Building a new one bedroom home on my parents land?

[ProfoundlyD]

Sorry if this isn't the right place to ask my question.

First of all I am 34 year old & profoundly deaf from south west greater london' I would like to apologies in advance for my poor gammar and spelling but I will try my best to be clear as possible.

I am unable to get on the property ladder and struggling with high rent which is forever going up.

I had a discussion with my parents about the possibility of knocking down my parents garage and shed so i can build a one bedroom detached bungalow on their land so I can owned my own place. The land will be in my name and have my own new address.

The problem is Richmond council are not being very helpful letting me know if this plan of my would be doable or not. I ask for a 15 min meeting to show my plan but they are not interested.

I will have to pay a around £900 to show them my plan and they still won't tell me if possible or not.

I have put two pictures up, do you think it doable or not?

Thank you.

 

[noseall]

The loss of your parents' garage and the lack of parking for your own dwelling alone will be enough for a refusal.
Probably.

 

[Nakajo]

See if you can find any precedent on Richmond's planning pages.

 

[ProfoundlyD]

I forgot to mention noseall the drop kerb in the pictures I have put up i wanted to have the kerb put up so it is no longer a drop kerb where the garage is.

Also have a new drop kerb at the front of my parents house, it will improve the parking problems because I will have my van off the road too by parking on my parents drive.

Hope I am making sense here.

 

[Nakajo]

Actually Richmond's site is rubbish for these kinds of searches. Sorry.

 

[cjard]

I thought there were no precedents in planning?

 

[Nakajo]

That's what they want you to think.

 

[cjard]

It's an oft trotted line, but then you see mixed examples - some people do get that dormer because the neighbouring houses have it, others don't get it "because every application is assessed on its own merits"

Overall, I think there aren't any precedents, just cases where one person found sufficient justification and other people can then give the same reasons. At least until there's a change in the local plan

 

[PTS2]

Precedent only applies to planners if it supports a decision they've already made.

I reckon the only way you'll find this out is to chuck in a plan and if (when) it gets knocked back then go to appeal which is where you'll get a more impartial decision. As any new house is going to be worth a fortune in Richmond you need to get enough cash together to get somebody in to help who knows what they are doing. Look at it on as a better bet than some nag on the 2:30 at Doncaster.

 

[Nakajo]

The point is, if there are previous/recent applications which have been refused, then the likelihood is that this will be refused too.

 

[^woody^]

Precedent only applies to planners if it supports a decision they've already made.

There is no such thing as precedent in planning. It's a common mistake to think that it does, or that it can be used to justify further development. It can't.

Only appeal decisions can carry any weight.

Likewise, previous refusals are no guarantee that subsequent applications (which are different to previous ones, or address reasons for refusals) will also be refused.

 

[^woody^]

do you think it doable or not?

Get some advice from a local planning consultant or [good] architectural technician. Free or pay for their time.

It might be worth approaching this as a granny flat, where by the development can be tied to the main house. Using your disability as a lever for independent living.

 

[Nakajo]

It's delusional to think that precedent cannot be used to justify development. For instance, within a conservation area, designers wishing to depart from identikit developments have to justify their proposals against the backdrop of what has gone before, and explain why an apparently contrasting development conforms with the principles set out in an appraisal statement, say. Sometimes they take their schemes before design appraisal committees and have exactly these sorts of conversations. Likewise for developments of this type. If there's a recent case where local planning policy was shown to support a proposed development, then there's hope for the OP. For a layman, it's a shortcut to ploughing through policy. (That said, I don't hold much hope for development on this particular site - although I think the granny flat/disability approach is an excellent idea.).

 

[^woody^]

It's delusional

Not really.

Yes areas can change, and that can be used as support for an application. But that is not precedent.

The council is under no obligation to approve development just because there is something similar there already. There is no reason to compound previous [bad] decisions, or make areas worse by over developing with poor design - despite what had gone on in the past.

The local policy is everything, and that decides what is acceptable.

 

[Nakajo]

Yes, but it's about making an assessment of the likelihood of obtaining planning permission prior to committing time and energy to the project.