Planning Delays - Confused where we stand

Joined
27 Dec 2008
Messages
63
Reaction score
1
Location
Aberdeen
Country
United Kingdom
We submitted plans for an extension in February. We are due a decision next week (April 20th) as that's 8 weeks since we put the plans in.

Our architect submitted the application as our 'agent'. When asked whether there were any trees closeby, he ticked 'no' despite there being three large trees, the closest about 3.5 metres away from the proposed development. We didn't see the application before it was submitted but later read it online.

One of our neighbours has objected. One of his objections is that the application is incorrect since it says there are no trees in close proximity. Our architect says he ticked 'no' because he knows the planners and they always advise to tick ;no' to save him the trouble of plotting out every tree on the boundary. They apparently advise that they will ask for a tree survey if they think it requires one once they carry out the site visit.

Five weeks after submitting the application, the planning department contacted our architect asking for a tree survey. I'm assuming this was because of the objection from the neighbour or because they've done a site visit.

We duly had a tree survey done. We are due to recieve it by email today but we already know the contents as we have spoken to the expert that's writing it. The trees are not a problem for the development since they are shallow-rooted. The advice is that we must cut any roots by hand but all else is well.

The planning department now insist that our original applicaiton was invalid and cannot be validated until they have the relevant paperwork. This includes the tree survey. Our planning application has been removed from the plannnig website and we are told the clock has been re-set to 8 weeks from now for a decision. I canot understand this, since everything is in place for a decision. Neighbours consulted, parish council approved.

The reason I am so frustrated is mainly that we are living in a house that needs total renovation. We bought it at the end of Janaury so have tried t move fast since we know it needs completely re-wiring and we have had flashes from sockets and a workman had an electic shock. We have two kids aged 5 and 2 and it's very stressful living here knowking the elctrics are dodgy. We desperately need to start renovating so we can get re-wiring.

Any thoughts on what's going on here?
 
Sponsored Links
Yea, your architect has been a lazy git and couldn't be bothered to have the trees surveyed either to save the hassle of surveying them, missing them when he popped out to see you or is just incompetent. The application was invalid and should not have been validated in the first place. If you have cause to complain it should be directed to your architect no one else. There's a very clear part of some planning app forms that asks about trees, to say no is a lie plain and simple. Its very clear why planning apps are invalidated, heck there's even a simple checklist you can tick off! Furthermore IMO every applicant should get to look through an application prior to its submission.
 
Thanks for your replies.

I know you don't need planning for a rewire - the problem is, we're knocking out the back and side walls of the kitchen so to rewire them now (includes cooker and fridge) seems crazy.

I can't really understand why the goalposts would have changed. Architect is very busy and familiar with local planning department's requirements. He is apparently always told to tick the 'no' box WRT trees in close proximity.

I also don't understand why the application was validated. How was it allowed to get so far down the line? How do any of his applications get that far without a tree survey? The tree survey is routinely requested later in the process.

SO - what will happen now it's going to be 'validated'? We sit here for eight weeks knowing that the whole process has already happened? We sit through a consultation period of three weeks that's already happened? It gets re-approved by the parish council? HOwever you look at it, there's no reason the decision can't be taken on the 20th as planned - the process is complete.

Are the planners really going to sit and twiddle their thumbs for eight weeks just to make a point?
 
Sponsored Links
Thanks for your replies.

I know you don't need planning for a rewire - the problem is, we're knocking out the back and side walls of the kitchen so to rewire them now (includes cooker and fridge) seems crazy.

I can't really understand why the goalposts would have changed. Architect is very busy and familiar with local planning department's requirements. He is apparently always told to tick the 'no' box WRT trees in close proximity.

I also don't understand why the application was validated. How was it allowed to get so far down the line? How do any of his applications get that far without a tree survey? The tree survey is routinely requested later in the process.

SO - what will happen now it's going to be 'validated'? We sit here for eight weeks knowing that the whole process has already happened? We sit through a consultation period of three weeks that's already happened? It gets re-approved by the parish council? HOwever you look at it, there's no reason the decision can't be taken on the 20th as planned - the process is complete.

Are the planners really going to sit and twiddle their thumbs for eight weeks just to make a point?
Unfortunately (or not depending on your viewpoint) the planners have their rules and regulations to abide with which means an application needs to be validated before it can be assessed. The application was validated (incorrectly) because your architect ticked a box he shouldn't have, when it was drawn to their attention they responded accordingly. There's no getting around the fact that your architect has cocked up. Frankly I don't believe your architect, planners just do not let things like that go by. However you look at it your architect has made a blunder. They're not making a point they're acting in accordance with planning law.

If the foot was on the other shoe ...........
 
100% agree that your Architect is at fault. I work in Architecture + do householder extensions all the time.

If a tree is within felling distance of your boundary the Planners want to know + then require a tree survey.

Why did he tick 'no'? for you (as the client) to potentially avoid tree survey costs? If you follow his argument, why didn't he speak / chase up the Planning Officer in the interim to query if 'anything additional' was required.

He's been lazy, despite his protestations.......... as a minimum I'd having a 'robust conversation' with him. Your the one's who have been left in a jam. Get him to reduce his Building Regs fee also?
 
Yes, his argument for not ticking 'yes' to the tree question was partly based on the additional cost of a tree survey but mainly based on saying that planning always advise that they will ask for one if required.

We obviously knew about the close proximity of trees when we bought the house but the vendor was very difficult (to say the least) and made it hard for us to view the property once we'd made an offer.

We moved in at the end of Janaury and had the architect round within a week. He spent a lot of time looking at the plot. I pointed out the trees and said I'd noticed that their roots were quite prominent on our side of the boundary. Obviously I'm not a building or planning professional and I was concerned that they would be 'in the way' of the proposed extension. He explained that where tree roots are concerned, builders get around the problem by digging deeper foundations but obviously, with hindsight, how could the planning department or building control advise digging seeper foundations if they weren't being made aware of the trees?

In the event, the trees are shallow-rooted and not causing a problem. Extra deep foundations are not needed. Still, the whole process must begin again. The neighbours must be consulted all over again, which puzzles me because they're just going to get additional information about some pretty but irrelevant trees.

I wish there was some way of applying common sense to this. If the tree survey had highlighted any issues, I could understand having to re-consult and go over things again. As it happens, the tree survey shows no problems. I'm struggling to understand why the decision must now be held up. There can be no further objection since there's nothing to object about.
 
Yes, his argument for not ticking 'yes' to the tree question was partly based on the additional cost of a tree survey but mainly based on saying that planning always advise that they will ask for one if required.

We obviously knew about the close proximity of trees when we bought the house but the vendor was very difficult (to say the least) and made it hard for us to view the property once we'd made an offer.

We moved in at the end of Janaury and had the architect round within a week. He spent a lot of time looking at the plot. I pointed out the trees and said I'd noticed that their roots were quite prominent on our side of the boundary. Obviously I'm not a building or planning professional and I was concerned that they would be 'in the way' of the proposed extension. He explained that where tree roots are concerned, builders get around the problem by digging deeper foundations but obviously, with hindsight, how could the planning department or building control advise digging seeper foundations if they weren't being made aware of the trees?

In the event, the trees are shallow-rooted and not causing a problem. Extra deep foundations are not needed. Still, the whole process must begin again. The neighbours must be consulted all over again, which puzzles me because they're just going to get additional information about some pretty but irrelevant trees.

I wish there was some way of applying common sense to this. If the tree survey had highlighted any issues, I could understand having to re-consult and go over things again. As it happens, the tree survey shows no problems. I'm struggling to understand why the decision must now be held up. There can be no further objection since there's nothing to object about.
 
If the LPA has validated the application, then it can't be subsequently invalidated.

In any case, the government guide to LPA's specifically states that lack of supporting information is not a reason to invalidate an application

And the planner should have noticed this on his visit and notified you sooner

If the LPA does not give you a decision by eight weeks after the application was validated, then you can automatically appeal to the Planning Inspectorate on the grounds of non-determination
 
You're not really listening

your architect ticked a box he shouldn't have

planners have their rules and regulations to abide by

they're acting in accordance with planning law.

The foundations need to be designed to accommodate any special circumstances such as the trees, Building Control would insist on deeper foundations when they inspected and discover whacking great trees next to the development. Your architect needs to make allowances for this in his drawings or you'll be back here complaining abut the system when your architect's been incompetent again!
 
I'm not listening?

Why do the foundations need changing?

The tree survey says shallow-rooted trees, nothing within root protection distance, cut any existing roots by hand - no need for any special alterations to the plans.
 
In a nutshell yes. It consists of several documents - plans, detailed descriptions of the trees etc. There is an aerial drawing which shows the root protection area for each tree and it's clear that the extension isn't in any of these zones.

I was expecting it to require deeper foundations but apparently not.
 
It does seem a lot of fuss about nothing.

Oh dear! Trees! Oh ****! Survey on desk! Trees not a problem! Stop the clock! Reconsult the neighbours and the parish council! Show them the pretty trees! How interesting! Are they a problem? No!.........

I also work in a public organisation. There's a lot of stuff that gets done 'because that's what the rules say' which actually cause hold ups and problems and don't serve any purpose. I guess I'm strugglign with the 'not serving any purpose'
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top