Paragraph 80 - 'Isolated' Plot

[Makkers82]

Hi All,

 

We've only just started on our paragraph 80 (formerly 79) application and we already feel like we're butting heads with  the local planning department. 

 

Our plot lies 'in the countryside, outside of the settlement boundary' (based on nearby applications), but in their pre-application advice the local planning officer said that it was not deemed to be 'isolated', due to it having neighbouring properties to the north and south, and it being around 250m from the nearest village (without any services etc.). The officer quoted the Braintree judgement to back up this assessment, and seemed to suggest that it should be an end to the matter ('highly unlikely" that the planners would support our application).

 

I'm a bit confused by the whole thing - The site is in the open countryside, away from facilities, villages etc, although there are a couple of other houses nearby. 

 

Is the planners assessment fair and how much weight should we give to it?  Should we just ignore and crack on with a full application, or do we need to fight this battle first?  I get the feeling that the whole 'isolated' debate is still pretty much open to interpretation - Can we argue this point?

 

Any and all thoughts welcome!

 

Many Thanks

[Mr Punter]

I am far from an expert, but the judgement seemed to be against the LPA and in favour of the developer.

 

You will need to show that the design is exceptional in design and quality. Originally this was to enable wealthy entitled Tory scum people to build mansions in the countryside, but it seems to have changed a bit.  The are lots of Grand Designs type schemes but some are fairly pedestrian.

[IanR]

 

10 hours ago, Makkers82 said:

Is the planners assessment fair and how much weight should we give to it?  Should we just ignore and crack on with a full application, or do we need to fight this battle first?  I get the feeling that the whole 'isolated' debate is still pretty much open to interpretation - Can we argue this point?

 

For the Planning Officer to have high-lighted this Appeal judgement, they must feel it carries some weight, which as a High Court judgement you assume it must.

 

It makes the definition of "isolated" black and white in planning terms. A site is either within a settlement/village, or it is isolated.

 

The actual Approved (at Appeal) application, that was then being further Appealed at the High Court was for a site the LPA felt was "isolated" and therefore required special circumstances for Approval, but the developer felt (and was agreed with by the Planning Inspector) was within a settlement as it was between two other houses and therefore required no special circumstances.

 

If the Planning Officer is using this argument against your Para 80 application to say it is not "isolated" due to it being between two existing houses, then by this High Court judgement they are saying it is within a settlement, and so does not require special circumstances, ie. it can be treated as an infill.

 

The Planning Officer will probably try to argue that it is not within a settlement, but the High Court judgement makes it clear, it is either one or the other. 

 

Out of the two options, having it considered within a settlement is likely the better option, as you have no need to prove special circumstances.

 

[Temp]

Its quite possible for a plot to be "outside the development boundary" but at the same time "not isolated".  

 

I reckon the planning officer decided it wasn't isolated as defined by the court case.. Then his boss took a look and decided to over rule him on the grounds that it was outside the development boundary.

 

If you are building a "paragraph 80" house it is presumably going to be a significant building with budget to match. I think its work employing a planning consultant to handle the application. 

 

I wonder if the planners needs feel a house must be isolated in order for the exemptions in para 80 to apply?

[Alfie]

I wish you the best of luck with this Makkers82.

 

We're going down the same route as you and I cannot overstate the importance of having someone with a solid understanding of what it is going to entail in order to get this through.

 

I remembered watching a couple of Hawkes Architecture videos when I was looking into mine, this one looks specifically at the Braintree case. This one is a follow up and looks like it might have some similarities to yours (potential infill and maybe the para 131 route (it might have moved paragraph now with the change) could be the way forward).

 

20 hours ago, Makkers82 said:

and it being around 250m from the nearest village

 

This might be the issue. Have you looked at the planning districts five year housing plan? It might be that this section of land (or surrounding) is a potential village expansion site and therefore whilst currently not part of the boundaries now it will be in several years. We had the potential of a new road that may/may not be build in the next 10 - 20 years (it's been talked about since 1980!) to contend with for our pre-app.

 

8 hours ago, Temp said:

If you are building a "paragraph 80" house it is presumably going to be a significant building with budget to match. I think its work employing a planning consultant to handle the application. 

 

I'd second the planning consultant however if you're working with an architect that has a strong history of delivering these types of builds then they should have a good steer on the potential or not of "the site". Ours walked the land with us and told us not to even bother with a couple of sites as they have no chance (even though isolated). We've just had our first design review panel and the potential of the site (views (in and out), opportunity for bio-diversity gains, etc) cannot be understated.

 

Feel free to PM is you need anymore information or have any questions. 

[Makkers82]

Thanks All for your comments, really useful stuff.  Alfie - I'm going to check out those videos and will be in touch!