To ask for help objecting to a proposed build

[QuestionableMouse]

I live in a row of houses that has a playing field on one side and farmland on the other. Part of the farmland is currently being built on with a development of 70 houses. I objected to that as did most of the village to no avail.

Now the council want to build 40 houses on the playing field. This will block access to my back garden and will mean my house is overlooked (the plans drafted show the new houses will have parking that's basically right against my fence.)

Its basically doubling the size of the village. There's no plan to manage the extra traffic (each house has parking for 2 cars plus visitor parking so in the region of 300 extra cars). The access currently isn't great and can get blocked in bad weather.

No one in the village wanted either development (including the parish Council) but the Borough Council overruled the objections. Its going to totally change the village. Please can you help me object?

I sympathise. An elderly but active and healthy relative had lived for 50 years in her home, overlooking a field. The council built a council building in the field, just feet from her fence. They had the whole damn field but they chose to block her in. It blocked 80% of her view. She cried for weeks, couldn't bear to go in her garden again, crumbled inside, her health and mind rapidly deteriorated, and died.

Reading Borough Council, if you're reading this, you utter, utter b*.

If the playing fields are open to all to use, loss of amenity land is one argument against. Are they council-owned? There's a potential conflict of interest if the council owns the land. They'll get far more when they sell it if it's got PP for housing, so it's in their own interest to grant it.

If there really are lots of empty houses in the area, you could argue that there is no need for more housing and therefore the environment will be spoiled for no good reason, as the local housing market is oversupplied with properties.

Check that the access road isn't joining the existing road on a blind bend or anything, as road safety is a strong argument.

Go online and look at the structure plan and the local plan, just in case the land in question isn't an agreed site for development. It has been known for councils to do things in the wrong order.

Your best bet is too find some incredibly rare flora or fauna, but that's a bit of a long shot on a playing field.

Talk to borough councillors until you find who's sympathetic and can help you formulate your objection. If they are also Parish councillors, they may already be familiar with the arguments against. in proper planning terms e.g. traffic flow, sewage and water use, density for your area etc. Ask them if they are asking for 'section 106' provision? This often puts developers off. Get your neighbours to object too - in writing. If enough of you do that, you will be allowed to address the planning meeting.

As a last resort, find a planning specialist and club together with neighbours for costs.

Our area doesn't have a Local Plan... that way they don't have to refer to one, or do the wider impact research. Funny that!!!

Rural area across the UK are being devastated. Habitats, water plains, all sorts of green land, pastures etc that have soaked up water, helped prevent flooding, all are being built on

Infrastructure is not being improved. Planning is not actually being planned and sensible decisions are not made.

I've posted before about the rural area I am in. Bounded by rivers and an ancient forest we are still required to build tens of thousands of new homes. Probably to feed Bristol, Cardiff and even London. Local residents, businesses and the area as a whole will not benefit.

The small market town I live in is proof of that. The town high Street is on its knees. Those living in the satellite developments don't use it. They shop on their way home, socialise with their families wherever they moved in from, etc. Yet they add to the burden of school, roads GP etc. None of which has grown or, in the case of the roads simply cannot grow (rivers tend to be quite a decisive boundary).

So... tell me, and posters like me, again why our protests are mere nimbyism!

Brown sites abound. Larger towns and cities often have greater potential for appropriate increases in infrastructure.

Yet rural communities are routinely inconvenienced - we were faced with a 3 - 4 MONTH road closure to put a water main in. Main road, up to 20,000 cars a day. All detours would be down single track lanes, rutted farm lanes. County planners, developers and water board all agreed the closure was necessary and would happen... 5 miles of the road would be 100% closed for the duration.

It took our local MP to make them all admit they hadn't looked for recent data and, as we don't my have a Local Plan, there was nothing to make them collect any.

If you don't live rurally you have no idea what the addition of a few hundred house does to daily life. Labelling us Nimbys shows that quite clearly.

Hi OP,

A planning application must be decided by a local planning authority (LPA) in accordance with the ‘development plan’ unless some other significant matter permits a different decision to be made.

You need to look at the local planning policy (‘development plan’) for the LPA that is deciding the application. Outside London that is usually a district council.

The development plan (usually comprising the ‘local plan’ as the principal document but a few others as well) will contain policy for different geographic parts of the LPA’s area.

If the development on the site accords with the development plan, you will need to find planning reasons to object to the development in order to convince the LPA to refuse planning permission. The development plan is likely to specify the sorts of things that need to be brought forward to make development on a site acceptable.

If you can’t comb through the policy to ensure that the developer has complied with the elements it needs to justify the grant of permission, you will simply need to object for proper planning reasons. These include overlooking, or a failure to mitigate increased traffic impacts arising from a development.

You should be aware that in the vast majority of cases, developers have taken the necessary steps to illustrate that planning permission can be properly granted. This is why it seems to people objecting as though their concerns aren’t heard. The reality is that the developer’s efforts combined with the legal duty on the LPA explained in the first para mean there are often few reasons for refusal to be justified: the LPA knows its area, what development can be accommodated where, and on what basis - and this is what the development plan contains.

You could hire a planning consultant to write on your behalf. If you split the costs it can be affordable.
Would any listed buildings or conservation areas be adversely affected?

I think if you are going to make an objection you have to stick to facts and figures, such as increased strain on local amenities etc. Unfortunately I don’t think being overlooked is seen as reasonable grounds for an objection. I understand your concerns but these sort of things are getting more common these days.

OP you need to get your head down if this really bothers you and as has been suggested look into the potential policy infringements that the development may refer to - green space, nature and wildlife concerns, character of the area and whether the proposed plans affect this or a sense of community, parking provision, traffic issues, privacy on your property, distance to your property, access for emergency services, drainage for these additional proposed properties, whether there is another playing field within the required area locally and so on.

Find the planning application on your local councils website, spend serious time drafting making specific points relating to the above. Vague comments about will get you nowhere, the existing planning application should include the number of vehicles they estimate the housing will create- if not you need to write in detail about the issue to the highways agency. I would encourage neighbours to do the same, but bear in mind if there are no legitimate legal niggles with any of the above it will likely go ahead.

If you are unsure i would have a look at some existing planning applications on councils websites to example how others are objecting proposed developments, these are all public access documents so easy to find.

I would consider moving if it bothers you that much though, before approval is granted. Equally i would look in to the likelihood that this may increase the value of your home in the long term. 40 houses will not be a long term building site.

It’s frustrating but I have to say based on experience, you will be wasting your time, if the council want to do it they will, they will change everything to suit themselves, whether that involves moving established protected wildlife, removing TPO’s, building on flood plains, unless Highways have objected to the access that will be a useless argument too, all they think about is ££££.

Greenfield should be protected full stop. There are plenty of brownfield sites to build on in this country.

Totally agree, @Babymamaroon. Developers aren't very interested in building on brownfield though, as it's lots more costly and therefore reduces their profits.

For a development of this size it would have come from central office and will if its now in planning stage been in the district plan for many years , developments such as this do not just happen , so it's quite unlikely there is anything you can do other than maximise the potential of the 106 agreement - something for the community that is provided by the developers as part of the development , can vary depending on size and potential profit margins from a kiddies playing park to a school or hospital

How big is the playing field? Might be worth looking at sportengland advice/planning guidance, because round here they generally object to almost all development that would result in the loss of playing fields. The national planning policy framework (NPPF) has policy guidance that all local plans should be consistent with. It’s not a long document, and is broken down into sections.
You can certainly object on the basis of the impact of the comings and goings associated with the car parking on your quiet enjoyment of your garden/house. If you google “what is a material planning consideration” there are documents that are helpful, and most local authority planning websites have guidance on objecting.

OP, it will be an uphill battle. But:

1. look at the Local Plan first
2. putting too much emphasis on the strain on local amenities can often backfire. It just means the council will demand more local amenities in the S106 provision as a get out.
3. If you complain about access, all that tends to happen is the developer will be asked to provide better access. Which means more annoying roundabouts.
4. Don't overlook the design. It's probably going to be awful, new builds usually are nowadays. Unless yours is an ugly new build too (sorry!), you can demonstrate how it is not inkeeping with the surrounding, ruins the public view experience, spoils the village etc.
5. Pay attention to what the councils and developers say, go to the meetings.
6. Ask the council for their reasons behind their demands and claims. They usually don't have any/it's full of council-speak. Challenge them at every point, especially when they talk about the Local Plan, community cohesion, population etc.

Good luck.

Being overlooked/loss of privacy can absolutely be taken into account.

I sympathise OP. I live in a rural village. Since I moved in we have had a house built next door to us, right up against our boundary, their garden is above ours, so they overlook our garden and I have no privacy. At the end of my garden three houses are being built, on a flood plain, which could have an impact on flooding elsewhere, including my garden, but they have still been allowed. Many of the houses here are becoming second homes or holiday rentals, which also destroys a community, we are trying to move now.
You need to group together, look at all the fine details, and challenge everything. Good luck.

Undoubtedly not all the houses being built are in the right place. Some of them are already worth less than they were first bought for. Developers and gullible local authorities have got away with a lot. Central government has stepped in to railroad local objections In some cases. The result is fields full of drab identikit houses that nobody really wants to live in. And more traffic. And more pollution.

@QuestionableMouse

I sympathise I really do. The same thing is happening in my village. (Approx one mile square, with 120 homes,) It's not going to affect me, as I live kind of in the middle of the village.

But will affect about 35 to 40 properties, (on the way in,) as the (50) new homes they are building are on a field on the way into the village. So it will affect their view, (over the fields towards the woodlands.)

And a little park is being built on another small field (on the way in to the village) that will have (probably) dozens of kids playing on it, so there will be 'people' noise then, that isn't there now.

Our county council have said that 10,000 new homes have to be built in our county by the end of 2027 (roughly 1200 a year.) Around two thirds private sale and one third social housing, and every single town, suburb, village, and hamlet has to have some. No-one is exempt.

It seems annoying (to some) that they move to a quiet rural low-population village, just to have it increase in population. You move to get AWAY from people, not to have more coming !!

However, as I said, everyone has to tolerate it unfortunately, and there is nothing you can do about it.

Maybe just be glad it's only 40 houses. Sorry it's blocking your nice view though, I wouldn't like it, and think YANBU to be pissed off.

Really have no advice as you can't stop it (probably.) But I do get you, and I do sympathise.

Ignore the NIMBY comments. MOST people would be pissed off, and if they say they wouldn't they're lying. And as some posters have said, in some cases they don't change the infrastructure either. So the amenities and facilities have to cope with extra people/children. Potentially another 2 or 3 dozen children will need to get into our little village primary school! And other amenities and facilities will be stretched too!

Road capacity and infrastructure is a big one. In the rural area I live more than one development has been knocked on the head by the local Highways dept regardless of any other objections as there was no plan to make the developer contribute to it. Also completely agree with
Because no fucker ever listens to that, that's why
There are 25,000 new houses required in the local plan for this area. There is not one single school, doctors surgery, playing/sports area or hospital upgrade that has been included in that. Of the three huge areas (formerly agricultural farm land) that have so far been developed/are undergoing development, of the promised (during planning stage) infrastructure, only one sports field has so far materialised. Worse, because the relevant government dept forced the planning of one development to be accepted, the local council will now have to foot the bill (multi million pounds) for the necessary road upgrade because the developer has somehow been allowed to back track on what they’re stumping up for. The required percentage of affordable homes has also been allowed to be reduced to a minuscule amount. GBP350,000 does count as affordable even here in the SE. It isn’t nimbyism, it’s bloody disgusting.

Btw OP, in your personal case, is the access at the back an actual ‘right to access’? Or just something you currently do because you can? If the former then you need to not just object on that basis, if your access will be blocked, but talk to a solicitor, because you may need them to provide a letter confirming your right to access.

It's not just 40 houses. It's 40 on land directly behind my street and then 70 on a field at a right angle to my street so 110. In a village with a population of ~500. It is a massive change.

Good point on contacting the highways agency. The road in is a narrow B road with a nasty blind bend. It's bad now with just the traffic from my street so I can't imagine what it'll be like with 5x as much.

We're getting more too. It's not the houses which are the problem although the village has doubled in size in the last 20 or so years, it's the school which is at capacity with no physical room to extend, it's the GPs/the HV/the community midwives/the graveyard...and all the rest. The fact that there is one road in and out doesn't exactly help either with building works.

It's awful living in the middle of it. Dirty, noisy and disruptive. Our county's population is set to double. We were never given a voice in this, just told we were getting houses to fulfil local need. What a big lie. We're now, five years later told it's to attract extra people into the county and the numbers of houses have been decided by a mysterious business consortium 'advising' the local authorities.

A good developer will be one step ahead of any complaints about roads etc as it has to be part of their planning application. Same with the play park , they will just set aside a section of the land to build a new play park. People need places to live and building even higher up the chain frees up properties for entry level buyers / renters.

Make sure the objection is clearly written and sticks to planning policy and principles, making reference to the relevant Local Plan and NPPF. Has the council met its housing targets? Developers often manage to get planning approval if the council cannot demonstrate a five-year housing land supply. It is difficult when developers have very clever expensive lawyers to help them get approval; if the council refuses planning permission, they may be able to successfully appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Do any of the trees have TPOs, and has the developer done a full ecological assessment?

Is the developer promising a Section 106 agreement to improve infrastructure?

The local CPRE group might be able to help, and residents' groups often get set up.