Planning permission help needed if possible

Iwanttobuild

Hi all 

just looking for a bit of help or advice really planning consultants I wouldn’t say have been not that great  very quick to take your money

Currently have a piece of land been trying to get planning permission on it now for about three years, got rejected last year, took it to appeal but failed it on a boundary issue very frustrating as you can imagine. To the right of our piece of land. there is a couple of cottages and they managed to get a brand-new build in the back garden adjacent to our land it got rejected first on a boundary issue,  but next minute it got built  . Also have tried to do change of use on the stable block that is on the land. It’s a concrete build did a pre-application council has come back with a decision saying it’s out of the boundary line  and a few other items just don’t understand because there is already a building on the piece of land .It just seems one rule  for one rule for another we have done  Everything?   council, I’ve asked and paid,
we need to move quite urgently, specially, with young two children, and one with major heart disease but we thought we would try this option first 
just looking for a bit of helpful advice if anyone can help would be much appreciated Thanks .

prettyandfluffy

I would suggest you make an appointment and go and see the Duty Planning Officer at your local authority.  Tell them what you want to achieve and ask what would be acceptable & lawful.  Alternatively you could use a Planning Consultant but unless you know of a good one, you would be better off doing it yourself.

Doozergirl

"Boundary" issue or planning envelope? 

Boundary doesn't quite make sense to me.  

user1977

No, I was also confused by the references to boundaries, which aren't usually a planning issue at all.

Section62

user1977 said:

No, I was also confused by the references to boundaries, which aren't usually a planning issue at all.

Two possibilities:

1) The 'boundary' is between a parcel of land which has residential approval, and a parcel of land which currently has some other land use - the council doesn't want to allow the residential area to encroach into the other (e.g. agricultural), even though others (e.g. the OP) regard the two parcels as being one land holding.

2) The 'boundary' is a settlement boundary - an area the council has defined as the maximum extents that a particular settlement will be allowed to expand into (same principle as a green belt boundary).  They were a popular planning approach in the 90's and 00's but less so now.

Either could give rise to a situation where a neighbour is seemingly allowed to do what they want, but the OP's application is refused.

ProDave

Without the details I would guess the neighbours got permission because what they were building on was garden, i,e, already residential land.  But it sounds like your land is classed as agricultural because it has stables on it, and it sounds like the planners are saying no because of that.

If a planning consultant has failed and an appeal has failed, there might not be much you could do.

How much of a hurry are you?  turn the stable into a proper garden room type shed, and use it as a garden room.  Mow the grass like it is a garden.  Take any fence down.  then after (I think) 10 years if nobody has raised an issue you can get a certificate of lawful development to make it garden ground, and then try again for planning.

Section62

ProDave said:

How much of a hurry are you?  turn the stable into a proper garden room type shed, and use it as a garden room.  Mow the grass like it is a garden.  Take any fence down.  then after (I think) 10 years if nobody has raised an issue you can get a certificate of lawful development to make it garden ground, and then try again for planning.

If you've asked the council and they said 'no' then going ahead anyway is a good way of getting a planning enforcement notice served on you.

ProDave

Section62 said:

ProDave said:

How much of a hurry are you?  turn the stable into a proper garden room type shed, and use it as a garden room.  Mow the grass like it is a garden.  Take any fence down.  then after (I think) 10 years if nobody has raised an issue you can get a certificate of lawful development to make it garden ground, and then try again for planning.

If you've asked the council and they said 'no' then going ahead anyway is a good way of getting a planning enforcement notice served on you.

He asked for permission to build a house, they said no because it is not residential land.  I am suggesting he quietly starts using it as residential land, and if he gets away with it long enough can get a lawful development certificate for that which removed one of the hurdles for building on it.

Of course they may notice, and slap an enforcement on it, in which case he is no further forward, but it has to be worth a try?

Iwanttobuild

Thanks for all your replies this is what we got back from the local authorities a pre-application for a change of use on the stable block. It is nearly the same decision we got on the dwelling we tried to put on the site there is houses in front of the site houses to the left of the site houses to the right of the site and we are in the middle. 

Pre-application advice is sought in relation to a proposal for the conversion of a stable building into a dwelling.

. The site comprises paddocks with stables to the south-eastern corner accessed via a track from the northern corner of the site, . The site is located outside the boundary and is therefore in the countryside, for planning purposes.

 is a narrow road which provides access to residential properties, allotments and agricultural fields. The site is located to the south-eastern side of the lane. The settlement boundary lies to the west and north of the site, comprising residential properties. Allotments lie to the south of the site, and these are also outside of the settlement boundary. There is a mature hedgerow fronting the road at the application site, with mature trees on the grass verge to the west. On the western side there is also a pavement that leads into the village to local facilities and public transport services.

The site is located outside of the settlement boundary as such the site is located in the countryside for planning purposes (SCLP3.3). In accordance with SCLP5.3, outside of the defined Settlement Boundaries, new residential development will be limited to:

a) Affordable housing to meet identified local needs on exception sites adjacent to, or well related to, Settlement Boundaries or clusters of housing in the countryside (in accordance with Policy SCLP5.11 and Policy SCLP5.4);

b) Limited development within existing clusters (in accordance with Policy SCLP5.4);

c) Replacement dwellings on a one to one basis where these are no more visually intrusive in the countryside than the building to be replaced;

d) Subdivision of an existing larger dwelling;

e) Conversion of an existing building (in accordance with Policy SCLP5.5);

f) Rural workers dwellings, where there is an essential need for a rural worker to live permanently at or near their place of work (in accordance with Policy SCLP5.6);

g) Other residential development consistent with policy on residential development in the countryside contained in the National Planning Policy Framework.

The proposal is seeking the conversion of an existing building, which would come under criterion e of SCLP5.3; this policy permits the conversion of existing buildings to residential use, in accordance with policy SCLP5.5, where:

a) The building is redundant;

b) The building provides a positive contribution to the landscape;

c) The conversion does not require significant alteration;

d) The design maintains or enhances the structure, form and character of the rural building;

e) The design of the conversion, including any necessary works to the curtilage, does not have a harmful effect on the character of the landscape;

f) Any impacts on the natural environment are adequately mitigated for;

g) The conversion enhances the immediate setting of the area; and

h) The site is served by an appropriate existing access.

It is also noted that paragraph 80 of the NPPF states that

The Planning Statement advises that the stable building is redundant and has been unused for about 2 years. In order to comply with the above policy, it should be demonstrated that the barn is redundant.

No details (plans/drawings) of the conversion have been provided at this stage, as such criterion c to h of the above policy cannot be assessed fully. A structural assessment would need to be provided to demonstrate that the building is suitable for conversion. When considering the design approach for the buildings, reference should be made to policies SCLP11.1 - Design Quality, SCLP11.2 - Residential Amenity and SCLP10.4 Landscape Character to ensure that the proposal accords with SCLP5.5.

submitting an application. Local Plan Policy SCLP7.2 also requires that the proposal provides sufficient parking for proposed dwellings in accordance 

Part (b) of the policy requires the building to make a positive contribution to the landscape. The Council's Historic Environment considers the conversion of buildings in the countryside and includes a section on assessing their impact in the countryside. It states that "In determining landscape value an assessment should be made of the importance of the building in relation to the landscape generally and how much the building adds to its visual attraction. Consideration needs to be given to whether the quality of the landscape would suffer if the building were to be removed or altered." In respect of this, the existing building cannot be said to be of any significant importance in the landscape. The existing building was constructed under application C/91/0546, which granted consent in 1991 for the erection of a stable block. The building is a low-lying, modern structure which is utilitarian in character and appearance. The blank gable of the building faces towards the public highway, this being the elevation which is most visible from public areas. The building is not of historic, aesthetic or architectural merit. Further to this, it is not considered that there would be any adverse impact on the character of the landscape if the building were lost completely. The proposal would therefore not comply with Policy SCLP5.5(b) in that the building does not make a positive contribution to the landscape.

The proposed site is adjacent to the settlement boundary to the west but is otherwise surrounded by land which is within the defined countryside. To the east and south of the site are allotment gardens, and although these serve , they are outside of the settlement boundary.

The submitted Planning Statement argues that the subject site "is not isolated and would support the rural community of Rushmere in accordance with the Framework". Paragraph 79 of the NPPF states that "to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services.". It is acknowledged that the subject site lies adjacent to a settlement with some basic services, identified as being suitable for limited housing growth. Thus, the proposal would contribute somewhat to the vitality of the village.

However, the NPPF also recognises, in Paragraphs 130 and 174, the importance of being sympathetic to local character, including landscape setting, and of recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. The current site provides an attractive rural edge to the village, resulting in clear distinction between the settlement boundary and countryside. The current equestrian use of the site is a use which is characteristic of the countryside. The conversion of the stable building to a dwelling would undoubtedly alter the character of the site through the change of use, which would result in the proliferation of residential paraphernalia associated with occupancy. This would be in harmful contrast with the rural character of the site and its immediate environs. The National Planning Policy Framework supports the re-use of redundant or disused buildings in the countryside for residential purposes where this would enhance the immediate setting; in this case, it is not considered that the proposal

immediate setting. Furthermore, the new dwelling would be considerably set-back from the highway, as opposed to nearby dwellings which generally front the highway, with small setbacks. Thereby, the proposal would not be in-keeping with the pattern of development within the area.

Given the scale of the development, the benefits of the proposal would be of limited weight overall. The proposal would undermine the spatial strategy set out in the development plan (SCLP3.2), and this would result in harm to the environment of the wider area; it is considered that this would outweigh the benefits in this instance.

It is therefore considered that the proposal to convert the stable building into a dwelling does not comply with national and local policies. Should an application be submitted for this proposal, it is unlikely to be supported by officers.

Other Matters:

The building, depending on its current condition, may be a suitable habitat for protected species. It is recommended that any planning application is accompanied by a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal and any other surveys it recommends. The site is located inside of the Zone of Influence for European Designated Sites and would therefore be liable for a contribution towards Suffolk Coast Recreational Disturbance Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy (RAMS). The proposal may also be liable for Community Infrastructure Levy.

A new dwelling would be vulnerable to contamination. Therefore, any application would need to be accompanied by a Phase 1 land contamination assessment as a minimum. If the assessment identifies potential sources of contamination, further on-site testing and assessment in the form of a phase 2 assessment will also be required.

CONCLUSION:

It is considered that the proposal to convert the stable building into a dwelling does not comply with national and local policies. Therefore, the submission of a planning application for the conversion of the building to a dwelling is not encouraged, as in the view of officers it is likely to be refused.

However, if contrary to the above advice, an application is submitted it will need to be accompanied by a Structural Survey, Phase 1 Contamination Report, and an Ecological Assessment. Guidance on other documents and requirements can be found on the council's website.

Constraints

Community Infrastructure Levy - CIL Charging Zone: Mid Zone DC Case Polygons - DC Reference: DC/17/1773/FUL

DC Case Polygons - DC Reference: C/11/1256

DC Case Polygons - DC Reference: DC/17/2168/FUL

DC Case Polygons - DC Reference: DC/18/1466/DRC

DC Case Polygons - DC Reference: DC/21/3082/FUL

DC Case Polygons - DC Reference: DC/15/0595/FUL

Neighbourhood Plans - Name: Rushmere St Andrew Neighbourhood Plan Area Planning Enforcement - Planning Enforcement Reference: EN/93/0159 Mineral Consultation Area - Mineral Consultation Area: 1

Recreational Disturbance Avoidance - Name: RAMS - Zone Of Influence Recreational Disturbance Avoidance - Name: RAMS Zone B

As with all pre-application advice, the Council is not bound with regard to its final decision on any future application. Please note – this pre-application advice is given on the basis of National and Local Planning Policies applicable 

Iwanttobuild

ProDave said:

Section62 said:

ProDave said:

How much of a hurry are you?  turn the stable into a proper garden room type shed, and use it as a garden room.  Mow the grass like it is a garden.  Take any fence down.  then after (I think) 10 years if nobody has raised an issue you can get a certificate of lawful development to make it garden ground, and then try again for planning.

If you've asked the council and they said 'no' then going ahead anyway is a good way of getting a planning enforcement notice served on you.

He asked for permission to build a house, they said no because it is not residential land.  I am suggesting he quietly starts using it as residential land, and if he gets away with it long enough can get a lawful development certificate for that which removed one of the hurdles for building on it.

Of course they may notice, and slap an enforcement on it, in which case he is no further forward, but it has to be worth a try?

We use the Land all the time as we don’t have a garden for the children so we are always up there.
yes tried permission to build a house they have said no trying to do change of use on the stable block with a pre-application may have come back and said no there would be no changes in size done to the stable block obviously roof and a few alterations Windows doors et cetera but nothing in size.

Section62

ProDave said:

Section62 said:

ProDave said:

How much of a hurry are you?  turn the stable into a proper garden room type shed, and use it as a garden room.  Mow the grass like it is a garden.  Take any fence down.  then after (I think) 10 years if nobody has raised an issue you can get a certificate of lawful development to make it garden ground, and then try again for planning.

If you've asked the council and they said 'no' then going ahead anyway is a good way of getting a planning enforcement notice served on you.

He asked for permission to build a house, they said no because it is not residential land.  I am suggesting he quietly starts using it as residential land, and if he gets away with it long enough can get a lawful development certificate for that which removed one of the hurdles for building on it.

Of course they may notice, and slap an enforcement on it, in which case he is no further forward, but it has to be worth a try?

The application for a dwelling would also involve change of use of the land from whatever it is (agricultural/horticultural?) to residential - it is the change of land use which is the primary problem, not the concept of a building (and it also appears the OP wanted a conversion of the building, not a new build).

Trying to stealthily change the land use to residential after the council have said 'no' is the problem.

Also In this case, if I've understod the situation correctly, it isn't a case of the OP extending their existing garden into a piece of neighbouring land, but rather having a standalone plot.  In that case it wouldn't be enough to cut the grass as it it were lawn and convert the stables into a garden room - it wouldn't be a residential use unless someone was living on it.  And in the case of this specific site, someone managing to live here without the council being made aware is not going to happen.