PD right removed on old cottage renovation, can I still have a static?

[martynjl]

We're trying to buy a piece of land that has an old stone cottage on it that has full Planning for reinstatement. The planners have not allowed much to be altered at all and have removed PD rights and placed an article 3 directive on the curtilage of the plot. Which states: Article 3, Schedule 2, Part 1 of

the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-

enacting that Order with or without modification) no enlargements, improvements or other alterations to the dwelling house or any outbuildings shall be erected or constructed

without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

 

So I'm assuming this means we'd need permission for a static caravan to be placed on it during the build. Does this mean it could be refused? As we'd need to live there in order to proceed. 

 

I think they have tried to avoid anyone doing this by making the curtilage basically the same size of the house and garage and not leaving any room to put one there. We could put one where the garage is to be built. Build the house then move in and replace the static with the garage. It's got me worried by the fact they seem to have to tried to avoid this situation by not including none of the 3.5 acres in the curtilage. 

 

Can anyone offer an advice?

Edited February 13 by martynjl

[joe90]

I lived in a static during my build and didn’t tell the council, however I think you need to get clarification from the council regarding using a static as accommodation during your renovation because the house will not be habitable during the work (planners are not consistent).

[Temp]

Technically I don't think you don't need PP for a van for building workers to live in. So if all occupants can claim to be doing at least some work on the house you should be ok. No children obviously.

 

I believe this even extends to a van on neighbouring land.

 

I'm travelling at moment so can't easily quote a source but it should be possible to find it in the GPDO somewhere.

 

Edit: The menu on my flight includes "Fluffy egg preparation" I guess that's an omelette then.

Edited February 14 by Temp

[Alan Ambrose]

Maybe an egg blown up in the microwave or some kind of Japanese Kawaii thing?
 

I have heard of applications for a van during building being turned down. Maybe that was some special circumstances.

[Temp]

It was ok as it happens. Just landed in Delhi.

 

Probably best to let you get back on topic.

[kandgmitchell]

We are currently living in a static and I was prepared to fall back on this part of the permitted development rights

 

PART 4 Temporary buildings and uses

Class A – temporary buildings and structures

Permitted development

A.  The provision on land of buildings, moveable structures, works, plant or machinery required temporarily in connection with and for the duration of operations being or to be carried out on, in, under or over that land or on land adjoining that land.

Development not permitted

A.1  Development is not permitted by Class A if—

(a)the operations referred to are mining operations, or

(b)planning permission is required for those operations but is not granted or deemed to be granted.

Conditions

A.2  Development is permitted by Class A subject to the conditions that, when the operations have been carried out—

(a)any building, structure, works, plant or machinery permitted by Class A is removed, and

(b)any adjoining land on which development permitted by Class A has been carried out is, as soon as reasonably practicable, reinstated to its condition before that development was carried out.

 

However, the Council have been fine. We got an address registered, pay Council Tax with the account listed as Caravan at...... , our bins get emptied and no-one has raised an eyebrow.

 

This is within Part 4 of the GDPO, however in your case they appear to have removed Part 1 rights (the normal PD for dwellings) so would still be available.

[ProDave]

I am confused.  You are buying 3.5 acres, but there is not enough land in the "curtilige" to park a static caravan.

 

So if the curtilige only covers a tiny area, what is the current planning use of the rest of the 3.5 acres?  

[joe90]

With my planning fight the council tried to reduce the curtalige  to just the house and drive when in fact we had half an acre garden (plus a half acre field), when I asked them how they got their info they said “google earthl 🤣🤣🤣 well I laughed and told them I could get family members to testify the “garden” had been in use for at least 40 years, (they backed down).

[martynjl]

@ProDaveyes, they turned down almost everything requested by the seller, the neighbours kicked off about everything so the curtilage ended up being more or less the outline of the house, garage and road. They've allowed only what they had to. Not even a small extension to the original building. The neighbours had a big say on it and when they could not get the application refused they played havoc with the plans and got everything reduced in size. Funny considering their massive "compounds" near by. 

[joe90]

1 hour ago, martynjl said:

The neighbours had a big say on it

How, why, neighbours don’t get to tell the planners what they can do, yes they can object but only with objections that stand up to scrutiny (yes I have been there and won). NIMBY ism is not a valid objection.