All I can say is that in one case, seven people signed a joint letter that a case officer gave false information for the new home of a local builder. The subsequent case officer recorded it as one objection (even though they had asked for it to be counted as individual objections)
The OP really need to get this to the planning committee and the more INDIVIDUALLY (sorry for capitals) signed letters the better.
Yes exactly, that’s why I made the point it’s very important to register complaints as individuals. If the planning officer/council feel there is considerable opposition to the development they will take account of this.
Thank you for the very kind reply and comments. We had a clandestine meeting today of 15 residents all 2m apart, made local councillors aware of our concerns and getting our ducks in a row. Suggestion from councillor is that personal attendance at planning meeting is always well received. I think 3 minutes is allocated and I guess it could be by video conferencing at the moment.
[quote=“AndyP, post:63, topic:8191”]
Suggestion from councillor is that personal attendance at planning meeting is always well received. I think 3 minutes is allocated
[/quote]
Hi again, Andy,
In the case of the large scale development I mentioned above, since there were so many objectors involved, the Planning Dept. insisted that we nominate three speakers, each allocated, as you say, three minutes each.
They’d clearly already decided they would approve the application, so for that reason, it was important that our presentations were scripted, in order that we could each be sure of getting our respective points across , within the allotted time, which was on a stop watch, and also to avoid simply repeating what each of the others had to say.
Good luck.
Oh and hopefully all the letters will make individual points, don’t make them look as if they are just cut and paste.
The odd thing about this is the three storey element in a garden grab? Bizarre ,
Especially if it’s a retirement home----- all those stairs!!
They could install a paternoster. That would be cool.
Dangerous items, long time since I’ve seen one of those
Andy may confirm/or not - it appears there’s line of sight to the sea, hence the height & balcony arrangements and a flat top roofline. Plus, with other local houses being 3-storeys including rooflines, it isn’t taller, and is thereby (arguably) ‘in keeping’.
Yes the height and reason for the height and balconies is that it will provide exceptional views of the sea. In fact there are no other three story buildings in the local area other a few that have a dormer window in the roof.
Marconi used to have a paternoster in their main office building, I think it would have been at their Chelmsford plant. I didn’t like using it. Apparently it was strictly forbidden to stay in the paternoster and go right over the top and then right down to the bottom and up again to the starting point, but one of the staff told me it was an initiation rite for all apprentices to do it in their first week.
Best
David
When I worked at Birmingham City University there was a paternoster in one of the buildings. Staying on for a full rotation was common, at least by students.
We had one in the office I used in Düsseldorf. It was a talking point for delegations from China and Japan who hadn’t seen them before (and yes, they wanted to ride around at the top).
It finally got shut around ten years ago when someone tried to move a small desk in it and managed to lose the sight in one eye when he got caught up trying to exit it.
The office has been empty since we left around six years ago.
If you think that the development will have an impact on the enjoyment of your garden or house as a consequence of overshadowing, I would urge you to generate an accurate series of plans showing the impact of the shadows cast. Most professional CAD software is capable of generating such. For example, ARCHICAD has this facility integrated into the software - I can’t speak for other CAD software.
In my experience, it is customary to generate these plans for all the hours of daylight for the equinoxes and for the solstices. If you can present all of these it shows that you have prepared an even-handed, measured, response, whereas just presenting the worst case looks (to me) to be too polarised.
I have tried to skim most of the responses here so apologies if I repeat advice but I fear that you will have limited ability in policy terms to object looking at the drawing!
The advice above about overlooking and privacy are you key objections I think. To have a terrace at second floor level is likely to be a no-no for instance. One other point is that many local authorities have policies against developing the bottom of gardens. I haven’t seen where you are but it would be worth checking if your LA has such policies. Most London authorities for instance, will resist such development even if you might have access and you could meet privacy distances etc.
I would also get those sun diagrams done at spring, autumn and winter equinox as these will show quite different results to ‘high summer’!
hope that helps.
I believe this is an obligation on the developer to produce a Solar Study as stated in the local planning guidelines. You can contact the case officer to find out.
If there is no obligation on the developer, then you can request it as part of your objection case… for all the obvious reasons. And as blag says, there’s no harm in doing your own of course.
It’s been 10 years since I last worked in England, and this may be a long shot, but if you can find out if there are any specific fauna and flora, animal species of special interest or local ground pollution, then an Environmental Impact Assessment will be required. These can often bring up some interesting and unforeseen issues for the developer.
Anyway, I’m sure we are all now very interested in the outcome of your case. 
I’m sure there was one in Essex Uni’s Library. Would have been around ‘72, when I was doing the choose-a-uni visits. We were allowed to try it out. So I did!
Ah, for my lost Yoof.
There seems to be a pre-conceived assumption in this thread that objection to a development like this is automatically appropriate, and it is just the method that needs discussing. For me, the opposite is true. Any increase in housing density should be supported by default unless an issue of public health is present.
I think Canada may have different issues to the closely packed UK, also a lot of houses are becoming out of proportion for the land available .
Near where I live, a developer wants to build four houses that may pollute a pristine trout river.
We have serious erosion into the countryside in order to provide “executive homes” at the same time we have a housing shortage of affordable homes and social housing