Planning permission , head scratcher.

lincroft1710

It often appears that logic goes out of the window when granting or not granting PP. As you know a refusal of PP can be appealed and even then allowing the appeal can sometimes not seem logical.

If the council are indicating refusal of PP, are you willing to risk buying the land and take your chances with an appeal?

ProDave

Has this actually been the subject of a formal planning application? or just some informal, non binding, pre application advice?

If the former, you need to see the exact wording of why it was refused, and either alter the proposal to overcome the objections, or appeal the decision.

If the latter, then a formal planning application is your next step, possibly as advised by employing a planning consultant.

ProDave

If you are considering buying the plot there are 2 ways to proceed.

One is make an offer to buy it subject to getting planning permission, then submit an application for outline permission to build a house. This is exactly what we did when buying our plot. You don't need to own the land to submit a planning application but you must notify the owner you are doing that.

The alternative is to buy it at a cheaper price, but that will usually come with an uplift clause, so when you eventually get permission you will have to pay the vendor a percentage of the uplift in value before you can build on the plot.

Head on over to buildhub.org.uk for a self build forum.

Aylesbury_Duck

izzzzythedog wrote: »

We have also noticed the house next door has nibbled a few foot off this land so we will be knocking on the door and pointing out our intentions to ignore this if they were to welcome our PP application.

Not a sensible thing to do, for a number of reasons.

System

izzzzythedog wrote: »

Thats helpfull , rammed full of infomation , thank you .

You need professional advice, just as you did five months ago, you should not be buying a bit of greenbelt expecting to change its designation in the local development plan without having explored the risks involved with a suitable professional. I would suggest (based on your posts) that you have no experience of gaining planning permission or changing local plans, but yet you seem confident you will just buy this bit of land and it will fall into place.

EachPenny

izzzzythedog wrote: »

I remain unsure why they would define this small strip of land this way given it brings nothing to the area whatsoever and is not intrinsic to the idea of greenfield/belt and certaintly is not part of any border . It does not fit into the concept of the reasons for greenbelt and its clearly a building plot waiting to happen.

This is not really a good place to start your planning journey. If you don't understand the reasons then you have little chance of making the right arguments to change the status of the land.

What would concern me is you've gone ahead with the purchase of the land before understanding the feasibility of getting consent. And it sounds like many people (perhaps with a lot more experience and knowledge than yourselves) have been trying and failing.

izzzzythedog wrote: »

So our plan of action is firstly to get a change of classification on the land away from greenbelt/field to residentual . We fully understand we will need to fight the good fight with the council to get this and we are simply going through the motions until the appeal process s the council will reject any and all proposals we offer.

To avoid wasting thousands of pounds you really need to learn about the planning system urgently. The 'appeal process' relates to specific applications, not to the policies and land use classification in the Planning Authority's Local Plan. If the council refuse permission for sound reasons based on the Local Plan policies (e.g. 'garden grabbing', transport impact, overdevelopment) then the planning inspector will not simply agree with you just because you really, really want to develop this piece of land.

Planning appeals are normally won where it can be shown the authority has misapplied planning policies, not because the policies themselves are wrong.

izzzzythedog wrote: »

We will of course approach the council prior to make it fully known how we intend to offer evidence in the reasons why it should be granted PP and explain that we will be taking it as far as is needed so hope they can see the wood from the trees and not force us to aim for the appeal process.

I am sure the planning officer you speak to will be most grateful for the information you intend to provide them with. I suggest you first ask them to stop eating their biscuits and/or drinking their coffee to minimise the risk of them choking as they ROTFL.

Seriously, if you adopt that approach then you will more or less ensure you will not get the planning consent you are hoping for. Treat your planning officer as if they were a god, not someone who you consider to be beneath your superior knowledge of the planning system.

izzzzythedog wrote: »

We will also been popping round to our local MP`s surgury to try to get him on board plus petitioning our local councillers.

Planning is a statutory process and there are strict rules on how the decisions are made. Neither MP's nor Councillors are allowed to lobby on behalf of an applicant. The best you will achieve by approaching them will be advice on how to make a planning application.

izzzzythedog wrote: »

We apparently could avoid alot of this if we seek to create an eco house as it turns out they will automatically grant PP if its got a tiny carbon footprint . Once again a chat with planning could allow us to walk this path if needed.

This is not how it works in reality. Otherwise I would be putting in planning applications to build some rather nice eco houses with excellent close-up views of Stonehenge. All a 'chat' will do is to obtain advice on the probability of getting consent and what you might need to change in your plans to achieve it. If the site itself is not considered suitable for development then the type of development ('eco' or otherwise) is irrelevant.

izzzzythedog wrote: »

If this fails we have already been informed we can place stabling on it . This will increase the worth of the land if we then decide to offload or we can then apply for a change of use to housing!

Who informed you of this? There are still rules on planning, even if all you want to put up are stables. You will probably need to get planning consent for a stable block in this particular situation.

An application for change of use to housing would still need to comply with the relevant policies. If you cannot obtain consent for residential now, you won't be able to obtain consent for change of use. The planning system is not stupid.... it is aware of and therefore prevents people doing that kind of thing.

izzzzythedog wrote: »

It is a round about way of doing things but its plan B. It turns out if livestock is kept on the land then builds are allowed to be erected to cater for the workers on this land . It turns out there are more than 1 way of doing things , i dont like the idea of this as it seems underhand but its an option.

Again, who told you this? If it seems underhand do you not think other people have thought of the idea before and found it doesn't work in reality? Otherwise farmers up and down the country would be having houses built on agricultural land to 'cater for the workers on this land'.

izzzzythedog wrote: »

In the event the council allowing just a stable then so be it . We will clear the land of the trees ( self seeded without a pres order ) , landscape it and use it as we see fit or maybe sell back out .

Selling the land on may be the only option you end up having. Bear in mind that it might take a very long time to sell, and there is a high risk of you getting less for the land than you paid for it, especially if you have kindly explored all the planning options for the next purchaser and still come up with a blank.

izzzzythedog wrote: »

Nothing formal has ever been presented based on what the planning officer told me over the phone . Just a quick chat to anyone whom enquired most likely over the phone . He seems a nice approachable chap.

I've never met a planning officer who wasn't a 'nice approachable chap' (or chapess). It is part of the job to be nice and polite to people (customers) making use of the planning service, and feedback on telephone manner (amongst other things) will be used as part of their performance review.

There is however a difference between being nice and polite when communicating, and using their professional judgement when considering a planning application. If personality and telephone manner was a true indicator of whether or not planning consent would be given, then nobody would ever be refused anything.

izzzzythedog wrote: »

We were thinking of taking a few little steps ourselves and then as you say seeking a planning consultant whom knows the councils planning office . By little steps an example is i was going to give the planning officer a call and ask if theres a company whom they prefer to work with given my intention . I figure there must be some they wont have time for and some they consider to be fair and therefore more likely to give a smooth transition . Every little helps in this mindfield .

Unfortunately (for you) you figure wrong.

Planning officers have to deal with whoever they have to deal with, and have a professional duty to do so impartially. There are of course companies that experienced planning officers will know are more unpleasant to deal with than others, but the chances of them telling you which ones are very close to zero. If the planning officer were to make a recommendation about which company to use, and then granted consent for an application made by that company on your behalf, they would leave themselves wide open to allegations of corruption. (no doubt you would highlight in making your appeal that you used the company personally recommended by the planning officer :doh:)

Simply asking the planning officer for a personal recommendation of who they would like to work with would immediately ring alarm bells in their head that this case may result in them having to defend themselves in a disciplinary hearing and thus ensuring from that point on everything is done absolutely by the book. Far from 'every little helps' it could be one of the biggest blunders you make.

It really seems you don't understand the first thing about this 'minefield' you are walking into, and are relying on hearsay to inform your judgement of the risks attached to an investment of a very large amount of money. Please, for your sake stop and think. If it really was as easy as you think it is, why do you think others (with a lot more experience and money) have not already bought the land and built houses on it?

sevenhills

izzzzythedog wrote: »

We are led to believe the land is either greenfield or greenbelt . I remain unsure why they would define this small strip of land this way given it brings nothing to the area whatsoever and is not intrinsic to the idea of greenfield/belt and certaintly is not part of any border . It does not fit into the concept of the reasons for greenbelt and its clearly a building plot waiting to happen .

The chances of new development on Green belt is subject to its aspects of its design quality. So, getting Greenbelt Planning Permission relies on your design. The National Planning policy framework outlines that a development can be permitted if it is of high architectural value and quality.

System

izzzzythedog wrote: »

Wow , thank you for taking the time :T.

I will agree we are nieve in this and hence the thread to open our eyes , find out what we are in for and seek to ask kindly of others experience in how we can make this happen as painlessly as possible .
Can i ask how you would recommend we go forward . We are buying the land and will seek permission regardless of the hurdles in place .

How much time and money have you go to throw at this?!
It's abundantly clear that you literally have no idea of the process, there is no painless way to change the designation on a piece of land in the local development plan and if you are thinking of a para 55 house - copying the next door neighbours bungalow is miles away from complying with this policy.
You are about to waste all kinds of money on this bit of land, it's absolutely stunning that you haven't bothered to engage professionals to devise a planning strategy before spending money on a bit of land that's impossible to develop, if you've not figured that out in five months....

You need to get real with this - I know you'll probably report this post too because seemingly the truth is nothing you want to hear about, you've said if plan a doesn't work you've got a plan b and plan c - but in reality there is no realisation of a viable plan a,b or c

EachPenny

izzzzythedog wrote: »

I will agree we are nieve in this and hence the thread to open our eyes , find out what we are in for and seek to ask kindly of others experience in how we can make this happen as painlessly as possible .
Can i ask how you would recommend we go forward . We are buying the land and will seek permission regardless of the hurdles in place .

Then aside from the advice already given, the next best advice is to wait for either the next door bungalow or pub to be sold, buy that as well, combine the two plots into one, and then sell the lot as a whole.

That is about the only way you will ever see a significant return on the value of your investment, unless the Council has a significant change of policy at the Local Plan level (typically this might happen once every 10 years or so).

izzzzythedog wrote: »

Thats what we have also read . A person put a bid in for the land ( at 50% more than we are paying ) with the intent to create an underground `eco` house . The land has a mild slope but you cant help but notice the stream that creates the boundry of the property so i suspect it would be inappropriate.

If someone else put in a bid 50% more than you are paying then why is the land being sold to you? This should tell you something (either the Estate Agent is lying to you about the bid, or else the bidders discovered there was no way of getting planning consent, even for an 'eco' house).

izzzzythedog wrote: »

We were not seeking to create anything thats `defining` . We are hoping to simply create the same as next door , a simple small bungalow . I suspect if we stated we wanted to build this with geothermic extraction , solar panels , a composting toilet and a well we would be more than likely given carte blanche to do as we please .

You are making a huge and unjustified assumption. 'Eco' does not give you carte blanche. Before anything else you would need to show the site is suitable for the development you propose, and there are no alternative sites you could develop. The planning rules are not simply torn up because someone promises to build a composting toilet.

Development on green belt land (which it doesn't sound like this is) is sometimes allowed if an overriding need for that development in that location can be demonstrated.

It would be a requirement of a development in such a case that the design has "high architectural value and quality". But the reverse is not true, a "high architectural value and quality" development cannot be built just anywhere simply because it is high quality.

bowlhead99

izzzzythedog wrote: »

Wow , thank you for taking the time :T.

I will agree we are nieve in this and hence the thread to open our eyes , find out what we are in for and seek to ask kindly of others experience in how we can make this happen as painlessly as possible .

Ah great, that's good to hear.

You are finally taking notice of all the sensible comments flooding in and recognise that you are naive in this and what you suspect will more than likely be just fine, probably won't be fine at all. Planning permission was already sought and failed. Since then, the council have allowed a large concentration of 'new build' development of 1600 houses to be focussed at a new site half a mile up the road so that there is plenty of access to quality housing stock without ripping up gardens and little patches of greenbelt.

It's good that after reading the posts from EachPenny and others you now realise that many of the things you think will be very easy or a good place to start, will be very difficult or a terrible place to start.

But then you say:

izzzzythedog wrote: »

I suspect if we stated we wanted to build this with geothermic extraction , solar panels , a composting toilet and a well we would be more than likely given carte blanche to do as we please .

Having heard all the comments and explanations about what you don't know or understand about the practicalities of obtaining planning permission, and then eventually coming to the realisation that you are very naive in all this and probably hopelessly optimistic because you don't have a clue of the process...

... why are you still allowing yourself to "suspect" that if you asked to build a house with x, y, z features you would just get carte blanche to build it how you like ??

Turning a leafy tree-filled garden in a greenbelt area into a house with one or two properties and huge black metal solar panels on the roof, after other people have tried and failed to get a change of use from garden to a dwelling, is not easy. I agree with the above poster that you could have used the last five months for seeking independent professional advice and coming up with firm plans or submitting them after agreeing with the seller what would happen if the plans were successful or unsucessful.

But what you seem to have done is just had anecdotal chats with people or looked up stuff on the internet from a position of naivety and despite acknowledging that you don't know what you are doing, you still reckon if you do x, y, z you should get carte blanche to go right ahead and do what you please. Seriously? So now you are going to go ahead and buy the land without any firm knowledge of what you'll be able to use it for (other than garden).

The people with vested interests in telling you that the application process will have a reasonable chance of working out for your are the seller of the land (who would like to have your cash), the estate agents (who would like to make money off a sale to you and also to have a chance to make a future sale from you if you later sell it disappointed or sell it off developed), and potentially the sellers of planning consulting services or architects who would like you to think there is at least a chance of getting it done and are willing to explore the options with you in drawing up plans to have a crack at it, in exchange for a large invoice which is payable whether or not the permission is succesful.

Whereas the people without vested interests are the ones on this forum who are independent and largely impartial, and have pretty much all said that either it's a non-starter, or that it could be extremely difficult, so that it's crazy to just buy the land on a dream and a hope and then battle through the process "regardless of the hurdles in place".

Common sense should be telling you that you should have regard to the existence and the cost of those hurdles rather than just being overcome with greed that a garden can be bought cheaply and would be worth more money if it was allowed to be a house. As the above poster implied, it could be a bottomless pit of time and expense if you are willing to throw unlimited funds at it out of stubbornness; it would be a lot more sensible to draw up some kind of agreement to buy it for £x subject to successfully obtaining change of use - or to buy it for £y with an additional contingent consideration or profit share payable if your development is an eventual success.