epsilonGreedy Posted June 18, 2021 Share Posted June 18, 2021 7 minutes ago, oxo said: 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? I suspect the problem is with the large flat roof that I assume lurks behind the new parapet wall along the side of the extension. Does this side wall of the upper floor move towards the viewer by about 3m or 4m? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe90 Posted June 18, 2021 Share Posted June 18, 2021 As said before pics would be good! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted June 18, 2021 Share Posted June 18, 2021 (edited) 6 hours ago, oxo said: (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. ... (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. ... (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 o.... Accordingly, the first floor level extension constitutes an overdominant, inappropriate and un-neighbourly form of development... Here's the starts to a plan of attack: 1. ... An 'overdominant rear extension failing to respect the character and appearance of the subject property' , does not deny you the chance to make an extension that isn't over dominant. What is meant by over dominant? Its either dominant or not. Over dominant means - to me - the author isn't quite sure of him(?)self. Chink of light already. '...would adversely reduce the size of the garden and affect the existing sense of openness....' Any extension reduces the size of any garden and always of necessity reduces openness. I smell weakness in the agument application site is constrained by containing a narrow, irregular rear garden compared to other buildings. Is this correct? In percentage terms, how correct is the author? If for example you garden is 20% smaller - would a 20% small extension help things? the result of which would be a cumulative harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area. So is the argument that yours is the straw that breaks the Camels back? If so , BINGO. Principle of Consistency applies (more on that later - just got in from work, knackered) 2 How correct is this 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. Look for local precedent: Argue along the lines you allowed this here, here and here so why not now. Principle of Consistency applies 3 Same argument as 1 above 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 Can you reduce the depth and bulk? Map? Plan? so we can help more. Sorry this is a bit hasty - in a rush. Regards, Ian Edited June 18, 2021 by ToughButterCup 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oxo Posted June 18, 2021 Author Share Posted June 18, 2021 5 hours ago, epsilonGreedy said: I suspect the problem is with the large flat roof that I assume lurks behind the new parapet wall along the side of the extension. Does this side wall of the upper floor move towards the viewer by about 3m or 4m? the roof is not very flat and is matching the pattern of all other backs (14 of us), which are all butterflies (I'm told they are called), except one flat who escaped planning scrutiny and sneaked what they fancied.. ? do you think this could work - with a green living wall feature ? could look striking but not safe by more sonservative accounts.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adsibob Posted June 18, 2021 Share Posted June 18, 2021 Can I just seek clarification on a couple of points? Are you proposing: two extensions, a ground floor and a first floor with the first floor being extended so that its side wall is flush with the side wall of the existing ground floor (and part of the existing first floor)? What is in front of that side wall? Is it a street which is perpendicular to the street that your house is on, because being an end of terrace you are on a corner? Or did you say it was a footpath, i can't remember? Just trying to understand who will see that aspect of your project. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 I am aware that , for good reason, you might not want to, but could you give us a map? A Google map would do, please. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeSharp01 Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 10 hours ago, oxo said: with a green living wall feature ? If you can make it work structurally you could set the wall above about 2.4m back 300mm or so to accommodate the living wall this would reduce the overhang of foliage over the footpath and create quite an impressive feature with environmental and sight line benefits I would not slope the bottom as you have but that might work also but with the back set. This would increase costs but, as you would not need to use brick above this line on this face, you won't see them so they need not be there, might not cause onerous structural issues. PS I would also take it to full height. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangti6 Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 Did the officer state they didn’t attend site or is that an assumption because they didn’t approach you? They could have seen the site from where your photographs are taken. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oxo Posted June 19, 2021 Author Share Posted June 19, 2021 5 minutes ago, dangti6 said: Did the officer state they didn’t attend site or is that an assumption because they didn’t approach you? They could have seen the site from where your photographs are taken. planning report said they didn't do site visit due to Covid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oxo Posted June 19, 2021 Author Share Posted June 19, 2021 1 hour ago, MikeSharp01 said: If you can make it work structurally you could set the wall above about 2.4m back 300mm or so to accommodate the living wall this would reduce the overhang of foliage over the footpath and create quite an impressive feature with environmental and sight line benefits I would not slope the bottom as you have but that might work also but with the back set. This would increase costs but, as you would not need to use brick above this line on this face, you won't see them so they need not be there, might not cause onerous structural issues. PS I would also take it to full height. like your ideas thank you! we thought of the wall setback and green feature as option2 for the application but the structural costs would be a lot higher so we didn't apply for it in the end. worth considering if all else fails with the appeal - it could look very pretty indeed. But that would mean moving the window to the back wall and overlooking the neighbour again ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oxo Posted June 19, 2021 Author Share Posted June 19, 2021 9 hours ago, Adsibob said: Can I just seek clarification on a couple of points? Are you proposing: two extensions, a ground floor and a first floor with the first floor being extended so that its side wall is flush with the side wall of the existing ground floor (and part of the existing first floor)? What is in front of that side wall? Is it a street which is perpendicular to the street that your house is on, because being an end of terrace you are on a corner? Or did you say it was a footpath, i can't remember? Just trying to understand who will see that aspect of your project. that's right, 2 extensions of about 150 sq ft in total, with the side wall flush with the existing ground floor the map looks like this - yellow arrows point to our building, and the yellow line is the tiny footpath - only residents of the square would use it to get to the main street north bound, hardly anyone walks there, most people arrive/leave by car red blocks are other end of terraces, which are all extended, you can see below their extensions facing our side wall is open space, trees, some parking - we are not the focal point of the square, the open spaces are everywhere. looking at it from proportions point point of view - we are a tiny drop in the ocean, surrounded by much taller neighbours (directly behind us is the one who objected). Massive new redevelopments to the north, east and south from our building they allowed this on end of terrace 1 and this at the other end 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mania Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 (edited) Hi Oxo Yes it is worth it.... We had our planning application application refused. There was objection from our neighbour, a local residents association and the parish complaining that our design was bulky and overbearing, loss of privacy, loss of light and out of character with the street scene (high % with gables), impact on conservation area as well as loss of bungalow. Admittedly our design was "out there" (our nice neighbour / friend referred to it as "the Miami style house" (he didn't object)). I contemplated changing our design and resubmitting our application with a more traditional to try to make it fit. But our planning appeal consultant advised against this and quite rightly suggested that our plans will still most likely still be refused. Mrs. Bucket would have complained no matter what, so there's no guarantee that your resubmission will be passed. We submitted our appeal and included that we had pre-application advice (from an officer who left (managed to argue this point cross referencing the point in the white paper)) and how the officer did not visit the site (yours could have still viewed from outside regardless of Covid), similar to your situation where you have evidence. We cited that the officer preferred this mass out of the two we presented for review. The report included all the reasons why the property wasn't suitable in its current state - how we want to make it our forever home. We also stated how our architect had accounted for the 45 degree rule in the design and good architectural design encourages new design, in fact in his decision the inspector stated "Paragraph 127 of the Framework sets out that planning decisions should ensure that developments are sympathetic to local character while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change”. He also stated that the design would have no impact on the conservation area? We referenced statements referring to inclusions in the latest government law of permitted development passed Ist September 2020 (?) and referenced the NPPF re Pre-application engagement and front-loading as well as referencing other relevant paragraphs such as how the design will meet current and future standards re Lifetime homes, if you have children you can explain the tight space and demonstrate by submitting photographic evidence of the rooms, including two beds, crowded etc. And in your case you can reference similar house designs as you plan for in the area. We said we would use obscure windows to the sides. There are many arguments you could use, I could go on and on - I spent hours looking at our LA's paper and cross referencing arguments in the NPPF, government white paper and Permitted Development law to help make sure the appeal was all watertight. You might find this useful to make sure your design adheres: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/830643/190910_Tech_Guide_for_publishing.pdf And to cross reference points in response to the council and objection letters https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/958420/MHCLG-Planning-Consultation.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-design-guide https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn00485/ We asked our neighbours opposite and a few doors away to write letters of support (doesn't have to be those originally consulted (one was)), which they did and helped to highlight that opinions are divided. Mrs. Bucket our immediate neighbour used the same arguments as she did before which obviously were her personal opinion and actually read quite pathetic saying we were building "down the garden" and this time went and wound up our nice immediate neighbour's wife to do the same when he was out. The council's response was very wishy washy referring to the LA plan, which is still at the modifications(?) stage and easy for us to respond to, you also get a chance to respond to representations in any objection / support letters - but at this stage of writing you are not allowed to produce new evidence and only respond to the council's comments but did cross reference the responses to the government's white paper and law. If you do lose the inspector will highlight areas and make recommendations and as I understand it you can still win with say a condition that you should add more greenery etc. In our case it was that we must have obscured windows to the side walls and not use the flat biodiverse roofs as balconies. The council wanted our PD rights taken away should our appeal be granted but the inspectorate couldn't see any reason for it. So glad we appealed because WE WON!!! A local estate agent who came to value said its a shame some people don't and how he has seen some homeowners scale right back or build chalet bungalows instead. Something which we did try to contemplate. After winning were able to modify our design and resubmit for free and get rid of the red bricks which the pre-app officer advised us to incorporate to try and marry the traditional and were able to go back to our original plan of pure white front and slightly angular design. As our architect put it, "free roll of the dice". Go for it, while it can go either way and there's no guarantee that you will win, but there's also nothing to guarantee if you submit a revised design / planning application you will get approval. The more I dug into the policies and laws the more I found them to be in our favour if presented well. Please don't be disheartened. If you don't try you will never know and you could find yourself in the same predicament if you don't. Good luck. Edited June 19, 2021 by Mania 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pocster Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 On 16/06/2021 at 15:23, the_r_sole said: 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 Exactly . We always got “ detrimental to the local amenity “ . Fight them hard enough and make then define exactly what they mean . Obviously they’ll struggle but will come back with usually a list of weak points . Then you can adjust to suit thereby mitigating ‘ out of character’ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 (edited) Well @oxo, looks like you got your answer. Yes, appeal A quick canter through some of the reasons you should do so: COVID and no visit. - Pure tosh. Are they saying they can't jump in a car and visit cos of C-19? Sorry, that's convenient lazy-arsed b0ll0cks. Inspectors are at this very moment cruising the country on Inspection visits and have been throughout. Lazy, lazy lazy argument. out of character - no site visit hmmmm, how can a reasonable judgement be made if no site visit ? limits (to) size and space - tell me where those measures are limitless... do an accurate comparison of yours vs other locals, and suggest a compromise in %age terms. Skin the cat differently. Ignore local objectors. Develop a thick skin. In the words of one contibutor Stuff Em. Local comparisons: your post earlier today, excellent - the start of an evidence base: now go and get 3 more. Document them carefully. Present them well. Presentation and accuracy are key - the reputation of any Planner you employ should be based on results, and not local lore. Look at the decisions he / she wrote and analyse them carefully. You need concise, punchy, accurate attention to detail. Not reputation. Time to change Planner? Dont make yourself an easy target. Know the guts of all the local decisions in similar properties- yep, hard work. But the exercise will repay the effort. Know why applications were refused, and why they succeeded. Take @MikeSharp01's idea and run with it. It'll give the thing an interesting twist: sustainability / green agenda. Did I mention, develope a thick skin? Oh yeah..... sorry. Worth saying again. Persistence. Ian Edited June 19, 2021 by ToughButterCup 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jilly Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 It's definitely an important point the the Conservation Officer didn't make a formal comment. The buzzwords are 'the proposal must preserve or enhance the Conservation Area'. Ours was deemed neutral because behind trees, so think a greenery idea is a good one. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 @oxo, I said I'd point you to some resources on Consitency in Planning. The Importance of Consistency in Planning: a good overview An earlier thread on BH about the subject Want the source of the decision? North Wiltshire District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment (1993) 65 P & CR137. (widely referred to online) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shire2020 Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 Hi, I know SW6 well as used to work locally, what a lovely area you live in. Definitely keep persevering with an appeal and I hope you find a strong planning consultant. I know many of these companies will have ex planning officers etc who will be able to advise and support your case. I was reading about one company yesterday who also had the ex Head of planning from a local council now working for them which supported their success rates. Please don’t give up! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oxo Posted June 20, 2021 Author Share Posted June 20, 2021 Massive thank you to all friends here for breaking it down for me and good reference. So much to learn ? Can I just check buttercup - the green wall was not part of the planning application and refusal. Are you suggesting we appeal whilst also run with the new green wall application in parallel? Or is it possible to propose a condition on us to include green wall and move windows to the back - as part of the appeal process? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bramco Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 14 hours ago, ToughButterCup said: The Importance of Consistency in Planning: a good overview An earlier thread on BH about the subject Wish I'd known about this a few years ago!! Our 1st application was recommended for refusal by the case officer based on the pre-app report written by another officer. The plot is in the Green Belt but in-between a row of houses, so should have been recommended for permission to be granted based on the exception in the green belt for infill in villages. During discussions prior to the application going to committee, we pointed out that at the same time as the pre-app case officer was stating that 30m was too large a gap for the plot to be infill, she recommended granting permission for another application (also for infill in a village in the Green Belt) where the plot width was 100m. Permission was granted We couldn't get our case officer to make any concessions about consistency - he would always state that each application must be examined on its merits and this was repeated ad nauseum in the planning ctte meeting by the chief officer in answer to questions from ctte members about consistency. In the end the ctte was split 6-6 and the chairman voted against granting permission, we reapplied and had the exact same result the 2nd time. The appeal inspector though, essentially told the LPA they were 'WRONG' and permission should have been granted. We used all the various legal decisions about Green Belt and infill in our submission but I wish we'd known about this one as it would have backed up our request for consistency. And now due to that first officer in the pre-app report, we're 3 years down the line, should already have been living in the new house and are now faced with all the escalating costs due to Covid, Brexit etc. as we're only now about to break ground. If only we could make them accountable. Simon 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 Hmm, @Bramco, you have me sucking my teeth here. The planning application process is complex, delicate, infuriating, demanding, and endlessly interesting. So much ambition and energy (nervous or otherwise) hangs there in the balance . And a few wrong words, a tiny bit of wrongly handled micropolitics and mammaries point at the ceiling. If outside the local planning coterie, there's no substitute for reading voraciously. In every sense of the term, Planners and their courtiers are an elite. The only counter to their laziness / dismissiveness / insularity is knowledge. And they know applicants are ambitious. THE key attribute to bend others to their will. I am very pleased indeed to know that a just-in-case-you-didnt-know post was of some use. Thanks for the feedback. Appreciate it.... Ian 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 @oxo, how dare you call me merely buttercup. I'm tough, OK , TOUGH. Well, I was once. ? In relation to MikeSharp01's suggestion, I think if you get a hint that sustainability is an issue, then his idea would be one way of delivering that. Mike always has good ideas..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeSharp01 Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 You could talk to the planners about the green wall before going to appeal so you give them the option to "look again" before committing to appeal which will cost them a heap of time and money. You have 320mm backset to play with and the green wall can sit quite comfortably just adjusting out the slope. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 1 hour ago, MikeSharp01 said: ...You have 320mm backset to play with.... See what I mean @oxo? Not 319 or 321, 320mm of backset. Now, if only I knew what backset is .... life would peachy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnnyt Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 Let's face it, unless there is a policy change, you're not going to change opinion of the LPA My experience involving an infilling appeal in a village (outside boundary) in GB, after 2 applications and 2 appeals, the last being successful is once reasonableness has been exhausted, is to hit them and hit them HARD! Only then, would the LPA listen after they had to pay costs and I ended up with 2 properties on an enlarged plot. You have to be very thorough, persistent and try to find an angle for a costs award . You can then offer to drop the costs application if the LPA in the weight of the evidence choose not to defend the appeal. I also brought consistency to the table in my appeal and the relevant case law. You will get a fair crack of the whip with the Planning Inspectorate. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitpipe Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 2 hours ago, MikeSharp01 said: You could talk to the planners about the green wall before going to appeal so you give them the option to "look again" before committing to appeal which will cost them a heap of time and money. You have 320mm backset to play with and the green wall can sit quite comfortably just adjusting out the slope. I would advise preparing for an appeal (argumentation etc) and then get a local planning consultant to discuss this with the planners, with a 'look again' option held out as a way for them to gracefully stand down. We achieved this simply by producing some axiometric (i.e. as viewed on a 45o angle) drawings and low and behold the objections evaporated - it did not require changing the scheme, which had already been toned down once following the original refusal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now