Planning Enforcement

YoungBlueEyes

Forgive my earlier sarcasm @lauraj27, mea culpa.

Your neighbour sounds like a right piece of work. The wise bods on here will get you straightened up though

ThisIsWeird

lauraj27 said:

Well we think the public comment on our proposed extension by this neighbour is what has led to the involvement of planning enforcement officer in relation to the patio or as they have stated extensive terraces. 

We didn't necessarily remove the shrubs because he complained about blossoms blowing into his garden, but because we wanted to make the most/best use of the space so thought it would be best to turn it into a paved area that could be sat on during the summer months. Lots of other plants have remained in both the front and back garden. Guess I was just trying to say that it seems silly to complain about the patio when previously they complained about plants that were there. 

I can't really sketch and I'm a bit worried about uploading photos of the area in case the neighbour finds this thread. So I will try to make it a bit clearer. 

The entire garden from the back of the house to the bottom of the garden is 80ft in length. The final 18-20ft  length of the garden, i.e. the area we have paved, when we moved in consisted of a sloped hill. The bottom of the slope up to it's highest point (which coincided with the height of the gravel boards of the back fences) was about 45cm-50cm.  We had the area flattened/levelled and put paving slabs down and the paving slabs are actually lower than the gravel boards of the back fences. 

Ok, Laura.

I can do a wee sketch and PM it to you to check?

Could you explain - the remaining 60' of garden is level? And this main garden 'level' corresponds pretty closely to the height of the gravel board at the bottom fence? So these gravel boards were around 1.5' high (two boards? three?)? And how high is the fence on top of these gravel boards?

Only the bottom 20' part of the garden sloped gently down towards the end? And it was a gentle slope - about 1.5' drop over around 20 feet?

Ok, when this bottom bit was 'levelled', its height was changed in what way in relation to the rest of the garden? Is there a 'step' at all where the 60' garden joins this end 20' part?

lauraj27

I'll PM you the photos as that might be easier. 

Apodemus

ThisIsWeird said:

lauraj27 said:

Well we think the public comment on our proposed extension by this neighbour is what has led to the involvement of planning enforcement officer in relation to the patio or as they have stated extensive terraces. 

We didn't necessarily remove the shrubs because he complained about blossoms blowing into his garden, but because we wanted to make the most/best use of the space so thought it would be best to turn it into a paved area that could be sat on during the summer months. Lots of other plants have remained in both the front and back garden. Guess I was just trying to say that it seems silly to complain about the patio when previously they complained about plants that were there. 

I can't really sketch and I'm a bit worried about uploading photos of the area in case the neighbour finds this thread. So I will try to make it a bit clearer. 

The entire garden from the back of the house to the bottom of the garden is 80ft in length. The final 18-20ft  length of the garden, i.e. the area we have paved, when we moved in consisted of a sloped hill. The bottom of the slope up to it's highest point (which coincided with the height of the gravel boards of the back fences) was about 45cm-50cm.  We had the area flattened/levelled and put paving slabs down and the paving slabs are actually lower than the gravel boards of the back fences. 

Ok, Laura.

I can do a wee sketch and PM it to you to check?

Could you explain - the remaining 60' of garden is level? And this main garden 'level' corresponds pretty closely to the height of the gravel board at the bottom fence? So these gravel boards were around 1.5' high (two boards? three?)? And how high is the fence on top of these gravel boards?

Only the bottom 20' part of the garden sloped gently down towards the end? And it was a gentle slope - about 1.5' drop over around 20 feet?

Ok, when this bottom bit was 'levelled', its height was changed in what way in relation to the rest of the garden? Is there a 'step' at all where the 60' garden joins this end 20' part?

Hmmm....  I was reading it as sloping up to the gravel board at the back fence?  So the new levelled bit consitutes a raised platform, at a slightly higher level than before, which might explain why the neighbour had concerns and why the Planners wanted to have a look?

Section62

lauraj27 said:

I'll PM you the photos as that might be easier. 

No disrespect intended towards ThisIsWeird, but the people you need to be discussing this with are the council's planning department.  If their enforcement officer says planning consent was needed then you need to understand (from them) why they think that, and either persuade them otherwise, or else make a retrospective application for consent.

ThisIsWeird is a very helpful poster, but I think I'd be right in saying they would themselves say they aren't an expert on permitted development rules, and in this case that is what you need if you don't want to make an application for consent.

Having been involved in many planning and neighbour disputes there are two things I'd suggest you do - firstly avoid letting the dispute with the neighbour escalate, secondly get the planners to clarify exactly what you need to do to regularise the planning situation. Then do that.

You could expend a lot of time and energy on this forum getting opinions about the planning situation, but in my view that is unlikely to move you much further forward against an enforcement officer who has already formed their own view.

ThisIsWeird

Apodemus said:

ThisIsWeird said:

lauraj27 said:

Well we think the public comment on our proposed extension by this neighbour is what has led to the involvement of planning enforcement officer in relation to the patio or as they have stated extensive terraces. 

We didn't necessarily remove the shrubs because he complained about blossoms blowing into his garden, but because we wanted to make the most/best use of the space so thought it would be best to turn it into a paved area that could be sat on during the summer months. Lots of other plants have remained in both the front and back garden. Guess I was just trying to say that it seems silly to complain about the patio when previously they complained about plants that were there. 

I can't really sketch and I'm a bit worried about uploading photos of the area in case the neighbour finds this thread. So I will try to make it a bit clearer. 

The entire garden from the back of the house to the bottom of the garden is 80ft in length. The final 18-20ft  length of the garden, i.e. the area we have paved, when we moved in consisted of a sloped hill. The bottom of the slope up to it's highest point (which coincided with the height of the gravel boards of the back fences) was about 45cm-50cm.  We had the area flattened/levelled and put paving slabs down and the paving slabs are actually lower than the gravel boards of the back fences. 

Ok, Laura.

I can do a wee sketch and PM it to you to check?

Could you explain - the remaining 60' of garden is level? And this main garden 'level' corresponds pretty closely to the height of the gravel board at the bottom fence? So these gravel boards were around 1.5' high (two boards? three?)? And how high is the fence on top of these gravel boards?

Only the bottom 20' part of the garden sloped gently down towards the end? And it was a gentle slope - about 1.5' drop over around 20 feet?

Ok, when this bottom bit was 'levelled', its height was changed in what way in relation to the rest of the garden? Is there a 'step' at all where the 60' garden joins this end 20' part?

Hmmm....  I was reading it as sloping up to the gravel board at the back fence?  So the new levelled bit consitutes a raised platform, at a slightly higher level than before, which might explain why the neighbour had concerns and why the Planners wanted to have a look?

Ah, I think you may be right.

Sounds touch-and-go whether this could be a breach - that will surely come down to the measurements involved - and it's strange that Planning have seemingly taken a view on it without actually seeing it (unless they peered over the neighbour's fence...)?

ThisIsWeird

Section62 said:

lauraj27 said:

I'll PM you the photos as that might be easier. 

No disrespect intended towards ThisIsWeird, but the people you need to be discussing this with are the council's planning department.  If their enforcement officer says planning consent was needed then you need to understand (from them) why they think that, and either persuade them otherwise, or else make a retrospective application for consent.

ThisIsWeird is a very helpful poster, but I think I'd be right in saying they would themselves say they aren't an expert on permitted development rules, and in this case that is what you need if you don't want to make an application for consent.

Having been involved in many planning and neighbour disputes there are two things I'd suggest you do - firstly avoid letting the dispute with the neighbour escalate, secondly get the planners to clarify exactly what you need to do to regularise the planning situation. Then do that.

You could expend a lot of time and energy on this forum getting opinions about the planning situation, but in my view that is unlikely to move you much further forward against an enforcement officer who has already formed their own view.

You are absolutely right S62.

Laura should approach planning over this, and ask under which rules they are making their seeming judgement.

I was hoping to get an idea of how likely this is a breach - it would seem to come down to the new level Vs the previous one. And this would appear to be a close call, certainly not definitive at a glance. If it turns out that it is a close call, then Laura would be better armed when making the approach.

For instance, if Planning are assuming this patio is fully 'raised' above the main garden level, but Laura can demonstrate that actually it is sitting part way up an existing slope, so is less than 300mm above the ground that was always there, it could be a different matter.

Possibly.

_Sam_

Section62 said:

lauraj27 said:

I'll PM you the photos as that might be easier. 

No disrespect intended towards ThisIsWeird, but the people you need to be discussing this with are the council's planning department.  If their enforcement officer says planning consent was needed then you need to understand (from them) why they think that, and either persuade them otherwise, or else make a retrospective application for consent.

ThisIsWeird is a very helpful poster, but I think I'd be right in saying they would themselves say they aren't an expert on permitted development rules, and in this case that is what you need if you don't want to make an application for consent.

Having been involved in many planning and neighbour disputes there are two things I'd suggest you do - firstly avoid letting the dispute with the neighbour escalate, secondly get the planners to clarify exactly what you need to do to regularise the planning situation. Then do that.

You could expend a lot of time and energy on this forum getting opinions about the planning situation, but in my view that is unlikely to move you much further forward against an enforcement officer who has already formed their own view.

I would agree that a usual caveat would apply in that discussion forum is not always going to be the correct advice. But often the advice given is correct, often a different view is presented that may make one think of an option one wasn't aware before etc - in other words, the discussion forum may help the OP to see the issues involved, and as such be better prepared to deal with planning enforcement officer. 

Simply sending them over to planning would not enable to the OP to "persuade them otherwise", if the OP is not sure about the potential issues

Section62

lauraj27 said:

It's just causing a lot of stress and anxiety; if a retrospective application is needed, this is likely going to be objected to and we will then have to remove it.

As previosuly explained, the neighbour can object, but that doesn't mean consent will be refused by the council.  Refusal by the council also doesn't automatically mean you have to remove it.

Find out what the planners are concerned about and what they want done to fix it.  Then come back here for advice on whether that is reasonable.

All the rest is just guesswork and expended time/effort/stress with limited (or no) productive outcome.

elsien

lauraj27 said:

Section62 said:

lauraj27 said:

I'll PM you the photos as that might be easier. 

No disrespect intended towards ThisIsWeird, but the people you need to be discussing this with are the council's planning department.  If their enforcement officer says planning consent was needed then you need to understand (from them) why they think that, and either persuade them otherwise, or else make a retrospective application for consent.

ThisIsWeird is a very helpful poster, but I think I'd be right in saying they would themselves say they aren't an expert on permitted development rules, and in this case that is what you need if you don't want to make an application for consent.

Having been involved in many planning and neighbour disputes there are two things I'd suggest you do - firstly avoid letting the dispute with the neighbour escalate, secondly get the planners to clarify exactly what you need to do to regularise the planning situation. Then do that.

You could expend a lot of time and energy on this forum getting opinions about the planning situation, but in my view that is unlikely to move you much further forward against an enforcement officer who has already formed their own view.

Thank you. 

We are due to have the planning enforcement officer round next week; however we have had a telephone conversation with them where they said the slope is measured from the lowest point not the highest (which is contrary to the technical guidance) and that it was engineering works because more than two wheelbarrows of soil were moved and we should have had a meeting with them before the work was done. 

It's just causing a lot of stress and anxiety; if a retrospective application is needed, this is likely going to be objected to and we will then have to remove it.

Plus we just feel under siege and under surveillance in our own home which isn't a very nice situation but we can't find any other property to buy that's within our budget. 

We try to limit the interactions with the neighbour and any that we do have we try to be civil and extract ourselves as quickly as possible. 

I think you are getting a bit of ahead of yourself there. There are lots of planning applications that are objected to, but go through anyway. Having to remove what you’ve done is not a foregone conclusion.