flanagaj Posted Tuesday at 10:48 Share Posted Tuesday at 10:48 I suspect I am not alone here, but why do people put in public objections for a property that does not impact them in anyway. We have just received our first public objection (currently, cannot read the comment) from someone who lives 200 metres down the lane, and only comes past our plot when they walk their dog up the no through lane. So it can only be a "I don't like it as it changes the appearance of the lane", when in fact, it's that he wants to walk his dog along the lane without anyone being able to look out a window and see him. Just reinforces my view, that there are some very sad and bitter individuals out there! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe90 Posted Tuesday at 10:59 Share Posted Tuesday at 10:59 5 minutes ago, flanagaj said: Just reinforces my view, that there are some very sad and bitter individuals out there! Oh you are so right, however any objection has to be valid. Our neighbour who objected on many grounds were told that their objections were not valid and ignored. So don’t despair. Just look forward to being able to wave good morning every day from your new house in the future 🤣 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chazzyjeff Posted Tuesday at 11:21 Share Posted Tuesday at 11:21 18 minutes ago, joe90 said: Oh you are so right, however any objection has to be valid. Our neighbour who objected on many grounds were told that their objections were not valid and ignored. So don’t despair. Just look forward to being able to wave good morning every day from your new house in the future 🤣 This is reassuring. The logical part of my brain always assumed that any objection would have established planning principles applied to it, perhaps precedents etc then just dismissed if it was merely a case of "I don't like the way it looks when I'm going on a walk". The other part of me was concerned they would deal with it like the police sometimes do, assume the complainant is automatically in the right and try to stop someone doing a lawful activity. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havkey100 Posted Tuesday at 12:10 Share Posted Tuesday at 12:10 I think the consensus is to try and not take it personally. I feel the same, that comments should be restricted to addressees impacted directly by the development in the direct vicinity. However, defining the cut off would be challenging. We had all sorts commenting on ours, none of which were deemed valid. The only comment that was valid in my view was from a parish councillor, and after a minor redesign he was satisfied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flanagaj Posted Tuesday at 12:24 Author Share Posted Tuesday at 12:24 Unfortunately, the plot is on the edge of the AONB, and whilst it will show windows above the hedge line and you could argue change the area, the properties on the lane are a random bag. I have posted the current comments below. And this one is from the people we purchased the plot from! We have even kept the ridge height the same, and move the proposed bungalow 5 metres further away from their boundary. As to an eyesore, I can only think they are luddites who don't like change. Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application Comment Reasons: Comment:The current planning application ref: 23/00259/FUL submitted by us, Mr & Mrs P A Pardoe, and approved by Basingstoke & Deane Planning Department and the Council on 28th July 2023. This planning application was amended and modified by us to meet and comply with the 'objections and concerns' of the Planning Department. These alterations to our original submission included; 1) The removal of windows facing the north of the property. 2) The removal of UPVC windows replaced with hardwood windows 3) The requirement that the roof height be no higher than that of Primrose cottage, in order to minimise the visual impact from the road. 4) The removal of gates onto the road as no gates were permitted. 5) The removal of the brick facade replaced with timber cladding, covering the entire building. 6) The requirement to include new hedging to compensate for the removal of existing hedges. Without these alterations, we were informed that the planning application would not have been approved. We are therefore concerned that the amended planning application, submitted by the new owners, includes many of the elements that we were required to amend or remove entirely. We are also objecting on the grounds that, whilst the construction of the bungalow in the approved planning application, is built in a style and materials that are sympathetic to the rural nature of the neighbouring buildings, the style and construction of the amended proposal is totally out of character, and being two storey and so close to the road would be an imposing eyesore. Being in an AONB its visual impact from the fields and countryside behind is significant and this can not be mitigated by hedging as there is insufficient space behind the back of the house and the boundary. We are also concerned that the flat roof of the garage of the proposed building will, in the future, be used under permitted development to add a further extension to the upstairs of the building. If this was to happen it would have a significant impact on the view and how imposing the building is to Primrose cottage I'm not hopeful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russell griffiths Posted Tuesday at 12:52 Share Posted Tuesday at 12:52 Get a planning consultant on board we spent £4500 on one and if it had been 5 times this price it would have been worth it. the lady that did ours had an answer to ever point the council raised, every time they pointed out something she shot them down. regarding neighbours, we had a lady that said it shouldn’t be built as when we do build it the lorries coming into our site would fall in the lake, utter retards the lot of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flanagaj Posted Tuesday at 13:05 Author Share Posted Tuesday at 13:05 11 minutes ago, Russell griffiths said: Get a planning consultant on board we spent £4500 on one and if it had been 5 times this price it would have been worth it. the lady that did ours had an answer to ever point the council raised, every time they pointed out something she shot them down. regarding neighbours, we had a lady that said it shouldn’t be built as when we do build it the lorries coming into our site would fall in the lake, utter retards the lot of them. The architectural practice we are using have an in house planning consultant. But I do wonder whether we would be better off using a specialist planning consultancy firm. I'd rather have then worry about lorries falling into the lake, than stating the proposed development is an eyesore. The cheek of it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Ambrose Posted Tuesday at 13:09 Share Posted Tuesday at 13:09 I believe that most LPAs ignore local objections unless there's a dozen or so. They assume a few people will always object and most of the 'objections' are not on planning grounds so they are ignored. I'm amazed that even 'nice, kind, worldly neighbours' often can't see beyond they're own petty interests - a lot 'want more houses to be built'. Yeah but not next to them. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flanagaj Posted Tuesday at 13:14 Author Share Posted Tuesday at 13:14 3 minutes ago, Alan Ambrose said: I'm amazed that even 'nice, kind, worldly neighbours' often can't see beyond they're own petty interests - a lot 'want more houses to be built'. Yeah but not next to them. It's amazing how some object, even though the proposed development if approved would most likely lift the value of the lane, and in doing so raise the value of their property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flanagaj Posted Tuesday at 13:26 Author Share Posted Tuesday at 13:26 I had a feeling that the lane was clique. It's very interesting that not a single objection was raised, and only positive comments to the previous granted planning application were submitted, and yet, when the new comer submits an application, it's inundated with objections by the very same people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe90 Posted Tuesday at 14:52 Share Posted Tuesday at 14:52 But how many of these objections are valid? Don’t give up, I didn’t and got EXACTLY what I wanted in the first place. NIMBY,s the lot of them. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russell griffiths Posted Tuesday at 15:54 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:54 Is the look of your house relevant I walked around all the neighbours and made a note of the house type and materials used, there where no two the same so we had an argument that it didn’t need to look like any of the others as there wasn’t a precedent for a certain type. ridge height I can see being a problem if everything is a bungalow and you want two storey, but if that isn’t the case then why does everything need to look like a run down cottage. get some ammunition together. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flanagaj Posted Tuesday at 16:22 Author Share Posted Tuesday at 16:22 26 minutes ago, Russell griffiths said: Is the look of your house relevant I walked around all the neighbours and made a note of the house type and materials used, there where no two the same so we had an argument that it didn’t need to look like any of the others as there wasn’t a precedent for a certain type. ridge height I can see being a problem if everything is a bungalow and you want two storey, but if that isn’t the case then why does everything need to look like a run down cottage. get some ammunition together. 1) There are no two houses the same. A right mixed back of brick, clad and render 2) Some are bungalow and some are houses 3) Our proposed ridge height is no different to the bungalow next door. We have dropped the house down so as to be able to keep the ridge height the same I am going to stop stewing, and just wait until the LPA has given their view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe90 Posted Tuesday at 16:31 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:31 30 minutes ago, Russell griffiths said: everything is a bungalow and you want two storey Same with me, but I still won. I actually proved next door was 1200mm higher than was quoted or documented on their planning (but was so long ago that it didn’t matter) :. I went to a hip roof to reduce “massing” and that was taken positively by the appeal officer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russell griffiths Posted Tuesday at 16:37 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:37 Can you not get a meeting before the outcome, to try and workout what the likely outcome will be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe90 Posted Tuesday at 16:50 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:50 How many objections are “valid” .? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flanagaj Posted Tuesday at 17:19 Author Share Posted Tuesday at 17:19 36 minutes ago, Russell griffiths said: Can you not get a meeting before the outcome, to try and workout what the likely outcome will be. The Case Officer is doing a site visit on Friday. I wonder if the Planning Consultant should attend as well. He hasn't mentioned he is going to meet. 24 minutes ago, joe90 said: How many objections are “valid” .? Both objections are really along the same lines. You will see first floor windows above the hedge line on the lane. The lane in question has a sloping field in front, so nothing looks at the property, apart from people walking past. The argument that the property will be seen for miles around it rather moot, as the ridge height is no different than the previous granted dwelling. There is also no vantage point in the area where the dwelling will be really visible. I think it's simply, a couple of luddites who don't want to see a more modern building, and want to see a crappy bungalow hidden from view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe90 Posted Tuesday at 17:38 Share Posted Tuesday at 17:38 17 minutes ago, flanagaj said: You will see first floor windows above the hedge line on the lane. Personally I don’t think that’s a valid objection unless it led to overlooking someone else’s house/windows which it’s not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torre Posted Tuesday at 18:18 Share Posted Tuesday at 18:18 1 hour ago, flanagaj said: until the LPA has given their view Your neighbour's already given you a shopping list of changes the planners requested last time (to the original application) so they'll surely be raised by those same planners again (you might want to redact the neighbour's name here by the way). Definitely get your planning consultant or architect to attend as they're likely to be able to give much more policy driven 'clarification' as needed (read up on the protocol of site visits) Fortunately (for you and your future home) you're in an AONB, but unfortunately in planning terms there's more outstanding natural beauty without another house in it, unless of course it'll be your own! So you need to show how your design is exceptional (a very high bar) or do all you can to minimise harm. (You could for example suggest limited removal of permitted development rights to address concerns like building over the garage in future) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russell griffiths Posted Tuesday at 19:21 Share Posted Tuesday at 19:21 Why on Earth are your architects planning guy not attending what the bloody hell are you paying them for. as I said mine had an argument for every thing the council guy mentioned she didn’t say much, but every word was absolutely glorious, she countered everything the council guy said to the point that by the end of the meeting the council guy just said put everything you have just said in writing to me and I will pass it. There is a saying get your ducks in a row. this is exactly what you need to do, you will only get one chance. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pocster Posted Tuesday at 19:26 Share Posted Tuesday at 19:26 8 hours ago, flanagaj said: I suspect I am not alone here, but why do people put in public objections for a property that does not impact them in anyway. Because they are (expletive deleted) and object to anything . Don’t like change , don’t like you . (expletive deleted) ‘em that’s what you do 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pocster Posted Tuesday at 19:28 Share Posted Tuesday at 19:28 7 hours ago, Havkey100 said: I think the consensus is to try and not take it personally This is true . But it FEELS personal - so ( not to repeat ) (expletive deleted) ‘em 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flanagaj Posted Tuesday at 19:38 Author Share Posted Tuesday at 19:38 16 minutes ago, Russell griffiths said: Why on Earth are your architects planning guy not attending what the bloody hell are you paying them for. as I said mine had an argument for every thing the council guy mentioned she didn’t say much, but every word was absolutely glorious, she countered everything the council guy said to the point that by the end of the meeting the council guy just said put everything you have just said in writing to me and I will pass it. There is a saying get your ducks in a row. this is exactly what you need to do, you will only get one chance. That's a good point, I will request that they attend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe90 Posted Tuesday at 19:47 Share Posted Tuesday at 19:47 7 minutes ago, Pocster said: But it FEELS personal And that’s because as a self builder you are not running a business, it’s to be your home for you and your family, so it is personal, yes there are rules of engagement which are set out beforehand (planning rules and policies) and we should get to understand those before we even start the process. It’s the lack of knowledge of their own policies and through no fault of their own no time to deal with issues in a timely manner because of lack of staff and funding. In my case an authoritarian dictator of a planning officer with no interpersonal skills whatsoever. BUT revenge was sweet when I won and the LPA lambasted for not following their own policies 👍 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pocster Posted Tuesday at 19:48 Share Posted Tuesday at 19:48 Just now, joe90 said: And that’s because as a self builder you are not running a business, it’s to be your home for you and your family, so it is personal, yes there are rules of engagement which are set out beforehand (planning rules and policies) and we should get to understand those before we even start the process. It’s the lack of knowledge of their own policies and through no fault of their own no time to deal with issues in a timely manner because of lack of staff and funding. In my case an authoritarian dictator of a planning officer with no interpersonal skills whatsoever. BUT revenge was sweet when I won and the LPA lambasted for not following their own policies 👍 Got ya ! Been there and won - it becomes a full time ‘job’ … 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now