 |
| | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| |
| #1  11-Jun-2005, 12:45 | ||||
| ||||
| Fighting against Planning permission Who knows how to win a fight against a building developer being granted planning permission. I live in a small estate of around 60 4 bed plus type houses, built by a renouned quality builder. there is a small piece of grass area towards the end of the cul de sac, that has been sold, and the owners are now looking to maximise profit and build 4 x 3 bed semis, and a 4 bed, on an area roughly the equivilent of 1 1/2 of the original plots. I dont hold out much for the battle against all the potential for back handers etc..... but has anyone been in a similar situation fought, and won? The outline plans showing these properties, are as they state not to scale, in fact quite misrepresentative!  If you do try to make it to scale it will look absolutely awful!  |
| #2 11-Jun-2005, 14:03 | |||
| |||
| Andy, Yes been involved in two planning battles where I live and won both. We won because of the increase in traffic close to a primary school and of course the danger of construction traffic during the build. This is where someone had decided to knock down a large 5 bed with big garden to build 4 to 6 smaller dwellings and make loads of money. It was won because of the impact on the small road that runs by the school. If they are maximising space in an estate where there is no danger to schools etc and probably no perceptible impact on traffic will be hard to fight sadly. The planners are happy to squeeze anything in anywhere these days due to the housing pressures they're under. Remember the old joke about the Barratts development. In the style of the News at 10 newsreader - A tragic accident occured yesterday when a Barratts bricklayer got his trowel jammed between two houses!  Best of luck mate. |
| #5 11-Jun-2005, 18:38 | ||||
| ||||
| Yeah, i think you could be right. The family that live the closest to the location, ie opposite, didnt receive the letter from the council, yet another in a further cul de sac did???  Well weve got an assortment in the road, of Solicitors architects etc etc, and have formed a petition, based on proper fact  not just high emotions.We'll see....................... |
| #7 11-Jun-2005, 19:02 | |||
| |||
| relevant planning law is on website of the deputy prime minister, PPG3 is usually most relevant. your local council should have a local plan of number of new houses needed. land may have been allocated to them already in which case the developer would have to show its a windfall site ( i'm assuming its not green field and used for farming) they then need to demonstrate theirs a need and your local council might have rules on number of affordadle houses to be built. Increase in local trafic and safety is always worth a go, also you have a right to privacy so if the proposed development overlooks houses that should be included as well as increases in noise/light polution. i'm not certain on rules on car parking spaces per house as i think they have changed but developer must show there is adequate parking per property. its always worth a trip to your local panning dept and ask them for advice but from sounds of it the land is exactly what the government are trying to use before opening up more greenfield sites  |
| #10 11-Jun-2005, 20:17 | |||
| |||
| Quote:
got exactly the same currently being built in front of us, 3 "houses" in the space you could fit 1 decent size house with a garage. developer pulled a further application after we showed him he couldn't get a trowel into the space between our fence and his proposed wall. you might be a able to fight it on grounds there is other land allocated but with 5000 greenfield sites i think they'll use a windfall site first |
Hybrid Mode
