Conflicting views in Banes

[stoxman1]

Dear all,

A virgin poster here please be gentle...

We are looking to build a single storey rear extension to our house in a conservation area. The council is Bath and North East Somerset (BANES). We are getting conflicting views. The council's own website mostly directs towards the government's planning portal and the standard designated land restrictions. We are comfortable that we won't breach any of these (we are happy to match materials, keep height below 4m and current roof limits, nowhere near boundaries and we are going back less than 4m from the original house). Everything suggests that BANES are happy with permitted development so long as you follow the central government rules. There is also a section which spells out the Article 4 powers they have taken that apply specifically to conservation areas. They have taken powers over HMOs, walls, estate agent boards etc but nothing about extensions.

http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/services/...ing-permission/article-4-directions-and-other

Our architect has now come up with a document which says that there is a limit of 10% of existing house or 50m3 which would be entirely too small. We are looking to build 80m2 (and probably 160m3). However, there are no links to this paper anywhere on the main site and it seems very at odds with central policy. It also refers to old Acts. Something tells me that this is an out of date paper.

http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/sites/default/files/living_in_a_conservation_area.pdf

Our architect is a very sensible and highly experienced chap and I would normally take everything he says as gospel but I just find this so confusing. I think I am right in saying that this is an old policy and not relevant but he is the professional and it feels like I am telling a Michelin starred chef that he can't boil an egg. I have tried speaking with BANES but they are very vague and won't say outright whether PP is required or not and whether PD applies.

I have spent a lot of time on this and had a good trawl through the forums before posting but couldn't find anything similar. I really would appreciate any help.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Unfortunately your architect is a dinosaur with regards to his planning knowledge and your situation is not that uncommon. Frankly he's an embarrassment to the industry and one has to wonder how many punters have needlessly applied for planning permission due to his poor advice. This may sound harsh but its not that uncommon, we see queries like this all the time who have been given wrong advice from both architects/designers and often the planning departments themselves, I kid you not.

The rules he is referring to are the Pre 2008 rules and those limits no longer apply. You are right to use the Planning Portal as a guide: http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/permission/commonprojects/extensions/ you may also find the technical guidance useful: http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/100806_PDforhouseholders_TechnicalGuidance.pdf Class A is for extensions.

You should also ignore those document that you linked to. Believe it or not it is an all too common scenario for councils to leave out of date documentation on their websites.

With regards to your proposals meeting the PD criteria, it s not a case of your Local Authority being happy or not, if your proposal meets the criteria then it is permitted, end of!

If you are happy that no Article 4 restrictions apply and your permitted development rights have not been removed (normally only for new builds) and your proposal meets the PD criteria then get on and build it. That's the whole point to Permitted Development, you do not need a costly bit of paper from the council saying so.

Really unless you're planning some mad grand designs affair you really don't need an architect (in fact an un-knowledgeable one is the very last thing you need) all you need is good architectural technician.

You may enjoy this too: http://planningjungle.com/wp-conten...-10-Worst-Permitted-Development-Loopholes.pdf

 

[stoxman1]

Unfortunately your architect is a dinosaur with regards to his planning knowledge and your situation is not that uncommon. Frankly he's an embarrassment to the industry and one has to wonder how many punters have needlessly applied for planning permission due to his poor advice. This may sound harsh but its not that uncommon, we see queries like this all the time who have been given wrong advice from both architects/designers and often the planning departments themselves, I kid you not.

The rules he is referring to are the Pre 2008 rules and those limits no longer apply. You are right to use the Planning Portal as a guide: http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/permission/commonprojects/extensions/ you may also find the technical guidance useful: http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/100806_PDforhouseholders_TechnicalGuidance.pdf Class A is for extensions.

You should also ignore those document that you linked to. Believe it or not it is an all too common scenario for councils to leave out of date documentation on their websites.

With regards to your proposals meeting the PD criteria, it s not a case of your Local Authority being happy or not, if your proposal meets the criteria then it is permitted, end of!

If you are happy that no Article 4 restrictions apply and your permitted development rights have not been removed (normally only for new builds) and your proposal meets the PD criteria then get on and build it. That's the whole point to Permitted Development, you do not need a costly bit of paper from the council saying so.

Really unless you're planning some mad grand designs affair you really don't need an architect (in fact an un-knowledgeable one is the very last thing you need) all you need is good architectural technician.

You may enjoy this too: http://planningjungle.com/wp-conten...t-Permitted-Development-Loopholes.pdf[/QUOTE]


Thanks for such a swift and comprehensive reply. Much appreciated.

I had seen the 10 loopholes. Hilarious to see what is theoretically possible!

I still find it amazing that a professional working in the Banes region has missed this. I work in financial services and it would be analogous to me discussing PEPs with clients having missed the launch of ISAs a decade ago....

Would you suggest getting a legal opinion that our building fits with PD? I have spent a lot of time on the gov planning portal and am pretty confident that PD applies as it seems very clear. However,I'm nervous of spending 100k on building and then finding that I misunderstood something. I would quite like someone's PI insurance to sue if they advise us to build when we shouldn't.

Best

A

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Respectfully if you have £100K to spend then maybe you should be applying for a Lawful Development Certificate form the council, which is a guarantee that the works are PD. The additional cost and delay seems insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

If you came to me I would advise that I was 99.9% certain it was PD and that I had used my best endeavours and so you should be OK to get on with it but the only guaranteed way is to get a LDC.

The building industry is not alone, as no doubt you have found for yourself, there are many ‘professionals’ working within the financial sector mi-selling this & that or unaware of the latest regulations or whatever, there is good and bad in every profession.

 

[stoxman1]

Respectfully if you have £100K to spend then maybe you should be applying for a Lawful Development Certificate form the council, which is a guarantee that the works are PD. The additional cost and delay seems insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

If you came to me I would advise that I was 99.9% certain it was PD and that I had used my best endeavours and so you should be OK to get on with it but the only guaranteed way is to get a LDC.

The building industry is not alone, as no doubt you have found for yourself, there are many ‘professionals’ working within the financial sector mi-selling this & that or unaware of the latest regulations or whatever, there is good and bad in every profession.

I fully agree with your comparison of my profession. There are still some bad apples but thankfully the FCA is rapidly squeezing them out through ever more rigorous qualifications. My shock was how a professional could miss something that sits right at the very heart of the their day job. I would actually have been sympathetic had he missed some clause 27.1, para 6, section 18b of an obscure European law; No-one can know everything and there are miles of such red tape generated every day but for someone involved in Banes planning to miss a fundamental change to PD in Banes is hard to accept.

Thanks for the advice on LDC. I had thought of it but wondered whether this would "tip-off" the planning people and have them trying to turn a PD into PP. I would imagine that a lot of planners are annoyed that PD came along and completely bypassed them. Would they be vindictive enough to try to drag a PD project into PP or do they simply have to follow the law and sign off if we have followed everything that is on the Planning Portal? As one specific example, the Banes planners are pretty excited about bats and it seems that every old house that goes for PP is asked to have a full emergence bat study done which is £1k and would delay us by a few months due to the bat season. Might the planners take LDC as an opportunity to ask for bat surveys, reassess whether our house should be listed (it isn't but a 400 year old farm house might deserve to be) etc. I guess what I am asking is does an LDC invite trouble from people who are concerned with their own power and jealous that we are able to build without their say-so.

Best

A

 

[Nakajo]

Unless you're planning to sell the property soon, I wouldn't bother with the LDC.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

The LA will have no choice but to accept the works are PD provided whoever submits the application has demonstrated that the works meet the necessary criteria, I never known for a LA to ask for a bat survey but it's possible, maybe have a shimey up and check for any signs and remove any evidence if there is. You should be able to get a bat survey for a lot less than £1k anyhoo.

 

[Nakajo]

I might be wrong, but I don't imagine planners are particularly opinionated about PD one way or the other. Where they are concerned, I'm sure they would just issue an article 4 direction anyway.

 

[cjard]

I might be wrong, but I don't imagine planners are particularly opinionated about PD one way or the other. Where they are concerned, I'm sure they would just issue an article 4 direction anyway.

Is that even possible? "Oh look, an LDC application has come in, let's have a look at the site.. Hmm, we don't want any building there but we haven't got anything in place.. Tell you what, we'll delay the LDC, issue an article 4 then refuse the LDC.."

Sounds like an abuse of process.. One would assume an article 4 would have to exist (provably) prior to the application for an LDC

 

[Nakajo]

cjard - Yes. I was speaking more generally. The Article 4 direction would have to be in place prior, as you say.

But if a local authority became aware that there was a growing trend for demolishing chimneys in Conservation Areas (under PD), say, then one could imagine them issuing a blanket restriction by means of an article 4.

 

[Nakajo]

FMT - BTW, bat surveys are pretty common requests these days. They used to be included as pre-start conditions, but they were so often ignored or otherwise flouted that they are now (in areas where bats habituate) more usually a requirement of validation.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

FMT - BTW, bat surveys are pretty common requests these days. They used to be included as pre-start conditions, but they were so often ignored or otherwise flouted that they are now (in areas where bats habituate) more usually a requirement of validation.

A Local Authority cannot demand a bat survey in order to validate an application, any validation list that the LA may portray on their website that differs from those in the legislation has no legality. An applicant is only obliged to submit what the legislation says they must submit on order to validate it.

 

[Nakajo]

Technically, that's true - and I've pointed this out to local authorities many times in relation to other 'validation requirements' (most commonly Design & Access statements).

That said, with regards to Ecological Surveys, my understanding is that a Local Authority *can* refuse to *determine* an application until a report is submitted. Because these reports can only be conducted at certain times of the year, there is a high likelihood that the report could not be provided within the timeframe of the application. Under these circumstances, refusal - or something like it - is inevitable.

So, unless an applicant particularly enjoys the Appeal process, it may actually be in their interest to submit an Ecological Survey with their application when 'required'!

 

[jezza2508]

Hi Stoxman,
another newbie here.
I am also looking to build a single storey extension on my bungalow in BANES.
As far a I can make out, it falls well within all the PD criteria. I sent in the Prior Approval documents, and have now received a decision letter stating that it is not PD and will need a full application. The 'reason' given for it not being PD was that I extends beyond the side elevation of the existing house. This I find odd, since the regulations clearly state that an extension can go on the side so long as it is less than half the width of the original house.
Unless BANES have some particular restriction in place ( which I cannot find evidence of) I am somewhat at a loss. I have tried to ring the planning office, but they all seem to be on holiday!
Any thoughts anyone?

 

[tony1851]

@jezza, are you sure it is permitted development and fulfills all the criteria?
You mentioned Prior Approval documents, but they are only applicable to rear extensions.
As you say, if the extension width is less than half the width of the house, it should be p.d.
Would it be more than 4m high by chance?