{"id":11206,"date":"2024-10-21T09:59:23","date_gmt":"2024-10-21T09:59:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/?page_id=11206"},"modified":"2025-04-22T09:01:22","modified_gmt":"2025-04-22T08:01:22","slug":"overlooking","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/overlooking\/","title":{"rendered":"Overlooking"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"wpb-content-wrapper\"><h2><b>Our proposed development is minor in nature because<\/b><\/h2>\n<p>1 it does not increase the footprint of the building. The footprint of the building remains unchanged.<\/p>\n<h6 class=\"western\"><strong>Key <\/strong><strong>Legal <\/strong><strong>Principle<\/strong><strong>: No Material Harm = No Grounds for Refusal<\/strong><\/h6>\n<p>Under planning law, <strong>planning permission should be granted unless the development causes <\/strong><em>material harm<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Because this minor building alteration does <strong>not increase the footprint<\/strong>:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>It does not lead to <strong>loss of garden\/amenity space<\/strong>, <strong>overdevelopment<\/strong>, or <strong>drainage\/flooding issues<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>It improves the <strong>appearance<\/strong> of the building, and clearly its <strong>physical impact at ground level<\/strong> stays the same \u2014 which is often key for <strong>neighbouring amenity<\/strong> and <strong>site constraints<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote><p>Secondary legal principle: the fact that <strong>the footprint remains unchanged<\/strong> means there\u2019s <strong>no intensified land use<\/strong>, and thus no <strong>risk of breaching local spatial policies<\/strong> or causing material harm.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>2 It does not increase the top height of the building.<\/p>\n<h6 class=\"western\"><strong>No Increase in Height = No Additional Impact on Neighbors<\/strong><\/h6>\n<p>From a planning law perspective, <strong>building height<\/strong> is a material consideration. The new flat roof:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Does <strong>not exceed the original ridge height<\/strong>,<\/li>\n<li>Does <strong>not increase overshadowing<\/strong>, <strong>loss of light<\/strong>, or <strong>loss of outlook <\/strong><strong>as amply demontrated.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Then there is <strong>no material harm<\/strong> to neighbouring properties<\/p>\n<p><strong>Legal principle:<\/strong> <em>A development that does not materially harm neighbo<\/em><em>u<\/em><em>ring amenity is generally permissible under planning law.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>3 This minor development involves only minor changes to the external envelope of the building. In this case only increase in height is a two edges of the extension while the top height of th eextension is unchanged.<\/p>\n<p>In planning law, a local planning authority can <strong>only refuse<\/strong> an application if the proposal causes <strong>material planning harm<\/strong> or <strong>conflicts with the local development plan<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>In this case:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The <strong>overall <\/strong><strong>extension <\/strong><strong>height remains unchanged<\/strong>, which means:\n<ul>\n<li>No new overshadowing or daylight, as proven extensively with the relevant studies<\/li>\n<li>No increase in visual dominance. This is evident and self explanatory, especially due to the height of the extension remaining unchanged.<\/li>\n<li>The <strong>change to two edge heights<\/strong> is a <strong>minor design variation<\/strong> within the original massing of the building.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote><p>Therefore, <strong>there is no material harm<\/strong>, and under UK planning law (and similarly in many legal systems), that means the application <strong>should be permitted<\/strong>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<hr \/>\n<p>This minor development does <strong>not breach local policy <\/strong><strong>( it is perfectly in line with it as amply demonstrated) <\/strong>, and there are <strong>no overriding material considerations against it<\/strong> \u2014 Threfore it should be approved.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h6 class=\"western\"><strong>Minor External Changes = Minor Development<\/strong><\/h6>\n<p>This proposal involves:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>No increase in footprint<\/li>\n<li>No increase in ridge\/top height<\/li>\n<li>Only <strong>minor height adjustment<\/strong> to part of the extension to match it with th etop height of the original extension.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>This type of development is often classified as <strong>\u201cminor\u201d<\/strong> in planning terms, meaning:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>It falls well below the scale of development that would have <strong>strategic or cumulative impacts<\/strong><\/li>\n<li>It is to be assessed primarily on <strong>design, appearance, and impact on neighbo<\/strong><strong>u<\/strong><strong>rs<\/strong>, not major policy issues.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The Design and appearance has been discussed at length and it is clear that not only is this a substantial improvement, but while it fits really well in this area it is mainly hidden by the sorrounding houses of Harold Street and Castle Street.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Since it does not negatively affect any neighbouring properties, amenity, character, or infrastructure as amply demonstrated , <strong>there is no lawful basis to refuse<\/strong> it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 class=\"western\">No Impact on Neighbouring Amenity or Character<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Visual continuity<\/strong> is maintained, as the top height stays the same<\/li>\n<li>The <strong>bulk and form<\/strong> of the building are largely unchanged<\/li>\n<li>It would not feel significantly different to observers or neighbours. However it is a significant improvement and most of the extension is hidden from view by the sorrounding house which are one storey higher than the extension (even with the new proposed flat roof).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>This aligns with core national and local planning principles (such as the <strong>NPPF in England<\/strong>, which emphasizes good design <strong>without stifling innovation<\/strong> or <strong>minor architectural changes<\/strong>).<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Overlooking.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Overlooking is one of the policies matters that needs to be taken into consideration in a general full planning application.<\/p>\n<p>As we will see this minor development causes no &#8220;material harm&#8221; to the existing houses in terms of privacy and overlooking. In some cases, not only does it not cause any material harm, but the new window openings are well over 20 metres away from any habitable room window not causing overlooking in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h4 class=\"western\"><strong>Duplicating Existing Overlooking.<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>If other windows in the building or nearby already overlook the same area (e.g., a garden or window), adding another similar window <strong>doesn\u2019t <\/strong><strong>cause<\/strong><strong> harm<\/strong> in a legally significant way. In such cases the impact is considered <strong>neutral<\/strong> or <strong>minimal<\/strong>, and therefore <strong>non-material<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>To summarise the windows on the extension are allowable because:<\/p>\n<p>1 there are already existing windows in the extension overlooking directly both properties facing Harold Street and Castle street. Therefore the addition of further windows on upper levels facing the same direction will not cause loss of privacy.<\/p>\n<p>2 in the case of the properties facing castle street the distance between the extension and the back windows of the uninhabitable rooms on the ground floor is over 20 meters. Therefore even in case no existing windows were present in the existing extension the long distance allows brand new windows to be placed on this side of the extension because when the distance is over 20 metres, as we will see below, directly facing windows are not considered to cause loss of privacy due to the distance alone.<\/p>\n<p>3 even in case of the absence of existing windows in the extension there is ample pre exising loss of privacy from the other windows of neighbouring properties.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasins which we be exploring in detail below the windows in the extension are all allawable.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>The legal concept of &#8220;material harm&#8221;.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><em>&#8220;One cannot lose something he does not have. Someone cannot have less than something he did not have in the first place.&#8221; In our context you either have privacy or you do not have it. if you do not have privacy you cannot lose more privacy.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>When it cones to a view though a window you are either being seen from another window at a distance or you are not seen at all. Once you are seen then you have to take measures to avoind being seen no matter how many more windows there might be later on watching into your window. There maybe partial viw or direct frontal view , if you are concerned about people seeing you you will have to use curtains ,\u00a0\u00a0 blinds\u00a0 etc. It is not as if there is apartial viw than then you would use half curtains of see throguh curtains, you would use the same curtains in the same way.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The concept of &#8220;no material harm&#8221; or &#8220;material Harm&#8221; in law is a well known legal tool which has to be used in court in order to prove that damage of some sort had been caused by any third party.<\/p>\n<p>This Legal tool is used in several legal realms.<\/p>\n<p>In commercial law, \u00a0 non-compliance of certain products with a regulatory framework, the &#8220;non-material harm&#8221; principle is used to decide whether\u00a0 to bring prosecutions or not. In case no accidents or damage has been caused, it is usually agreed upon that a court case is wasteful as the product did not cause any harm and it could become compliant later. In courts one of the first tests to be passed is &#8220;any material Harm been caused&#8221;?<\/p>\n<p>This is also the first test that has to be passed in civil and sometimes also in criminal court. Without being able to prove any &#8220;material harm&#8221;, rarely can court cases\u00a0 be successful.<\/p>\n<p>For example, in a civil legal dispute where there is no direct indirect financial loss, that dispute cannot be brought successfully to court. This is because the court will ask to prove damages and calculate the financial co0mpensation. Without any financial loss or &#8220;material harm&#8221;, no financial reward can be awarded. Therefore, any civil court case that does not pass the &#8220;material harm&#8221; test is very unlikely to be brought successfully to court.<\/p>\n<p>In order to be successful in court, &#8220;material harm&#8221; has to be proven first. First, it has to be proven that whatever breach of contract, regulation, action, event etc. directly or indirectly caused &#8220;material harm&#8221;, for example, a financial loss that otherwise would not have occurred.\u00a0 The concept of material harm is also used in criminal court and the judge or prosecutor usually takes the view that for minor infractions that do not cause any &#8220;material harm&#8221; court time shall not be used and a, warning letter or corrective action to conform with regulations (for example) may suffice.<\/p>\n<p>The same also applies in planning, of course. It is well known that in planning where &#8220;no material harm&#8221; has been caused by a development, any objection based on any matter that does not cause any &#8220;material harm&#8221;is not an admissible objection to reject the planning application.<\/p>\n<p>A &#8220;material harm&#8221; has to be proven to cause the planning application to be successfully rejected based on an objection. <span lang=\"en-US\">The only valid objections in planning are those which demonstrate the harm that will be caused by the development. Where harm is not demonstrated, such objections are not valid. If an objection is made that does not meet the test of &#8220;material harm&#8221; and the planning application is rejected on an objection that does not prove &#8220;material harm&#8221; then the planning rejection can be successfully overturned at appeal.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h3 class=\"western\"><strong>Duplicating Overlooking is Permitted<\/strong><\/h3>\n<h4 class=\"western\"><strong>No <\/strong><em>Additional<\/em><strong> Material Harm<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>Planning authorities and and especially courts focus on whether a proposal <strong>makes things worse<\/strong> in a way that is <strong>legally significant<\/strong>. If overlooking already exists ist is well established that there is <strong>n<\/strong><strong>o net loss of privacy<\/strong>, and hence no \u201cmaterial harm\u201d.<\/p>\n<h4 class=\"western\">In case of this minor building alteration<\/h4>\n<p>If nearby windows already overlook a certain area:<\/p>\n<p>That area is considered to be <strong>already exposed <\/strong><strong>to overlooking<\/strong>, and residents have a reasonable expectation of <strong>reduced privacy<\/strong>. A new window duplicating this view is seen as <strong>within acceptable planning norms<\/strong>, especially in urban or semi-urban settings like in this specific area.<\/p>\n<h4 class=\"western\"><strong>Planning Policy and Consistency<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>Planning decisions must be made based on <strong>material planning considerations. <\/strong>A new window that <strong>mirrors existing conditions<\/strong> does not cross that line. Otherwise, every building with more than one window facing a neighbour could be challenged.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>If there is already an established loss of privacy, extra window openings generally cause &#8220;no-material harm&#8221;.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>If there is already an established loss of privacy in the backyards and\/or there is a direct existing view into back windows, it is expected that\u00a0 measures have already been taken by the residents due to lack of privacy caused by existing surrounding buildings.\u00a0 Any further development or window opening does not cause an increase in loss of privacy. An existing development has either privacy or it has not.\u00a0 For example, if there is only one overlooking window, the residents are required to preserve their privacy using curtains on their windows and other measures. This does not change if the overlooking windows are three instead of two. The same measures for privacy preservation\u00a0 have to be taken, whether there is 2 or 4 or multiple overlooking windows. Therefore, any new window opening overlooking the same area clearly\u00a0 does not cause any &#8220;material harm&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>In other words, once the loss of privacy is already established, the residents have to use curtains, blinds etc, and they have to be aware of the overlooking in the same way before and after any new overlooking window\/s\u00a0 are installed. However, in our minor development, the increase in overlooking is very minor as this is an existing building where there is a slight increase in size and number of windows.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the properties of castle street, as we will see, not only had a clear established loss of privacy, but some new windows will be placed at a distance well superior to 20 meters from a habitable room window. The 20-metre standard is a well-known adopted design standard and in several cases in densely built central area this 20-metre distance is also relaxed to a distance even less than\u00a0 20 m. Otherwise, essential required\u00a0 development would not take place where it is clearly needed.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, as it has been seen by several planning cases where there is clearly &#8220;no material harm&#8221; caused by the development, any objection\u00a0 is easily dismissed at appeal or even in planning court. Should a refusal of planning permission be based on any excuse or objection which constitutes &#8220;no material harm,&#8221; this will be challenged and easily overcome on appeal or even in planning courts\u00a0 (if required).<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><b>Any additional windows both facing Harold street and Castle street on the extension are permissible.<\/b><\/p>\n<p>The proposed windows do not introduce any new or materially harmful overlooking, as similar views are already present from existing windows within the property and surrounding buildings.<\/p>\n<p>The area potentially visible from the new windows is already subject to overlooking from existing, legally established windows as we will see in this document. Therefore, the additional windows do not create any material loss of privacy.<\/p>\n<p>It is understood that under planning policy, only <strong>material planning considerations<\/strong> may be grounds for refusal. Subjective concerns or personal discomfort, where no measurable impact exists, fall under <strong>non-material considerations<\/strong> and should not influence the decision as it is clear and very well demonstrated in this case.<\/p>\n<p>In urban and suburban settings, a degree of mutual overlooking is an accepted and typical part of the built environment. As this proposal does not cause any material harm in term of overlookoiing and privacu concerns in any way, and does not impact any previously private or secluded areas, therefgore it is amply demonstrated that any additional windows in the extension are permissible from a planning perspective.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>The existing windows and door openings in the existing extension. <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pre-existing windows and entrance doors in the existing extension are facing both the back of the properties facing Castle street and Harold street. And the view is direct into those properties.<\/p>\n<p>There are already previously bricked up windows and an entrance door on both\u00a0 sides of the extension. These can be reopened any time without planning permission and they already provide a clear view into all the properties and windows at the back of the houses facing both Harold Street and Castle Street. Therefore, any extra window openings on the ground and first floor height on both sides of the extension will not cause any &#8220;material harm&#8221; by definition.<\/p>\n<p>In the existing extension there are recently bricked up windows and doors both facing the properties of Harold Street and Castle Street. It is clear to see from the brick work that those have been bricked up recently. This was due to the lack of security posed by those openings in the extension. These allowed easy and hidden access to intruders, vandals etc. The openings of the extension provided easy and hidden access to intruders and this was the reason for closing them up Therefore, past occupiers preferred bricking up the openings to increase security of the building. Therefore, these are existing windows and entrances can be reopened any time without the need . These entrances and windows provide direct views from the ground floor into all the properties in Castle Street and Harold Street.<\/p>\n<p>In connection with the properties facing Harold Street, the first loss of privacy is caused by the window openings and the entrances in the existing extension. As we will see, these openings have caused the loss of privacy to the properties facing Harold Street, but not those facing Castle Street. This is because the rear extensions of the properties facing Castle Street are at a distance of over 20 meters to our extension. the distance between the extension and the first floor back room windows of the properties facing Castle Street is approximately 24 meters.<\/p>\n<p>Hence, in connection with the properties facing Castle Street:<\/p>\n<p>1 any new window opening on our extension both at ground floor and first floor level do not cause any loss of privacy due to the distance exceeding the minimum requirement of 15 meters in highly dense areas (where the site is located ) but even 20 and 24 meters respectively.<\/p>\n<p>2 any new windows on both ground and first floor extension are a simple addition to previously pre-existing windows.<\/p>\n<p>3 even if these openings in the\u00a0 extension caused any loss of privacy (which they do not). There is an already established loss of privacy caused by another existing property\u00a0 due to the first windows overlooking into the rear of all the properties facing castle street. This will be examined in detail shortly.<\/p>\n<p>Even without the existing rights to the window openings in the extension, as we will see any new window opening on either side of the extension does not cause material harm to any neighboring property.\u00a0 This is because the overlooking already exists from the main building and other properties. This exising overlooking is a normal feature of city centre areas where this type of overlooking is also acceptable nowadays from a planning perspective.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>The existing view into\u00a0 the back of the properties facing Castle Street from adjacent properties.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>As we have seen above, the extension has pre-existing windows and door openings which look directly into the back of the properties facing castle street. However, given the distance from the extension to the back\u00a0 of the properties facing castle street, no addition to the windows in the extension both on the ground floor and first floor can cause any loss of privacy.<\/p>\n<p>However, the loss of privacy has already been caused, not by the windows in the extension, but by the adjacent property overlooking into the backyards and back windows of the properties facing castle street. These windows are at a distance well\u00a0 below the 20 meters and in some instances even less than the 15 metres threshold in city centres. However this level of overlooking , as we mentioned erier, is allowable because the rules for overlooking are relaxed due to the site location in a dense popu;ated city centre area.<\/p>\n<p>To summarise, even if the windows and door in the extension were not previously present, any new windows both at ground and first floor levels of the extension\u00a0 would be allowable because:<\/p>\n<p>1 The distance from the extension to the closest window on the ground floor (non-habitable) of any property facing Castle Street is over 20 metres. The distance to the nearest habitable room window on the first floor is over 24 metres. As we can see in our development, the windows are 20.2 metre away from the closest ground floor window and approximately 24 metres away from the first floor windows, which are considered habitable. This clearly passes the standard test for overlooking. This is especially due to the fact that the allowable distance in the city center can be relaxed down to 15 metres.\u00a0 Therefore, any new window openings on the extension are allowable.<\/p>\n<p>2 More importantly, there is a much more invasive overlooking issue from the first floor windows of the nearby property. This is the cause of the established loss of privacy of the properties facing castle street.<\/p>\n<p>In essense the proposed windows are duplicates of existing ones and face an elevation where overlooking is already established. A separation distance of over 20 metres from any habitable room window is mainte=ainred, in line with established privacy standards. Therefore, the proposal does not result in material harm to residential amenity.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loss of privacy objections\/overlooking. Where the loss of privacy has already occurred.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In case the existing windows of preexisting buildings have already caused a loss of privacy, the residents are already in loss of privacy and are assumed to have taken all possible measures to prevent the neighbours from overlooking, like using of blinds, curtains etc.<\/p>\n<p>Where there has already been a previous loss of privacy, any additions of windows that are overlooking the same existing estates will not cause a further loss in privacy. This is because the affected residents will be required to take the exact same measures to prevent overlooking into their private dwellings. The test is, with or without development, will the residents reasonably need to take the same or similar measures to preserve their privacy?<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, where a loss of privacy is already established, the addition of overlooking windows clearly do not constitute any &#8220;material harm&#8221;. If, before and after the development, the residents have to take the same measures as before to avoid being seen through the windows, then there is clearly &#8220;no material harm&#8221; caused by the development. On the contrary, if after the development, the residents require curtains and blinds to avoid overlooking which was not previously required, then &#8220;material harm&#8221; from the new development can be argued.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>What is the minimum distance between directly facing windows?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Usually the allowable distance between habitable room windows that are facing directly one another is 20 meters for suburbs. This is a very common standard used in planning for several years, and therefore this minimum distance has long been considered acceptable from a planning perspective.<\/p>\n<p>The overlooking issue is more stringent into sleeping quarters. Sleeping quarters are usually located on the first floor. However, the minimum distance requirement is not as stringent when new windows look into kitchens and diners. There are even less stringent the overlooking issue into backyards.<\/p>\n<p>The same privilege of right to privacy is not afforded in the same way to non-habitable room windows, like kitchens and sometimes dining and living rooms. Therefore, in suburbs the minimum\u00a0 distance can be less than 20 meters if the window is to a habitable space.<\/p>\n<p>It has to be borne in mind first of all that it is customary for habitable rooms to be located on the first floor . The ground floor is rarely dedicated in single family homes to habitable rooms. These are usually , dining rooms kitchens etc. The areas of concern are the first floor rooms, which are the ones to be habitable.<\/p>\n<p>These non-habitable spaces are usually, with some exceptions, located on the ground floor in detached and terraced houses. Therefore, the distance to neighboring ground floor windows can also be less than 20 meters in suburbs.<\/p>\n<p>As a general rule, any directly facing windows placed at a distance higher than 20 metres is not considered to cause\u00a0 loss of privacy from a planning perspective. Therefore, in a suburban area, any directly facing windows at a distance greater than 20 meters is considered allowable.<\/p>\n<p>This 20 metre rule is often relaxed and reduced to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.designingbuildings.co.uk\/wiki\/Privacy_distance\">15 meters in city center areas<\/a>. This therefore becomes the minimum distance requirement for new directly facing windows in order not to cause loss of privacy in city center areas. This is where our development is located. This reduction to 15 meters is considered necessary because otherwise no new developments would be possible where it is mostly needed. This is the reason for the relaxation in the minimum distance requirement in city centre areas.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Views at an angle<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The above is true for planning standards for directly facing windows. However, even if the windows are not facing directly each other there is still loss of privacy. Windows that provide views into other properties at an angles different to 90 degrees (direct facing view) also do cause a material loss of provacy. This is because even if the view is not as good as the direct facing windows, views into the internal space of a dwwellinghouse is still possible at an angle.<\/p>\n<p>Because of this the presence of these windows cause the affected household to require curtains and other obscuring measures to maintain their internal privacy.\u00a0 The closer the view is to 90 degrees the better the view into the window. Conversely, the smaller the angle the less the view. See the figure below for reference.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-11558\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/New-diagram.png?resize=1500%2C1500&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"1500\" height=\"1500\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/New-diagram.png?w=1500&amp;ssl=1 1500w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/New-diagram.png?resize=300%2C300&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/New-diagram.png?resize=1024%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/New-diagram.png?resize=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1 150w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/New-diagram.png?resize=768%2C768&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/New-diagram.png?resize=600%2C600&amp;ssl=1 600w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/New-diagram.png?resize=100%2C100&amp;ssl=1 100w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Figure 1. Even non directly facing windows do provide a certain degree of overlooking (loss of privacy).<\/p>\n<h3 class=\"\" data-start=\"470\" data-end=\"527\"><\/h3>\n<p><strong>At an angle<\/strong>, a new window <strong>can<\/strong> be considered to cause a loss of privacy <strong>if<\/strong>:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>It allows a view into neighbouring habitable rooms<\/strong>, especially into Bedrooms<\/li>\n<li><strong>It is within a certain distance.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li>The angle of view allows enough view inside the dwelling house.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>While there is no fixed national distance, many local authorities use a <strong>20-metre rule<\/strong> for directly <strong>facing habitable window<\/strong><strong>s<\/strong><strong>.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The acid test for views at an angle is: does this view at an angle reasonably cause the neighbour to require taking measures to preserve their privacy by using curtains or blinds etc? As discussed at length in case where privacy is already lost then additional windows (duplicating windows) do not cause any material loos of privacy.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Parameters for establishing a &#8220;Material loss Of Privacy&#8221; for views into a habitable space in terms of distance and angle of view.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Distance from any habitable window to establish loss of privacy:<\/p>\n<p>Less than 20 meters causes loss of privacy in suburban areas. This is a\u00a0 standard used in planning for several years and very well accepted for testing overlooking into habitable rooms. The distance can be shortened considerably to even half\u00a0 10 metres in certain cases if the view is into an uninhabitable space like kitchen, dining areas etc.<\/p>\n<p>Less than 15 meters causes loss of privacy in city centre areas. The distance can be shortened considerably to even half\u00a0 5 to 6 metres in certain cases if the view is into an uninhabitable space like kitchen and dining areas.<\/p>\n<p>Provided that the distance between windows are\u00a0 below the above stated thresholds, angle of views to establish loss of privacy maybe as follows:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Less than 15 degrees angle, no material\u00a0 loss of privacy<\/li>\n<li>20 to 15 degree angle could be cause of concern of loss of privacy. This mean that people especially prone to preserve their privacy could subjectively believe that the privacy have been lost.<\/li>\n<li>more than 20 degree angle,\u00a0 loss of privacy as the angle of view is sufficient to have enough internal view of the premises is that it is objectively required to use means of privacy preservation like curtains, blinds etc.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Therefore:<\/p>\n<p>1 Any view into a habitable window at a distance less than 20 meters and an angle greater than 20 degrees may constitute a potential loss of privacy in a suburban area.<\/p>\n<p>2 Any view into a habitable window at a distance less than 15 meters and an angle greater than 20 degrees may constitute a potential loss of privacy in a city centre area.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Established loss of privacy of the properties facing Castle Street.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Because\u00a0 there are established existing windows and an estrance door on the side of the extension facing the porperties in castle street plcing windows on this side of the extension does\u00a0 not require planning permission due to established rights.<\/p>\n<p>However as we have seen, even if there no pre existing windows on this side of the extension, the extension is 20.2 meters from the nearest ground floor window (kitchens, non habitable) and 24 meters from the first floor habitable windows of the properties facing castle street.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore,\u00a0 the windows on this side of the extension are considered not to cause any overlooking even by suburban standards. Therefore, any window opening on both ground and upper levels are allowable from a planning perspective.<\/p>\n<p>Given the above there is no need to examine any existing loss of privacy from any properties, however we have done this as part of our due diligence to show how existing properties already cause a material loss of privacy to these properties.<\/p>\n<p>Here we are going to examine the views of the neighbouring property&#8217;s first floor windows. Specifically, we are going to examine the existing overlooking into the properties&#8217; back windows facing castle street.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/ground-floor-window.pdf\">ground floor window<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11256&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.4.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11253 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1978%2C2560&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"1978\" height=\"2560\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=1978&amp;ssl=1 1978w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=232%2C300&amp;ssl=1 232w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=791%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 791w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C994&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1187%2C1536&amp;ssl=1 1187w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1583%2C2048&amp;ssl=1 1583w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C776&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation 1.4<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>We see the direct distance between the exising windows on the extension and the ground floor windows for the non habitable rooms being over 20 meters.<\/p>\n<p>The direct distance between the exising windows and the first floor habitable rooms of the proeties facing castle steet is approximately 24 metres which is well the acceptable threshold. Hence even if no exising windows were present in this sisde of the extension new windows would be permissible due to the distance being over the threshold.<\/p>\n<p>Hence no legitimate claim of overlooking or loss of provacy can be made due to any of the windows facing the propeties in castle street even if not window openings were previously present.<\/p>\n<p>However we continue this study to show how there is indeed loss of privacy from other preestiting development.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h5><strong>Wide Viewing Angles (68\u00b0 and 63\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<h4><strong>23388 (23.388 meters) with 68\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (23.388 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis is above the privacy thresholds for both suburban (20 meters) and city center (15 meters) areas, meaning distance does not contribute to a loss of privacy.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (68\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nA 68\u00b0 angle is significantly greater than the 20-degree threshold, offering a wide view of the surroundings. However, the greater distance minimizes the risk of detailed internal views.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nNo loss of privacy occurs due to the <strong>distance being greater than 20 meters<\/strong>, even though the angle is wide.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4><strong>24332 (24.332 meters) with 63\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (24.332 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nLike the previous example, this distance is well beyond the privacy thresholds, ensuring no privacy intrusion.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (63\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nWhile wide, the combination of the large angle and the long distance ensures the view focuses more on general coverage rather than detailed observation of specific spaces.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nNo loss of privacy is established as the <strong>distance exceeds the threshold<\/strong> and limits intrusive visibility.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h5><strong>Moderate Viewing Angles (52\u00b0 and 48\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<h4><strong>27646 (27.646 meters) with 52\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (27.646 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis distance is far beyond the thresholds for both suburban and city center areas, eliminating concerns about privacy intrusion.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (52\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nA 52\u00b0 angle is moderate and offers good coverage, but the long distance ensures that it does not intrude on privacy-sensitive areas.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nNo loss of privacy occurs due to the <strong>substantial distance<\/strong> that mitigates the effect of the moderate angle.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h5><strong>28945 (28.945 meters) with 48\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h5>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (28.945 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nSimilarly, this distance is much greater than the thresholds, providing a sufficient buffer to prevent privacy intrusion.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (48\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nThe narrower angle and long distance further reduce the possibility of detailed visibility into private spaces.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nNo loss of privacy occurs because the <strong>distance and angle combination are well within acceptable limits<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h5><strong>Narrow Viewing Angles (36\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<h4><strong>20284 (20.284 meters) with 36\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (20.284 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis distance is slightly above the suburban threshold (20 meters) and far beyond the city center threshold (15 meters), making privacy intrusion unlikely.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (36\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nThe narrow 36\u00b0 angle provides focused and detailed monitoring, but the sufficient distance ensures that it does not compromise privacy.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nNo loss of privacy occurs due to the <strong>distance being above the suburban threshold<\/strong> combined with the relatively narrow angle.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h5><strong>Overall Privacy Assessment<\/strong><\/h5>\n<p>All configurations analyzed result in <strong>no loss of privacy<\/strong> due to the <strong>distances exceeding thresholds<\/strong> for suburban and city center areas. Even though some angles are wide, the distances mitigate their potential for intrusion. These setups align well with privacy-preserving principles.<\/p>\n<p>[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=&#8221;11245&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.1.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<h4><strong><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11245 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1978%2C2560&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"1978\" height=\"2560\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=1978&amp;ssl=1 1978w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=232%2C300&amp;ssl=1 232w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=791%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 791w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C994&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1187%2C1536&amp;ssl=1 1187w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1583%2C2048&amp;ssl=1 1583w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C776&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/strong><\/h4>\n<h4><\/h4>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation <\/strong><strong>2.1 Views into non habitable space on the ground floor.<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h5><strong>14.585 meters with 30\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h5>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (14.585 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis is below both suburban (20 meters) and city center (15 meters) thresholds, raising concerns for privacy intrusion.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (30\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nA 30\u00b0 angle is greater than 20 degrees, allowing visibility into private spaces. Combined with the short distance, it creates a material privacy impact.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nA <strong>material loss of privacy<\/strong> is present in both suburban and city center areas if it were a view into a habitable room, however given the fact that the view is in a non habitable room there is no material loss of privacy.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h5><strong>Moderate Viewing Angles (52\u00b0 and 44\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<h4><strong>16.128 meters with 52\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (16.128 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis is below the suburban threshold (20 meters) but above the city center threshold (15 meters). Privacy concerns may arise in suburban contexts.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (52\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nA 52\u00b0 angle exceeds the 20-degree threshold, providing a broad view of the surroundings. However, the sufficient distance reduces its ability to intrude on privacy-sensitive areas.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nLoss of privacy occurs due to the <strong>distance exceeding thresholds<\/strong> despite the moderately wide angle however this loss of privacy occurs in a non habitable room on the ground floor therefore no material loss of privacy.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4><strong>21 meters with 44\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (21 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis is far below both suburban and city center thresholds, raising significant privacy concerns due to proximity.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (44\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nThe 44\u00b0 angle exceeds the 20-degree threshold, offering detailed visibility of internal spaces. Given the extremely close range, this setup constitutes a clear privacy violation.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nN<strong>o material loss of privacy<\/strong> due to the distance and the fact that the view is on a non habitable room.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h5><strong>Narrow Viewing Angles (33\u00b0 and 30\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<h4><strong>23.153 meters with 33\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (23.153 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis is beyond the privacy thresholds for both suburban (20 meters) and city center (15 meters) areas, indicating that distance alone prevents privacy concerns.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (33\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nThe angle exceeds the 20-degree threshold, making it capable of providing a detailed view of internal spaces. However, in suburban areas, this could be subjective unless additional privacy measures (e.g., blinds) are implemented.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nno material <strong>loss of privacy<\/strong> exists due to the acceptable distance and view intoa non habitable space.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h5><strong>Overall Privacy Assessment<\/strong><\/h5>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>23.153 meters, 33\u00b0:<\/strong> No privacy loss due to sufficient distance.<\/li>\n<li><strong>21 meters, 44\u00b0):<\/strong> N<strong>o material loss of privacy<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>16.128 meters, 52\u00b0:<\/strong> Potential privacy loss in suburban areas; none in city centers if the voew were into a habitable room, however the view is into a non habitable room hence no material loss of privacy due to the use of the areas on the ground floor.<\/li>\n<li><strong>14.585 meters, 30\u00b0:<\/strong> Potential privacy loss in suburban areas; none in city centers if the voew were into a habitable room, however the view is into a non habitable room hence no material loss of privacy due to the use of the areas on the ground floor.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11248&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.2.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<h4><strong><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11248 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1978%2C2560&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"1978\" height=\"2560\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=1978&amp;ssl=1 1978w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=232%2C300&amp;ssl=1 232w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=791%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 791w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C994&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1187%2C1536&amp;ssl=1 1187w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1583%2C2048&amp;ssl=1 1583w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C776&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/strong><\/h4>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation <\/strong><strong>2.2<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>Another view into the firsf floor windows of the properties Facing castle street. These are non habitable windows.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h5><strong>Moderate Viewing Angles (34\u00b0 and 49\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<h4><strong>15.8 meters with 34\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (15.8 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis distance exceeds the suburban (20 meters) and city center (15 meters) thresholds, eliminating concerns about privacy loss.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (34\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nThe 34\u00b0 angle is above the 20-degree threshold, allowing for a moderate field of view. However, the long distance reduces its potential to intrude on private spaces.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>Potential loss of privacy<\/strong> occurs because the distance is sufficient and the angle of view however the use as non habitable spece of the gound floor space does not constitute this a loss of privacy.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h5><strong>17.10 meters with 49\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h5>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (17.10 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis distance is significantly below both thresholds, raising substantial privacy concerns.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (49\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nThe 49\u00b0 angle exceeds the 20-degree threshold and provides a wide field of view. Combined with the extremely close proximity, this configuration allows detailed visibility into private spaces, creating a strong privacy violation.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nA<strong> loss of privacy<\/strong> could be argued due to the <strong>short distance<\/strong> and <strong>wide angle, <\/strong>however due to the non habitable nature of the speces on the ground floor<strong> no material loss of provacy occurs.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h5><strong>Narrow Viewing Angles (38\u00b0 and 57\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<h4><strong>21.7 meters with 38\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (21.7 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis distance is slightly above the suburban threshold (20 meters) and well beyond the city center threshold (15 meters), reducing potential privacy concerns.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (38\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nA 38\u00b0 angle exceeds the 20-degree threshold, allowing visibility into private spaces. However, the acceptable distance minimizes its impact.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>No loss of privacy<\/strong> occurs due to the distance exceeding thresholds, despite the moderate angle.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h5><strong>23.7 meters with 57\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h5>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (23.70 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis is far below both the suburban and city center thresholds, raising significant privacy concerns.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (57\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nThe 57\u00b0 angle is significantly greater than the 20-degree threshold, providing a very wide field of view. Combined with the very short distance, it results in a clear intrusion into private spaces.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>No material loss of privacy<\/strong> occurs due to the long <strong>distance<\/strong> and <strong>wide angle<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h5><strong>Overall Privacy Assessment<\/strong><\/h5>\n<ul>\n<li><em><strong>23.7 meters, 34\u00b0:<\/strong> No privacy loss due to sufficient distance.<\/em><\/li>\n<li><em><strong>17.10 meters, 49\u00b0:<\/strong> Significant privacy loss due to short distance and wide angle.<\/em><\/li>\n<li><em><strong>21.7 meters, 38\u00b0:<\/strong> No privacy loss because of sufficient distance, even with a wider angle.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>These results demonstrate that maintaining sufficient distances is critical to mitigating privacy concerns, especially when viewing angles exceed the 20-degree threshold.<\/p>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11250&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.3.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11249 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1978%2C2560&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"1978\" height=\"2560\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=1978&amp;ssl=1 1978w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=232%2C300&amp;ssl=1 232w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=791%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 791w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C994&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1187%2C1536&amp;ssl=1 1187w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1583%2C2048&amp;ssl=1 1583w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C776&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation\u00a0<\/strong><strong> 2.3<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Analysis Based on Parameters:<\/strong><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Distance:<\/strong><br \/>\nFor a suburban area, loss of privacy applies if distances are <strong>less than 20 meters<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>18.346 meters<\/strong> is the <strong>only distance<\/strong> below the 20-meter threshold.<\/li>\n<li>Other distances (19.470m, 23.725m, and 25.531m) <strong>exceed the 20-meter limit<\/strong>, ruling them out for privacy concerns.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle of View:<\/strong><br \/>\nLoss of privacy applies if angles are <strong>greater than 20\u00b0<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>All angles provided (62\u00b0, 55\u00b0, 44\u00b0, and 40\u00b0) <strong>exceed 20\u00b0<\/strong>, indicating the potential for loss of privacy if combined with a critical distance.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Combined Result:<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>18.346 meters (Distance) and 62\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis combination falls under the suburban &#8220;loss of privacy&#8221; category. The distance is critical (&lt;20m) and the angle exceeds 20\u00b0, constituting a <strong>clear loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li><strong>19.470 meters (Distance) and 55\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nAlthough the angle exceeds 20\u00b0, the distance is borderline (~19.47m). It <strong>could pose a privacy concern<\/strong> but remains marginal.<\/li>\n<li><strong>23.725 meters (Distance) and 44\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nThe distance exceeds 20m, so despite the wide angle (44\u00b0), there is <strong>no loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li><strong>25.531 meters (Distance) and 40\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nThe distance exceeds 20m, so despite the angle (40\u00b0), there is <strong>no loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>18.346 meters with a 62\u00b0 angle<\/strong> clearly causes a <strong>loss of privacy<\/strong> in a suburban area.<\/li>\n<li><strong>19.470 meters with a 55\u00b0 angle<\/strong> may raise <strong>borderline privacy concerns<\/strong> due to its proximity to the threshold.<\/li>\n<li><strong>23.725 meters with 44\u00b0 and 25.531 meters with 40\u00b0<\/strong> do not cause material loss of privacy, as the distances exceed the critical 20-meter condition.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11252&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.4.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11252 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1978%2C2560&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"1978\" height=\"2560\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=1978&amp;ssl=1 1978w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=232%2C300&amp;ssl=1 232w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=791%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 791w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C994&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1187%2C1536&amp;ssl=1 1187w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1583%2C2048&amp;ssl=1 1583w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/2.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C776&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation<\/strong><strong> 2.4<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li>\n<h4><strong>Narrow Viewing Angles (43\u00b0 and 64\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>43\u00b0 at 24.67 meters:<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>This narrower angle provides a precise and focused field of view for monitoring <strong>specific zones<\/strong> like pathways, entrances, or areas with high detail requirements.<\/li>\n<li>At <strong>24.67 meters<\/strong>, this configuration is ideal for long and narrow spaces or confined zones.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>64\u00b0 at 19.81 meters:<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>With a wider field of view, the 64\u00b0 angle balances detail and coverage, making it useful for <strong>medium-sized areas<\/strong> like driveways, yards, or sections of gardens.<\/li>\n<li>At <strong>19.81 meters<\/strong>, it efficiently monitors broader areas without losing too much focus.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<hr \/>\n<h4><strong>Moderate Viewing Angles (46\u00b0 and 57\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>46\u00b0 at 26.59 meters:<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>The 46\u00b0 angle offers a moderately focused view, suitable for <strong>monitoring larger sections<\/strong> while retaining clarity.<\/li>\n<li>At <strong>26.59 meters<\/strong>, this angle works well for covering <strong>extended spaces<\/strong> such as backyards, corridors, or medium-sized outdoor zones.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>57\u00b0 at 20.84 meters:<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>A 51\u00b0 angle expands the perspective slightly while maintaining good detail coverage.<\/li>\n<li>At <strong>20.84 meters<\/strong>, it is ideal for areas like <strong>compact yards, entrances, or outdoor spaces<\/strong> where broader visibility is desired.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11253&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h4><strong><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11253 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1978%2C2560&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"1978\" height=\"2560\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=1978&amp;ssl=1 1978w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=232%2C300&amp;ssl=1 232w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=791%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 791w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C994&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1187%2C1536&amp;ssl=1 1187w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1583%2C2048&amp;ssl=1 1583w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C776&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/strong><\/h4>\n<h4><\/h4>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation <\/strong><strong>1.1<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Viewing Angles and Corresponding Distances<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>59\u00b0 at 19.95 meters<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Widest angle<\/strong> in the image.<\/li>\n<li>Ideal for <strong>wide-area coverage<\/strong> such as gardens, large open spaces, or multiple zones with reduced distance focus.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>54\u00b0 at 21.96 meters<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>Slightly narrower than 59\u00b0, balancing area coverage and clarity at a medium distance.<\/li>\n<li>Useful for <strong>yards, entry points<\/strong>, or areas needing moderate coverage.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>42\u00b0 at 23.21 meters<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>A moderately narrow angle that delivers a <strong>focused view<\/strong> while maintaining a reasonable field of coverage.<\/li>\n<li>Effective for <strong>mid-range distances<\/strong> like pathways or transitional zones.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>38\u00b0 at 29.51 meters<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Narrowest angle<\/strong> in the image.<\/li>\n<li>Designed for <strong>long-range monitoring<\/strong> where detail is critical, such as walkways, corridors, or focused surveillance of distant objects.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<hr \/>\n<h3><strong>General Observations<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>The <strong>59\u00b0 and 54\u00b0 angles<\/strong> are for broader coverage over shorter distances.<\/li>\n<li>The <strong>42\u00b0 and 38\u00b0 angles<\/strong> focus more on precision and detail over medium to longer distances.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11254&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.2.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11254 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1978%2C2560&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"1978\" height=\"2560\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=1978&amp;ssl=1 1978w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=232%2C300&amp;ssl=1 232w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=791%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 791w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C994&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1187%2C1536&amp;ssl=1 1187w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1583%2C2048&amp;ssl=1 1583w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C776&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation <\/strong><strong>1.2<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h3>Analysis Based on Parameters:<\/h3>\n<h4>1. <strong>Distance<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>For a <strong>suburban area<\/strong>, loss of privacy applies if distances are <strong>less than 20 meters<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>Only one distance (19.234 meters) is below the 20-meter threshold.<\/li>\n<li>Other distances (20.297m, 24.178m, and 25.679m) <strong>exceed<\/strong> the threshold, so they are automatically ruled out for privacy concerns.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4>2. <strong>Angle of View<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>Loss of privacy applies if angles are <strong>greater than 20\u00b0<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>All angles (59\u00b0, 54\u00b0, 45\u00b0, 42\u00b0, and 38\u00b0) <strong>exceed 20\u00b0<\/strong>, indicating the potential for loss of privacy <strong>if combined with a critical distance<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h3>Combined Result:<\/h3>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>19.234 meters (Distance)<\/strong> and <strong>59\u00b0 (Angle)<\/strong>:\n<ul>\n<li>This combination falls under the suburban &#8220;loss of privacy&#8221; category.<\/li>\n<li>Since it is <strong>less than 20m<\/strong> and <strong>greater than 20\u00b0<\/strong>, this <strong>could constitute a loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Other Distances<\/strong>:\n<ul>\n<li>All other distances are above 20 meters, so even with wide angles (54\u00b0, 45\u00b0, 42\u00b0, and 38\u00b0), they <strong>do not constitute loss of privacy<\/strong> under the provided criteria.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<hr \/>\n<h3>Conclusion:<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Only the <strong>19.234-meter distance with a 59\u00b0 angle<\/strong> potentially causes a loss of privacy in a suburban area.<\/li>\n<li>For the rest of the angles and distances, <strong>no material loss of privacy<\/strong> exists, as they fail to meet the critical distance condition.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11255&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.3.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11255 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1978%2C2560&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"1978\" height=\"2560\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=1978&amp;ssl=1 1978w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=232%2C300&amp;ssl=1 232w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=791%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 791w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C994&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1187%2C1536&amp;ssl=1 1187w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1583%2C2048&amp;ssl=1 1583w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C776&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation <\/strong><strong>1.3<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<div class=\"flex max-w-full flex-col flex-grow\">\n<div class=\"min-h-8 text-message flex w-full flex-col items-end gap-2 whitespace-normal break-words [.text-message+&amp;]:mt-5\" dir=\"auto\" data-message-author-role=\"assistant\" data-message-id=\"a5844237-91ec-435a-ac3c-8dd3dd223d01\" data-message-model-slug=\"gpt-4o\">\n<div class=\"flex w-full flex-col gap-1 empty:hidden first:pt-[3px]\">\n<div class=\"markdown prose w-full break-words dark:prose-invert dark\">\n<h3>Analysis Based on Parameters:<\/h3>\n<h4>1. <strong>Distance<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>For a <strong>suburban area<\/strong>, loss of privacy applies if distances are <strong>less than 20 meters<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>Only one distance (21.980 meters) is below the 20-meter threshold.<\/li>\n<li>Other distances (22.953 m, 26.468m, and 27.870m) <strong>exceed<\/strong> the threshold, so they are automatically ruled out for privacy concerns.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4>2. <strong>Angle of View<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>Loss of privacy applies if angles are <strong>greater than 20\u00b0<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>All angles (42\u00b0, 50\u00b0, 62\u00b0, 66\u00b0) <strong>exceed 20\u00b0<\/strong>, indicating the potential for loss of privacy <strong>if combined with a critical distance<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h3>Combined Result:<\/h3>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>12.980 meters (Distance)<\/strong> and <strong>66\u00b0 (Angle)<\/strong>:\n<ul>\n<li>This combination falls under the suburban &#8220;loss of privacy&#8221; category.<\/li>\n<li>Since it is <strong>less than 20m<\/strong> and <strong>greater than 20\u00b0<\/strong>, this <strong>could constitute a loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Other Distances<\/strong>:\n<ul>\n<li>All other distances are above 20 meters, so even with wide angles (42\u00b0, 50\u00b0, 62\u00b0, and 66\u00b0), they <strong>do not constitute loss of privacy<\/strong> under the provided criteria.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<hr \/>\n<h3>Conclusion:<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Only the <strong>12.980 meters (Distance)<\/strong> and <strong>66\u00b0 (Angle)<\/strong>\u00a0potentially causes a loss of privacy in a suburban area.<\/li>\n<li>For the rest of the angles and distances, <strong>no material loss of privacy<\/strong> exists, as they fail to meet the critical distance condition.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11256&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.4.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11256 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1978%2C2560&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"1978\" height=\"2560\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=1978&amp;ssl=1 1978w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=232%2C300&amp;ssl=1 232w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=791%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 791w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C994&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1187%2C1536&amp;ssl=1 1187w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1583%2C2048&amp;ssl=1 1583w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/visulization-1.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C776&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation <\/strong><strong>1.4<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h5><strong>Wide Viewing Angles (68\u00b0 and 63\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<h4><strong>23388 (23.388 meters) with 68\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (23.388 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis is above the privacy thresholds for both suburban (20 meters) and city center (15 meters) areas, meaning distance does not contribute to a loss of privacy.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (68\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nA 68\u00b0 angle is significantly greater than the 20-degree threshold, offering a wide view of the surroundings. However, the greater distance minimizes the risk of detailed internal views.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nNo loss of privacy occurs due to the <strong>distance being greater than 20 meters<\/strong>, even though the angle is wide.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4><strong>24332 (24.332 meters) with 63\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (24.332 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nLike the previous example, this distance is well beyond the privacy thresholds, ensuring no privacy intrusion.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (63\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nWhile wide, the combination of the large angle and the long distance ensures the view focuses more on general coverage rather than detailed observation of specific spaces.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nNo loss of privacy is established as the <strong>distance exceeds the threshold<\/strong> and limits intrusive visibility.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h5><strong>Moderate Viewing Angles (52\u00b0 and 48\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<h4><strong>27646 (27.646 meters) with 52\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (27.646 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis distance is far beyond the thresholds for both suburban and city center areas, eliminating concerns about privacy intrusion.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (52\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nA 52\u00b0 angle is moderate and offers good coverage, but the long distance ensures that it does not intrude on privacy-sensitive areas.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nNo loss of privacy occurs due to the <strong>substantial distance<\/strong> that mitigates the effect of the moderate angle.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h5><strong>28945 (28.945 meters) with 48\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h5>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (28.945 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nSimilarly, this distance is much greater than the thresholds, providing a sufficient buffer to prevent privacy intrusion.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (48\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nThe narrower angle and long distance further reduce the possibility of detailed visibility into private spaces.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nNo loss of privacy occurs because the <strong>distance and angle combination are well within acceptable limits<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h5><strong>Narrow Viewing Angles (36\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<h4><strong>20284 (20.284 meters) with 36\u00b0 Angle<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Distance (20.284 meters):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis distance is slightly above the suburban threshold (20 meters) and far beyond the city center threshold (15 meters), making privacy intrusion unlikely.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle (36\u00b0):<\/strong><br \/>\nThe narrow 36\u00b0 angle provides focused and detailed monitoring, but the sufficient distance ensures that it does not compromise privacy.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong><br \/>\nNo loss of privacy occurs due to the <strong>distance being above the suburban threshold<\/strong> combined with the relatively narrow angle.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h5><strong>Overall Privacy Assessment<\/strong><\/h5>\n<p>All configurations analyzed result in <strong>no loss of privacy<\/strong> due to the <strong>distances exceeding thresholds<\/strong> for suburban and city center areas. Even though some angles are wide, the distances mitigate their potential for intrusion. These setups align well with privacy-preserving principles.<\/p>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11257&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.1.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11257 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2560%2C1978&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"2560\" height=\"1978\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=2560&amp;ssl=1 2560w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=300%2C232&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1024%2C791&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C593&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1536%2C1187&amp;ssl=1 1536w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2048%2C1583&amp;ssl=1 2048w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.1_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C464&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation <\/strong><strong>3.1<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<div class=\"flex max-w-full flex-col flex-grow\">\n<div class=\"min-h-8 text-message flex w-full flex-col items-end gap-2 whitespace-normal break-words [.text-message+&amp;]:mt-5\" dir=\"auto\" data-message-author-role=\"assistant\" data-message-id=\"45fa3048-ba40-44d1-867e-d55d4df5e2e4\" data-message-model-slug=\"gpt-4o\">\n<div class=\"flex w-full flex-col gap-1 empty:hidden first:pt-[3px]\">\n<div class=\"markdown prose w-full break-words dark:prose-invert dark\">\n<h3><strong>Wide Viewing Angles (66\u00b0 and 51\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p><strong>66\u00b0 at 8.9 meters:<\/strong><br \/>\nThis angle provides a very wide field of view, allowing substantial visibility into the adjacent property.<br \/>\nAt 8.9 meters, the proximity combined with the wide angle makes this configuration ideal for observing large areas, such as entire backyards or outdoor spaces. However, it also raises significant privacy concerns due to the clear and detailed line of sight into neighboring areas.<\/p>\n<p><strong>51\u00b0 at 10.58 meters:<\/strong><br \/>\nA 51\u00b0 angle delivers a slightly narrower but still expansive field of view, offering clear observation of moderately large zones.<br \/>\nAt 10.58 meters, the combination of distance and angle enables detailed monitoring of outdoor areas like gardens or patios, which may impact privacy for the residents of the neighboring property.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3><strong>Moderate Viewing Angles (34\u00b0 and 29\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p><strong>34\u00b0 at 14.56 meters:<\/strong><br \/>\nThis angle represents a moderate field of view, striking a balance between focused and broad observation.<br \/>\nAt 14.56 meters, the view provides good clarity into specific zones such as portions of backyards or small outdoor spaces. While less invasive than wider angles, it still poses privacy concerns, particularly in suburban areas where this distance is significant.<\/p>\n<p><strong>29\u00b0 at 16.97 meters:<\/strong><br \/>\nA 29\u00b0 angle offers a narrower and more controlled field of view, limiting the scope of observation to a focused area.<br \/>\nAt 16.97 meters, the distance reduces the intensity of visibility, but the angle remains on the threshold of causing privacy concerns. Residents sensitive to overlooking may still feel observed, especially in suburban settings where privacy is more critical.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3><strong>Summary<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>66\u00b0 at 8.9 meters<\/strong> and <strong>51\u00b0 at 10.58 meters<\/strong>: These configurations provide <strong>wide fields of view<\/strong> at close distances, resulting in a <strong>clear loss of privacy<\/strong> due to detailed visibility into neighboring spaces.<\/li>\n<li><strong>34\u00b0 at 14.56 meters<\/strong> and <strong>29\u00b0 at 16.97 meters<\/strong>: These angles create <strong>moderate privacy concerns<\/strong>, offering focused observation while maintaining significant visibility into adjacent areas.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<p>This analysis supports your assertion that the window views in question might not significantly intrude upon the privacy of other properties unless they fall under the defined thresholds.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11258&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.2.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11258 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2560%2C1978&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"2560\" height=\"1978\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=2560&amp;ssl=1 2560w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=300%2C232&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1024%2C791&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C593&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1536%2C1187&amp;ssl=1 1536w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2048%2C1583&amp;ssl=1 2048w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.2_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C464&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation <\/strong><strong>3.2<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>\n<h3><strong>Wide Viewing Angles (59\u00b0 and 33\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p><strong>59\u00b0 at 7.96 meters:<\/strong><br \/>\nThis angle provides a very wide field of view, enabling substantial visibility into the neighboring property.<br \/>\nAt 7.96 meters, the combination of close proximity and a wide angle creates significant privacy concerns. The observer can clearly see a large portion of outdoor spaces, such as backyards or patios, making it difficult for residents to maintain privacy without curtains or landscaping.<\/p>\n<p><strong>33\u00b0 at 8.05 meters:<\/strong><br \/>\nA 33\u00b0 angle offers a moderately wide view, balancing visibility and focus.<br \/>\nAt 8.05 meters, the field of view allows for detailed observation of specific areas, such as garden spaces or entryways. While less invasive than the 59\u00b0 view, this angle still poses privacy concerns due to its short distance and clear line of sight.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3><strong>Moderate Viewing Angles (28\u00b0 and 20\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p><strong>28\u00b0 at 13.24 meters:<\/strong><br \/>\nThis angle delivers a more focused and narrower view, reducing the overall visibility while maintaining clarity into specific zones.<br \/>\nAt 13.24 meters, the moderate distance limits the field of observation but still allows for targeted visibility into parts of the neighboring property. Residents sensitive to privacy might feel the need to use window coverings or landscaping for protection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>20\u00b0 at 15.62 meters:<\/strong><br \/>\nA 20\u00b0 angle offers a narrow, controlled field of view with limited scope for observation.<br \/>\nAt 15.62 meters, the increased distance reduces the impact of the visibility, and the narrow angle minimizes the field of vision. While this setup poses minimal privacy concerns, it may still be perceived as intrusive by privacy-conscious residents.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3><strong>Summary<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>59\u00b0 at 7.96 meters<\/strong> and <strong>33\u00b0 at 8.05 meters<\/strong>: These angles provide <strong>wide fields of view<\/strong> at close distances, causing <strong>significant privacy concerns<\/strong> due to detailed visibility into outdoor spaces.<\/li>\n<li><strong>28\u00b0 at 13.24 meters<\/strong> and <strong>20\u00b0 at 15.62 meters<\/strong>: These configurations create <strong>moderate to minimal privacy concerns<\/strong>, offering narrower, more controlled views with reduced impact on neighboring properties.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11259&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.3.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11259 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2560%2C1978&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"2560\" height=\"1978\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=2560&amp;ssl=1 2560w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=300%2C232&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1024%2C791&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C593&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1536%2C1187&amp;ssl=1 1536w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2048%2C1583&amp;ssl=1 2048w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.3_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C464&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<h3><strong>Visualization\u00a0 <\/strong><strong>3.3<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>This particular view not only cause a material loss of privacy to the back yard of all the properties facing hard Street. But due to its angle of view and distance to the first floor windows it starts to provide\u00a0 an almost direct clear view view through the first floor windows.\u00a0 This causes a CLEAR\u00a0 material loss of privacy directly into the first floor sleeping charters of the dwellinghouse. This constitutes a clear loss of privacy not only due to the short sdiatance that stats at just above 6 meters in to first floor window of 68 Harld street but also to a maximum of 10 metersinto the first floor window of 72 Harold Street. The angles of view \u00a0 offer a clear view inside the dwelling house through the first floor windows directly inside sleeping quarters.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h4><strong>65.13 meters at 30\u00b0<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Field of View<\/strong>: Narrow and highly focused.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Distance<\/strong>: At 65.13 meters, this angle provides precision viewing without covering excessive areas.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Privacy Assessment<\/strong>:\n<ul>\n<li>The angle of 20\u00b0 is on the threshold where privacy concerns could subjectively arise.<\/li>\n<li>Due to the moderate distance, the view is unlikely to intrude on sensitive areas unless the line of sight is directed at specific windows or private zones.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion<\/strong>: This setup supports privacy for most scenarios, with minimal risk of intrusion.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h4><strong>86.44 meters at 39\u00b0<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Field of View<\/strong>: Moderate and balanced.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Distance<\/strong>: The viewing angle at 86.44 meters enables observation of broader areas while maintaining a controlled perspective.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Privacy Assessment<\/strong>:\n<ul>\n<li>The 39\u00b0 angle exceeds the threshold for privacy concerns, especially in suburban or urban areas.<\/li>\n<li>While the distance helps mitigate direct intrusion, the increased coverage may reveal sensitive areas, depending on the surroundings.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion<\/strong>: Effective for targeted monitoring but requires careful positioning to avoid privacy issues.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h4><strong>132.33 meters at 39\u00b0<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Field of View<\/strong>: Similar angle as the previous example, but the extended distance expands the visual range significantly.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Distance<\/strong>: At 132.33 meters, this setup allows comprehensive observation of distant features or zones.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Privacy Assessment<\/strong>:\n<ul>\n<li>Although the distance reduces the likelihood of detailed intrusion, the 39\u00b0 angle still poses a concern if the view encompasses residential windows or private areas.<\/li>\n<li>The greater scope demands attention to context and potential visibility into sensitive spaces.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion<\/strong>: Suitable for large-area monitoring; privacy concerns depend on placement and neighboring property dynamics.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h4><strong>158.33 meters at 56\u00b0<\/strong>:<\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Field of View<\/strong>: The widest angle and farthest distance recorded, enabling an expansive perspective.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Distance<\/strong>: At 158.33 meters, this configuration offers maximum coverage of large spaces or landscapes.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Privacy Assessment<\/strong>:\n<ul>\n<li>The 56\u00b0 angle represents a significant risk for privacy as it can encompass multiple properties or sensitive zones, even at this distance.<\/li>\n<li>Adjacent properties may require privacy measures if the setup includes their private areas.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion<\/strong>: While excellent for comprehensive observation, this setup poses substantial privacy risks and necessitates thoughtful positioning and potential privacy-preserving actions.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h3><strong>Key Observations<\/strong>:<\/h3>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Viewing Angles and Privacy<\/strong>:\n<ul>\n<li>Angles greater than 20\u00b0 warrant careful consideration for privacy impacts, especially in suburban or urban settings.<\/li>\n<li>Wider angles like 39\u00b0 and 56\u00b0 amplify potential concerns, particularly at shorter distances or in densely populated areas.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Mitigation Strategies<\/strong>:\n<ul>\n<li>Implementing curtains, blinds, or frosted glass in visible zones can alleviate privacy concerns for adjacent properties.<\/li>\n<li>Placement and orientation of observation tools should prioritize avoiding direct views into private windows or areas.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11260&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.4.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11260 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2560%2C1978&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"2560\" height=\"1978\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=2560&amp;ssl=1 2560w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=300%2C232&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1024%2C791&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C593&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1536%2C1187&amp;ssl=1 1536w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2048%2C1583&amp;ssl=1 2048w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.4_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C464&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation <\/strong><strong>3.4<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>This particular view not only cause a material loss of privacy to the back yard of all the properties facing hard Street. But due to its angle of view and distance to the ground floor windows it starts to provide an internal view through the ground floor windows.\u00a0 Hence the material loss of privacy implication is not only to the back yard but it is also to the internal areas of the dwelling houses on the ground floor.<\/p>\n<h5><strong>Narrow Viewing Angles (10\u00b0, 14\u00b0, 16\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>7022 (7.022 meters)<\/strong> with <strong>10\u00b0 Angle<\/strong>:<br \/>\nA 10\u00b0 angle provides a highly concentrated field of view, making it perfect for observing a specific, small area from a distance. At 7.022 meters, this angle ensures pinpoint accuracy, ideal for monitoring entry points or focused surveillance in narrow spaces.<\/li>\n<li><strong>12307 (12.307 meters)<\/strong> with <strong>14\u00b0 Angle<\/strong>:<br \/>\nA 14\u00b0 angle offers slightly broader coverage than 10\u00b0, but it\u2019s still narrow enough for detailed observation. At 12.307 meters, this angle is suitable for monitoring hallways, confined outdoor areas, or any space where precision is important.<\/li>\n<li><strong>15023 (15.023 meters)<\/strong> with <strong>16\u00b0 Angle<\/strong>:<br \/>\nWith a 16\u00b0 angle, you get a balanced narrow perspective that works well for close-to-mid-range monitoring. At 15.023 meters, this angle is great for observing defined areas like smaller outdoor zones, gates, or portions of a facade with clarity.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<hr \/>\n<h5><strong>Moderate Viewing Angle (45\u00b0)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<ol start=\"4\">\n<li><strong>20284 (20.284 meters)<\/strong> with <strong>45\u00b0 Angle<\/strong>:<br \/>\nA 45\u00b0 angle is versatile, offering a mix of detailed focus and broader area coverage. At 20.284 meters, this angle is ideal for monitoring medium-sized areas such as a driveway, a garden section, or the front side of a building. It captures enough detail without intruding into unnecessary zones, making it a practical choice for general surveillance.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11261&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.5.pdf&#8221;]<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h4><strong><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11261 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.5_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2560%2C1978&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"2560\" height=\"1978\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.5_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=2560&amp;ssl=1 2560w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.5_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=300%2C232&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.5_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1024%2C791&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.5_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C593&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.5_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1536%2C1187&amp;ssl=1 1536w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.5_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2048%2C1583&amp;ssl=1 2048w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.5_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C464&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/strong><\/h4>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation <\/strong><strong>3.5<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>This particular view not only cause a material loss of privacy to the back yard of all the properties facing hard Street. But due to its angle of view and distance to the first floor windows it starts to provide an internal view through the first floor windows.\u00a0 Hence the material loss of privacy implication is not only to the back yard but it is also to the internal areas of the dwelling houses.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Analysis Based on Parameters:<\/strong><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Distance:<\/strong><br \/>\nFor a suburban area, loss of privacy applies if distances are <strong>less than 20 meters<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>All provided distances (5.852m, 7.022m, 12.307m, and 15.023m) are <strong>below 20 meters<\/strong>, indicating they meet the distance condition for potential loss of privacy.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle of View:<\/strong><br \/>\nLoss of privacy applies if angles are <strong>greater than 20\u00b0<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>10\u00b0: Below 15\u00b0, so <strong>no loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>14\u00b0: Below 15\u00b0, so <strong>no loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>16\u00b0: Between 15\u00b0\u201320\u00b0, this could cause <strong>subjective concern<\/strong> but does not objectively constitute a loss of privacy.<\/li>\n<li>45\u00b0: Exceeds 20\u00b0, indicating <strong>objective loss of privacy<\/strong> if combined with critical distances.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Combined Result:<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>5.852 meters (Distance) and 45\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis combination meets the suburban loss of privacy criteria (distance &lt;20m and angle &gt;20\u00b0).<br \/>\n<strong>Result:<\/strong> Material loss of privacy.<\/li>\n<li><strong>7.022 meters (Distance) and 16\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nDistance meets the threshold, but the angle (16\u00b0) is between 15\u00b0\u201320\u00b0, meaning <strong>subjective concern<\/strong> could arise but does not constitute definitive loss of privacy.<\/li>\n<li><strong>12.307 meters (Distance) and 14\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nDistance meets the threshold, but the angle (14\u00b0) is below 15\u00b0, so there is <strong>no loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li><strong>15.023 meters (Distance) and 10\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nDistance meets the threshold, but the angle (10\u00b0) is below 15\u00b0, so there is <strong>no loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>5.852 meters with a 45\u00b0 angle<\/strong> constitutes a <strong>material loss of privacy<\/strong> in a suburban area.<\/li>\n<li>All other combinations (7.022m with 16\u00b0, 12.307m with 14\u00b0, and 15.023m with 10\u00b0) <strong>do not cause a material loss of privacy<\/strong> under the provided criteria due to insufficient angles of view.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>[vc_single_image image=&#8221;11262&#8243; img_size=&#8221;full&#8221; onclick=&#8221;custom_link&#8221; link=&#8221;https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.6.pdf&#8221;][\/vc_column][\/vc_row]<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11262 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.6_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2560%2C1978&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"2560\" height=\"1978\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.6_page-0001-scaled.jpg?w=2560&amp;ssl=1 2560w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.6_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=300%2C232&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.6_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1024%2C791&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.6_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C593&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.6_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=1536%2C1187&amp;ssl=1 1536w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.6_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=2048%2C1583&amp;ssl=1 2048w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/3.6_page-0001-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C464&amp;ssl=1 600w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<h4><strong>Visualisation <\/strong><strong>3.6<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Analysis Based on Parameters:<\/strong><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Distance:<\/strong><br \/>\nFor a suburban area, loss of privacy applies if distances are <strong>less than 20 meters<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>All provided distances (4.257m, 6.736m, 11.704m, and 14.668m) are <strong>below 20 meters<\/strong>, meeting the distance condition for potential loss of privacy.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Angle of View:<\/strong><br \/>\nLoss of privacy applies if angles are <strong>greater than 20\u00b0<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>8\u00b0: <strong>No loss of privacy<\/strong> as it is below 15\u00b0.<\/li>\n<li>10\u00b0: <strong>No loss of privacy<\/strong> as it is below 15\u00b0.<\/li>\n<li>20\u00b0: Exactly 20\u00b0, this <strong>could constitute a borderline loss of privacy<\/strong> depending on interpretation.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Combined Result:<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>4.257 meters (Distance) and 20\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nDistance is critical (&lt;20m), and the angle is borderline (20\u00b0). This combination <strong>raises privacy concerns<\/strong> but may require further review.<\/li>\n<li><strong>6.736 meters (Distance) and 10\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nDistance meets the threshold, but the angle (10\u00b0) is below 15\u00b0, so there is <strong>no loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li><strong>11.704 meters (Distance) and 8\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nDistance meets the threshold, but the angle (8\u00b0) is below 15\u00b0, so there is <strong>no loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li><strong>14.668 meters (Distance) and 8\u00b0 (Angle):<\/strong><br \/>\nDistance meets the threshold, but the angle (8\u00b0) is below 15\u00b0, so there is <strong>no loss of privacy<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Conclusion:<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>4.257 meters with a 20\u00b0 angle<\/strong> constitutes a <strong>borderline loss of privacy<\/strong> in a suburban area due to its critical distance and borderline angle.<\/li>\n<li>All other combinations (6.736m with 10\u00b0, 11.704m with 8\u00b0, and 14.668m with 8\u00b0) <strong>do not cause material loss of privacy<\/strong> under the provided criteria due to insufficient angles of view.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<hr \/>\n<p>This analysis highlights the material loss of privacy caused by direct visibility into the gardens and offers actionable solutions tailored to the severity of intrusion for each property.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Conclusions<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Properties facing Harold Street<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>All the above extensively proves that this minor development does not cause any material harm to any of the properties facing Harold Street. Because:.<\/p>\n<p>1 The existing windows and entrance door of the extension already offer a direct view into all the properties of Harold Street.<\/p>\n<p>2 The windows on the first floor of the main building already have plenty of established views into all the back windows of the properties facing Harold Street.<\/p>\n<p>Because of the above, any extra window openings both on the main building and the extension do not cause any material harm to the properties of Harold Street, therefore allowable.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Properties facing Castle Street.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>All the above extensively proves that this minor development does not cause any material harm to any of the properties facing Castle Street. Because:<\/p>\n<p>1 The existing windows and entrance door of the extension already offer a direct view into the back of all the properties facing Castle Street.<\/p>\n<p>2 The windows in the extension are at a distance which is widely considered not to cause overlooking and acceptable from a privacy perspective in planning. Hence, even in case of non-PRE-existing windows in the extension and no door openings on this side of this extension, the windows on this side of the extension are over 20 meters from the ground floor windows and approximately 24 metres from the castle street first floor windows of the habitable rooms. As we have seen, the standard minimum distance from directly facing windows in city centre area can be reduced to 15 meters but in our case it is also over the standard 20 meters distance applied in suburban areas.\u00a0 In other words, even if there were no existing windows and doors opening in the Extension facing the back of the terraced houses facing Castle Street, any new window is at a distance higher than 20 meters from a non-habitable window on the ground floor and 24 meters away form the window of a habitable room on the first floor. These distances are considered acceptable and therefore allowable from a planning perspective.<\/p>\n<p>3 It had been amply demonstrated how the view from the adjacent property is far more intrusive that any existing window in the exension and any future window in the extension. As we have studied above the existing view from the existing residential building is far more intrusive than the view from our minor development.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, it has been amply demonstrated\u00a0 how there is clearly &#8220;no material harm&#8221; caused by the minor development into the properties facing castle street. Hence, it is amply demonstrated that any extra window openings do not cause any material harm to the properties of Castle Street, therefore allowable.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Properties facing Rutland Street<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The existing windows both on ground floor and first floor of the main building all provide a direct view into all the properties&#8217; back windows. We think this is straight forward and requires no studies or explanation.<\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Our proposed development is minor in nature because 1 it does not increase the footprint of the building. The footprint of the building remains unchanged. Key Legal Principle: No Material Harm = No Grounds for Refusal Under planning law, planning permission should be granted unless the development causes material harm Because this minor building alteration [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"default","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"set","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-11206","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/11206","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11206"}],"version-history":[{"count":197,"href":"https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/11206\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12058,"href":"https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/11206\/revisions\/12058"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/areton-ltd.com\/Aretonoldbackup\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11206"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}