Planning law change could cause 'neighbour wars' (From Watford Observer)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting WO to 80360, or email us
Watford Borough Council to write to government in opposition to planning law change
10:10am Tuesday 23rd October 2012 in News
By Mike Wright, Chief Reporter
Politicians in Watford have warned plans to allow homeowners more freedom to extend their homes could lead to "neighbour wars" in the town.
Watford Borough Council is set to write to the Coalition Government voicing their opposition to proposals to remove local authorities’ planning powers.
The move comes after ruling Liberal Democrats put forward a motion attacking plans to allowing people to extend their homes by up to eight metres without seeking planning permission.
Under current rules people have to get permission for any planned extension that is more than three or four metres long.
The motion, which was put forward by Oxhey councillor, Iain Sharpe, and seconded by elected mayor Dorothy Thornhill, also criticised plans to weaken council powers to force developers to build affordable housing.
The motion said: "This council believes that local people, through their democratically elected local authorities are the most suitable judges of what development is acceptable in an area and the suitable level of contributions a developer needs to make."
However the motion also carried praise other Coalition Government’s housing plans to provide 15,000 new affordable homes and bring empty properties back into use.
At a meeting on Wednesday, elected mayor Dorothy Thornhill said the motion had been put forward as the council could not agree with government proposals that were "blatantly wrong".
The motion found backing among other Liberal Democrat councillors who urged other parties to support it.
Woodside Lib Dem Alan Burtenshaw said: "This will be horrific for people living next door."
Steve Rackett, the leader of the Green group, said plans to allow larger back garden developments would have a particularly serious effect in crowded urban areas of Watford.
He added: "There are not going to be neighbour disputes, but neighbour wars."
The government’s proposals also met opposition from former Conservative, turned independent councillor, Malcolm Meerabux.
He said the extension plans could "blight" communities and contrasted them with Conservative ministers’ pre-election promises to protect gardens and green areas from development.
Councillor Meerabux concluded by quoting Dr Martin Luther King saying: "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."
However Labour leader Nigel Bell attacked the Liberal Democrat motion as "disingenuous" for opposing the Conservatives, whom they support in government.
In the end the motion was carried, but the Labour group abstained from the vote.
As a result the council will write to Eric Pickles, the secretary of state from communities and local government, outlining the views expressed in the motion.
Comments(9)
Reader (R)
says...
10:57am Tue 23 Oct 12
What did you expect from a government that can only be described as the 21st century version of that classic dish "The Eton Mess".
Watfordengineer
says...
11:37am Tue 23 Oct 12
Hornets number 12 fan
says...
11:55am Tue 23 Oct 12
TRT
says...
12:18pm Tue 23 Oct 12
PhilCox
says...
1:53pm Tue 23 Oct 12
That way we would have saved ourselves from ugly extensions and still allowed people to build the extensions they desire.
Under permitted development rules the current planning rules are a mess. The Queen is limited to a 4m extension at Buckingham Palace the same as anyone in a 3-bed detached house in Watford. You can however build a detached single story building on your back garden provided it doesn't take up more than 50% of your garden.
There should be different rules for those living in larger properties to those living in smaller properties, based on the size of the existing house or the original house, not "one-size-fits-all". A proportional rule rather than a fixed size rule.
Planning needs the removal of these one-size-fits-all rules. After all, what's wrong with just using some common sense where planning is concerned?
The present rules allow our planners to allow and even encourage monstrosities such as McCarthy and Stone developments whilst refusing planning for far less intrusive extensions. Ask the locals what they would prefer - an 8m extension no longer looks like such a problem!
The planning system needs fixing and some common sense injected into it. I'm not sure the current proposals are the answer, but the status quo is not the answer either.
S/O man
says...
3:37pm Tue 23 Oct 12
garston tony
says...
1:29pm Wed 24 Oct 12
I guess a more direct question is are there rules regulating building onto extentions that are below the size that need planning permission.
Reg Edit
says...
9:34am Thu 25 Oct 12
garston tony wrote:You couldn't, it's from the original back wall of the house.
A genuine question out of curiosity but if I say built an extention under the current rules, or even the proposed new ones, that allow me to do so to a certain size without planning permission could I then say in a years time build an extention to that extention of the same size?
I guess a more direct question is are there rules regulating building onto extentions that are below the size that need planning permission.
You could however build elsewhere except to the front of your house, single storey, up to 50% of the garden area.
TRT says...
10:21am Tue 23 Oct 12