Attempting to 'reason' with a planning department.

[PeteWilliams]

Hi,

Just wondering if this is worth a shot…

Our 3m rear extension was denied on the basis that it was 'inappropriate development in the greenbelt'. We've now found that the council is going to allow 160 new homes to be built in the field literally on the other side of the road to our house.

To me, that rather invalidates their refusal of our application, but I suspect it will make no difference to their standing. Anyone had any experience of this situation? Can they be 'reasoned' with, or would an appeal be an option..?

Cheers

Pete

 

[Notch7]

Im guessing you cant do it under PD?

There is no precedent accepted in planning. So the 'my neighbour has one' doesnt count. (im not saying your situation is comparable, but you wont be able to say, what about the 160 homes?....)

 

[Nakajo]

Reason? That's a good one, that is. Just appeal it, referencing the neighbouring development. You have a decent shot at success.

 

[PeteWilliams]

Im guessing you cant do it under PD?

Well we thought so, but they said no…

The house already has a 3m single-storey extension so in theory we could go back to 6m from the 'original house' with PD. But apparently because the proposed extension touches other existing extensions, they evaluated them all as a single extension and said it wouldn't come under permitted development.

See this image: https://photos.app.goo.gl/DFMJg0gYrugnRYY63
They treated our certificate of lawfulness application as if we were applying for the new extension, the two single-storey extensions, and I think the 2 storey extension as well… and said we couldn't have it - despite the fact that we already have the bits that don't qualify…

Utter madness, but the rules seemed to be on their side with this one.

 

[^woody^]

It is a reasonable decision.

The reasons to grant permission for a new homes is based on different factors to those which are used to control the appearance of existing homes - these factors will then be applied to those new homes.

But whether the decision was correct implementation of policies is a different matter. That's what appeals are for.

 

[lt8480]

Could you clarify approximately when the other extensions were built, whether any of them were granted planning or have pre-existing LDCs. and the approximate external widths and depths of each.

You may be able to extend up to 6m using the prior notification route (and hope no neighbour objects) - I think this is still possible even if you are in the green belt / I think this route still works as long as you are not in Designated Land (conservation areas, national parks and the Broads, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and World Heritage Sites). However the status of the extisting extension will determine whether this can be done.

Not that is probably helps but out of curiosity is the field where they are building the new houses also Greenbelt?

If you can share drawings and the delegated report (not just the refusal notice) then we may be able to advise further.

 

[wessex101]

Hi,

Just wondering if this is worth a shot…

Our 3m rear extension was denied on the basis that it was 'inappropriate development in the greenbelt'. We've now found that the council is going to allow 160 new homes to be built in the field literally on the other side of the road to our house.

To me, that rather invalidates their refusal of our application, but I suspect it will make no difference to their standing. Anyone had any experience of this situation? Can they be 'reasoned' with, or would an appeal be an option..?

Cheers

Pete

Is that all the refusal notice said? It seems rather brief, it didn't quote any specific planning policies? Can you look at the planning officer's report?

Most Councils will have specific Green Belt policies, for instance a couple near me only allow a maximum 50% increase in floor area so your extension would fall foul of that.

As for an appeal, are you still in time for an appeal? Always worth a go if you can show the planners have not applied their policies correctly.

 

[Aeron Rees]

I’m not entirely sure the reason for not allowing you to do it under permitted development is correct. You are able to go back 6 m from the rear elevation of the original dwellinghouse under a Notification for Prior Approval for a Proposed Larger Home Extension (as long as no neighbours object). Based on your drawings you are only extending to the rear of the existing three meter extension, so are within 6 m limit for single storey rear extensions. The only potential thing that I could see on your drawing is that the line for the single story extension directly to the rear of the original dwellinghouse goes past the side of the original dwellinghouse by a tiny amount (though this might just be the drawing). If it is the case that the proposed extension goes past the side of the original dwellinghouse by even a millimetre then it would be classed as a side extension and therefore the total width of the extension cannot be greater than half the width of the original dwellinghouse, that may be why they are not allowing PD, however it might be that the drawing is a little bit off and that’s not the case at all.

In terms of ‘inappropriate development’, as you know that is a very subjective term and basically is what the planner determining the application and the manager who signs off think (though the planner and their manager often come to different conclusions themselves, but obviously the manager’s opinion appears to be final in most cases).

Obviously what is inappropriate to one person may be appropriate to another. I don’t know what materials your extension is made up of etc. But the inspector that would determine the appeal is just another person with their own opinion, and I have seen countless times where the inspector has come to a different opinion to the planner.

It would be worth seeing the actual report written by the planner and some elevation drawings of your proposal, including proposed materials so that I can give you my opinion, though again it is just another opinion to throw into the mix.

With regard to the new houses, it probably won’t influence the Local Planning Authority, but if you appeal it you don’t need to worry about what the local planning authority think, just the inspector!

 

[PeteWilliams]

I'll rummage out the original report and drawings etc tomorrow. But some info from memory:

With regards to the original extension plan, they said that they normally allow you to extend up to 50% above the original footprint. Somehow our house is already at 125%, so they've said that's our lot and they won't approve any increase, no matter how small.

With regards to the rear PD extension, I believe that was done under a Notification for Prior Approval for a Proposed Larger Home Extension. Ignore the inaccuracy in the sketch, the extension just went out, not sideways.
Here's our architect's summary of the council's decision:

"Because the new extension is being attached to an existing extension and where this is the case the council consider all the existing extensions combined under permitted development rules. So because the new extension is classed together with the existing side and rear extensions, the council consider the total enlargement to exceed 4 metres in height, have more than one storey, have a width greater than half the original house and extend beyond a wall forming a side elevation of the original dwelling house. This is deemed to be the case even though the previous extensions were approved under planning applications and not PD.

The case officer advised that the technical guidance on permitted development was updated last month (April 2017) to clarify this point as it was not explicit about this in the previous guidance. However she advised it would not have changed their decision if the application was submitted before the guidance clarification was issued."

 

[^woody^]

Yes, all standard and reasonable.

 

[garyo]

If you build a 20cm wide alleyway down the middle of your two existing 3M rear extensions, then you change the consideration from a PD point of view, but that might be too much of a price for you to pay.

 

[PeteWilliams]

Yeah I did briefly consider that, but the door in that wall is the only viable entrance into the kitchen.

 

[geraldthehamster]

Prior Notification isn't retrospective - you can't get it for something already built. Which 3m of your proposed total 6m extension already is.

 

[Aeron Rees]

With regards to the original extension plan, they said that they normally allow you to extend up to 50% above the original footprint. Somehow our house is already at 125%, so they've said that's our lot and they won't approve any increase, no matter how small.

No, the permitted development stipulates that you can build up to 50% of the curtilage (i.e. the garden and everything surrounding the original building). Therefore you could build three times bigger than the original house as long as it didn’t take up more than 50% of the curtilage area (original building not included).

With regard to the other assessment criteria that the council have used, I believe they are correct unfortunately.

To be honest, I think your best bet would be to appeal a refusal, see what the inspector says, and if they approve it all good, if not then you are just back to square one but have tried everything in your power to get it through.

Sorry I couldn’t be more help.

 

[PeteWilliams]

No, the permitted development stipulates that you can build up to 50% of the curtilage (i.e. the garden and everything surrounding the original building). Therefore you could build three times bigger than the original house as long as it didn’t take up more than 50% of the curtilage area (original building not included).

This was a full application, not PD. The 50% is their own rule for what they do/do not allow when it comes to extensions.

Thanks to all who have replied, I'll have a think about what to do next.