Our house adjoins open countryside and before we bought it we knew there had been several planning applications all dismissed because the land surrounding our house is of 'special nature interest' or something like that. This gave us the confidence that there wouldn't be homes built on it (or so we thought).
Of course we paid a premium to have a house with such views and we subsequently had an extension built to specifically take advantage of those views.
Now, all of a sudden, our local council has put forward proposals to build some 1900 homes to basically surround our house in all directions not currently built on.
Of course this will have a massive impact on the value of the property until such a time they decide against the plans (there is a local action group challenging them). And this is at a time we were considering moving too 🙁
But I have just been told about 'planning blight' where you can claim compensation for loss of value to a home which we will undoubtedly will have - the area we are in is one of the more popular areas of Harrogate due to its open aspects but suddenly we will be plunged into the middle of a massive estate.
So (and I know I am being a NIMBY), has anyone had any experience of this and can give me any advice on what we can do to try to protect our asset.
🙁 Been feeling really down about this for over a week since I found out - utterly gutted.
And this is where they are considering building - the plans mean houses will go right up to that wall outside our extension...
[img] 
[/img]
If your council is proposing to enable this then it must be in the Local Plan, which obviously your solicitor would have checked? I think most people secretly encourage development because it usually means that property prices go up rather than down (unless you live next to Heathrow)
Yes it is in the local plan, but we bought the house 10 years ago, long before the LDF was even thought about.
I doubt that building homes right up to our wall will increase our property's value!
I think most people secretly encourage development because it usually means that property prices go up rather than down
Does it? I'm struggling to see how that works!
You might have paid a premium for the view... but the view wasn't for sale. So sadly you paid for something but you didn't buy it.
Interesting to hear. We've been looking at houses, some with not dissimilar views but I've been refusing to consider that when deciding if the price is reasonable for this exact reason. Views can go as rules/etc change over the years.
Good luck though. I'd suggest that the group trying to stop approval is your best bet.
To give you an idea of the scale - our house is marked - it juts out into the planned development (simply because it was originally a farm-hands house so was built on what is farm land.
[img] 
[/img]
I'm pretty sure the rules around "planning blight" apply to large developements such as new roads, airports etc.
I don't think new residential housing would be considered.
You might have paid a premium for the view... but the view wasn't for sale. So sadly you paid for something but you didn't buy it.
I fully accept that, but we had good reason to believe the land was protected because of it's special interest nature (if it hadn't had such 'protection' we would have thought very carefully about buying in the first place, but we thought it offered us protection from development quite literally on our doorstep) but the council seems to have ignored this and want to plough on.
Jeebus 😯
That's one big flipping load of shitty new build homes to be surrounded with.
Feel for you dude. No experience here or strong opinions, but best of luck with it.
Playing devil's advocate - if it was that important, did you fully understand what this 'special interest' thing meant because if not, you've basically taken a punt on which it looks like you're going to be unlucky.
[i]the council seems to have ignored this and want to plough on. [/i]
I think they key is going to be for you to establish exactly how 'special' the area is and what sort of restrictions that it places on development.
Planning blight normally only applies to proposed rail/road routes where a number of alternatives have been proposed and not yet decided on. I think you'll be lucky to get compensation unless it';s proven the council have acted illegally in making the proposal in the first place.
clubber, have to moved to Costa Del Nailsea yet?
Back to the views subject...
When we first bought the house it was similarly priced to other properties without the view we have (further up the terrace) then a few years ago the council presented their plans for future development and 'our' view wasn't effected. It was at this stage we decided to extend as we (wrongly) assumed that was it for the LDF. Even late last year further new plans were submitted and the land wasn't effected again. Then suddenly a few months ago this came to light and it has pretty much written off the value we put on the house with the extension and means we are stuck where we are (unless we reduce the asking price) until such a time plans are confirmed and they chose not to build here OR they do plan and then we would really have to wait until the new homes are completed - who would want to buy a house adjoining a building site where 1900 homes are being built? 🙁 Arse biscuits.
there's specific land classifications which would have afforded you protection from development. If you didn't specifically identify that the land around your house had the benefit of that then any woolly expectations of "special interest" are meaningless.
Either it's protected or it's not. Having pp rejected in the past for woolly environmental reasons is no protection in the future.
Playing devil's advocate - if it was that important, did you fully understand what this 'special interest' thing meant because if not, you've basically taken a punt on which it looks like you're going to be unlucky.
I accept we didn't fully understand what it would mean in the longer term but (because of the plans we knew were rejected repeatedly in the 1980s and 1990s because of the 'special interest' status) we wrongly assumed the land would not be considered when there are many more sites that aren't protected.
But it seems the council want to use this option as it is the easiest one for them - rather than having several smaller developments, they can just bung a whole load on one spot.
Stoner and waswawas...
You don't need to tell me what I already know - I am not questioning their decision as I know they can build there and yes, we did take a risk when we first bought, but the OP is about planning blight as I am trying to understand it and whether it may apply to us...
At the end of the day our house was valued at £300k earlier this year. I reckon it will now be worth £250k (because of the stamp duty bracket).
plenty to read up on here:
You have to demonstrate financial loss, rather than utility loss. Big can'o'worums. Not my field at all, planning lawyer/specialist needed really. Personally I think you're paddle-less in shitcreek. Unfortunately.
Yeah I am sure I am really - just trying to understand where the land lies.
Particularly pissed off because we very nearly sold earlier this year before all this came up but decided the property we were looking at wasn't quite 100% right. Now if a similar (but 100% perfect) property came up we wouldn't be able to afford it as we won't have enough equity in our house.
Firstly, that sucks as its a nice view. As above your options are pretty limited, in fact I'd say your lucky to have had the view for 10 years as from the map it likes an ideal bit of land to fill with houses. You are probably best to join the action group and get vocal. Even if they still build you might be able to get certain caveats like space between the development and your house or some landscaping. Within the action group there might be options like applying for town green status, no idea if that would work but its been pretty sucessful in stopping the footy ground down here.
EDIT ...also I wouldn't dwell on the if and buts buying and selling property. Loads of missed opportunities out there.
unlucky.
We have something similar in the pipeline out this way. On one side we're very much protected, as the common is protected from any development whatsoever by a specific Act of Parliament.
However out the other side, a couple of fields away there's proposal for 50+ houses. Personally Im not instinctively opposed to development - its my profession to a certain extent, but you should see how frothy the blue rinsers have got round here over the last few weeks.
IMO as long as theyre sympathetic to the area, dont drop a bollock with crap design and put forward very detailed rain interception and flood management plans then Im not too bothered.
also I wouldn't dwell on the if and buts buying and selling property. Loads of missed opportunities out there.
Agreed - we have dithered and lost but that is how it goes. And to be fair, we always said that if there was build on the land that we should be lucky for having the view when we did but it is just now it is (potentially) happening, the reality of the reduction of home value is hurting me - especially as we were considering moving anyway.
the reality of the reduction of home value is hurting me
So, how much less will your house be worth than you paid for it?
MF - what stage of the LDF is the local authority (sorry can't tell from map where you are) at? Councils are under massive pressure to allocate land for housing even with the demise of regional spatial strategies, and as someone else said ^^ that allocation looks like a classic choice: next to existing residential, reasonable road access and I'm assuming the H27a allocation to the north is employment/ mixed development?
It's worth finding out how 'strategic' the Council consider this allocation to be (1900 homes would suggest it is) and whether they are still at the 'options' stage of the LDF, i.e. consultation and final decisions are still to be taken, or whether these are the 'preferred options' or indeed the allocations they intend to put in the submission development plan document (bearing in mind it still has to get through examination). LDF production is incredibly slow, depending on where they are in the plan stage, it could still be very much at the options stage. Also, having land allocated in a plan doesn't necessarily mean that it will get built on, these are hardly boom times for construction. Who owns the land and who proposed the allocation? Is there a developer behind it? All stuff to uncover that will help you get a picture of how certain development may be.
Unfortunately 'special nature interest' really doesn't mean much. You need to find out if the land has any formal designation Does it have SSSI designation? (were you asking about this on another thread the other day?) National level designations give you more leverage, whereas local nature designation carry less weight. That said, look at local biodiversity action plans (BAPs), known biodiversity linkages, green infrastructure networks etc as these are important and if you can demonstrate that this area is of local significance then that may help you.
Everything you need to know about the plan development and where it's up to, including allocations should be on the LA website. BAP info and other relevant stuff also on the t'internet.
No point dwelling [sorry] on house values and what might have been. Also amazingly some people really aren't that bothered about views and may well buy your house for other reasons, so losses may not be what you are worrying they might be.
Duh! sorry missed the bit where you clearly said .. Harrowgate... 🙄
Its ‘green belt’ that matters and if it is not in a defined green belt area the option of development would always have been on the cards. I suspect the solicitor told you this.
It can be very counter intuitive when you look at what is and isn’t green belt. That looks like exactly the kind of countryside that should be protected however that doesn’t mean it will be. Similarly you can get loads of awful industrial sites that are part of green belt land.
Good luck with the campaign.
Thanks for your very helpful response ART.
It isn't an SSSI (yes I was asking about those the other day) - it seems I had got a bit confused as to what status the land has and it is certainly a much less important listing.
The plan is 'Plan A' and they have a 'Plan B' - all other options have now been discounted. Plan B includes building on some of this land but not all (and would mean that at least the field directly adjoining our property isn't effected).
The land is owned by several people (mainly farmers). We know the farmer who owns the field adjoining our house and we know he has sold for development in the past. The truly gutting thing is that 'Herbie' (who was the original farmer of that land) died a couple of years ago as a penniless frail old man. He gave the land to this man in the hope (apparently - through people in the community who know the story in more detail) because he wanted to ensure it remained farmed land, not houses. So straight away he must have put it forward for building. Bastid.
I have tried the LA website but it is painfully slow but we are attending the meetings (both campaign meetings and council ones) to ensure we stay in the loop.
Unfortunately for us, we have probably the worst plot to be effected by this proposal as the development will adjoin two open aspects we currently have. Most other people only lose one aspect.
Yes I see - have just googled the consultation doc and they are up to preferred options on the site DPD so it will (in theory) be down to those two growth options of which option 2 is clearly the best for your plot, although not perfect. This is still preferred options so you can and should get in there and make your case. You need to use the Council's own policy to your advantage - I note they have a section in their Core Strategy (see policies on housing/ settlement growth) on a presumption against greenfield development (pretty standard) which they say they can't follow in this case as they are out of brownfield land, so you need to demonstrate why this greenspace is important. Also it seems from the blurb in the condoc that the sustainability appraisal appears to favour the more dispersed development put forward in option 2 so that also helps your case. As I said there is a way to go between this stage and an adopted DPD so you have time either to fight your corner or to sell up and move on. Big shame about the farmer, but it is a sad fact that in this country that land that we could grow food on, that supports biodiversity, and that provides a whole host of other amenity and health and well being benefits is worth more; a lot more, if we put a load of houses on it. People do need places to live too though so bear that in mind as you lob another proverbial at the weary planning officer!
So from that consultation doc, is Option 1 (the worst for us) their preferred option (being '1') or is there no apparent weighting at the moment?
I can't understand it from what I have read.
OK - both options are considered 'preferred options' equally. There is no implied weighting or favouring between the two, although officers will have views on which is most deliverable so read carefully what they say in the supporting text for each option to see if there are any hooks/ pointers in there.
They seem to be saying that the landscape impact of option 2 would be less, and they talk about the impacts of 'increased traffic' for option 2 rather than 'significant increased pressures on the B6162' arising from option 1. This may seem subtle but the word 'significant' is indeed significant [yes I know!] in these matters when they are justifying decisions.
HTHs 🙂
Yeah I did see that, but conversely they mention sewerage and traffic calming issues (both would need to be addressed with option 2 much moreso than with option 1).
Get some bats / crested newts in there asap?
In my (albeit simplistic) view, surely several smaller sites would be more preferable - then small pockets of development can be built as and when needed, rather than having one huge building site that will go on and on for years and years.
Saying all that, if they DID build there, I would be first in the queue to get a house on the western fringe where it would adjoin greenbelt (and make me even closer to Stainburn Forest)... 🙂
Get some bats / crested newts in there asap?
We have bats!!!! They fly around our house every night.
Hmm....
...council presented their plans for future development and 'our' view wasn't effected
...further new plans were submitted and the land wasn't effected again.
Unfortunately for us, we have probably the worst plot to be effected by this proposal...
...(and would mean that at least the field directly adjoining our property isn't effected)
[b]A[/b]FFECTED
4 bloody times? You are doing it on purpose just to annoy me!
Grr
Dave
We have bats!!!! They fly around our house every night.
You need to let them out. Besides bats on/in your property are your problem.
Now bats on the proposed site.
Sorry alfa - that is one word I always screw up.
I hope it hasn't effected (sic) your enjoyment of this thread.
mk1 - I have no idea where the bats live - as our house adjoins the field they could be coming from anywhere. I don't think they are IN our house. (Although we do have starlings). And rats occasionally.
Yeah they do say that about sewerage etc, but the key thing I said back there was 'deliverable', which is what the Council will have to demonstrate to the inspector at examination - small sites vs big sites, various pros and cons...
Anyhow ... , bats!! always good, probably foraging along the hedges/tree line we can see out your window...
I hope it hasn't effected (sic) your enjoyment of this thread.
Well, I suppose it did effect my participation in the thread; but I doubt my comment will affect you enough for you to effect a change in your spelling habits. I apologise for suggesting that you were effecting an affectation purely for the effect of affecting my mood.
Dave
Bats = good,
Newts = better,
Unicorn = best.
I DID see a flying newt with a horn too...
Same things happened to my parents many years ago - bought the house on the assurance from the developer that land behind wasn't able to/going to be developed. 5 years later and they filled in the gaps across the field 🙁