Havkey100

Thanks. We originally considered the mirrored option but wanted to remain within the main build line of the row of adjacent houses (the edge can be seen in red). This was seen as best practice to give a consistent build line as we are on a corner plot, the bungalow acts as the 45 degree pivot to the row of houses to the west. We have elevations and street scene and will update for the changes we have made so far. There is another property approved nearby where they place 5 houses in front of a bungalow, the nearest of which is 1m from the fence line of the only amenity space available. This is 400m from our site.

The last message said: The distance between the rear of the bungalow and the two-storey property would still result in an overbearing impact upon future residents of the bungalow, given this is their main rear outlook and amenity space. It is likely that only a single storey dwelling would be accepted here due to the plot restrictions. When referencing BRE guidelines we are significantly better than 25 degrees for protection of light and outlook. Additionally, the two "affected" rooms in the bungalow are dual aspect, with entirely unimpacted views retained to the west and south. There are two images attached of our plan and one of another approved application where a bungalow was demolished and replaced with a larger two bed. Our proposed footprint is very similar to the neighbouring bungalow with a ridge difference of 1.4m. The approved example has a closer spacing and a ridge difference of 1.9m and is situated to the south east. By definition it is larger in relative mass and more overbearing than our proposal, yet the delegated report stated that it was not overbearing on the neighbouring bungalow (note there are habitable rooms on the south east side of that bungalow). We are proposing that all glazing on the western upper floor is obscured to protect privacy, similar to the approved example, and also to modify the boundaries further to give a larger rear garden to the bungalow. Maybe I am reaching at the comparison, but it feels that we are being held to a different standard to other recent applicants, which is somewhat frustrating.

Thanks, we will persevere. That will be our next step. We have already sought pre-advice and they have initially indicated that we have a very strong case to appeal if rejected.

We are building in an infill plot next to a bungalow that we own. The concern was that that placing a two story dwelling next door would be overbearing to future owners. The elevation difference is 1.4m and we are about 10m apart, set a about a 45 degree angle back garden to back garden. The proposed building footprint is 100m2 vs the bungalow which is 140m2. We have proposed obscured glazing on the windows facing the bungalow to alleviate any possible privacy concerns from overlooking. We pass on BRE 25 degree rule comfortably and our plot is to the north, not impacting direct sunlight. Both properties would sit on plots about 700m2 each. The area is full of two story dwellings, the bungalow is an outlier. All other new dwellings approved in the area are two story, with even 1.5 story dwelling being refused as it was deemed not consistent with the dominant local vernacular. The case officer's manage has implied they would prefer a 1 story dwelling. This does not work for us as a family and is also inconsistent with local precedent and at least two other application in the area approved in the past year or so. We have examples of two story dwellings being positioned at less than 10m with greater elevation differences and where the new dwelling is substantially larger than the neighbouring bungalow. This was actually a permitted demolition of a bungalow to be replaced with a two story build. It feels we are being held to a different standard for some reason. We are better on all aspects of PSP8 - Residential Amenity as far as we can tell.

Hello all, new to the forum and the journey. A bit of background: We have had our planning application for a new build in for some months now. There were around a dozen local objections but we managed to navigate most of the planning hurdles with highways, archaeology, local parish endorsement etc... We received notification from our case officer that they had prepared their report, recommending approval and provided the planning conditions for our agreement. We reviewed and confirmed that we were happy with their stipulations. About three days later the case officer reached out to advise that their line manager subsequently disagreed with their approval and ever since we have been trying to find a solution to satisfy their concerns. We have been forthcoming in making amendments and have a design that is objectively more sympathetic than a couple of recently approved and directly comparable applications, but it seems are getting nowhere. I assume precedent in planning is not quite the same as UK case law... My architect is of the view that we have a strong case for appeal should we be denied permission, but I am really hoping it does not come to that. We feel like we have had the rug pulled from under our feet on this. Whilst the case officer was clearly premature in their communication to us, we can only assume that this type of blocker has not been applied to them in the past or they would not have got as far as issuing the conditions schedule. The planning office seems incredibly stretched so progress is slow and I have sympathy for the case officer, who obviously has a mountain of other applications to manage. We are about a month past the determination deadline, however I am least reassured that the planner is open to dialogue to help us find a solution. I am sure there are many other frustrated applicants here, this is my first foray into planning and I am already feeling that the whole system is not fit for purpose. There are areas left open to subjective opinion when there are clear and objective measures that can be applied. The relevant comparable examples we have found make the hurdles we are facing even more frustrating! Apologies for the opening rant. We are really excited for the build so the delays are somewhat infuriating!