Planning Departments

Author
Discussion

ruggedscotty

Original Poster:

5,626 posts

209 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
Well the clanger has indeed dropped....

I live on an estate that was built on a section of school playing fields. Typical council sold off the land to raise a little money. Barratt bought the land and built a few houses. two estates were built. The one im in was going to be larger but they halfed it. Would have been a U shape but remained as an l shape. hard to explain in words lol.

Anyways they said they were not going to build on the land.

10 years or so down the line we get notified - well actually a small number of people in the estate get notified as we were deemed not to be affected. They are going to build a five aside pitch with an advanced pitch. 6 meter high fences and flood lights and going to open it seven days a week - 08:00 to 22:00 weekdays and 09:00 to 20:00 weekends. currently there are a few games there not enough to be a major concern but what is being proposed I really dont like.

Where do you start, how do you go about getting this reviewed and even try to stop it..... the reality of this is starting to sink in and its horrific the thought of it indeed.

based in scotland.... Anyone have any ideas ?

barryrs

4,389 posts

223 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
My advice is have a good read of your local authorities planning policy's and try to remain pragmatic.

By putting together a concise objection based on material considerations your concerns should be taken seriously by the planners.

bobtail4x4

3,716 posts

109 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
you can employ a planning consultant to make your objection, as much as emeploying one to apply in the first case,

Macadoodle

828 posts

133 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
So the land used to be used as playing fields, and now its going to be used as......playing fields? I'm just guessing here, but I don't think the planners will have a problem with that.

Sarcasm aside, they aren't exactly 'building' on the site. Its not a block of flats they're sticking up, its some fencing and some lights. I know its not what you wanted to hear, but I think you may have trouble getting this stopped. Swapping my sarcastic hat for my constructive one, I would look into the volume of traffic the new pitches would generate - this may be your grounds for objection.

northwest monkey

6,370 posts

189 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
Personally, I'd rather have the football pitches than more housing. Where we used to live had a couple of five a side pitches nearby and apart from the lights being quite bright there was never any bother.

jules_s

4,285 posts

233 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
bobtail4x4 said:
you can employ a planning consultant to make your objection, as much as emeploying one to apply in the first case,
This sort of thing is usually part funded by the Football foundation and Sport England, and as such the applications are usually nigh on airtight

The lights will have a flood map to ensure acceptable light pollution. There will be a travel plan to manage away travel issue.

I've not yet heard of a 6m high fence around a 5-a-side pitch though or a 3G one


jesta1865

3,448 posts

209 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
Macadoodle said:
So the land used to be used as playing fields, and now its going to be used as......playing fields? I'm just guessing here, but I don't think the planners will have a problem with that.

Sarcasm aside, they aren't exactly 'building' on the site. Its not a block of flats they're sticking up, its some fencing and some lights. I know its not what you wanted to hear, but I think you may have trouble getting this stopped. Swapping my sarcastic hat for my constructive one, I would look into the volume of traffic the new pitches would generate - this may be your grounds for objection.
you'd be surprised, i used to play football for a club that won their league, this would have have meant stepping up into the realms of the what people call non-league football. we had the stand and had floodlights already, but the lights needed upgrading.

it went all the way to parliament, but we were turned down the planning permission to upgrade the lights and had to watch the teams below us move up.

all down to local residents objecting to light pollution, that they said would increase, despite us having it already and them being pointed onto the pitch.

it happens

JustinP1

13,330 posts

230 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
ruggedscotty said:
Where do you start, how do you go about getting this reviewed and even try to stop it..... the reality of this is starting to sink in and its horrific the thought of it indeed.
Anyone have any ideas ?
What's horrific exactly?

How will it affect you?

Will the lights be shining on you?


The traffic issue is going to be limited. 5 a side at the worst case scenario is 10 cars an hour.

ETA: Don't get me wrong, I'm not having a dig. You need to think of answers to these questions to demonstrate that the impact on your life and the estate will outweigh the benefit to the community.

To do that, you need to be very specific.

Edited by JustinP1 on Thursday 26th March 10:01

gus607

917 posts

136 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
NIMBYism.

anonymous-user

54 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
We need more houses, but not near my house.

We need to build more roads, but not near my house.

Kids need to play outside more, but not near my house.

The Surveyor

7,576 posts

237 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
If you are to present an effective objection, you need to do some work yourself understanding what are genuine material objections. 'I don't like it' just doesn't cut it when you're considering a formal objection to a planning application.

As noted before, a playing field being used as a playing field is going to get a smooth ride through planning so you need to focus on the aspects of that use that will genuinely impact on you. Traffic would not be significantly different to the traffic levels had the rest of the residential development been completed so I would suggest that's a non-starter. Look at the type, location, hours of operation of the floodlights and ensure that they have included a light pollution assessment in the application. You can normally view these documents on the Local Authorities planning portal.

Whilst ultimately you may not have a valid objection to the planning application, you will have some protection in the future if the flood lights are a problem as 'light pollution' has recently been added to the list of 'statutory nuisance' under the 'Environmental Protection Act 1990' so if they do genuinely cause you issues later you may still have some redress.

Good luck but keep it in perspective to avoid disappointment!


rivercatch

37 posts

114 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
As described I wouldn't have much hope in stopping it completely.

I would think it would be a much better use of time to identify the things that are most impactful - like lights, traffic, hours of use, etc - and then lobby to get those particular problems changed an become part of the planning conditions.

benters

1,459 posts

134 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
given your explanation OP, I don't think you have a realistic chance of turning this around. There are some fights you cannot win and to me this sounds like one of them. Might be better to look at moving if that is at all realistic and you don't feel you can adapt to your likely new neighbours

Mr Adds

264 posts

149 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
I am a planning officer, and the principle of the proposal sounds fine subject to light spillage from the floodlights and highway issues from people parking.

ruggedscotty

Original Poster:

5,626 posts

209 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
Ive had some discussions over the past few days regarding this - Currently there is a pitch but it is attached to the school as a part of the PE department. Its used through the week day but has minimal out of hours usage.

The proposal is to add in a 3G pitch with the drainage fencing and flood lights. Flood lights to 10pm every weekday and 8pm at weekends.
What is proposed is a significant up step in usage.

What concerns me is the noise and light overspill.

Its just another example of the residents not being taken into consideration yet again.

The Surveyor

7,576 posts

237 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
ruggedscotty said:
....Its just another example of the residents not being taken into consideration yet again.
Maybe they have, and they have decided that the benefits to the wider public heath from improved sport facilities outweighs the concerns from one individual.

Tankman104c

50 posts

109 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
A few years ago we had a new sports centre built behind my property on green belt land, which made no difference at all to our local planners! They had about 6 floodlit 5-a-side football pitches built. Luckily the pitches were far enough away that the lighting was not a problem but the NOISE was!!! The pitches were in metal cages so apart from all the moronic shouting from the players(?) there was a continuous crashing of the footballs against the cages well into every evening!
There was only one solution..... we moved house just to get away from it!

deckster

9,630 posts

255 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
ruggedscotty said:
Ive had some discussions over the past few days regarding this - Currently there is a pitch but it is attached to the school as a part of the PE department. Its used through the week day but has minimal out of hours usage.

The proposal is to add in a 3G pitch with the drainage fencing and flood lights. Flood lights to 10pm every weekday and 8pm at weekends.
What is proposed is a significant up step in usage.

What concerns me is the noise and light overspill.

Its just another example of the residents not being taken into consideration yet again.
I suspect that the existing residents had very similar concerns when your house was built on top of a nice quiet green space - one might perhaps suggest there is an element of karma at work here, if one was of a persuasion to believe in such things.

In any case, it doesn't sound like such a terrible thing to have there. Why don't you just take up football and enjoy the amenity - you never know, it might even be fun!

JustinP1

13,330 posts

230 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
deckster said:
I suspect that the existing residents had very similar concerns when your house was built on top of a nice quiet green space
I was actually going to post exactly the same thing in response to the OP, but you beat me to it.

There's a small but compact village near me which is 2 300 year old farmhouses, two dozen 70's semis and two dozen nice detached 4 bed houses built 5 years ago.

The residents are up in arms complaining that the village is earmarked for further development. One of the sods knocked on my door trying to get me to sign a petition to stop development and was quite taken aback when I told him that I thought the building plan put forward was a great idea because I for one would like to buy one.... smile

The hypocrisy is so bad, there is actually a house half built in the village centre by a different developer with an 18 foot wide sign saying 'Say No To 40 New Homes' on it. I kid you not.

ruggedscotty

Original Poster:

5,626 posts

209 months

Friday 27th March 2015
quotequote all
I love it when peeps trott out the NIMBY...... Yep indeed its a case of not in My back yard - well front actually as I will soon look out at a fence.

You would be very surprised about the extent of NIMBY that exists - most never get to the point where something happens that irks them. But when it does it does. See below drawing - the red line represents where the fence will be. Then you see just how close it is to the properties on the street.



A place for everything as the say and that isnt where it should be.