Submit plans with intention of future NMA

[Deejay]

Brief history.  Approval for 2 detached dwellings 2011 on long narrow site.  Plot 2 sold and house built to aproved plan.  Unable to sell Plot 1 so reluctantly decided to build ourselves.  Enquired about additional 2 bedrooms in roof (we knew very little about anything at that time) and "architect" advised NMA, which we did and it was approved and build went ahead.  Jump to 2021.  

We occupy 1970 bungalow on site.  Plan is to demolish bungalow and build house with triple garage with granny flat over. We have already submitted plng enquiry (£360) with plans almost the same as Plot 1 which would mean there would be 3 dwellings, all looking almost the same on the private access road providing uniformity. No objection by Planning to replacement dwelling but with changes ie too bulky, kneelers and copings, natural stone etc. (conservation area).  There is a footpath at the bottom of the garden, which also borders the back garden of a bunglow which is part of an estate of bungalows.  The footpath leads from the Church to the estate.  I feel there may be objections from this particular corner of the estate - all pensioners (like myself) and quite pally - one a councillor.  My thinking is we should dispense with the rooms in the roof for the formal application, and if approved, go back with a NMA to add the extra staircase and rooms in the roof with ensuites and veluxes.  The garage/granny flat is longer/higher than the garages of the other two properties, and I am assuming that in itself will draw attention.  Our plans submitted already for pre-planning showed rooms in the roof.  Does anyone see any reason why the NMA would be refused as it would be apparent we had intended doing this all along.    I have hopefully attached a copy of the location plan to give an idea of the position of the new house.  

22 5 21 Location Plan Annotated.pdf

[Bitpipe]

NMA, as the name implies, is only for non material amendments (the materiality is determined by the LA).

 

We did one for our build, slightly increasing size of street facing windows (from 1000mm to 1200mm), adding Solar PV to rear elevation and tweaking layout and size of Velux.

 

However the second, adding PV to front elevation, was rejected as being a material amendment and requiring PP. As it was, we were allowed to do it under PD so became a non issue.

 

If you were allowed 2 beds in roof as a NMA they must not have materially impact the street scene etc.

 

Would removing the staircase and rooms in roof change the external view - i.e. would the NMA require additional Velux etc? If not why bother removing them?

 

I would not worry about local objections derailing your approval - the planning officer needs to determine that based on local policy and planning law. Objections need to be addressed by them and if sufficiently high in volume can pull the application into committee. You can appeal if you believe planning decision is incorrect.

 

Also, planners can only approve what is in front of them, not what has gone before or may come after - they will be dealt with on their own merits.

 

Have you discussed any of this with a planning consultant? Some architects are on the ball in this respect but some less so.

[Deejay]

When we applied for the NMA in 2014 for the house on Plot 1 it was by accident rather than design in that we had never intended building the house ourselves.  Lack of buyers of the plot forced us to re-think.  I suppose I am now aware of manipulating the situation.  If we remove the rooms on the top floor and the staircase we are left with a 3 bedroomed house with views only from the first floor, which the OAP'S on the estate I am sure would not object to - however I think their attention would be drawn to the rooms in the roof.  Our immediate neighbour, who bought their plot from us, may object to rooms in the roof, although all overshadowing etc requirements will be met.  Others around us may also object as may the Parish Council - some prob thinking they should have objected more profusely the first time around (no objections last time from Parish Council).  If I can avoid the application going to Committee then I would prefer this, and I really don't want to face an appeal.  The architect is retired and inexpensive and between us we are trying to make the road to approval as smooth as possible, hence my considering the NMA route.  If, as you say, Planning only consider what's in front of them, then my removing the top floor rooms shouldn't "be held against me".  They gave approval in 2014 for the house on Plot 1 for exactly the same thing so is there any reason to not allow it this time.  I would have said Plot 1 was less likely to obtain approval to the NTA because of surrounding properties so we were surprised how smoothly it went through.