Part one/two storey side extension

[Another John]

Hello, I'm new here and I wonder if anyone can help me with this please?

My daughter recently has an application for a part one/two storey extension refused for the reason –
‘The proposal does not comply with the Council’s requirement for a minimum 1 metre side space to be maintained to the flank boundary in respect of a two-storey development in the absence of which would constitute a cramped form of development…’
The relevant policy reads –
(i) for a proposal of two or more storeys in height, a minimum 1 metre space from the side boundary of the site should be retained for the full height and length of the flank wall of the building; or
(ii) where higher standards of separation already exist within residential areas, proposals will be expected to provide a more generous side space. This will be the case on some corner properties.

To explain, the house is on a corner plot and the one-storey part of the proposed extension is 0.3m to the flank boundary and the two-storey part is 2m.

So, on the face of it, this proposal does not meet the aims and objectives of the UDP, hence, its refusal seems correct.

However, the Council will allow separate applications for a two-storey extension with a 2m side space and a one-storey extension with a 0.3m side space (even where the two-storey part is 1m back), which means that the refusal was based upon a strict adherence to the wording of the policy; and not necessarily the aims and objectives behind it, which should read –
(i) for a proposal of two or more storeys in height, a minimum 1 metre space from the side boundary of the site should be retained for the full height and length of the two-storey flank wall of the building; or

My question is – could the Council have used discretion in interpreting the policy to approve this application?

If the answer is NO, it means that every similar application would require 2 sets of architects drawings, 2 application fees and 2 lots of waiting 8 weeks for approval – OR would it be possible to save 8 weeks at least by lodging both applications at the same time?

Thank you for your time.

 

[Nakajo]

Yes, I think they could and should have used discretion. If time permits, submit an appeal.

 

[Another John]

Thank you Nakajo.

Unfortunately, I spoke to the Planning Inspectorate on Friday and they're saying that there's a huge workload which means that Householder Appeals are now taking 16-18 weeks.

This leaves me back in the hands of the local planning department so I'm trying to find out if I can put pressure on them to reconsider the case with the merits of my technical/academic argument in mind.

 

[Nakajo]

It might be useful to provide drawings here.

 

[^woody^]

I'm trying to find out if I can put pressure on them to reconsider the case

They can't do that.

You either appeal the decision, or submit a revised scheme. Those are the options.

You can also do both.

 

[Another John]

Thank you Woody.

The Appeal will take too long so it will have to be a revised scheme, which leads me to another question that I'd touched upon in my first post.

Ultimately, the Council accepts to-the-boundary single-storey extensions and (on a corner plot) 2m to-the-boundary two-storey extensions but, as we've found out, not under the same application. So, can I submit an application for each part at the same time?

 

[^woody^]

On several occasions in the past, with contentious extensions, the contentious bit was done under permitted development, and I've applied for the other bits.

The situations were very similar to yours - ground floor under permitted development ( for which the council had no control) and first floor applied for permission ( and in accordance with the planning policy).

Each time, the planners played their face up - arguing that the other work needed to be started/significantly complete/fully complete or that work could not be applied for if the planner could not see the party of the building it was too be built on as they could not "visualise it"!

Each time I would argue to the contrary, and each time ask for any precedent or case law that supported the planner's assertions, and remind them of the costs of delays would be sought from the council. And each time the planners did not provide and reference and accepted the applications and subsequently granted approvals.

It's been a couple of years since I last had to do this, but I've not come across anything in the meantime to say that this still can't be done.

So I can't why your daughter can't apply for the first floor even though the ground floor is not built yet, and on a similar theme there is no reason why she can't apply for the two schemes at the same time.

And you could also pursue an appeal, based on this nonsensical situation - especially if the council ends up approving a scheme in two applications, what was refused as one application. And if you won such an appeal, then the costs of the two subsequent applications ( and plan drawing) should be awarded. If not by the inspectorate, then by the Local Government Ombudsman via a separate complaint to the council.

Having said that, the council does seem to have followed their own policy in terms of the two storey extension not being 1m in from the boundary. So perhaps the agent should have known this and not designed a non compliant extension in the first place - but advised your daughter of how to circumvent this?

 

[Another John]

This is very interesting Woody; and I really appreciate you giving me the benefit of your experiences in similar circumstances.

Everything you've said makes total sense, which gives me added confidence in going forward with this, so thank you again.