The grandmother who sued her neighbor over his intentions to construct vacation cottages in his backyard has now filed identical plans for her own backyard.
Patricia Shave attempted to thwart Paul Body’s plans to construct 18 vacation rentals on a field near Marden, Kent. She successfully petitioned for a judicial review of the council’s December 2019 decision to approve the projects.
The judgement was subsequently reversed, leaving the council liable for the 70-year-expenses old’s of £18,699.
The council reassessed the proposal and awarded Mr. Body planning approval once again, prompting Mrs. Shave to again threaten legal action.
Her attorneys submitted a ‘proposed petition for judicial review,’ but she has now attempted a different approach by asking to construct her own vacation cottages in her backyard.
Mr. Body was represented by Paul Nicholls of the Graham Simpkins Planning firm, who said, “Mrs. Shave was the primary objector to my client’s proposals.”
She specifically said that she did not want any vacation houses near her, however she has now filed for a vacation park in her own backyard.
Her son Matthew Shave, who runs a yacht brokerage firm in Majorca, believes she is not being hypocritical since she does not intend to construct the apartments and is only “testing the system.”
He said, “Of course, my mother does not want to construct the vacation rentals. There, she lives with my sister.
“When we opposed to the proposal, we cautioned that if the council were to give approval, any rural open area would be susceptible to a similar request.”
It is true that we are testing the system.
Mrs. Shave had objected to her neighbor’s plans on the basis of ‘amenity damage,’ stating, “The harm would be severe owing to noise and disruption, loss of privacy, smells and diminished view, light pollution with loss of dark sky.”
Countryside vacationers enjoy outdoor activities such as barbecuing, games, and music.
Mrs. Shave said that she was unable to make concrete arrangements.
She said, “I’m waiting to see what impact the vacation houses next door will have.” If the intrusion is too extreme, I may be forced to relocate, despite my reluctance.
Since 1993, the grandmother has resided in her 300-year-old cottage and raised her three children there.
She is especially concerned that water runoff from her neighbor’s property may exacerbate her flooding issues.
She said, “When it rains heavily, which is now not an issue, my garden already floods up to the step.” I am concerned that any further runoff may allow water to enter the home.
If my mother ends up needing to relocate, I suppose having authorization for vacation rentals may raise the value of her property.
Both applications are technically for “caravans” for vacation use, however this is a technical description, and both will resemble three-bedroom vacation lodges.
Mrs. Shave has submitted an application to Maidstone Borough Council for four timber-clad lodges on concrete hard-standings, in addition to six additional parking places.
The Marden Parish Council did oppose to Mr. Body’s intentions, but has not objected this time.
Mr. Body was obliged to provide a drainage statement, ecological evaluation, reptile and bat report, great crested newt report, visual impact assessment, business strategy, and a unilateral pledge to revoke approved development rights, but Mrs. Shave did not.
They said that Mr. Body had no objections to the overall concept of the development.
Mr. Body’s site is anticipated to be developed within a few months.
Mrs. Shave’s application is still pending determination.