PP Declined - Overly Dominant Extension Vs Local Plan policy - Appeal?

Joined
24 Aug 2004
Messages
139
Reaction score
3
Location
Devon
Country
United Kingdom
Hi,
Applied for Planning Permission to LA for an over garage second storey extension on a 3 bed detached property. Planning Officer states that application will be refused as extension is "overly dominant and it would fail to respect the character of the original building, contrary to Policy DE5 of the adopted local plan"

In speaking with him, he said the extension should be "subservient to the existing property". In my opinion it is, i.e. considerably smaller than the original. The word subservient isn't used in the adopted local plan policy.

He went on to say that if the extension plans are amended to set back by 0.5M from the original line and lower from the existing ridge by 0.5M the application would be approved. I don't want to do this as it's not a particularly big extension in the first place and this will make it not worth while. Also, it would look rubbish.

Q1: Is there relevant planning law that uses the word "subservient" that could be referenced on appeal by the Planning Inspectorate?

Q2: Is there planning law that states extensions have to be set back by X metres? (Detached Property
(Permitted Development rights removed - housing estate)

I've tried to search for the above but couldn't find anything... I intend to appeal if the only basis for refusal is the policy in the local plan as the estate we live on has precedent with several houses already having done what I want to do. Just want to make sure I know a bit more before proceeding or if there are any gotcha's out there.

Thanks
 
Sponsored Links
That's a standard requirement up and down the land. The local policy is hardly every prescriptive, but will state in general terms how development can meet policy.

There are situations when an extension could be deemed acceptable without a set back or lower ridge, but not on bog standard houses.

The alternative, as many people do, is get the plans passed on a compliant design, and then build something different.
 
As it is a detached property it depends how the extension will appear in relation to the existing property and if close to the boundary, adjoining properties, will it retain a gap between the adjoining property?

I have got planning permission for several extensions that have been taller, larger or set forward of the existing house but in each case the plot has been large enough to take it and the overall design looked balanced.

On the other hand, side extensions on semi-detached properties or detached properties where the extension runs up to the boundary are more problematic and the set back from the front elevation and reduced ridge height are more important to avoid the old "terracing" affect. 0.5m seems quite generous as a set back, anything up to 1 metre is quite normal, I'm working on one at the moment where the planner has asked for a 3 metre set back but that isn't going to happen (I assumed it was a typo but he has confirmed he really did mean 3 metres).

Read the local planning policies, although usually they are very vague and not all that helpful. Going through the local planning applications and trying to find similar applications that have been approved probably provides more helpful guidance. I spent this afternoon listing all the local 2 storey side extension applications approved in last 5 years with a set back of 1 metre rather than the 3 metres that the new planning officer has asked for. In the space of about an hour I've found 3 applications in very close proximity so god knows where he dreamt this 3 metres up from and should strengthen our argument.
 
That's a standard requirement up and down the land. The local policy is hardly every prescriptive, but will state in general terms how development can meet policy.

There are situations when an extension could be deemed acceptable without a set back or lower ridge, but not on bog standard houses.

The alternative, as many people do, is get the plans passed on a compliant design, and then build something different.

Hi Woody, is there a piece of planning law that states it is a standard requirement? I couldnt find it...

I'm curious about your last point; wouldn't that be problematic if we sold and the approved plans didnt match the actual build.., assuming an enforcement notice didn't happen in the meantime:( Thanks again.
 
Sponsored Links
As it is a detached property it depends how the extension will appear in relation to the existing property and if close to the boundary, adjoining properties, will it retain a gap between the adjoining property?

Read the local planning policies, although usually they are very vague and not all that helpful. Going through the local planning applications and trying to find similar applications that have been approved probably provides more helpful guidance. I spent this afternoon listing all the local 2 storey side extension applications approved in last 5 years with a set back of 1 metre rather than the 3 metres that the new planning officer has asked for. In the space of about an hour I've found 3 applications in very close proximity so god knows where he dreamt this 3 metres up from and should strengthen our argument.

Hi Wessex. The boundary gap will be the same as we are building above an existing attached garage. There will be no terracing effect. The build will actually look like several larger houses on the estate from the developers original plan in the 80's; our house was the smallest layout on an estate made up of all detached houses. Ive sent PO pictures of 3 houses like mine that have extended without step down/back; PO is not intereted as the Local plan adopted in 2015 has "material changes" from prior plan, his words. Im either going to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate or do what Woody suggests i think. Thanks
 
Sounds like it might be worth sticking to your guns and calling the planners bluff. Sometimes they just get it wrong and you have to take it to appeal.

Worth nailing down those "material changes" to the local plan though. If there is specific guidance in the local plan that the extension will contravene then the planning inspector is unlikely to go against it.
 
Worth nailing down those "material changes" to the local plan though. If there is specific guidance in the local plan that the extension will contravene then the planning inspector is unlikely to go against it.

Thats the problem, i cant get hold of the previous adopted plan to compare the material changes... I think ill just ask the council for a copy.
 
Still confused... Is the Set Back/Set down actual planning law or did this originate into common practice some other way?
 
In the space of about an hour I've found 3 applications in very close proximity so god knows where he dreamt this 3 metres up from and should strengthen our argument.
When would you make that argument? In a supporting statement at the point of application, or during the process when you're in communication with the case officer and trying to steer things?
 
Still confused... Is the Set Back/Set down actual planning law or did this originate into common practice some other way?

The requirement for any set back is part of planning policy, which is different to planning law.

Policy is based on how the council want the area to look, so the council draw up a set of guidelines as to how things can be built to acheive the look required by the policy.

As a concept, planners like to maintain the look and feel of an area by keeping as much of the original appearance as possible, and then over time new additions or changes in society and social character can be evidenced, rather than building everything to mimic the existing and everything looks the same in say 100 years time.

So, in this case, the original house needs to be be the dominant feature and any additions to harmonise (not mimic) and to be subservient. Basically, extensions need to appear to be extensions and not make the house just look like a bigger house. It is that concept which is practiced by all planning authorities.

Sometimes there is architectural merit, or specific need to ignore this concept, as the end result will be a positive addition to the area. That is why policy is not prescriptive and relies on subjectivity - allowing someone to justify a design that contravenes normal policy - in fact there is normally a policy to allow this!
 
Thanks Woody. I have the extract of the planning policy from the adopted local plan. Would it be naive to assume that as there is no mention of set back in the policy then set back does not form part of the policy? The bit I am struggling with is that I can't find it documented anywhere.

Here is the extract:

Policy DE5 Domestic Extensions: Extensions to domestic dwellings will be permitted where:
  1. The plot is large enough to accommodate the proposed extension without resulting in a cramped or overdeveloped site,or the loss of important trees or hedgerows
  2. The extension would not dominate or have other adverse effects on the character or appearance of the original property or any neighboring properties, or on the street scene in general.
  3. The extension would not cause harm to the amenity of nearby properties, for example through overlooking, overbearing impact, loss of privacy, or water run off
  4. The extension would not result in the loss of parking, including garage space, where no suitable alternative exists to serve the property
  5. Highway safety would not be impaired; and
  6. No net additional surface water should drain into shared sewers
I am confident that my proposal meets 1,3,4,5,6. the contentious area is 2. The case officer is quoting the explanation notes from the policy "important that house extensions respect the character of the original building...and should therefore be of an appropriate scale or design’ The part of the explanation he left out was respect the character of the original building and the surrounding area.. and should therefore be of an appropriate scale or design

My argument is that the extension does not dominate the original property and blends with the surrounding area as the estate is full of mixed design detached houses from the original development; the extension just makes the property look like one of the bigger original plots on the development, but not the biggest.

It becomes a subjective point of view and I could understand it on a street where all of the houses are identical in size and design and it was just mine that had an extension, but that isn't the case here. I would argue that a stepped back/down extension would actually detract from the overall design of the estate as no other properties have this. (the ones that have extended have been allowed to mimic)

It's just frustrating as we desperately need the space for a new arrival! Highly likely I'll have to appeal when they refuse on Friday :(
 
Well I still think your argument has merit.

Just make sure you have expressed your argument clearly and have all your evidence in the application. Otherwise withdraw application and resubmit with all your statements and evidence added otherwise it wont be considered at the appeal. (using back up laptop with dodgy keyboard so kept it brief)
 
If you want to fight for the design rather than make concessions to satisfy the council, then just bang an appeal in. Put your case in writing and submit it- there is no fee for appeals, you can submit online, and you will get a decision in around 8 weeks.

Worst case scenario you lose the appeal and then apply for the amended design the planning officer has asked for. This is also free as you get a free re-submission.

So- a second opinion for free, and a fall back option which is also free. The only problem being it all takes time.
 

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