BigBub

You may be able to get permission for the proposed extension but the council would be very unlikely to agree to the extension going right up to the boundary line. The guidelines typically expect 1-2m separation to avoid the terracing effect. It may therefore not be worth doing based on the amount of space you would gain.

At a minimum, your prior approval application would have required a block plan to be included showing the proposed extension. Block plans are top-down views and usually show the largest outline of your proposal which should have been the roof with the overhang. The tech guidance carries limited weight compared to the regs. The regs use the wording "the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would have a single storey and extend beyond the rear wall of the original dwellinghouse..." so I think it is fair for this to include large overhangs. You can no longer rely on the prior approval and therefore must make a retrospective householder planning application. No merit in requesting a different planning officer.

Look in to the Principle of Consistency: https://www.tpexpert.org/plannings-ultimate-curse/ "The principle is not that like cases must be determined alike, but a decision-taker ought, when considering a materially similar proposal, to have regard to the principle of consistency, to have good reason if deciding to depart from the previous decision, and to give reasons for any such departure." It doesn't necessarily mean you would be successful with an appeal but it would put the onus on the council to justify why they changed their view on the extension being overbearing/overshadowing.

Other than outline permission, you could also consider the Permission in Principle (PIP) route as this only requires an application form, site location plan and fee.

I would take it to appeal if I was you. Certificates of Lawful Development for existing development are made under Section 191 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 which defines lawful development as development against which no enforcement action may be taken and where no enforcement notice is in force, or, for which planning permission is not required . (refer to https://www.gov.uk/guidance/lawful-development-certificates#definition-of-lawfulness-and-its-limits) It might depend on how you made your CLD application though with the wording you used and the land you outlined in red compared with your application.

Your council will have a Statement of Community Involvement somewhere on their webpages. This document usually sets out the policy for the minimum number of objections that will bring an application to committee. Otherwise it could be that someone has asked a local Councillor to call the application in for committee.

Is the annexe being built under Permitted Development or Planning Permission?

When a council can no longer demonstrate a five-year housing supply, the tilted balance is engaged. This usually leads to more housing applications for the council which may not accord with every policy in their local plan but more weight may be given to them in meeting the housing need on balance. https://www.savills.co.uk/blog/article/312988/residential-property/in-plain-english--the-tilted-balance.aspx

Given that you have agreed to the extension of time to the deadline you also won't have the benefit of getting your fee refunded for the extra delay...

It would likely be much cheaper to use your local authority's pre-app service compared to the £1,000 appraisal

The civil service code applies to Civil Servants. Only those who work for central government are considered civil servants. Councillors fall within local government

Each LPA will normally set out their own Code of Practice or Guidance Protocol for Members on a specific committee.

From experience, most LPAs will ask for a 2 or 3 week EoT. Unless you have provided amended particulars that the case officer has advised are necessary to avoid refusal, it is rarely in the interest of the applicant. When you agree to an EoT the LPA do not have to record the application as being decided late, even if they miss the 8 weeks deadline. One main reason you might not want to agree is that you will lose out on the Planning Guarantee which entitles you to a refund of the application fee when a minor application takes longer than 16 weeks to be issued a decision. I've noticed more and more LPAs charging additional fees for applications which are not valid on submission, for example if a drawing was missing a scale bar they would request that it is amended and also that a £60 invalid fee is paid. If they can charge for their time to validate an application, I am thinking to start requesting a fee from the LPA to agree an EoT. I know they will almost always refuse but it would be more to make a point that it's not just their time that is valuable.

@Alan Ambrose The The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) defines what a valid application is under Article 34, Part 6 which also mentions that a valid application is taken to have been received when the application, and such of the documents, particulars or evidence referred to above as are required to be included in, or to accompany, the application have been lodged with the appropriate authority mentioned in article 11(1) and the fee required to be paid has been paid. When you submit an application via the planning portal, the council receives the application and all documents by email and the fee is transferred over to them. The LPA can not treat the application as invalid until you agree to their change of the description. Refer to the following which mentions that Checking the accuracy of the description of development should not delay validation of an application: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/making-an-application#Changes-to-the-description-of-development

If you submitted an application through the Planning Portal and all required particulars were provided along with the correct fee then the council has to deem the validation date as the date they receive the application, not a date 1 or 2 weeks later when they have processed and registered the application. If they are not doing this then they are manipulating the system