Gypsy Site and Listed housing?

[Adam F]

Bit of a long shot really....

We and our 3 neighbours have just found out our local council are planning on submitting plans for a perminant 'new age traveller' site less than 100 yards from our houses. Ours is GII listed the others arent but are just as old. The site is a beautiful open field we all overlook.

We are pursuing all usual routes - council, local MP etc but just wondered if our house being GII listed would have any impact - after all the hurdles and hoops we have had to jump though for seemingly minor work - surely they cant just plonk this next to us?

Adam

 

[robgil]

i don't think your view is listed like your house is. is the field used agriculturally?

 

[Flyfisher]

Do you know who owns the field?

 

[Pford75]

I seem to recall that someone here successfully opposed a planning application on the basis that it would affect the setting of the listed property (the planning application was on someone else's land).

I'm no expert on these matters, but it strikes me that if the application is from the LA, then it would have a high chance of success :x If you feel strongly, you might want to take the advice of a planning consultant in partnership with other local residents.

 

[Manders]

It may also be an idea to ensure that the LPA advertise the application as affecting the setting of a listed building.

 

[Cloudscape]

The right to retain a 'view' is a difficult one...

You can see various authorities' attitudes via Google, for instance:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=the+setting+of+a+listed+building&btnG=Search&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB

Searching combinations of 'setting', 'listed' and 'building' bring up more results.

But I notice Powys (my LA) say:

Any development which unacceptably adversely affects a listed building or its setting will not be allowed.

Examples of ways in which development may affect the setting of a listed building include impinging on an important view or vista, over dominating a listed building in scale or by introducing unsympathetic design elements.

And yet there have been several developments locally that have dramatically affected the settings of some very old buildings. New-build bungalows magically become two-storey and totally block views... steal the views, effectively.

Can I offer one other bit of advice. Don't use the word "gypsy" anywhere in your objection. Your focus needs to be on protecting the listed building. "Gypsy", these days, is seen as a pejorative - an insult. You'd be in danger of sounding like your objections are based on discrimination - not on aesthetics.

 

[Stephen]

Views may not be protected (unless in an AONB perhaps and in a few rare situations). However, the setting of a listed building is a valid issue for planning consideration. Therefore the siting of any development near a listed building has to consider its impact on the setting of the listed building. Setting can include views of the building from viewpoints around (but not usually views from the listed building). The curtilege of the building could also be relevant if the land now proposed for development was once part of the site that the listed building sits on.

I am not a planning specialist, but I suspect your strongest argument will be on the impact on the setting of your listed building.

 

[biffvernon]

Hey ho, and wearing an even stronger tin hat than when posting about global warming, what's wrong with gypsies?

As Stephen points out, the site will allow a greater number of people to enjoy views of a listed building.

 

[Moo]

I don't think they're gypsies, Biff. In the text the OP said 'new age travellers', which can be an entirely different animal.

 

[biffvernon]

But the thread title is "Gypsy Site and Listed housing".

Of course you wouldn't want any new age travellers nearby. They are probably intelligent, skilled, motivated folk who reject the industrialised model of house building and hanker for a day when craftsmanship and environmental sustainability will be valued. They'd likely object to people putting skylights in their listed roofs.

 

[Pford75]

Biff - My father has represented householders close to the Cranes Farm settlement in Essex. I realise that not all travellers should be tarred with the same brush, but in many cases there is a noticeable increase in anti-social behaviour (I know of several specific cases related to this).

Aside from that, there was a traveller site just off the Norwich ring road....sadly it was left strewn with rubbish, hedgerows destroyed etc. It might not be politically correct to voice these opinions, but I can see why people might not want this at the bottom of their garden.

 

[JoceAndChris]

Having been a new age traveller (I lived in a Renault Traffic for 5 years from 17- 21 years old, and my ex still does - well, he's moved up to a Ford Transit now) I can completely understand why people do not want them at the bottom of their garden. The vast bulk of them are xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

 

[Ushy M]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

Joce - you forgot to add "soap-dodging" - though maybe given your domestic water/mudbath circumstances, perhaps that would be a case of pots calling kettles black! (sorry couldn't resist) :wink:

 

[biffvernon]

And that's before Joce starts talking about her ex

 

[Flyfisher]

Joce, you must work on your natural reticence when posting. Try to say what you really think. :wink:

 

[Penners]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

That's just typical of today's lily-livered, namby-pamby political correctness.

 

[Penners]

Adam F - Stephen may say that he's not be a planning specialist, but his views in this matter are almost certain to be the most expert that you've had so far. I should base your arguments on his advice.

 

[christianb]

They are probably intelligent, skilled, motivated folk who reject the industrialised model of house building and hanker for a day when craftsmanship and environmental sustainability will be valued.

... and cholera, high rates of infant mortality, slums, destitution, life expectancy of 35, entire family of ten to two rooms, freezing winters.

Jeepers, Biff. A global warming warrior and crusty-loving. I'm betting you wear sandals and have a beard. :wink:

 

[Adam F]

Wow! Thanks for all the replies, not been online since last night - so thanks for the help.

So..... having done some digging around the LA it seems that no-one knows anything, and it is a twisted maze of contacts and deadends!!

What we have found out. The site is for New Age Travellers and is part of a South West England initiatiave to give equal rights to NATers and Gypsies - Dorset needs another 40 pitches.... (biting bottom lip!)

We have found some info on the LA website refering to effecting a listed prop. so will be pursuing that angle.

Our 4 houses have been subjected to a new bypass, a new industrial estate and a 750 house development less than 500 yards away in the last year - our only 'protected' view is the fields and countryside beyond which we all overlook - now they want this too..... for travellers.

The LA seem a closed shop and we all feel we have nowhere to turn at the moment - the LA who usually protect us against planning are the very people we are now fighting against. We are now turning towards our local MP.

Thanks again for the advice

 

[robgil]

so ,
if new age travellers are people with dreads who travel around living in vans and busses listening to the levellers and protesting against 'the man' who wants to stop them having peaceful gatherings such as the stone henge gatherings that we all used to enjoy until the police beat every one up , not that anyone really cared because every one was too out of it to be bothered and who are ridiculed for wanting to lead an alternative lifestyle even though most of them cant do it without accepting benefits from the very system they care to hate so much.

and gypsies are people who live in caravans and sell pegs door to door when they are not sharpening knives for people on peddle powered grinding wheels.

so , who are the people who live in vans and caravans , destroy private and public property , steal what isn't nailed down , own nasty vicious dags , eat children , cause whole towns to get up in arms when they arrive , talk in strangely fast accents , have children that never get washed and cause normal children in schools to do badly at exams because of the stench thus destroying peoples lives at a very young age, put a pony on every ounce of common land and generally eeking everything they can from the surrounding countryside?