Planning application with 5 year old tree survey

[GarethM]

Well, I think you'll understand why he's now past the point of being amicable and is happy to spend whatever fighting and salting the earth.

 

And without being picky, so what if he did make more selling driveways.

 

The homeowners probably added triple to their house price, to what they paid him as that driveway quickly becomes an extra two bedrooms.

Edited May 17 by GarethM

[openspaceman]

37 minutes ago, ArthurJob said:

 We did consider village green.

This can be difficult if the owner is not willing, not many are, even councils and charities with a remit to provide public recreation because most are run by people managers who don't want to have loss of control.

 

Generally a village green cannot be established if the area is part of the council's local plan for future development.

[ArthurJob]

34 minutes ago, GarethM said:

Well, I think you'll understand why he's now past the point of being amicable and is happy to spend whatever fighting and salting the earth.

 

And without being picky, so what if he did make more selling driveways.

 

The homeowners probably added triple to their house price, to what they paid him as that driveway quickly becomes an extra two bedrooms.

It was a very small extension to their drive really to accommodate an extra vehicle. We ultimately shouldn't have trusted the councillors at the time really.

[ArthurJob]

27 minutes ago, openspaceman said:

This can be difficult if the owner is not willing, not many are, even councils and charities with a remit to provide public recreation because most are run by people managers who don't want to have loss of control.

 

Generally a village green cannot be established if the area is part of the council's local plan for future development.

That's one thing in our favour, it's not in the local plan for future development. The council local plan has lots of areas allocated to meet their housing needs until 2041 so really this isn't needed at all. They gave it local conservation area status only 2 years ago which they claimed will protect it for future generations. Problem is it's not protection to the same level as green belt, village green or LGS. It is said to be possible to overcome it with mitigatory or compensatory measures.

[ArthurJob]

When it went to Committee last time all councillors bar one voted to refuse it due to loss of green space network and wildlife corridor etc. One chose not to vote. It went to appeal and thrown out for similar reasons.

[monkeybusiness]

Essentially someone bought some land with no planning restrictions that was thought to be impossible to build on because of potential mining issues. It was available for sale to the highest bidder, and nobody else fancied paying any more for it.

Said buyer invested (heavily I would imagine) in ground investigations and subsequently proved that where they want to build 3 houses is actually suitable from a ground-stability perspective. 
It seems a bit late to be moaning about potentially having new neighbours if I’m honest.
An investor has gambled and it looks like it may well pay off. Nobody wants development next to them - that’s why everyone knows the term NIMBY… 
 

[difflock]

To add, and more related to the NIMBY reference, the next door house but changed hands recently, the newcomer came over to introduce himself, and in the ensuing conversation he mentioned the piece of "waste ground" marching their property,

I said "thats not waste ground, it belongs to your neighbour on the other side, and we got a fully legally enshrined ROW over it".

We know this because it was all on the deeds/discussed with our soliciter when we purchased this place.

My wife then blithely added, "and we will be using if for timber extraction access when the forestry in behind is felled".

Plus the locals use that for access to the moss to walk their dogs.

"I cant have that says he, and he repeated this sentiment in several different ways, our grandchildren will be playing there".

And he went away and I shit you not, planted a laurel hedge across it at the county road end to totally block access!

Arrogant NIMBY prick!

I am unsure whether to simply drive the tractor through his new hedge, as I access our forestry,  or uproot them and dump them on his drive.

Neighbours, eh!

Edited May 18 by difflock

[ArthurJob]

11 hours ago, monkeybusiness said:

Essentially someone bought some land with no planning restrictions that was thought to be impossible to build on because of potential mining issues. It was available for sale to the highest bidder, and nobody else fancied paying any more for it.

Said buyer invested (heavily I would imagine) in ground investigations and subsequently proved that where they want to build 3 houses is actually suitable from a ground-stability perspective. 
It seems a bit late to be moaning about potentially having new neighbours if I’m honest.
An investor has gambled and it looks like it may well pay off. Nobody wants development next to them - that’s why everyone knows the term NIMBY… 
 

Ultimately yes, I think the key irritation is that we trusted the councillors advice at the time and the council are now seemingly unable to resolve the issue years on. Them putting the tree Preservation Order on was meant to supposedly be something to stop development. Years on I realise TPOs can be totally useless and are in this case. The trees on the site are all 24 years old and the larger neighbouring area are all the same age so what was the point of applying the TPO if apparently all the trees are of low value. It was merely to placate the residents at the time we realise now. The concern is that all the green space can be lost as a result.

Edited May 18 by ArthurJob

[GarethM]

4 hours ago, difflock said:

To add, and more related to the NIMBY reference, the next door house but changed hands recently, the newcomer came over to introduce himself, and in the ensuing conversation he mentioned the piece of "waste ground" marching their property,

I said "thats not waste ground, it belongs to your neighbour on the other side, and we got a fully legally enshrined ROW over it".

We know this because it was all on the deeds/discussed with our soliciter when we purchased this place.

My wife then blithely added, "and we will be using if for timber extraction access when the forestry in behind is felled".

Plus the locals use that for access to the moss to walk their dogs.

"I cant have that says he, and he repeated this sentiment in several different ways, our grandchildren will be playing there".

And he went away and I shit you not, planted a laurel hedge across it at the county road end to totally block access!

Arrogant NIMBY prick!

I am unsure whether to simply drive the tractor through his new hedge, as I access our forestry,  or uproot them and dump them on his drive.

Neighbours, eh!

Speak to a solicitor, but make sure you exercise the right regularly and remove the hedge and make sure it's unimpeded 24/7 access according to the deeds on both yours and his!.

 

As the last thing you want is blocked access or a garage built etc.