They want to build 60 houses on the fields next door

[stopthebuild]

Help!

I have to submit my objections shortly and we really want to get this plan scrapped.

There are fields directly behind the house (higher than us as were in a valley).

The plot has been earmarked for development as part of the councils 6 year plan.

Access isn't great, the water that already runs down is concerning in bad weather and has entered neighbours properties and there are plenty of brownfield sites around.

Does anybody work in this area or have knowledge of how to best object to this?

Thank you, I'd be grateful for any wisdom here.

"How old is your home?"

1930s

"If it’s been marked for development in the local plan then you’re too late.

The planners have identified this as an area appropriate for development."

It hasn't, it's a draft plan.

As others have said, if it’s been allocated for housing in the Local Plan then there is a presumption that it will be developed for housing. You could have a look at the policy that has been written for that site in the Local Plan (the Local Plan will be on the Council’s website) which might give you more context and the policy will probably be written in a way that sets out headline points for what needs to be done to meet the requirements of that policy to then get planning permission.

I know it’s a shock but probably far more effective to engage with the planning process in a realistic and positive way if you can and if it’s likely that housing will be developed on that land, it might be better to suggest ways that you think the development could be amended/improved rather than objecting completely. You may well be able to influence the impact of the development that way.

"So is there an actual planning application or is part part of the consultation process for the new local plan?"

There is no planning application. It's part of the consultation process for a new local plan, yes!

2 nearby developments are being called "controversial" by local councillors due to the huge increased flooding since they were built.

They are urging us to object to prevent developers being able to apply for planning permission here.

If it is still in the draft phase then it is probably best to base any comments around contraventions to the National Planning Policy Framework.

Unfortunately for you, local councils have effectively been told to find land suitable for houses and if they don't then the government will. It is probably preferable for residents to have the local council decide where best to put the new developments.

In that case raise any concerns you have got:

Need for housing
Type of housing - what is the local need - family houses, small units, affordable housing etc
Use of greenfield site over available brownfield sites
Access - both in terms of traffic but also in terms of a sustainable location ie how well served is it by public transport, will residents be able to walk/cycle to local services/amenities or will they be dependent on private car (a big no-no)
Flooding
Biodiversity/ecology - loss of habitat/wildlife/important trees/protected species
Landscape - impact on the character /appearance, visibility from wider area (any designated landscapes like AONB, National Parks etc?)
Impacts on local infrastructure - local schools, GP etc
Any archeological evidence in the fields

Have a look at the National Planning Policy Framework which sets out the main areas which are covered by hte planning system for more ideas.

I live on a one-track road of 30 houses. The council have no regard to resident's objections, and have granted planning permission for 88 student flats in the cul-de-sac at the end of the road.
The developers are harassing us to sell to them, and any that they've managed to buy, they've boarded up.
It's beginning to look like a slum, thus ensuring that they'll be the only ones to buy our home. Criminal.

When I objected to a local supermarket being built everyone was warned that raising objects on volume of traffic grounds would be ignored, as it had to be measured and a proper survey done.

However objections were raised on the fact it would cause access problems for the various nearby emergency services, causes issues with the cycle lanes due to the road layout, decimate local shops and was out of character with the area. In fact people argued the site should be turned into housing.

Likewise when housing is built in the area people can't object on the fact that housing is being built, but you can object on the number/type of housing.

So successful objections have been raised for putting in loads of studio/one bedroom flats instead of larger flats, and one/two bedroom flats instead of a mixture of flats and houses. Where people raise issues over on street parking then the development isn't allowed parking permits and the developer has to amend their plan to provide parking. (The last developer had lots of meetings before they put their plans in to cover these grounds and ensure there were no objections so their planning application was granted.)

In an area I use to live where there was flooding, developers have never been allowed to build the number of houses they wanted on playing fields due to the flooding. (In fact only one developer has been allowed to build some housing and that is right next to a school.) People just put in objections stating the exact years their homes/local houses were flooded and how building the housing would make the flooding worse by impacting more houses.

With the supermarket and the proposed housing on the flood plain the local MPs got involved to oppose the developments. My local MP and another has objected with local people and local councils on the height of some blocks of flats, however the Secretary of State has overruled them and allowed them to go ahead.

Sorry to hear that @Orpheline

Unless they throw up a little Tesco too then yes, residents will be reliant on cars!

The "controversial" sites nearby were plagued with issues. The marketing suite flooded and had to be demolished along with 4 of the other houses they'd just built.

If you want to object keep emotion out of it. I would not mention the personal affect on you such as view or building noise. I’d stick to but go in to more depth on:
School places (what has the developer proposed in terms of house sizes are the 3/4/5 bed therefore likely habitable by families and are the local schools already over subscribed - note the LA can get round this by allocating more school places but it will be difficult to do so from scratch is the school isn’t already earmarked for growth)
Nearest gp practices and wait times
Transport links - lack of buses and trains mean more cars. What are these currently like?
If neighbours have evidence of previous flooding and can prove it was caused by surface water run off from the fields they need to raise that objection with evidence but could be mitigated by developers saying they’ll improve drainage
Absolutely raise brownfield vs greenfield and quite LA policy back at hem if you can. But remember developers have deep pockets to fight rejections and a nice greenfield site will sell better
I would contribute to the draft plan not just the planning objections on the development itself

I'd be worried about flooding.

@skeggycaggy

How big does the development have to be to pay section 106 money?

It's now called the community infrastructure levy and can be calculated on any number of homes these days as it's a formulae - rather than based on a certain number of homes like the old s106

People need to remember that rural bus routes, libraries, school upgrades, community initiatives - a million different things - are all part funded via the contributions that new build housing pays via CIL and without these there would be fewer services for existing residents to enjoy

People need to remember that rural bus routes, libraries, school upgrades, community initiatives - a million different things - are all part funded via the contributions that new build housing pays via CIL and without these there would be fewer services for existing residents to enjoy
There'd also be less strain on the existing services without the constant building, so 🤷🏻‍♀️

Surely there must be some great crested newts, somewhere ;)

My advice is don’t spend too much time on your objections. Keep them succinct.

Land agents and developers are ruthless. They don’t give up and nearly always win the war. Councils can refuse planning permission, but it will be appealed and if that’s not successful then it Planning Inspectorate. Land agents use bully tactics and get their own way.

Rather than fight it, focus on parts of the plan that might improve/enhance your local community.

@Moolan there's no planning application. This is the local plan draft from the council. Our local councillors also oppose it.

@GreyhoundG1rl agree. There is a piece of land earmarked near me for 200 houses yet we have just had 300 HA houses built in that small town with another 200ish I think to go (fine we need HA houses) then the field adjacent is ear marked for another 300+ houses so nearly 1000 houses already! The school has been over subscribed for years by a big number and the GP surgery can barely provide services for the existing population considering how big a rural area they cover. Again it’s all been green field site do that alone makes me furious

We have this nearby - 4000 new homes due to be built a few fields away from us. We also back onto farmland. Luckily we bought some of the field next to us as an insurance against them building here and as suspected we found out the owner of the fields next to us did try to sell the rest of it for housing. Next time he might be lucky but at least they can't build on our land. Did you not object when the drafts were coming on?

You would have to base your argument on impact on local infrastructure, parking, road users, etc...

You will be up against a requirement to build homes. The council will need to evaluate sites. Everyone will have their say on all the sites identified. Houses will go somewhere but you need to say why they shouldn’t be near you. Just like everyone else.

The councillors have to evaluate sites and come up with a plan to meet need. Developers can certainly ensure water run off is dealt with. Transport can be enhanced. Roads can be built to the required standards. The Transport engineers will be looking at the sites too.

Don’t mention noise or outlook. Some sites will invariably be chosen. You have to hope it’s not the one near you. Just like everyone else. Who would ever want to make these decisions regarding local plans? No one wants housing. I find they don’t pay much attention to brownfield sites. They should but the cost of cleaning up can be massive! So houses are not worth building. Too expensive to sell.

@Stopthebuild
This is how I envisage us
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8600039/Chinese-city-builds-motorway-bridge-house-stubborn-owner-refused-move.html
It looks to be a nationwide problem, with no recourse.

@PickAChew

Surely there must be some great crested newts, somewhere ;)

Beat me too it!

Planning is strictly controlled and follows a clear process. IME plans or projects fail because they haven't applied process properly.

If it's a draft local plan, now is a great time to get involved. Once formally identified as potential housing, it will be much harder to fight.

Objections only result in change if there is a genuine planning reason. I have seen multi billion pound projects fail because of an objection.

Yes. True. But only when it’s Prince Charles! Are you local to him op? I assume we are not talking about his backyard in the Cotswolds here?

The important point is that local authorities must find housing sites. So there will be housing built somewhere. For your DC and others when they need it. New housing isn’t lying empty. No one wants it near them but in the end it has to go somewhere.

We had this problem, and there were a lot of objections because of water runoff issues, the local sewage station being at capacity, road access being poor, and other better sites being available where these things aren’t such an issue. So the site was moved. I get the feeling sometimes bonkers Parish councils put pins in maps and it soon falls apart when the infrastructure needs planning properly and reality kicks in.