Non material amendment

[Cresswelle]

Hi all. Just a general question. Can you apply for more than one NMA to an agreed application?
 

original app approved and then did a NMA back in Oct which was approved but decided on bi folds and submitted a further NMA which has been refused. 
 

can’t get hold of the planning officer to discuss. His notes say that the NMA needs to go through planning but I don’t think he is taking account of the first NMA and thinks that I’m asking for both changes in one application. (The first was to change the front from a window to garage doors) second is simply bifolds instead of patio doors. 

I’ve emailed and left various messages but not getting anywhere. Don’t wanna go down planning ideally as we are mid build 

[Conor]

Yes.

But if the changes are beyond the scope of an NMC/NMA, you'll need a full application. That's exactly what happened to us when we changed a couple windows.

 

[Cresswelle]

Annoying isn’t it. I’m tempted just to carry on but want to be compliant. Did you get approval after planning?

 

just worried if it gets rejected will my original app be still valid 

[epsilonGreedy]

38 minutes ago, Cresswelle said:

Hi all. Just a general question. Can you apply for more than one NMA to an agreed application?
 

 

Using the right terminology helps others help you.

 

I assume you started with an approved full planning application, then got approval for an NMA last October for the front of the property and then got refused on a second NMA for bi-folds?

 

You can put in an assortment of NMA's, I suspect my local planning office views them as a nice little earner.

 

I think the planner who refused your second NMA is saying he does not like the bi-folds and is advising you for your benefit to stop messing around with NMAs of dubious merit and go down the full application route so the planning office can appraise your overall intentions and guide you.

[AliG]

Is the opening size the same?

 

If not I don't think it needs an amendment unless you are in a conservation area. I think it would be the same as replacing a window which does not need planning approval.

 

Can you post the wording from the refusal. It would seem quite a surprising thing to refuse or need to go back to full planning. A window change should be an amendment at worst unless it materially impacts on a neighbour. Unfortunately there is no statutory definition of what is non material.

[Cresswelle]

In comparison to the previous approved plans, the applicant proposes to make the following changes:-
 Altering the roof form of the proposed single storey side extension
 Replacing a window with a garage door to the front elevation
 Insert bi-folding doors to the rear elevation
The Government's Planning Practice Guidance states that there is no statutory definition of ‘non-material’. This is because it will be dependent on the context of the overall scheme – an amendment that is non-material in one context may be material in another. The local planning authority must be satisfied that the amendment sought is non-material in order to grant an application. In considering whether an amendment would be "immaterial" or "insignificant", it is appropriate to refer to the following factors:-
i) Would the proposed development differ materially from that which has been granted permission? i.e. have any planning implications such as traffic generation, noise, design etc.
ii) Would the amended development have a significantly greater or different impact on its neighbours than the development already permitted sufficient to warrant their being re-consulted about the proposal?
iii) Would there be any significant change in the overall dimensions of the development or its elevational treatment?
There would be no significant change in terms of neighbour amenity; as the proposed alterations would not result in a negative impact upon the amenity of any neighbouring occupiers in terms of overlooking, loss of privacy or loss of outlook.
In terms of design and appearance, the proposal may not result in a detrimental harmful change to the appearance of the resultant dwelling, however the proposal would increase the size, scale and massing of the property beyond what has previously been approved (ref: DC/072729) and would also be widely visible from the public domain.

[Cresswelle]

The two first changes he has listed were approved on the previous Amendment and there is no difference in the size of the build 

[AliG]

It seems clearly that an error has been made here.

 

Did he not approve the previous NMA, normally they go back to the same officer?

 

Lauaghably he is refusing the NMA that you already have. The bifolds would  to alter the massing of the house or appearance from the public domain which are his main concern. This is the roof and garage door change already approved (I assume that the roof was also part of that NMA).

 

The difficulty that you now have is contacting him to get this point over.

 

It may be that you need to email his boss or speak to the council's complaints department if he won't speak to you. An alternative that I have had some success with is emailing the council's main planning helpdesk and explaining the issue then having them contact the officer.

 

[Conor]

1 hour ago, Cresswelle said:

Annoying isn’t it. I’m tempted just to carry on but want to be compliant. Did you get approval after planning?

 

just worried if it gets rejected will my original app be still valid 

We did. We actually ended up making a major change a month after our NMC was rejected and just rolled it in to that.

 

If you're just changing the type of window and it's not visible from the road, I'd push on without it.

[Cresswelle]

He did the last NMA and I agree I think he’s made a mistake as he’s referring to something already agreed. The bifolds don’t look into any neighbouring property etc. 
 

ive emailed the main planning email and been told he’s on hol till 16th so asked if someone else can pick up.