planning refusal, is appeal worth it?

[oxo]

thank you for reading this long read, dear forum experts

 

I'm new to planning and I was dreadfully affected by the refusal, didn't help that I fell in love with the project too soon, having had to deal with land registry anomaly tribunal over ownership for 3 years..

We bought the wee end of terrace 2-story thinking we had an easy case because out of 30 terrace houses - 26 houses had they original L-shape first floors extended (gap filled with an extra room/bathroom) and some had rare extensions built into the gardens.

 

We applied for exactly that - bring first floor in line with existing pattern, and extend ground level by 2m into the garden to allow for office space that we dearly need - working from home and all that.

We worked with professional planners and architects so we assumed things were in order. 

 

The objection came from the neighbour we could not trace before submitting (property developer living far away) - the objection threw kitchen sink at us - every argument was there, including that the area is in the need of very small houses, not average houses that we were aspiring to (the neighbour himself owns house twice the size of ours). Reasons of overlooking and bulk and out of character were all thrown in - except everything was going to make us look like the rest of the conservation square of 30, except we were end of terrace and facing infrequently used public path (which was only introduced in 1980s, much later after houses were built for London first gas workers, late 1800s)

 

We withdrew from planning and made 3 changes - move one of the rare proposed windows to the side flunk, to obscure the other window facing neighbour, and we reduced ground extention to 1.4m.

We had a very supportive heritage statement from a lovely person, and we used an even more distinguished planning consultant for our new application and statement.

 

the decision was delayed by 2 months and it came like a tonne of bricks. Apparently we were so out of character, our garden would suffer, our flunk wall would be too oppressive etc etc. the same neighbour objected on the same grounds, even though we were no longer overlooking him with clear glass (and we are still at least 8 meters apart, in central London!)

 

the issues we have are the following

- planning officer didn't tell us about the new objection second time around so we could not correct inaccuracies that our garden was described as too small and narrow in relation to others therefore we should not be allowed to touch it

- planning officer didn't visit the site so how could he judge the level of 'oppressive', when our heritage expert thought it was the right thing for us to do as it would make things consistent

- planning office said their conservation officer could not make formal comment on our heritage statement due to workload, whilst mentioning impact on conservation standards

- the square is of mixed character - how can our sympathetic works, as judged by 3 sets of professional architects/planners/heritage teams - be seen out of character, without even taking a site visit?

- if other 3 end of terraces were allowed much less sympathetic works - shouldn't any form of consistency be considered by the planners, to allow family space (currently the house is too small for us 3 as 700 sq ft)

- given the limits size and space - there are no many redesign options - none actually

- it seems the officer was totally swayed by the objector who doesn't even live anywhere near.

 

our planning consultant suggest we appeal, but having read the objection in its strongest of forms I'm wondering if it's worth another 6 months of uncertainty..

what is the best way to assess basis for appeal - our planner is supportive but they didn't get us the planning so how do we judge their judgement?

 

any wise thoughts would be most gratefully received!

 

 

 

 

 

[the_r_sole]

19 minutes ago, oxo said:

- planning officer didn't tell us about the new objection second time around so we could not correct inaccuracies that our garden was described as too small and narrow in relation to others therefore we should not be allowed to touch it

 

Unfortunately, there's no obligation on the authority to tell you about any of the comments received on an application, so if the objection is incorrect then an appeal might be worthwhile

 

19 minutes ago, oxo said:

- planning officer didn't visit the site so how could he judge the level of 'oppressive', when our heritage expert thought it was the right thing for us to do as it would make things consistent

 

They must have had enough information to base a decision on, but maybe this could add weight to an appeal if there's been no site visit.

 

19 minutes ago, oxo said:

- planning office said their conservation officer could not make formal comment on our heritage statement due to workload, whilst mentioning impact on conservation standards

 

Not sure that a conservation officers comments are necessary on a small scale development so might have worked in your favour to not have their comments if you do appeal

 

19 minutes ago, oxo said:

the square is of mixed character - how can our sympathetic works, as judged by 3 sets of professional architects/planners/heritage teams - be seen out of character, without even taking a site visit?

 

"out of character" is the planners get out clause for issuing a refusal, it's such a wide concept that it's impossible to disprove 

 

19 minutes ago, oxo said:

- if other 3 end of terraces were allowed much less sympathetic works - shouldn't any form of consistency be considered by the planners, to allow family space (currently the house is too small for us 3 as 700 sq ft)

 

If the previous works were bad, the planners can prevent similar extensions because of that, but a good planning consultant can usually argue that one out! However, the existing house being to small is not an argument 

 

19 minutes ago, oxo said:

- given the limits size and space - there are no many redesign options - none actually

 

I'd be surprised if there's no alternative design - I can do hundreds of iterations of an elevation from the same floor plan, there's always alternatives

 

19 minutes ago, oxo said:

- it seems the officer was totally swayed by the objector who doesn't even live anywhere near.

If they've raised valid planning policy objections, it doesn't matter where they live or who they are, it's the magic of the "democratic" planning system!

 

 

If you have no alterative design, just go straight for appeal it's the only route you have

Edited June 16, 2021 by the_r_sole

[Carrerahill]

23 minutes ago, oxo said:

thank you for reading this long read, dear forum experts

 

I'm new to planning and I was dreadfully affected by the refusal, didn't help that I fell in love with the project too soon, having had to deal with land registry anomaly tribunal over ownership for 3 years..

We bought the wee end of terrace 2-story thinking we had an easy case because out of 30 terrace houses - 26 houses had they original L-shape first floors extended (gap filled with an extra room/bathroom) and some had rare extensions built into the gardens.

 

We applied for exactly that - bring first floor in line with existing pattern, and extend ground level by 2m into the garden to allow for office space that we dearly need - working from home and all that.

We worked with professional planners and architects so we assumed things were in order. 

 

The objection came from the neighbour we could not trace before submitting (property developer living far away) - the objection threw kitchen sink at us - every argument was there, including that the area is in the need of very small houses, not average houses that we were aspiring to (the neighbour himself owns house twice the size of ours). Reasons of overlooking and bulk and out of character were all thrown in - except everything was going to make us look like the rest of the conservation square of 30, except we were end of terrace and facing infrequently used public path (which was only introduced in 1980s, much later after houses were built for London first gas workers, late 1800s)

 

We withdrew from planning and made 3 changes - move one of the rare proposed windows to the side flunk, to obscure the other window facing neighbour, and we reduced ground extention to 1.4m.

We had a very supportive heritage statement from a lovely person, and we used an even more distinguished planning consultant for our new application and statement.

 

the decision was delayed by 2 months and it came like a tonne of bricks. Apparently we were so out of character, our garden would suffer, our flunk wall would be too oppressive etc etc. the same neighbour objected on the same grounds, even though we were no longer overlooking him with clear glass (and we are still at least 8 meters apart, in central London!)

 

the issues we have are the following

- planning officer didn't tell us about the new objection second time around so we could not correct inaccuracies that our garden was described as too small and narrow in relation to others therefore we should not be allowed to touch it

- planning officer didn't visit the site so how could he judge the level of 'oppressive', when our heritage expert thought it was the right thing for us to do as it would make things consistent

- planning office said their conservation officer could not make formal comment on our heritage statement due to workload, whilst mentioning impact on conservation standards

- the square is of mixed character - how can our sympathetic works, as judged by 3 sets of professional architects/planners/heritage teams - be seen out of character, without even taking a site visit?

- if other 3 end of terraces were allowed much less sympathetic works - shouldn't any form of consistency be considered by the planners, to allow family space (currently the house is too small for us 3 as 700 sq ft)

- given the limits size and space - there are no many redesign options - none actually

- it seems the officer was totally swayed by the objector who doesn't even live anywhere near.

 

our planning consultant suggest we appeal, but having read the objection in its strongest of forms I'm wondering if it's worth another 6 months of uncertainty..

what is the best way to assess basis for appeal - our planner is supportive but they didn't get us the planning so how do we judge their judgement?

 

any wise thoughts would be most gratefully received!

 

 

 

 

 

Object.

 

I'd request a meeting with the planner and ask how much the letter of objection is impacting their decision, maybe they would refuse anyway. You said the neighbour is a developer? So how would he like if all his developments were objected to and blocked. You are a private individual trying to improve your house for your benefit and you care about your area - as a developer he cares about money.

 

I think I would try and track him down for a coffee and a chat. I suspect that he has some ulterior motive, hoping you will move away because this house no longer suits and wanted to buy it for himself to develop? Is he planning on selling up soon and doesn't want to sell a house next to a building site. 

 

 

[nod]

I would definitely appeal 

Whist it’s frustrating for you These objections usually only delay the inevitable

[Mr Punter]

100% appeal.

 

If you post up the refusal letter and anonymise it you may get some useful suggestions for the appeal.

 

The planning officer report can also prove useful.

[Adsibob]

An appeal inspector is much more likely to look at it objectively. Don’t skimp on the appeal though. It’s worth getting a Planning consultant with expertise in appeals on board.

[Jilly]

Did you go for a pre application meeting at the outset? That would have given you a feel for the lie of the land. I had to pay for the planning officer and the conservation officer to be present.  They love you to take mock up images to react to. Another tack would be to submit a revised application after a pre app and taking into consideration the objections. 

 

Have you got any Permitted Development rights? There might be another way round it to increase your floor space without planning permission. A garden building for working from home perhaps? Can you change the internal layout or extend into the loft space? 

 

There are some members who have gone through appeal, who should be along later.

 

Good luck!

[joe90]

I went to appeal after 3 failed planning attempts, did it myself. Found it easier and more user friendly than app.lying for planning permission. The appeal officer threw out all four objections even telling our planners they were not following their own guide lines. I even got what I originally wanted without the compromises I made for planning application no 2 and 3. Just do it ?

Edited June 16, 2021 by joe90

[ToughButterCup]

Stuff the objections.  Seriously,  stuff em.

 

The only thing that matters is the Decision Notice. Address the issues listed there, and you stand a chance. 

 

Post the Decision Notice would you please (copy / paste). Thanks 

[joe90]

40 minutes ago, ToughButterCup said:

The only thing that matters is the Decision Notice. Address the issues listed there, and you stand a chance. 

Only if you apply again for planning permission but not necessarily if you appeal. With my appeal the original “issues” were deemed not valid even though they were voted on by committee, not just one planner.

Edited June 16, 2021 by joe90

[oxo]

thank you for all the comments, they are giving us strength ?

we did speak to the officer at the first attempt at application. he even said they had no issue with the ground floor extension, which was documented by our planning consultant on email to us. we then withdrew to make changes to the first floor based on the objection - we moved one of the windows to the side and obscured the new bathroom window not to overlook the neighbour. but the decision and the new objection were still saying that we would be directly overlooking the objector - big inaccuracy there. we were also surprised that the decision was against the ground floor after all, despite the office not having an issue with it before as per the email mentioned above.

and we definitely won't be skimming it on the appeal advisor but to find an expert is proving difficult, we'd like them to be local expert in SW6 London, but not found it yet - if there is such person here - would LOVE to hear from them ?

will try and post the decision text later, just reading it makes me want to cry, just feels so unfair ?

[joe90]

4 minutes ago, oxo said:

he even said they had no issue with the ground floor extension, which was documented by our planning consultant on email to us.

 

5 minutes ago, oxo said:

we moved one of the windows to the side and obscured the new bathroom window not to overlook the neighbour. but the decision and the new objection were still saying that we would be directly overlooking the objecto

big inaccuracies!!!!!, you could ask them 1, why they changed their mind ?    2, how can you overlook through obscure glass?. IF you get a sensible answer well and good, if not go straight to appeal, bets of luck . Might be worth telling them you are definitely going to appeal as it costs them time and money (which they are already short of!) and keep us informed ?

[Bitpipe]

A word on objections and planning.

 

You can have zero objection and still get refused. You can have a hundred and still get planning (over a certain number of objections it gets pulled into committee vs being at the officers discretion).

 

What is relevant is planning law and your LA's planning policy - some of it is very subjective ('not in keeping' is the alternative to 'out of character') but that cuts both ways when you appeal.

 

TBH - I would not have made the initial withdrawl and changes unless the planner hinted heavily that it would have got it through.

 

I would appeal and maybe re-submit option 1 also and be prepared to appeal that too.

 

I do believe planners like to justify their existence somewhat and rely on compliance by the public. They don't like appeals as they need to defend them and if they loose too many it does not look good. Get a planning consultant on your side, maybe one who is an ex LA planner (they tend to have the local understanding and also relationships).

 

One of our neighbours is a conveyancing solicitor. For our application 1 (rejected) and 2 (largely the same as 1 with a few minor concessions) they wrote 8 page objections with every possible angle explored. Planners did not take any of their points but rejected 1 on separate issues.

 

They were poised to reject 2 as well until the consultant got them on the phone and said we will be appealing both schemes and we both know applicant will win. He then gave them a graceful climbdown option of 'what do you need to see to make you comfortable' (n.b. NOT what needs to change, we had already compromised to our limit in app 2). They settled on a seeing 3d render vs the starker 2d elevations and low and behold, problems evaporated.

 

As @the_r_sole says, many ways to skin the cat wrt schemes but you need to know where the red lines are, if they really exist.

 

And finally, while everyone invests a lot emotionally into these processes, do not take it personally.

 

It is just one of the many mountains you will climb on this journey so just treat it as an unpleasant bit of necessary bureaucracy.

 

Good luck!  

 

[Adsibob]

+1 for trying to get difficult neighbours on board. I've lost count how many times we applied and how many times the same neighbour unreasonably refused. On the last application, we wrote a polite letter to the neighbour pointing out that despite their last objection the last application was actually granted, and what we were now applying to do was to vary it in such a way that our extension would be some 50cm further away from their property. Only when they realised that, did they stop objecting and we got our plans (which we actually wanted, as opposed to the weird concession the council had forced us into) approved.

 

It was very frustrating though as I was aware of the importance of getting neighbours on board from the outset, and therefore printed all of our drawings in A3 for them and took them over to explain what we were applying for before we actually applied. I invited the neighbours to raise any queries or concerns with me directly before we filed. One neighbour was very reasonable and told me that they would be neutral on our application, whereas the other one refused to engage with me at all and instead wrote vehement objections after our application was filed.

[oxo]

57 minutes ago, Adsibob said:

+1 for trying to get difficult neighbours on board. I've lost count how many times we applied and how many times the same neighbour unreasonably refused. On the last application, we wrote a polite letter to the neighbour pointing out that despite their last objection the last application was actually granted, and what we were now applying to do was to vary it in such a way that our extension would be some 50cm further away from their property. Only when they realised that, did they stop objecting and we got our plans (which we actually wanted, as opposed to the weird concession the council had forced us into) approved.

 

It was very frustrating though as I was aware of the importance of getting neighbours on board from the outset, and therefore printed all of our drawings in A3 for them and took them over to explain what we were applying for before we actually applied. I invited the neighbours to raise any queries or concerns with me directly before we filed. One neighbour was very reasonable and told me that they would be neutral on our application, whereas the other one refused to engage with me at all and instead wrote vehement objections after our application was filed.

The same neighbour wrote on 2 pages how he objects to our house becoming larger because there would be shortage of smaller less expensive houses in the area for the families to buy. his own property is twice the size/height and value! So whatever we do to increase ours to create more space for ourselves - he will be against by the look of his lengthy objection essay.

 

Hard to imagine how to get such character on board - more and more inclined to be working with a more reasonable appeal officer who unlike our LA planner will actually visit the site to see how our proposal can make things better and not worse.

 

the comments here are clarifying so many things for me, it's great, want to hug everyone ?

[joe90]

13 minutes ago, oxo said:

The same neighbour wrote on 2 pages how he objects to our house becoming larger because there would be shortage of smaller less expensive houses in the area for the families to buy. his own property is twice the size/height and value! So whatever we do to increase ours to create more space for ourselves - he will be against by the look of his lengthy objection essay.

Not a valid objection

 

13 minutes ago, oxo said:

Hard to imagine how to get such character on board

Don’t bother, our neighbour who objected to everything had no valid objections whatsoever (according to the appeal officer). It’s nice if neighbours are nice but its obvious yours is not anyway. 

[Bitpipe]

21 minutes ago, joe90 said:

Not a valid objection

 

Don’t bother, our neighbour who objected to everything had no valid objections whatsoever (according to the appeal officer). It’s nice if neighbours are nice but its obvious yours is not anyway. 

 

What Joe said.

 

We buttered up the neighbours and they all objected anyway.

 

The 8 page objection contemplated the history of our beech hedge (you can't protect a hedge), the ecological impact of concrete and that there was 'too much' parking provision etc etc.  

 

All politely noted and rejected as valid criteria by the planners.

 

We built it and they all tell us how nice it is now.

 

[ToughButterCup]

There's no place for emotion on this... let's focus on facts.

 

What does the decision notice say?

[oxo]

2 hours ago, ToughButterCup said:

There's no place for emotion on this... let's focus on facts.

 

What does the decision notice say?

here we go.. sigh...

 

(1)

The proposed single storey rear extension is considered to be unacceptable in the interests of visual amenity and loss of amenity space. More particularly, the proposed rear extension, combined with the existing back addition, by reason of its resultant scale and depth would introduce an overdominant rear extension failing to respect the character and appearance of the subject property, and in turn would adversely reduce the size of the garden and affect the existing sense of openness. Furthermore, the application site is constrained by containing a narrow, irregular rear garden compared to other buildings along the same terrace, the result of which would be a cumulative harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area. In this respect the proposal would be contrary to Local Plan (2018) Policies xxx, as well as SPD Key Principle xxx of the Planning Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

 

-- this is the 1.4m ground floor extension that the officer didn't have an issue with in pre-planning stage. Also 'loss of amenity space' is strange because we would be gaining valuable family space on the ground floor that the house otherwise lacks. We'd still retain reasonable (for London) garden, and our garden is only marginally less deep, by some 0.5m compared to others, but by being end of terrace and openly west facing - our garden aspect is a lot brighter than others so a small reduction in its depth would not matter, especially when the trade off is a better internal amenity space - all in glass so bringing outside to the inside..

 

(2)

The proposed first floor level rear extension would have a detrimental impact on the established historic pattern of local terrace houses, as the additional bulk would result in a two storey height flank wall on the boundary of a public footpath, which would create an oppressive sense of enclosure to the route, that the existing set back respects. The proposal would therefore harm the character and appearance of the xx Conservation Area which is not outweighed by the public benefits of the scheme. The proposal would therefore result in an unacceptable impact upon the Conservation Area which it is desirable to preserve in accordance with s.72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. This is contrary to Policy xxx of the Local Plan (2018), Key Principles xxx of the Planning Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

 

-- 'the established historic pattern' is such that we are the only house on our side of the street that didn't have 1st floor extended, including 3 other end of terraces. We were aiming to continue the current existing pattern and bring it in line and homogenous consistency - both of our heritage expert and planning adviser totally agreed on that. Also the public path was not historic, it was created much much later, and it's not used by many people as it's a tiny shortcut from the square to a bigger street and a pub. We were to match all brick work and restore original decorative bits below the roof line (forgot the name), which was lost

 

(3)

The proposed first floor level extension is considered to be unacceptable in the interests of residential amenity. More particularly, the depth and bulk of the first floor level extension and its close proximity to neighbouring residential properties, results in an overbearing and dominating effect for the residents of the neighbouring properties located in the opposing terrace at 9 xx. This results in loss of outlook and an increased sense of enclosure from windows located to the rear of 9 xx. Accordingly, the first floor level extension constitutes an overdominant, inappropriate and un-neighbourly form of development and in this respect is contrary to Policies xx of the Local Plan (2018) and Key Principle HS6 of the Planning Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

 

-- we are talking about extending half width of the building out to the existing line of the other half - 'increased sense of enclosure' would not stand to scrutiny, especially that there was no site visit and the extent of the extension is disproportionally small in relation to what's in the square and the area and the fact that #9 is already so overtowring us and was a much later addition to the area - suddenly they gain total prominence in their exaggeration. 

 

?

[Jilly]

I can see why you are frustrated, they are very negative. 

 

My thoughts are, when referring to Conservation Areas, I've found planners don't care about what you need, only on appearance. When they mention amenity in a Conservation Area, they are referring to the external appearance to passers by, frustratingly, not to your right to enjoyment of your home. 

 

They seem fixated that you are the end terrace and so the guardian of the views. Maybe if you post some images people can give a reaction ( and see if they concur with the planners (don't take it personally)and see if they can help identify the problem and how to move forward.

 

Is it worth 3D mock up for the future attempt? 

[epsilonGreedy]

Quote

Also 'loss of amenity space' is strange because we would be gaining valuable family space on the ground floor that the house otherwise lacks.

 

@oxo I would drop this element of your objection because it is weak compared to the other points you are making. Using your logic anyone could over populate a home and then demand rights to extend based on a need for extra internal amenity space.

[joe90]

This is what I thought, just found confirmation.     “the extension must not take up more than half of theoutside space 

[ToughButterCup]

Right. Now we can do something about it....

 

I'm on a phone browser, let me switch to a decent machine....

[oxo]

[oxo]

13 minutes ago, joe90 said:

This is what I thought, just found confirmation.     “the extension must not take up more than half of theoutside space 

we have 6m front garden outside space, and we have 5.5m rare outside space and we are only asking for 1.4m - hopefully we are withing 'less than half' overall?