PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Advice - planning permission/ enforcement - what can you do when council will not act?

Options
2»

Comments

  • davidmcn
    davidmcn Posts: 23,596 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Would it not be similar to the situation where someone puts an application in for a block of flats on a piece of land that had a grade 1 listed buiding on it that was illegally knocked down and the planner then assessed the application purely on the merits of a block of flats and not on the fact there should be a protected building there? If that is the case in that scenario once the planning was passed how would you ever get the listed building back once a block of flats was given permission to be built?
    You'd separately need to get listed building consent to demolish (or indeed make any changes to) the listed building. Without that, any demolition would still be illegal. I suspect the planning wouldn't be granted if you haven't also at least applied for listed building consent, though not sure if that's a global policy.
    Da_rule I am not 100% sure but I believe that the tree is protected just by virtue of being in a conservation area rather than teh subject of a TPO?
    Ok, I think everyone has assumed by "protected tree" you meant there was a TPO. Being merely a conservation area means that (AFAIK) it's the same as any other breach of planning, so at best in the application the planners ought to be taking into account the protected aspects of the conservation area (such as the tree which ought to be there).
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.