Hi,
Wonder if anyone can lend any experienced advice or point me in the direction of self help.
I purchased a house to renovate and extend to move into. It's a 1970's semi in a street of same design properties. A number if these properties have been extended to the side adding 4m to the original property.
In my particular plot there is much more space on the side, therefore the ground extension to the side is 88% of the original dwelling. Originally I had the upper level to the same degree with a 1m step back at the front to provide subservience. However planning still said too big at first floor and it will need pulling in. Ok fair play so I pulled it in to 65% (4.35m). The ground level they were not concerned about so this remained. However I moved the front of the upper extension to step back 0.5m rather than the original 1m.
Planning looked at the revised plans and originally said they were fine yet a day later came back and said they went following a measurement with their scale rule showing over 4m to the side at first floor. Also they noted that the front had been brought forward and they wanted it changing back to 1m step back.
I arranged a meeting with the planner and noted that due to the roof plane it would not be possible to pull the side in the extra 0.35m or front 0.5 and that whilst others properties in the street where 4m to the side they were stepped back less than 0.5m at the front. They noted that "each property is evaluated on their own merit etc" blah blah! However I noted that if I could get the side in to 4m would they allow the 0.5m step back for which they said no, it needed to be 1m.
At this point I ask for a reason why a more prominently positioned property was granted recent permission for 0.4m step back and displayed photos as an example. She went to check the details of the other property and noted that it had not been built to the approved plans and that what had been approved was 0.8m! Now not wanting to get anyone else into any trouble I dropped this argument. However 2 other properties opposite which had extensions started last year, just finishing now have a 0.3m step back, which were approved as such!
Now I've revised my plans and managed to squeeze a 0.8m step back but now think I'm being unfairly treat given all other extensions on the street are not stepped back to the same degree and will as a result flip a lid if they still come back and deny this.
I wouldn't actually mind, yet as noted I can't achieve the 1m without major change due to the roofline I need to cater for at the rear, as a result of the first floor being brought in over the ground floor. Hard to conceptualise without example I know but take my word on this for information only
.
Anyway, the main question is, do I have any argument in relation to the other properties and their much reduced step back and is there anyone who I can go to in order to seek advice?
From what I've read reading a lot of acceptance and rejection notices, the reason for rejecting one can be the exact same reason for accepting another by different case officers. In fact the case officer that accepted the 0.3m step back on a neighbor is the same case officer I have! The whole thing seems very subjective and unreasonable... Or am I being unreasonable to expect the same level of treatment given the ground floor is larger because of the larger plot?
Wonder if anyone can lend any experienced advice or point me in the direction of self help.
I purchased a house to renovate and extend to move into. It's a 1970's semi in a street of same design properties. A number if these properties have been extended to the side adding 4m to the original property.
In my particular plot there is much more space on the side, therefore the ground extension to the side is 88% of the original dwelling. Originally I had the upper level to the same degree with a 1m step back at the front to provide subservience. However planning still said too big at first floor and it will need pulling in. Ok fair play so I pulled it in to 65% (4.35m). The ground level they were not concerned about so this remained. However I moved the front of the upper extension to step back 0.5m rather than the original 1m.
Planning looked at the revised plans and originally said they were fine yet a day later came back and said they went following a measurement with their scale rule showing over 4m to the side at first floor. Also they noted that the front had been brought forward and they wanted it changing back to 1m step back.
I arranged a meeting with the planner and noted that due to the roof plane it would not be possible to pull the side in the extra 0.35m or front 0.5 and that whilst others properties in the street where 4m to the side they were stepped back less than 0.5m at the front. They noted that "each property is evaluated on their own merit etc" blah blah! However I noted that if I could get the side in to 4m would they allow the 0.5m step back for which they said no, it needed to be 1m.
At this point I ask for a reason why a more prominently positioned property was granted recent permission for 0.4m step back and displayed photos as an example. She went to check the details of the other property and noted that it had not been built to the approved plans and that what had been approved was 0.8m! Now not wanting to get anyone else into any trouble I dropped this argument. However 2 other properties opposite which had extensions started last year, just finishing now have a 0.3m step back, which were approved as such!
Now I've revised my plans and managed to squeeze a 0.8m step back but now think I'm being unfairly treat given all other extensions on the street are not stepped back to the same degree and will as a result flip a lid if they still come back and deny this.
I wouldn't actually mind, yet as noted I can't achieve the 1m without major change due to the roofline I need to cater for at the rear, as a result of the first floor being brought in over the ground floor. Hard to conceptualise without example I know but take my word on this for information only
.Anyway, the main question is, do I have any argument in relation to the other properties and their much reduced step back and is there anyone who I can go to in order to seek advice?
From what I've read reading a lot of acceptance and rejection notices, the reason for rejecting one can be the exact same reason for accepting another by different case officers. In fact the case officer that accepted the 0.3m step back on a neighbor is the same case officer I have! The whole thing seems very subjective and unreasonable... Or am I being unreasonable to expect the same level of treatment given the ground floor is larger because of the larger plot?
