Planning Application Strategy

[RichA]

From reading some of the local Delegated Officers Reports 'Scale & Character' is often one of the local policies that thwarts proposed planning applications. The borough has a c50% 'benchmark' as an acceptable increase from the original property.

However, it may be possible under permitted development to achieve substantially more than this.

Is it every a good strategy to apply for a permitted development certificate of lawfulness for a large extension, perhaps with some extra bits, so as to demonstrate that a large scale extension could be achieved, only to submit a planning application for a slightly smaller extension (but still >50%).

The example would be wanting a 4m 2-storey rear extension, with a loft conversion & porch (totalling 80% increase).

[But could achieve a 3m 2-storey rear extension rear, loft conversion, porch and a 5m wide side extension under PD (100% increase)]

Thanks.

 

[^woody^]

Nah, that's a waste of time strategy.

 

[tony1851]

Actually, I'm not sure that is a waste of time.

As an example: when proposing an extension(s) to a house in the Green Belt, many LPAs limit the total increase in volume - usually to around one-third of the original volume of the house. This will often be less than the homeowner wants.

As permitted development rights apply to houses in the GB, a way forward is to draw up plans showing the maximum number and size of extensions which would be allowed under p.d. This would include side- and rear extensions, dormer additions, porches etc. Frankly, the aim is to make the total extensions look as dreadful as possible; planning consultants call this the 'fall-back' position. The volume increase will certainly be well-above the LPA's policy, and may also be above the increase in volume the client actually wants.

So you put it to the LPA: "do I have the extension I want, or do I build several - legitimate - extensions to give me what I want, even though the house would look naff, and would be far bigger than you want?"

Personally, I've tried this twice, and it worked.

 

[^woody^]

For contentious schemes, you would include details of the fall back scheme as part of the application.

Every application is considered individually, on its own merit, and in context of the local planning policy. So it is a waste of time submitting some sort of dummy application or LDC, and then the actual application hoping that the planner looks at the first one and then thinks "oh well I'll approve this one then".

 

[tony1851]

I wasn't necessarily meaning submit a dummy application, just to perhaps arrange a meeting with the officer who'd be dealing with it and run it past them?
This has worked for me, so might be worth a try.

 

[RichA]

Thanks both. So make reference to the potential PD as part of the application, but not a CoL for the required PD.

A couple of connected questions,
1 - for PD loft conversions what does 'additional roof space' mean, how is it measured?
2 - some planning approvals remove the right for future PD, is it therefore wise to apply in advance for any PD that you may want e.g. a garage?
3 - Is there such thing a good planning strategy (a playbook so-to-speak)? or just apply for what you want to build and go from there?

 

[^woody^]

Whether it's submitting a dummy application, or meeting with a dummy, it's still a waste of time.

 

[tony1851]

 

[RichA]

Any thoughts on these:

1 - For PD loft conversions what does 'additional roof space' mean, how is it measured? Is this additional space. i.e. a velux would be nil?

2 - Some planning approvals remove the right for future PD, is it therefore wise to apply in advance for any PD that you may want e.g. a garage?

3 - Is there such thing a good planning strategy (a playbook so-to-speak)? Or just apply for what you want to build and go from there?

Many thanks,
Rich

 

[^woody^]

Additional roof space is just as it says - the additional space under the new roof tiles or felt

Removing rights to PD is just some obscure remote but unlikley possibility that people on forums like this like to throw in, without any real knowledge of the planning system.

The strategy is to read your councils local policy, especially any supplementary extension guidelines. If the proposal conforms to policy, then it has to be approved.

 

[RichA]

Removing rights to PD is just some obscure remote but unlikley possibility that people on forums like this like to throw in, without any real knowledge of the planning system.

The strategy is to read your councils local policy, especially any supplementary extension guidelines. If the proposal conforms to policy, then it has to be approved.

Re: Strategy.
My LPA appears to like to limit the total increase in the original habitable floor area to c50% (Local plan re: scale & character - "respect the scale and proportions of the existing built forms for their location").
Is there a strategy to increase liklihood of being granted a large increase? e.g.
- 1 - Approval for 3.5m 2x storey rear extension (c40% increase)
- 2 - CoL for PD for Loft - can you do PD on the loft of a building that is only half build - see 1 above)
- 3 - CoL for PD for Porch

Re: PD rights
So, assume PD rights won't be removed, if I do a rear extension this may mean that I can do an additional side extension under PD in a few years.


Thanks for all the advice so far.