveasteading]

1 hour ago, jack said:

I did say "at worst".

 

Yes. Presumably sometimes the chairing is less robust.

Councils want houses.