Argh - Someone wants to make my semi into a terrace! Advice needed...

danza

danza

danza

Soldato
Joined
28 Mar 2005
Posts
13,679
Location
Drunken badger punching
This’ll be a long one.

The house next door which adjoins ours has just sold, seemingly to a property developer.

Starting with a little history:

A previous owner of the house applied for planning permission to extensively renovate the house, including a 2 storey extension to the side and single storey extensions at the front and rear (from what I can gather from the link below). Permission was rejected (this was in 2005), but there’s no record in my local council’s website archive as to why (although there was mention from a neighbour it was due to obstructing the view of flowing traffic). The house in the picture is as it is at the moment. My house has a single storey extension to the front, and this was built in 1985.

And today:

Today we received notification of a planning application to build an adjoining 2 bedroom property to the house next door, turning our semi into an end of terrace. Clearly I am biased as this will impact on the value of my property and as such do not want this application to go through.

My corner:

Parking

Parking around here is poor. The planning statement indicates that the existing drive will be used for the two properties (shared), and that the hard-standing front garden area of the existing house will remain as-is. The planning statement also mentions that the existing highway/pavement will not be modified. The Drawings clearly show the driveway partitioned to the new house, thus implying ownership of said drive by the new property. The statement also indicates that 2 cars can park on this driveway, and uses the argument that the houses will not likely have more than one car each as local transport links are good (this is quite a misassumption in my experience, as we have 2, my neighbour has 3 + 1 garaged, over the road has 2 etc. etc.). The drawing also shows that the new driveway will be very small (with enough room for a classic VW Beetle that I’m assuming is to scale and not much else), and I cannot see how this is large enough to accommodate 2 cars without at least one of them encroaching the pavement.

Terracing

All houses before the junction on Streetview are semi-detached. Addition of the new dwelling will create an out of character (for this side of the junction) terrace. The other side of the junction has a row of terraced houses, but these are more recent and of a different style.

So, what we might assume from this is that there could be another 3 cars on the (often rammed) road + one on the driveway. The existing layout is large enough to accommodate 2 cars on the driveway and previous tenants have had 2 cars, which is contrary to the assumptions made in the statement.

Obstruction

Could pull the traffic view obstruction one again? Goods vehicles do use the road, and at the very least their view will be impeded by the side of the proposed property.

The link below is that which contains all the relevant info:

http://pa.midsussex.gov.uk/online-applications/

Just type RH15 9SS into the search box, all the relevant info is in Related Documents > View associated documents. The property in question is number 15.

And a link to Streetview (red Citroen Xsara and white Citroen van on the drive):

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place...0x48758db0752a315b:0xe42fa673a839a45f!6m1!1e1

Is it likely that planning permission will be granted due to changes in guidelines and regs despite something similar in stature being previously refused?

If you’ve got this far and have managed to absorb some of the info in the links and have anything that might aid us in pushing a refusal (over and above what I’ve mentioned), I’d love to know.

Cheers!
 
Last edited:
The point in the notice to you is so you can air your objections, so why not tell the council all you have said here. Its all you can do, other than getting a letter together and asking all the people in the street to send the same letter to the council planning department.
 
Make sure you write a letter objecting to the council, if no one objects they will almost certainly pass it even if it breaks the rules. You need to research some local policies but it sounds very much like this application will breach the councils parking policy and will also substantially change the character of both the property and the street. Keep you objection factual and avoid emotive garbage as it means nothing. It is easy enough to have an application refused if it breaks rules good luck!
 
Hard to say really... the owner of the house next to us has applied and been denied or withdrawn 8 times since 2000 to alternatively convert it into extended flats or a terrace but it was mostly denied over concerns about the capacity of the sewage and water systems in the area.

As above though keep the objection factual as any emotive aspect generally holds little weight.
 
Is the fact that it would harm you economically not reason enough then? Terraces are almost automatically worth less than semis, all other things being equal. I'd be seriously concerned, good luck with the objection!
 
Cheers guys.

I know not to be emotive and to be as objective as possible. I'll go through all the docs in detail and compile an objection.

And adverse effect on property value is listed as an invalid cause for objection, which sucks.
 
If you're putting in an objection, make sure you only mention material planning considerations in it. Find the local planning policies and state where this proposal contravenes policy.
any points raised that aren't anything to do with policy will be discounted and can weaken your objection... Also speak to your local councillor and/or community council
 
I know a structural engineer who it might be worth speaking to who for a small fee (I assume) would be able to check out the regs and draft you a letter to send. He specialises in traffic surveys (amongst other things) so would be well placed to offer the correct legal advice on the parking and Im sure could argue that a bigger house means more traffic etc etc. He regularly works with planning departments so will know better than most how they work.

If you want his details I can send you them through, he wouldn't charge for an initial chat.
 
danza said:
Cheers guys.

I know not to be emotive and to be as objective as possible. I'll go through all the docs in detail and compile an objection.

And adverse effect on property value is listed as an invalid cause for objection, which sucks.
Click to expand...

Is this really the case? Surely if a neighbour is putting in an application to do anything at all that would adversely affect the value of your property you have a right to object on those grounds? I'm amazed if that's not allowed as a reason...
 
mothermachine said:
Is this really the case? Surely if a neighbour is putting in an application to do anything at all that would adversely affect the value of your property you have a right to object on those grounds? I'm amazed if that's not allowed as a reason...
Click to expand...

Nope

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/general/faq/faqapplyprocess

What are material considerations?

A material consideration is a matter that should be taken into account in deciding a planning application or on an appeal against a planning decision.

Material considerations can include (but are not limited to):

Overlooking/loss of privacy
Loss of light or overshadowing
Parking
Highway safety
Traffic
Noise
Effect on listed building and conservation area
Layout and density of building
Design, appearance and materials
Government policy
Disabled persons' access
Proposals in the Development Plan
Previous planning decisions (including appeal decisions)
Nature conservation
However, issues such as loss of view, or negative effect on the value of properties are not material considerations.
Click to expand...
 
Make some point about it projecting beyond the existing and typical building line to the rear, its so tightly shoe horned in theyve had to push it out to make the kitchen / wc work at GF. I would be wondering if highways would be happy with vehicular access that close to a junction also, especially as they will be reversing off.
 
The additional projection at the rear is nothing given an extension could be built anyway. You should focus on the impact on the street scene, the road is a mix of semi-detached and detached bungalows. The new house would unbalance the properties form an incongruous element within the street scene.

Also raise the issue of off street parking, try and find the local planning authorities parking standards which should be in the local plan.

Their also missing an elevation from the proposed drawing and the north arrow is not pointing north but thats something entirely separate.
 
Participant said:
Is the fact that it would harm you economically not reason enough then? Terraces are almost automatically worth less than semis, all other things being equal. I'd be seriously concerned, good luck with the objection!
Click to expand...

IIRC, house price effects are specifically not accepted as a reason to refuse permission for development.
 
Right, thanks for the replies guys. I've been totally snowed under for the last 2 weeks, so haven't had the chance to reply or write an objection until this evening. The objection is as below:

This is a formal objection to the proposal of the construction of a new two-bedroom end of terrace dwelling at the site of 15 Southway, Burgess Hill, RH15 9SS, with reference to the application 14/04355/FUL.

Objection with respect to the Planning Statement

The Planning Statement makes misassumptions and contradictions both in itself and with respect to the form ‘Application for Planning Permission. Town and Country Planning Act 1990’.
This objection details these discrepancies with reference to each section (where relevant) of the Planning Statement (reference 3685, dated November 2014 compiled by Clive Voller Associates).

‘The Scheme’

‘This is a full plans application for 1 No. Semi-detached dwelling.’

The plan is for an end of terrace dwelling according to current terminology, and happens to fall under the definition of ‘semi-detached’ only due to it sharing a party wall with the next house (number 15), which in turn shares a party wall with the next house (number 13). This creates a terrace.

‘Landscaping’ and ‘Parking/Access’

‘The existing driveway will remain and will provide off-road parking for both the new and existing properties’.

The drawings for the plan (specifically drawing number 3685-02 rev B) indicate that there is space for one mid-sized hatchback vehicle. Parking of another similar sized vehicle would likely result in encroachment onto the pavement and loss of line-of-sight of through and access traffic. Whilst Southway would appear to be a generally quiet residential area, traffic requiring access to Southway School, Forest View rest home (visitors/mini buses) and also some traffic from the industrial estate that all use the junction at South Drive throughout the daytime (as well as regular residential traffic) indicate that this is not the case.

Further to this, the Planning Application section '10. Vehicle Parking’ states:

  • Type of vehicle - Car
  • Existing number of spaces - 1
  • Total proposed (including spaces retained) - 2
  • Difference in spaces - 1

Based on use by previous tenants, the existing driveway can accommodate up to 3 medium-sized cars including visitor parking, with two cars commonly being parked (those owned by the tenants).

Referring once again to the drawings for the plan (drawing number 3685-02 rev B), the space appears inadequate for more than one mid-sized hatchback vehicle.

Further to this, the Planning Statement section ‘Parking/Access’ assumes that:

‘The council have adopted a Development & Infrastructure SPD; this seeks to give guidance on amounts of parking required for new developments. For 2 bedroom dwelling, a total number of 2 parking spaces should be provided, however, the proposal is in a sustainable location within easy access of a train station & bus stop, its is considered 1 parking space per property would be sufficient.’

With reference to the Development & Infrastructure SPD ‘Residential Standards’ (annex 4, P62), 2 and 3 bed dwellings should provide 2 parking spaces per dwelling (maximum standard). Therefore, the maximum standard stipulates that up to 4 spaces should be provided across the two properties. The effect of adding the proposed dwelling reduces the number of spaces to ~1 between 2 properties, resulting in a net deficiency of ~3 spaces.

The Planning Statement also argues ‘In conclusion the site sits within a location where the use of a car would not be part of everyday life’. This is baseless conjecture and experience shows that the opposite is true for the current occupants of the neighbourhood, with many dwellings having 2 or more vehicles that are used on a daily basis.

The current number of off-street parking spaces is insufficient to support parking of cars associated with the dwellings in Southway. Many of the properties were built with shared driveways or a single garage in a block. This often results in a high street parking density due to there being many 2+ car dwellings without sufficient allocated parking. Reducing the number of allocated parking spaces and adding another dwelling will exacerbate this issue.

Objection with respect to planning issues that will arise on the construction of a new dwelling at 15 Southway

Appearance

Whilst there are blocks of terraced houses across the junction of South Drive, the houses on the side of the junction adjoining to and along from number 15 are all semi-detached and of different character to those in-terrace across the junction. It can therefore be argued that the addition of an end-terrace dwelling will damage the appearance of the existing housing layout.

Highway Safety

The impact of the addition of this dwelling will include:

• Reduced line-of-sight of through traffic, especially applicable to set down and pick up times regarding Southway School and the safety of children during travelling.

• Increased on-road parking density in an area where this is already an issue. The loss of ~2 allocated spaces between 15 Southway and the proposed dwelling and the potential for ~4 cars between the two properties, only one of which could realistically be parked on the allocated driveway at the new development. This could result in a further ~3 vehicles requiring on-street parking. It has been noted that residents outside of Southway will utilise the road for on-street parking of their vehicles, further compounding the effect of inadequate allocated parking.

Previously refused application

In 2005, a similar planning application was submitted for the development of the site at 15 Southway:

‘05/01360/FUL | Demolish old entrance porch and lean-to. Knock down dividing wall between living and dining room. New downstairs WC installed. Extend kitchen to rear and entrance area with WC to front. Building new two storey hipped roof dwelling in existing garden and driveway area. | 15 Southway Burgess Hill West Sussex RH15 9SS’
There is no available information relating to the refusal of this planning application and the reasons as to why, but it is assumed that some of these reasons could still apply and therefore may be material in consideration of the proposed development with which this objection is concerned.
Click to expand...

I'll be sending this off tomorrow. Hopefully we get somewhere!
 
is the location in easy reach of public transport?

tbh I don't think there are any points in there that are going to hold much weight...
And there is no point whatsoever pointing out there was a refused application already when you don't know the reasons - site history is a material planning consideration and planners don't really like to be told how to do their job ime
Bringing up the definitions of terraced and semi's is pushing it a bit too I'd say - they will be judging it on the proposals submitted whether or not the description meets with your definition (the house does sound like it could be considered semi detached depending on which definition you use, i.e. it has a party wall to one side, and space to the front back and side... if you are going down the route of picking out the language on the forms you need to very specific you can't just say it's "current terminology" - also raising issues with the language of the application forms is a very weak objection, the description will have been assessed against the proposal by the planning office already)
 
Okey doke, you make fair points and I will look at rearranging the objection (and cutting out the bits that might not go down too well with the planning dept).

I don't know what else to argue in order to strengthen our objection, but parking and traffic are the main issues in our road, hence the focus on these.

And yes, it is in easy reach of public transport. Although I can think of only one person in our vicinity that uses it.
 
Last edited:
edit: bit late but hey ho...

quick view of those plans.... having been through both sides recently
first thoughts from those plans.

  • Additional noise of new house
  • disruption of it being built and it may cause structural issues to your house due to changes needed to the second house.
  • access to rear of 'middle' house, they will need to go through the house or someone elses garden - nothing on plans
  • parking would definitely be an issue, there is no way they could get 2 cars on there so would end up on the path/road causing obstructions - they would need to take up part of the public footpath which they do not own.
  • privacy of other neighbours and your backyard - get all your neighbours to complain as well.
  • rear alignment of properties
  • would cut out light from rear garden during the 'morning', you would get even less than you get now.
As a side note.... do you have any bats or rare animals/birds/plants, these can often stop planning or cause extra effort/cost for the developer.



Having said that, planning officials have their own rules (and in some cases money talks) in my experience so it may get passed no matter what you object with.


What I will say is get as many people as you can to object as possible from around your area, it might not help but the more people who complain the better.
 
Last edited:
Cheers for the reply. I've already submitted our objection, didn't think about the property line as a point of objection, but never mind, it's done now.

I've emailed our neighbourhood watch emailing list with all the details, which accounts for 30 households, so the wore should spread if people can be bothered to comment on the application.

My immediate neighbours are all objecting along similar lines to what I submitted. Hopefully that's the end of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom