Help preventing planning permission from being granted

[Cloudscape]

I agree that villages can and should grow, but the part of me that often finds new builds seriously ugly just won't shut up. My dad was an architect through the 60s and 70s and there was some really nice work done in those decades. There was also some ugly utilitarian rubbish... and locally to me, they seem to be still working from the lowest-common-denominator plans. The concession to modernism is to move into the 80s with magnolia Weathershield paint, and the 90s by adding a bit of wood cladding that ends up looking parched and grey.

I don't accept and never will that a (subjectively, admittedly) well-designed or better-looking house should cost any more to build than an ugly one. It's just that the wrong people get to make the decisions.

I'd like to see sympathetic shapes, use of sympathetic materials and colours, some appreciation for the setting... anything other than houses that looked like they were randomly beamed down from outer space. :shock:

 

[Nemesis]

Yup.

In my nearish locality, the small town/large village of Haydon Bridge, a major housebuilder bought a field. The houses built there bear not much resemblance to anything in the rest of the locality.

Facing the road are stone fronted houses. There is a small side return of stone, then the wall becomes red brick. Looks crazy, but presumably saved cash. As you approach the place driving along the A69, what you now see, rather than trees and hills beyond, is a clump of bizarrely out of scale tall red brick houses facing east - I think three storey, may even be four. Possibly meant to look like warehouses, but in a rural village round these parts tall red brick warehouses are not part of the local scene. But these are clone town buildings, stick up any place any where.

 

[Flyfisher]

I don't think trying to protect something you love is really being a hypocrite.

It might well be human nature to want to protect our own environment. The hypocrisy applies when we push the problem into someone else's environment.

If that's the view from your window, and that's the reason you bought the house, then I think it's simply human nature to want to protect that.

We all want to live in nice houses but we don't want any new buildings spoiling the view near us - let them spoil someone else's view. Isn't that the very definition of NIMBYism?

Human nature is frequently selfish and hypocritical - it's just an observation, not a judgement.

I agree entirely with Cloudscape; put energy into ensuring that the built environment is as pleasant as possible because denying new development is not a morally sustainable position, IMHO.

 

[Nemesis]

Three storey. They simply felt taller:

http://www.propertyfinder.com/cgi-bin/rsearch?a=o&id=502095419

PS:

a good size lawned rear garden offering views over open
countryside, and the river South Tyne towards Carlisle.

Carlisle - about 35 miles away??!!!

 

[Flyfisher]

I think we have a view towards Carlisle :wink:

 

[Nemesis]

Well, on those grounds there's a view towards the USA. And the river flows the wrong way. Also views over it would not be to the east.

Still, for those who want their mum handy:

four Bedrooms, Mater En-suite

 

[biffvernon]

If the weather were finer
One could see from here to China
If it wasn't for the distance in between.

 

[Nemesis]

Hexham Courant today:

Holiday homes will destroy our village’
Published on 25/01/2008

By ROBERT GIBSON

RESIDENTS of Langley, near Haydon Bridge, fear the rural character of their village could be damaged if an ambitious planning application gets the go-ahead next month.

David Knowles, of David Robert Ltd, wants to demolish the dilapidated buildings of the former Langley brickworks and replace them with a modern holiday village.

The applicant claims the eco-friendly development would help reduce carbon footprints, while at the same supporting the needs and the landscape of the picturesque rural area.

But objectors say it will be out of keeping with Langley’s distinct character, bringing noise and light pollution with it and leading to a loss of privacy.

The site is situated in the Green Belt on the edge of an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and is surrounded by wetlands, the Langley dam and the village of Langley itself.

It is currently home to a number of derelict buildings that had been used by the brickworks, adapted many times for farming use and never properly repaired.

Mr Knowles, who owns the land, submitted an application in November last year to demolish the buildings and replace them with the holiday village.

According to current plans, this would include self-catering holiday accommodation, a leisure building with an indoor swimming pool, a lodge building, a cafe and shops, and outbuildings for maintenance and bike hire.

A wind turbine on a five metre high vertical axis would also be included, adding to its green credentials.

A design and access statement prepared by John Cotterill of Zero Carbon Architecture Ltd states: “The proposals have been developed by the Zero Carbon Group, a Northumberland design and build company specialising in zero carbon development.

“The application seeks to establish a modern holiday village that responds to the future needs of people who would like to reduce their carbon footprint and holiday in the UK.

“The application will also support an existing rural community with local facilities and the establishment of employment opportunities, in turn leading to economic growth through tourism.”

The development would “incorporate features that will acknowledge, appreciate and preserve the historical and industrial heritage of the local area and in particular the former use of the site as a brickworks”.

It would also incorporate extensive planting to encourage wildlife and almost all the energy it used would be generated on site where possible.

The beauty of the surrounding area is highlighted in the statement, which suggests the holiday village would work in harmony with this.

Three residents, however, have lodged objections, claiming that the development would change the landscape irreparably.

Robin Erskine, of Hill Top Cottages, said: “The village of Langley consists primarily of three small hamlets at the Hill Top, the Saw Mill and Langley Methodist Church.

“This is a quiet residential community whose community life is centred on the actively used Langley Village Hall. This hall is only yards from the proposed development.

“The proposed development is so out of character with the existing village and the life that goes on there as to render it a wholly unacceptable intrusion.”

Mr Erskine added that other local businesses could be negatively affected and that private walkways and unspoilt wetland would be left vulnerable to trespass, leading to the total loss of privacy currently enjoyed by the residents.

Haydon Bridge Parish Council, which discussed the issue last Thursday, has also submitted an objection.

The final date for comments on the scheme is February 27.

As I reacall, the buildings described as so derelict are traditional and stone and very re-usable.

And this development will not enhance the quiet nature of the area. So those who want a holiday here because of the peace will be destroying that for others.

NIMBYISM?

It's not exactly in my backyard, but I think I don't want it either.

(an interesting article on the former brickworks page 16)

http://pscm.northumberland.gov.uk/pls/portal92/docs/10859

 

[JanieB]

It doesn't just have to be houses. We had a beautiful view over the Thames Valley until the local council landscaped the area behind us. All we can see now are trees, beautiful as trees are I preferred the view. :roll:

 

[Nemesis]

Yes, we have the same. In 1973 the parish council planted trees on what is village green (thus it was possibly illegal...) They have grown huge and block our view and our light. Ask for any cutting back and cutting down and that's perceived by some as vandalism.

 

[Sahara]

I would like to thank those who have offered constructive comments, links, etc to help me. At the moment I am trying to research sensible ideas for objection on the basis that I am due to give birth any day now. This means that meeting the deadline of submitting any objections may well be somewhere between tight and impossible for me depending on when the baby decides to put in an appearance! I therefore wanted to do as much research as possible before the plans are released in order to be able to write something quickly should I need to as, quite frankly, I have enough on my plate to deal with right now without trying to meet the short deadline that we have to respond to this. Judging by the size of the land and the amount of houses proposed, this will have a significant effect on us and whilst I realise I cannot raise any objections until I know the exact situation, I wish to be as throughly prepared as possible on understanding the valid reasons to object in order to be able to submit a response asap if my reaons are valid.

 

[Nemesis]

If you consider that access/excess traffic may prove a problem, then discuss this with the Highways Dept, which will also be asked for comments. Highways/access objections are pretty strong ones!

It may be possible to ask for a site visit to discuss your concerns.

If the houses look too tall or the materials used or simply too dense a development for the site that should be stated too. The joys of drainage is something to consider - are the drains adequate to take extra?

Also - call the local authority (planning) and ask if a Case Officer has been appointed, and see if you can have an informal chat. It is very likely that pre-application discussions have already been held, and you may get some 'lie of the land' depending on to whom you speak - some are more helpful than others. If no discussions have been held that in itself can be useful to know.


In my local authority, in some villages, there is a ban on new developments, as they have no shops, public transport etc they are not considered sustainable. In some places only 'affordable' housing is allowed.

Trawl through the local authority website and see what local plans and policies you can find.

http://www.planning-applications.co.uk/objection.htm

http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/MakingCommentsInfo.aspx


Not at all what you want at this time I agree!

Best of luck.

 

[biffvernon]

Yes, we have the same. In 1973 the parish council planted trees on what is village green (thus it was possibly illegal...) They have grown huge and block our view and our light. Ask for any cutting back and cutting down and that's perceived by some as vandalism.

Surely you commoners had coppicing rights. Why did you let the trees grow huge?

 

[Nemesis]

Common was inclosed in the 18th c. I own a small chunk of it! Rights were done away with then - as indeed was the village green, it too was inclosed.

What was the left over and deemed manorial waste became, after the 1965 Act, registered as village green. Including access roads which has caused many a problem, but that's another story.

No rights other than to recreation and the land is supposedly protected from damage and encroachment.

But the Parish Council ignore its responsibilities and has even flogged off easements!

Oooh don't get me started...

 

[Mark]

you cold look at loss of amenity space in the bungalow - that would be a valid objection.

Check any/all planning apps in the immediate area and see what the grounds were for acceptance or refusal.

 

[skier-hughes]

Only look at your own council's planning policies, don't bother even with your next door neighbour council's as they may differ, partiuclarly on density/access etc.

Visit the developer and ask to see plans now, probably get turned away but still you never know.

Look up all other planning applications.

Walk round the village and note all other building works of late.

Count the cars coming by.

Look for any accident records.

Check views for cars leaving the site.

Most people have two cars now, so use this in your calculations for parking etc.

Social housing is a good one to check on, what is your councils policy.

Find our who your local planning offficer is.

Check out your parish council planning people.

Local plans are now being rushed through by County now, and District councils aren't being used for cases that APPEAR to be straighforward. (Think I've got the councils right on that).

Visit your neighbours and gain there thoughts on it, if they aren't bothered then you have a real uphill battle, if they are, rope them in to doing some leg work and ensure they put letters in on time.

Make friends with everyone who is against it.

Don't rub those for it up the wrong way, you'd rather have them not do anythig than write in supporting it because you had an arguement about it.

Check the plans and the actual site very carefully, check back on older posts about building being on someone's land.

Can't think of anything else I'd be doing at the moment.

Graham

 

[Flyfisher]

All Nemesis' points for objections are good ones but it really depends on what is meant by 'development'. From the OP, this 'development' seems to be the addition of just two new dwellings, which is hardly likely to place much of a burden on the drainage and other services. Or create much additional traffic.

I'm not saying these are not valid objections but just trying to bear in mind what the reply is likely to be.

Checking the area development plan is a good idea. Is the location in question specifically mentioned? Are there any targets for increasing house numbers? What are the stated policies for housing development? All councils have to allow new builds so it's worth knowing their stated policy regarding the types and locations.

Of course, it's likely that the proposer(s) has also done their homework as they will already have invested significant time and money getting this far.

 

[Nemesis]

You'd be surprised how many haven't done the homework.