Triumph for the right to open windows in Penrith
Persimmon Homes has won its appeal against Westmorland and Furness Council to remove a planning restriction that required non-opening windows in bedrooms due to fears over noise from the nearby railway.
The restriction was attached to planning permission received in 2017 by Eden Council (now part of Westmorland and Furness Council) for 229 homes on land at Raiselands Farm in Penrith. The site borders the West Coast Mainline railway, which had led to concerns about the impact of noise on residents.
Construction on the project started in earnest in 2022 after a pause during Covid, and properties are being sold.
However, Persimmon noted in 2024 that it was having issues selling the properties because of the lack of ability to open windows. Registered providers were also hesitant to pursue the scheme’s 30% affordable housing provision because of this.
Accordingly, it requested a removal of the restriction – which was subsequently denied by Westmorland and Furness Council. The council argued that having windows that could open could negatively impact children and the elderly, who may be unable to shut windows and thus would have their sleep impacted.
The Planning Inspector did not agree, ruling that due to the nature of the development – being filled with family homes and not providing extra care support – it would be unlikely that a child or elderly person incapable of closing a window would not be living with someone who could assist them.
The inspector also referenced a DEFRA noise map, which showed that the site did not have noise levels high enough to be deemed a Noise Important Area.
According, they wrote: “there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that allowing occupiers to open their bedroom windows, particularly through the night, poses no significant risk to their health.”
Edgeplan was the planner for Persimmon on the case, with WSP providing technical advice around noise. Persimmon’s appeal team also included Walker Morris.
You can review the appeal decision yourself by searching reference APP/K0940/W/25/3367317 on the Planning Inspectorate website. You can see the application on Westmorland and Furness Council’s planning portal by searching 2024/0796/FPA.
Whilst the original intent seems well founded, this is an insane reason for refusing the amendment application. Rather than make a wild assumption of “what if” in terms of children and the elderly, why not rely on the original purpose for imposing the condition? If that could be otherwise mitigated, they should never have refused permission for the amendments. What a waste of time and resources. This kind of thing does nothing to help the public perception of the planning industry.
By Anonymous
Common sense has prevailed – the properties and owners need to be given options for how they would use their own property. Be that opening windows and an enhanced ventilation system to mitigate any apparent noise. Albeit I would question the levels of noise (do the trains run all night?) I have only seen a need for non opening windows in highrise. Better resolutions could have come from landscaped buffers, bunds or acoustic barriers…. The loss of common sense in this industry is worrying and costing people millions…
By Anonymous
Trains do run all night, mainly freight and the odd overnight sleeper trains.
By Anonymous
The houses could be set back with planting to help mitigate, however I’m assuming the developer would rather build houses right up to the boundary to ram more in, and with the blessing of planning permission.
By GetItBuilt!
The inspector referenced a DEFRA noise map, which showed that the site did not have noise levels high enough to be deemed a Noise Important Area. Not sure why that wasn’t taken into account at the planning application stage or on review of the proposed amanedment. Another case of localised officialdom and no common sense and now at a cost to the local council tax payer.
By Idris
Unbelievable, can’t people think anymore
A house must have some form of ventilation or you will end up with major damp problems especially in modern fay homes that are so highly insulated. Time we went back to basics im building.
By Anonymous
My house my choice
By Anonymous
Whichever officer refused that amendment should not be in planning. What a complete lack of common sense and reason! I’m afraid there are too many people like that in LPA’s. “Computer says no” types. Countless housing schemes up and down the country that face onto railways that miraculously don’t have an issue. Why would it be any different here? The reason used being “child or elderly person incapable of closing a window” is honestly one of the biggest overreaches I’ve ever seen from an LPA, and there’s a long list to choose from! Laughable waste of money and time for all involved.
By Anonymous