removal of permitted developement rights?

[cyclonebri2]

My family have a planning issue. They were granted a change of use permission for land to the rear of their garden but permitted developement rights were removed as the land partly bordered the rear of the neighbours land.

In effect we have to apply for permission for every thing, ie garden shed etc.

The word structure is the key to this, all structures have to be applied for.

My question is is there any constraint on trees and hedges on the site?????


It's not green belt, SSSI, national park etc, simply a garden bordering onto open farmland.
I have asked the involved planning dept of course but the words "in my view" where used when I asked so I am looking for collaboration ie confirmation of what they said.

Any qualified help greatly appreciated.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

They’re not uncommon conditions, what is the actual wording on the planning permission ie what are the exact conditions – word for word?

 

[^woody^]

Planning covers building, not horticulture

 

[cyclonebri2]

They’re not uncommon conditions, what is the actual wording on the planning permission ie what are the exact conditions – word for word?

There are no actual words, it's simply that permitted dev rights are removed. Ie every thing has to be applied for, albeit free of charge,

Given that another condition was applied with the consent ie details of boundary fence and hedge treatments, I just need to ensure that the word "structure" cannot possibly include "future growth"


In a nutshell a very aggressive and well connected neighbour is trying to ensure he/she does not lose their view (no rights we know).

 

[cyclonebri2]

Planning covers building, not horticulture

So "in your view" do you have any qualification for this???


What I'm doing here is trying to find any loophole a complainant can find to reasonable planting, 2 council enforcement officers have used the phrase I mentioned, and "in my view" is non too reassuring

 

[^woody^]

I have a spirit level in Bricklaying as a qualification.

But "In my view" the TCPA 1990 covers this. It's planning permission, not planting permission.

 

[Nakajo]

.

 

[cyclonebri2]

I have a spirit level in Bricklaying as a qualification.

But "In my view" the TCPA 1990 covers this. It's planning permission, not planting permission.

Yeah, I think we all have a level of common sense here, , and I'm not trying to be smart with you but what I meant was is there any particular section of the town and country planning act that rules this 1 way or the other.

I've learnt a lot about this act and it's use in recent times as I've been acting as a sort of amateur consultant for my SIL who spends a lot of time out of the country.
We were dragged into the committee process by the neighbours protestations against what was a simple change of use, they even employed there own pro planning consultant to oppose us. However we won, it was a genuine application that couldn't be refused under the act.

The good thing to come out of this is the fact that we have a very fair enforcer in the planning team, I've seen him so many times over the last few months that I'm sure we are on each others xmas card lists . It's just the words "in my view" that cause a little concern. (To clarify he said in his view trees or hedging are not structure).However it's the fact also that as we had to specify the type of hedging under a condition in the grant, it seems that it may have some bearing.

I live in an adjacent council area so I called my own planning dept, the answer was very similar but not categorical.

 

[PTS2]

You're not helping yourself here demanding professional advice for nowt on a web site full of amateur hacks.

Why don't you answer FMT reasonable question as to the exact wording of the council's correspondance? Every time you post a little bit more information trickles out. The first thing the professional you crave would say is 'show me all the letters' so why don't you do the same here?

 

[^woody^]

Planning law covers development which is defined as "the carrying out of any building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on, over or under land, or the making of any material change in the use of any buildings or other land"

It's a relatively simple definition, which does not include planting stuff. There are no hidden sections in the Act or catch clauses. The TCPA covers development only.

When applying for permission to develop land, a valid condition can be the planting scheme. This is purely to ensure that the site (more specifically the development for which permission is sought) fits in with its surroundings, is hidden from it's surroundings or otherwise looks acceptable in the context of it's surroundings. That's all.

 

[PTS2]

Planning covers building, not horticulture

This is simply wrong. See section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

 

[cyclonebri2]

You're not helping yourself here demanding professional advice for nowt on a web site full of amateur hacks.

Why don't you answer FMT reasonable question as to the exact wording of the council's correspondance? Every time you post a little bit more information trickles out. The first thing the professional you crave would say is 'show me all the letters' so why don't you do the same here?

excuse me? i'm demanding advice? i am simply offering all the detail as presented to me,,do you want paying for your answer?
to you, as a recent member of this forum, i suggest you either offer help or ask for it and judging by that reply in terms of need you proably fall in the latter category.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

They’re not uncommon conditions, what is the actual wording on the planning permission ie what are the exact conditions – word for word?

Yawn. Or pointless contributing.

 

[cyclonebri2]

They’re not uncommon conditions, what is the actual wording on the planning permission ie what are the exact conditions – word for word?

Yawn. Or pointless contributing.

Sorry, I don't have the letter to hand but from memory rights were removed to avoid "urbanisation" of the countryside, nothing more than that.
Since this condition we have applied for, and are advised it should be passed, permission for 4 various sized sheds and machinery stores etc

 

[Nakajo]

Without the information requested, it's hard to see that there's much point continuing this thread.