Hello guys,
We have an end-of-terrace house locates in Lambeth borough of London. There's a 1.8m gap between the exterior wall of the house and the party wall on the side adjoining an unused playground, which we thought could be used for extension. We employed a local design firm called DesignTeam to help with design and planning application, and the architectural designer suggested a two storey side extension during the first onsite consultation. We trusted the firm's local experiences, and decided to proceed with 2 storey design option. In the end we applied for planning application for a project including both two storey side extension and one storey rear extension.
Last week was the 8th week after our application was submitted, and the designer from DesignTeam informed us that the case officer said she would refuse our application, not allowing any amendment due to her heavy workload, and suggest us withdraw the application within 1 day. The designer strongly recommended us to proceed with refusal and then appeal afterwards, as he thought the case officer behaved unreasonably and lack of due diligence by not allowing amendments and not paid a site visit to our house either (case officer claimed she could view our house from public street, which is not possible for backyard where rear extension was planned). He said he had done many applications with Lambeth council. Most of cases the case officer would either accept his explanation or allow amendments. It's just this particular case officer that was very difficult to work with and even get hold of.
Being surprised at the case officer's feedback, I did some search work myself, and found an example from the council's local planning guidance (as attached), which I thought can be clearly applied to refusing our application. Therefore I asked the designer again, and he said that the planning guidance is for guide purpose only. He had many cases that didn't fully meet the requirements from the Lambeth guidance but still succeeded in the application. He insisted that it's because the planning officer being difficult to us and unwilling to negotiate.
Now our application has been officially refused. From the portal, one of the two main reasons is: "The proposed side and rear extensions, by virtue of their design, size, scale, siting and wrap-around nature at ground floor level, would fail to archive subordination with the host building." We were planning to finish the project by the end of the year, which is no longer possible. The designer suggested us to proceed with appeal, and they have a third party inspector experienced in appealing who charges 1,500 pounds upfront. At the same time we can submit another application to Lambeth with a modified design, which can be proceeded at the same time to save time.
I start to suspect that I may not fully trust what the designer said. My questions are:
- Do we have to strictly follow council's local guidance? In this particular example, whether the 1m minimum side space on the first floor still applicable for our end of terrace house facing an unused playground?
- Is it a major mistake for the designer not following the guidance? if so, are we eligible to seek for their compensations? (we have paid over 6k including architectural design, structural, interior, etc)
- Would it worth an appeal? 1,500 pounds is not a small money, and I think council has a sound argument with the example in the local planning guidance.
Thanks for your time to read through my story. It's so unfortunate for us that our first application got refused, and your advices are highly appreciated!
Jay
We have an end-of-terrace house locates in Lambeth borough of London. There's a 1.8m gap between the exterior wall of the house and the party wall on the side adjoining an unused playground, which we thought could be used for extension. We employed a local design firm called DesignTeam to help with design and planning application, and the architectural designer suggested a two storey side extension during the first onsite consultation. We trusted the firm's local experiences, and decided to proceed with 2 storey design option. In the end we applied for planning application for a project including both two storey side extension and one storey rear extension.
Last week was the 8th week after our application was submitted, and the designer from DesignTeam informed us that the case officer said she would refuse our application, not allowing any amendment due to her heavy workload, and suggest us withdraw the application within 1 day. The designer strongly recommended us to proceed with refusal and then appeal afterwards, as he thought the case officer behaved unreasonably and lack of due diligence by not allowing amendments and not paid a site visit to our house either (case officer claimed she could view our house from public street, which is not possible for backyard where rear extension was planned). He said he had done many applications with Lambeth council. Most of cases the case officer would either accept his explanation or allow amendments. It's just this particular case officer that was very difficult to work with and even get hold of.
Being surprised at the case officer's feedback, I did some search work myself, and found an example from the council's local planning guidance (as attached), which I thought can be clearly applied to refusing our application. Therefore I asked the designer again, and he said that the planning guidance is for guide purpose only. He had many cases that didn't fully meet the requirements from the Lambeth guidance but still succeeded in the application. He insisted that it's because the planning officer being difficult to us and unwilling to negotiate.
Now our application has been officially refused. From the portal, one of the two main reasons is: "The proposed side and rear extensions, by virtue of their design, size, scale, siting and wrap-around nature at ground floor level, would fail to archive subordination with the host building." We were planning to finish the project by the end of the year, which is no longer possible. The designer suggested us to proceed with appeal, and they have a third party inspector experienced in appealing who charges 1,500 pounds upfront. At the same time we can submit another application to Lambeth with a modified design, which can be proceeded at the same time to save time.
I start to suspect that I may not fully trust what the designer said. My questions are:
- Do we have to strictly follow council's local guidance? In this particular example, whether the 1m minimum side space on the first floor still applicable for our end of terrace house facing an unused playground?
- Is it a major mistake for the designer not following the guidance? if so, are we eligible to seek for their compensations? (we have paid over 6k including architectural design, structural, interior, etc)
- Would it worth an appeal? 1,500 pounds is not a small money, and I think council has a sound argument with the example in the local planning guidance.
Thanks for your time to read through my story. It's so unfortunate for us that our first application got refused, and your advices are highly appreciated!
Jay