Adrian F

I need some advice on how best to object to a planning application.

I live in Harlow a “New Town” in Essex in an area of housing built in the fifties this area was built around a number of existing bungalows with very large gardens. The estate surrounds these bungalows.

According to my neighbours these bungalows were bought approx 10 years ago by a developer and they applied for planning application which was rejected a number of times to build houses. Eventually the developer suggested that there was a planning restriction to say that they would only sell to people over 55 who would live in the property. Also in addition there were other restrictions about they couldn’t build houses only bungalows etc which they are though they all appear to have loft conversions so we are over seen anyway .

I received a letter a week back saying that the developer wants the restriction to whom they sell for 10 out of 25 properties to be lifted. Did I object? Well I do but having spoken to the planning officer today I get the impression it is down to me to prove my objections rather than the developer prove why the restriction of selling should be lifted. The area I live in has a high proportion of elderly people and most properties are occupied by people who have been here 10 years or more and it is a relatively nice quiet area, if 40% of this development are sold to any body as the developer would like they could be bought as buy to let with a significant proportion of the development being people who are short term residents. There are other reasons to long to list.

So any advice in how to word my objections would be very help full.

LG John

Firstly I'm amazed that a) a planning authority sought to impose such a restriction and b) that the developer didn't challenge the notion from day one. Who is the planning system to control what age group of people live in houses it approves - that is discrimination pure and simple. In all my time as a planning officer I've never heard of a restiction of that nature and I'd be amazed if its a condition of the planning application to approve the houses! As a legal agreement under section 106 (75 in scotland) I'd suggest it's sticky ground as well!

I doubt your objection will make any difference as in this day and age the planning authority cannot control who buys/occupys houses approved for private developers and that situ will be rectified I'm sure.

Adrian F

Saxo Boy when I spoke to the Planning office today he said that the developers suggested this restriction when they applied for the planning approval!?

As I said they were rejected a number of times so I suspect they put in things like this to try and get the application approved with the full knowledge that they would get it over turned at a later date.

Apparently I believe the developers have now said they need it altering as there isn’t the demand by this age group for housing which they anticipated when they submitted the original application. That of course is their bad luck (If True) surely this is just a bad business decision on their part why should they be allowed to change it now?

I personally don’t want a rapidly changing population of asylum seekers in buy to let properties just two garden fences away from me. But of course like all things it is knowing the correct way to word these objections that gives them credibility. Personally I liked the large green area of open gardens so never wanted the development at all but at least the restrictions to bungalows and older residents meant less intrusion and noise now of course this looks to be changing. The nature of the existing neighbour hood with a large older population and therefore it being a quiet friendly area attracted me to it when I choose to buy my house.

Forgot to add this restriction is only in place for the intial purchaser of the properties anyway so hopefully by the time they sell on i will have moved.

LG John

I mean this in the nicest possible way but you objection seeks to control the one thing you can't and have no right to control. Like everyone else in the country you have to run the risk of a bad neighbour which may occur irrespective of the age, race, colour of that neighbour.

I'm sorry but when the houses were built you lost the battle IMHO - you just have to leave them to the free market now.

Adrian F

Saxo Boy thats OK i suspected that was the case but thank you for taking the time to give me this advice.

richardg

adrian - if you check the planning file for the properties at the local authority offices, you may find the reason for the restriction in the history of the site. obviously if you know the reason for the restriction, you are better placed to argue against it.
saxo boy - there are a number of sites in southend kicking around at the moment with similar age restrictions on occupants and whilst i would agree with the suggestion that this is descriminatory, but can only assume it's because there may be less parking provision or smaller gardens (or shared gardens?). shame nobody thought about the judicial review route at the time

prodriva

The age restriction would be more likely based upon number of potential peak hour trips that would generated by that age group. Yes, parking provision is a big issue also but that alone could not stand as a valid objection. Vehicle trips generated by the development would make a valid abjection as if it were proved the development would generate a significant increase in additional trips, this would be to the detriment of the existing highway network. This could be your reason for objection based on the fact that the age condition would only apply to the first occupiers of the new properties. I would advise that you write to your local Councillor and ask for a contact for "the chair of you local Residents Association". Have a chat with your RA or better still write a formal letter registering your objection and cc the planning officer that is dealing with this application.

Good luck matey, the planning process these days is full of red tape and politics in this country.

LG John

That sort of restriction can be used in say sheltered housing and usually the parking requirements are reduced due to the elderly being less likely to own and use a car. However, generally such housing is arranged and laid out as sheltered housing with sheltered housing facilities available within a central location within the housing.

In this case it seems like Adrian is suggesting someone somewhere thought, 'hmmm, these houses should only be occupied by older mature people to keep chavs out so we'll restrict it as such' That is what is madness.

LG John

Hmm, made a joke but then re-read the original post and it didn't actually fit with the thread.

Adrian F

I don’t think the age restriction was there to keep out the Chav's as Harlow is Chav central! I think it was more as a way to over come planning objections as the area has a very large older population and narrow roads etc. we even have a 20 mph limit as there is such a large proportion of older residents crossing the road.

I know it is very Nimby but I feel that there were obvious reasons for the original applications being rejected and this restriction then helping it to be approved. Introducing a big chunk of housing in the middle of the area with a vastly different type of resident is a possible cause of friction. Also parking is a big issue as Harlow has serious parking problems and as mentioned I am sure there wouldn’t be enough parking and therefore they would park out into my road. These are objections I will try and structure into a letter. I have a few days until it has to be submitted.

Any other ideas will be gratefully received.

richardg

i think you need to check the history on the planning file adrian. you're working blind at the moment and you really need the facts (or the perceived facts) which influenced the decision in the first place, otherwise you'll be working with too many assumptions