How strictly do councils enforce permitted development breaches?

Better_Days

Yes, princeofpounds I've been reading about the castle hidden in a haystack with interest, I didn't realise it was still going on.

I've been speaking to a friend who lives in a large town nearby, and the dire finances of local authorities are increasingly resulting in planning applications being approved, which in the past would have been refused. The interaction of the Local Plans and the NPPF adds a further level of complexity in decision making.

Thanks Ithaca did you object on the 45 degree rule basis, or did you feel that it wasn't enough of a breach to make a significant difference to you?


I don't see any point in opening a can of worms unnecessarily, but as has been pointed out, I'll only get a clear answer if planning make a site visit.

Better_Days

DRP wrote: »

our extension is built under PD (with a lawful development cert), and is finished in render, whilst the house is stone.

So i don;t think they are that strict with the 'similar appearance' requirement.

Cladding can be an issue when it comes to PP under the 'character of the area' - something which is in both the Local Plan for our area, and the NPPF. But of course so much is a judgement call, interpretation of the guidelines in context, and whether anyone complains. I suspect that for PP, cladding is be one factor for consideration and may well not be enough on its own for a refusal.

Although in this case the surrounding houses are all brick or render, and corrugated metal is more what would be expected of an agricultural building.

spadoosh

Im getting a vague memory from permitted developments about being allowed within 1m of the boundary if the building is made of non combustible materials.

Just had a distant neighbour do similar and hes about the 1m line. Thought about complaining bout it as theyve just left it blockwork at the back but tidied it up everywhere else (out of sight out of mind). But then thought about just putting up my permitted development building with an acronym of the war against terrorism on it.

Pixie5740

Not that strictly if it's Birmingham City Council.*


*Apologies for a link to the Mail Online

Better_Days

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Not that strictly if it's Birmingham City Council.*


*Apologies for a link to the Mail Online

Eeek that's enough to give you nightmares.:eek::eek::eek:

spadoosh the PD rules have changed, for example larger extensions can now be built under PD. So it maybe the 1m rule is an old rule, but the 2m rule does seem to apply where the structure is more than 2.5 m high.

Ithaca

Better_Days wrote: »

Y

Thanks Ithaca did you object on the 45 degree rule basis, or did you feel that it wasn't enough of a breach to make a significant difference to you?

We didn't object formally for a number of reasons... (1) the Planning team had already told me informally that they were unlikely to enforce a minor breach, (2) we didn't want to fall out with our neighbours over it, (3) we're hoping to add a similar extension so I'm hoping the same principle will apply to us if we breach the rule slightly, and (4) once we've extended the impact of next door's extension won't be too bad.

I did send a representation in as part of the Planning consultation process to make sure they had considered the 45 degree ruling, but said we were happy with whatever decision they made (just wanted something on the record to establish that if next door can breach then we should be able to as well).

brodawel

Ithaca wrote: »

We didn't object formally for a number of reasons... (1) the Planning team had already told me informally that they were unlikely to enforce a minor breach, (2) we didn't want to fall out with our neighbours over it, (3) we're hoping to add a similar extension so I'm hoping the same principle will apply to us if we breach the rule slightly, and (4) once we've extended the impact of next door's extension won't be too bad.

Yes totally agree with all four points, especially 3 and 4 (and 2 of course)

Also just to add. I'd try and avoid any official complaining, unless absolutely necessary, because these things stay on file for future buyers to find out about, especially picky ones like me who always check the planning history