Detailed Planning Permission

[jgiddings]

Afternoon,

 

We are looking at purchasing a plot of land which received full planning permission for a two storey four bed house in 2011. The previous owners started works within five years of receiving permission so apparently the permission will now not lapse. 

 

However, they have not built the house, just some landscaping and driveway stuff.

 

We would want to build a house that is similar in terms of style floor space, but only 1 storey. Still in-keeping with the local area.

 

Essentially, we are happy with the house that got permission, but we would just like something smaller.

 

How should we proceed? I am relatively new to the idea of self-build and planning so I'm not necessarily looking for full answers but just to be signposted in the right direction.

 

In many respects the plot is ideal for us, but we couldn't afford to build the house which got permission, and frankly don't need anything that size. My main concern is that we apply for permission to build something different and then all permissions are revoked? I don't know if this is possible.

 

One other question I have is to do with a condition of the planning that says you shall not take up residency until it has been signed off as meeting the sustainability guidelines.  I assume this would not prevent me from living on the site in a static caravan/outbuilding during the build?

 

Many thanks for any help you can give us in this.

 

James

[Ferdinand]

OK. With the husk off. 

Welcome.

 

You need cast-iron proof (strong enough that you can get compensation if it is baloney) that the start of development has been accepted by the Council, which can I think only be a document called a "Lawful Development Certificate" that the Council themselves have confirmed to you is genuine. 

 

Then if you are happy that the existing design or minor mods to it will be acceptable to you as a Plan B should your new PP be refused, and that you can complete the design as is - perhaps with modern insulation standards though - then I would consider proceeding and doing PP changes after purchase.

 

Otherwise, or anyway, I suggest get your head straight about what you want exactly, and talk to the duty planner for the Council's view.

 

If you are PPing before purchase, you also need to worry about timescales and whether they will sell it to someone else first, or whether you do your PP first and trust them, or spend money on a legal agreement etc. My advice on that is *always* make it clear in agreement and law so there is no grey area. If you are dealing with strangers it makes the process clear; if dealing with friends it makes the process clear and prevents arguments that will make them non-friends or resentful acquaintances.

 

It may well be worth taking pro advice from a Planning Professional. If you do not know one, either do the homework to find one or ask the oldest, most hoary-looking person (think Treebeard or Dis) in the back office of your local independent estate agency with a good reputation to recommend one.

 

We need the full text of the Condition you are worried about to comment. The system for evaluating "sustainability" has moved on so its status may have been reduced to tangential wibble (ie it is now meaningless, rather like the law requiring you to offer a beached sturgeon to the monarch). Or perhaps not. You may choose to  negotiate something new with the Council, or not.

 

Ferdinand

 

Edited September 8, 2019 by Ferdinand

[ProDave]

Providing he met the conditons for "starting" the development then  the planning will be locked in.  I would seek from the council planners a letter of comfort stating they are happy that all the pre comencement conditions were met and they recognise the development has started.  That will prove the existing permission is still valid.

 

Then you can embark upon submitting plans for something on a similar footprint but smaller.

 

If the conditions for "starting" were not met, then the planning will have lapsed and you want at least outline planning before you proceed.

[Mr Punter]

No, it will not be revoked if you apply for a new consent 

[Temp]

1 hour ago, jgiddings said:

We are looking at purchasing a plot of land which received full planning permission for a two storey four bed house in 2011. The previous owners started works within five years of receiving permission so apparently the permission will now not lapse. 

 

However, they have not built the house, just some landscaping and driveway stuff.

 

That _might_ be sufficient to count as having started but, as others have suggested,  ask the council if they consider work has started and therefore the PP is still valid.

 

What do the houses either side look like? Planers like to maintain uniformity where it exists. If all other houses are massive places of similar design then they may not like the idea of one much smaller house.

 

 

[Ferdinand]

Yep ... if you are shelling out a six figure sum, you need total proof.

 

[jgiddings]

Many thanks for all the information!

 

Quote

We need the full text of the Condition you are worried about to comment. 

 

2. The dwellings hereby permitted shall be constructe to achieve a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and achieve a minimum of 1 credit under category Ene1 - 'Dwelling Emission Rate' in accordance with the requirements of The Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide (Version 3) November 2010.

 

...and...

 

4. The dwellings hereby approved shall not be occupied until a Code for Sustainable Homes 'Post Construction Stage' assessment has been carried out in relation to the dwelling and a 'Final Certificate' has been issued... etc

 

I was not so concerned about meeting the sustainable home code, but I had planned to occupy the site while working and this implies I cannot occupy the site until after it is signed off, unless I seek a separate permission. As the code may now have been superseded, would that null and void that whole condition?

 

Quote

No, it will not be revoked if you apply for a new consent 

 

Good to know.

 

Quote

What do the houses either side look like? Planers like to maintain uniformity where it exists. If all other houses are massive places of similar design then they may not like the idea of one much smaller house.

 

No real uniformity of size, and only loosely in style, but we're after something that would be generally in-keeping.

 

So first steps - check that the council are happy with 'material commencement' and informally discuss changing the permission to something similar but smaller.

 

Then, if everything looks good, secure a Lawful Development Certificate and engage a planning professional to submit revised plans.

 

Finally, attempt to purchase.

Edited September 9, 2019 by jgiddings

[Ferdinand]

IMO generally expect the SELLER to provide you with an LDC to prove that THEIR assertion is true. He should have one in his file already. If he cannot get it you will need to start again, which could kill it or cost 2k to 25k depending on how much you have to do and who you get to do it. For all you know it will be entirely poleaxed by a more recent policy.

 

(As I hinted above if you would be happy with the existing PP as Plan B that would mitigate this risk. Or your Planning Pro may tell you it is a 90% chance that you will get it. The focus needs to be on the Risk and Money associated with each decision or factor.)

 

You do not provide the MOT certificate when you buy a car from a seller.

 

If he wants you to do the LDC then fairness says you should get some consideration for spending your money to help him develop his building site, such as a lock in agreement. Your instinct may be to think that you have the smell of an opportunity and throw caution to the winds in pursuit of the elusive lesser spotted building plot.

 

If you are not confident with that, then get yourself an objective and fair minded good-evaluator acquaintance with no skin in the game you meet for a pie and a pint or similar every so often, and give that person the explicit role to ask awkward questions and tell you when they think you are leading yourself by the nose.

 

I know that you are dealing with humans here and may have an opportunity not known to others (Or has he tried before?), but you need arsecover in the thinking and the negotiations, and not to establish yourself as a soft touch. It is always difficult to judge. You have to strike the balance that is fair and works in the circs, and it is very difficult to make the call where that is.

 

At my former house I lost a right to implement a large extension because I had not got an LDC for an entrance and gravel driveway to prove start of development. I was pulling a slight fast one in trying to preempt a neighbouring extension up to my boundary by using an existing informal entrance and driveway with no drop kerb and a 10 year old PP, and I was young, but it had been in use for 10+ years, and if I had paid attention when I was 25 and had an LDC I would have won and stopped the extension in its tracks. I could still extend with something 800mm-1m from the boundary, but It was a lesson in when the tick boxes matter.

 

If your neighbour has not got the tick boxes it could cost him the full value of his plot .. maybe 150k. It is not your job to be his Planning Stalking Horse without having a damned good reason and knowing exactly what you are taking on and who will benefit.

 

But it is All judgement calls, and I could be being far too cautious.

 

Ferdinand

 

Edited September 9, 2019 by Ferdinand

[Ferdinand]

For CSH, I believe those conditions should fall away under ‘not enforcible’ or similar, as CSH is no longer a thing which can be imposed. You could ignore them for now and go some variety of “Dead horse, darling” to the planners if they go “Oi”, or get the condition removed first. Imo not one to worry about, certainly not this early on. They are more likely just to ask you to think about improving it because it is better for you.

 

I would mention it to Duty planning when you have informal soundings after The LDC has been provided.

 

https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Code_for_Sustainable_Homes

 

You may get a new sort of green doodah attached to any new permission, but current basic building regs are better than CSH 3 anyway.

 

For the caravan, others have replied.

 

We can come up with ideas that would improve the build quality. 

 

I am am not sure whether you will have to deal with newer building regs. I suspect you do.

 

Ferdinand

 

Edited September 9, 2019 by Ferdinand

[Jeremy Harris]

44 minutes ago, Ferdinand said:

For CSH, I believe those conditions should fall away under ‘not enforcible’ or similar, as CSH is no longer a thing which can be imposed. You could ignore them for now and go some variety of “Dead horse, darling” to the planners if they go “Oi”, or get the condition removed first. Imo not one to worry about, certainly not this early on. They are more likely just to ask you to think about improving it because it is better for you.

 

 

+1

 

We had a requirement for our build to be at least CfSH level 5 initially.  When the government scrapped CfSH before we actually started building that went away completely.  The only thing I removed from the design was the bike shed, which was added to gain CfSH points.  The planners had no isue with this, but it did create a minor snag when it came to the VAT reclaim, as the bike shed was still shown on the approved plans.  I had to send HMRC copies of the correspondence we'd had with the planners to show that there had been agreement to just not build it, before HMRC would process the claim.

[ToughButterCup]

17 hours ago, Sensus said:

[...]

• No, you can't live on a caravan on the site, during construction work, without their consent. You're allowed 'temporary accommodation' in terms of a site cabin, toilets, etc., and even (though it may perhaps seem absurd) a caravan to use as a site office... but actual residential occupation of the caravan is something that requires their specific approval

 

Except in Wyre District Council.

@Sensus quite correctly rehearses the law as it stands. But, 25 meters from where I write this post is a long-term demonstration of what really can happen.

 

Long story short (its Monday morning innit?) there's a problem for the Council in showing that  ' ... actual residential occupation of the caravan ... ' is taking place.

I laugh about it now - wiser, cooler heads on this forum reminded me to focus on my own house.

[Temp]

I wouldn't worry too much about occupying before getting the certificate. The planners are unlikely to take any action if they can see you are working towards getting one.

[Temp]

On 08/09/2019 at 12:42, jgiddings said:

I assume this would not prevent me from living on the site in a static caravan/outbuilding during the build?

 

Site workers are allowed to live on site without needing planning permission but see my reply in this thread for more. As I recall they can even live on land next door to the site.

 

 

Edited September 9, 2019 by Temp

[jgiddings]

Brilliant, thanks everyone.

 

I have asked the agent about the LDC today. He didn't seem to know what that was but said that the owner had a 'letter from the council' stating that they are happy work had commenced - perhaps they are talking about the same thing, but I have asked for confirmation from the owner.  

 

I am anticipating that we will have to deal with 2019, not 2011 building regs - and we will want a fairly energy-efficient home anyway.