Friday, 01 May 2015

What is the tone of the neighbourhood?

A couple of weeks ago I turned on my phone at about seven o’clock and it rang almost immediately. BBC Radio London - had I seen the pictures in the papers of the candy-striped house in Kensington? They gave me a few seconds on air without time to say anything meaningful, but since then there’s been a new twist to the story.

Candy striped houseThe owner, a property developer called Zipporah Lisle-Mainwaring, found that there had been objections from neighbours to her modest plans to demolish the building and replace it with a five-storey house, including a two-storey basement – nothing much, swimming pool, media centre, that sort of thing.

Planning permission was originally approved but then withdrawn after objections. It is believed that the deck-chair décor was a statement of revenge at this decision. One resident was reported as saying ‘Without sounding very pretentious, it isn’t very Kensington.’

Of course it’s entertaining to hear about squabbles among the Haves, and it did strike me that the house might not look out of place in Amsterdam. Also I’d like to note that the owner didn’t paint her house: she had workers do it for her.

But this story exposes serious issues of ownership and privacy which as a society we struggle to deal with. The first point to make is that if you create the cultural conditions in which houses are treated as commodities, you are going to get people treating houses as commodities. Logically this could mean total disregard for the interests of anyone else in the vicinity. Writing in the Sunday Times(£), India Knight argued that a neighbourhood

‘needs as much, if not more, maintenance than the housing it contains. If you want to live somewhere “nice” – clean, friendly, well-maintained, cheerful – then you need to play a part in making it so.’

What this means is that we need to do away completely with assumptions that the individual owner has the right to do what they like with their house. I’ve discussed this sort of thing before with regard to Christmas decorations and the constraints that home-owner associations can impose on residents. The space around the house affects others in all sorts of ways and their views have to be taken into account when changes are proposed, temporary or not. How we do that is another matter, and from the little I knew at the time of this story I couldn’t see how the authorities could stop or have stopped the resolute Kensington developer from having her house painted whatever colours she chose.

Well it turns out that the house is situated in a conservation area and planning law has something called a Section 215 Notice, tada! One of these has been served (I love the language):

“The owner has the right to appeal the notice by 5 June in the magistrates courts but, if no appeal is forthcoming, the owner must repaint the front elevation white and carry out repairs to the windows by 3 July.

“If the notice is not complied with by 3 July then the council can enter the property and carry out the necessary works. Furthermore the council can charge the owner for the costs in carrying out the works and prosecute them in the magistrates courts.”

Apparently Section 215 can be used ‘when one building affects the tone of the whole neighbourhood.’ Ask yourself how you would describe the tone of your neighbourhood, in a court of law.

Incidentally, in a rather unconvincing way, India Knight suggested in her article that estate agents’ particulars should include details about the neighbours. I’m not sure that would do much more than provide many field days for many legal people, but she’s in the right area: one of the Good Neighbour schemes I’m currently evaluating is cited by estate agents routinely, I’m told, and quite right too.

 

 

1 May 2015 09:29:46 | Neighbourhood relations, Space and place

4 Comments

S215 says nothing about 'tone'

215 Power to require proper maintenance of land.

(1)If it appears to the local planning authority that the amenity of a part of their area, or of an adjoining area, is adversely affected by the condition of land in their area, they may serve on the owner and occupier of the land a notice under this section.

(2)The notice shall require such steps for remedying the condition of the land as may be specified in the notice to be taken within such period as may be so specified.

(3)Subject to the following provisions of this Chapter, the notice shall take effect at the end of such period as may be specified in the notice.

(4)That period shall not be less than 28 days after the service of the notice.

'Amenity' is an elastic term I know, but it has been used since the 1947 act so far as I know, so there is a lot of precedent for how it might be used.

I'm a bit confused by the suggestion that planning permission was given and then refused. The planning system doesn't work like that.

I would also be concerned about giving powers to local community associations to veto planning decisions. Evidence from books like Privatopia and many stories from this blog show why.

Posted by: Ian Bertram | Friday, 08 May 2015 at 22:46

Thanks Ian for your thoughts as always. The quote using the word 'tone' in the Guardian article comes apparently from Kensington council’s lead member for planning. As a vernacular alternative to 'amenity' I think it's fine. The etymology of 'amenity' points to 'pleasantness', and whether we use 'tone', 'amenity' (backed up presumably by decades of planning practice and case law) or even 'pleasantness', we can't get away from the fact that such things are culturally constructed.

And like you, as you know, I am sensitive to the risks of community groups having too much influence over processes designed to be overseen by democratically-elected individuals or bodies.

Posted by: Kevin Harris | Sunday, 10 May 2015 at 09:24

Amenity as used in planning law is a 'term of art' and so is not the same as 'tone'. For me 'tone' carries rather different resonances than 'amenity'. Phrases like 'lowering the tone' etc involve a degree of moral approbation that is I think inappropriate to the sort of legal judgements involved here.

So yes, it is a cultural construct, but filtered through a legal framework, (equally a construct I suppose) that is I think important in securing a balance between the individual and the wider community to live without undue interference or disturbance.

Posted by: Ian Bertram | Sunday, 17 May 2015 at 15:55

Thanks Ian - the distinction between 'amenity' and 'tone' on the basis of 'a degree of moral approbation' is helpful. I guess some confusion follows from the elected member's use of the latter when meaning the former, in the Guardian article, with reference to a specific building, not to the actions of its owner. This all seems to suggest that (among those of us who are not specialists) our vocabulary might not be up to scratch when it comes to understanding the semi-public space around the home.

Posted by: Kevin Harris | Tuesday, 19 May 2015 at 10:48

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Getting by? Back in the early 90s I got disillusioned with being part of a circus of people talking about those who experience exclusion, too frequently in their absence. I tried (largely unsuccessfully) to get funding for what I called ‘Voices’ projects, whereby people’s own experiences were recorded and this constituted the text, with or without context. At one point I had a list of eight or ten sub-projects, but funders could not be persuaded. The nearest I came was with a project in Derry, Northern Ireland, but I don’t know what happened to the small amount of content created. More recently, I was part of a successful example, A series of doors, presenting the experiences of young people in poverty. It’s tempting to say now that ‘Liverpool has done it’, because a range of Liverpuddlian agencies have worked together to produce the Getting by? report. And they’ve done it supremely well. Try and get your hands on the hard copy. The project has documented 12 months in the lives of 30 families living in poverty in Liverpool where one or both parents are working. The website has included video clips as well as monitoring the political context and providing a clever connection between sources of help and advice, and the advisors’ take on the provision of that support. The report shows what you’d expect: these families are invariably hard-working, financially astute, and often enormously resourceful, but still have insufficient means to raise themselves out of poverty. And these are families with paid employment. The foreword quotes Beatrice Webb up-front: ‘Poverty is not due to a weakness of individual character, but is a problem of social structure and economic mismanagement.’ With a frankly unpromising general election in view, what chance that those who are in positions to do something about the social structure and the management of the economy will take any notice?
PREVIOUS POST
Community development and digital inclusion – SMILEY baseline report published The baseline report for the SMILEY evaluation of community development and digital inclusion (Social Media Initiatives in Local East York), co-authored by Alison Gilchrist and myself, is now available here. The report explores the results of a survey carried out in Derwenthorpe and the neighbouring areas of Tang Hall and Osbaldwick. Joseph Rowntree Foundation is developing a programme to deliver digital inclusion interventions and support existing digital inclusion initiatives in these areas. Our role is to assess the impact of the programme activities, which are intended to support the development of social links and networks between residents within and between these three localities. Our results suggest a sharp contrast between those who recognise and appreciate the potential of digital media to contribute to local life, and those who do not. We found that for almost half of those who have been involved in a local community issue, this has come about as a direct result of online contact ('once', 'a few times', or 'often'). But at the same time, a significant 40 per cent of respondents did not see any potential in local community uses of the internet, either through connecting with active local groups, or as a way of raising and influencing local issues. In several respects we found that approximately 20 per cent of respondents seem to experience digital exclusion. For example, eighteen per cent say they are ‘not very’ or ‘not at all’ comfortable trying out new digital technologies twenty-two per cent say they lack, or lack confidence in, their online digital skills one person in five does not expect that the internet could help them to keep in touch with friends or social contacts locally. The baseline survey was conducted between November 2014 and January 2015. It was carried out by five community researchers in Derwenthorpe and the surrounding areas. Download the full report. There’s more on the SMILEY project here. Our evaluation will go on to examine if and how JRF's interventions lead to the improvement of digital skills and literacy, generate a positive online identity for the area, and support community development and the integration of Derwenthorpe residents with neighbouring communities.

Kevin Harris

Search

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments