New Build Planning Frustrations

[Havkey100]

Hello all, new to the forum and the journey. A bit of background:

 

We have had our planning application for a new build in for some months now. There were around a dozen local objections but we managed to navigate most of the planning hurdles with highways, archaeology, local parish endorsement etc...

 

We received notification from our case officer that they had prepared their report, recommending approval and provided the planning conditions for our agreement. We reviewed and confirmed that we were happy with their stipulations. About three days later the case officer reached out to advise that their line manager subsequently disagreed with their approval and ever since we have been trying to find a solution to satisfy their concerns.

 

We have been forthcoming in making amendments and have a design that is objectively more sympathetic than a couple of recently approved and directly comparable applications, but it seems are getting nowhere. I assume precedent in planning is not quite the same as UK case law... My architect is of the view that we have a strong case for appeal should we be denied permission, but I am really hoping it does not come to that.

 

We feel like we have had the rug pulled from under our feet on this. Whilst the case officer was clearly premature in their communication to us, we can only assume that this type of blocker has not been applied to them in the past or they would not have got as far as issuing the conditions schedule. The planning office seems incredibly stretched so progress is slow and I have sympathy for the case officer, who obviously has a mountain of other applications to manage. We are about a month past the determination deadline, however I am least reassured that the planner is open to dialogue to help us find a solution.

 

I am sure there are many other frustrated applicants here, this is my first foray into planning and I am already feeling that the whole system is not fit for purpose. There are areas left open to subjective opinion when there are clear and objective measures that can be applied. The relevant comparable examples we have found make the hurdles we are facing even more frustrating!

 

Apologies for the opening rant. We are really excited for the build so the delays are somewhat infuriating!

[Kelvin]

What are the concerns? 

[Temp]

I feel for you. This sort of thing is unfortunately quite common. It took me over a year to get to the "recommended for approval" stage.

 

All I can suggest is to keep going. If you run out of ideas consider employing a planning consultant. 

[Havkey100]

We are building in an infill plot next to a bungalow that we own. The concern was that that placing a two story dwelling next door would be overbearing to future owners.

 

The elevation difference is 1.4m and we are about 10m apart, set a about a 45 degree angle back garden to back garden. The proposed building footprint is 100m2 vs the bungalow which is 140m2. We have proposed obscured glazing on the windows facing the bungalow to alleviate any possible privacy concerns from overlooking. We pass on BRE 25 degree rule comfortably and our plot is to the north, not impacting direct sunlight.

 

Both properties would sit on plots about 700m2 each. The area is full of two story dwellings, the bungalow is an outlier. All other new dwellings approved in the area are two story, with even 1.5 story dwelling being refused as it was deemed not consistent with the dominant local vernacular. The case officer's manage has implied they would prefer a 1 story dwelling. This does not work for us as a family and is also inconsistent with local precedent and at least two other application in the area approved in the past year or so.

 

We have examples of two story dwellings being positioned at less than 10m with greater elevation differences and where the new dwelling is substantially larger than the neighbouring bungalow. This was actually a permitted demolition of a bungalow to be replaced with a two story build. It feels we are being held to a different standard for some reason. We are better on all aspects of PSP8 - Residential Amenity as far as we can tell.

 

 

[Havkey100]

10 minutes ago, Temp said:

I feel for you. This sort of thing is unfortunately quite common. It took me over a year to get to the "recommended for approval" stage.

 

All I can suggest is to keep going. If you run out of ideas consider employing a planning consultant. 

Thanks, we will persevere. That will be our next step. We have already sought pre-advice and they have initially indicated that we have a very strong case to appeal if rejected.

[joe90]

I have been exactly where you are and went to appeal and won. Sounds like the line manager has a bee in his bonnet. I found going to appeal easier than dealing with planners but can take time. I think you have a very strong case. 

[ProDave]

And if you do go to appeal, it sounds like your case officer has already written the basis of your appeal claim for you.

 

Make it CLEAR to your planning officer that if it is refused you WILL be appealing.

[garrymartin]

6 hours ago, joe90 said:

I found going to appeal easier than dealing with planners but can take time.

Don't underestimate both the time it takes for an appeal to be dealt with and the emotional toll of not knowing whether you'll be able to move forward with your plans or not.

 

I'm in appeal at the moment and waiting for determination. It's quite literally a year to the day today that our original application went into the planners and was subsequently refused and appealed.

[Kelvin]

Bloody hell. What a waste of time. How can anything like this really take a year. I appreciate they are understaffed nevertheless. 

[joe90]

Just to expand on my post above I put in four applications, no 1 being exactiy what we wanted and no 4 what the planners wanted, which passed. However the ground floor was exactly the same for all four applications. We then started building then went to appeal for application no 1 (a clever planning consultant told me this was possible). We then went to appeal and won before we got to first floor level but this was worth the gamble as we had to build something!!,!. In the appeal notes the inspector slated the planners for not abiding by their own policies.   (Never heard from the again).

 

edit, my appeal took 4 months (but at least we were on site building 👍) yes it was emotional but at least we were doing something (I hate planners and have fought them and won before).

Edited May 30 by joe90

[garrymartin]

We did something similar. We put in a 2nd application after the 1st was refused, providing evidence (to our minds) that the original refusal was invalid in its observations. At the same time, we started the appeal on the 1st application while the 2nd was going through planning. At least that way we didn't lose 5 weeks on the appeal timescale when the 2nd application was refused too. At the time, putting in another application after the first refusal was "free" of charge. Appeals are also free and our appeal could have been withdrawn had the 2nd application been approved. 

[Alan Ambrose]

I’ve mentioned this before, but the above clever strategies don’t work, I understand, where you have a significant CIL charge. I haven’t looked at the CIL law in detail yet to find the reason why, but I’m pretty sure.

 

I have a couple of appeals in progress. They are slow, about 9 months median, if I remember rightly, but with a wide variation. Also, I think they can be as random and opinionated, and as badly justified, as the standard planning process. You can download some example determinations either from the appeals portal or from your LPA’s portal to get an idea. I’ve a thread here on BH discussing that. My LPA also flouts the Procedural Guide for appeals, and the inspector doesn’t seem to care a jot.

 

Summary is, suggest exhausting all your standard planning options before doing the appeal thing.

[Havkey100]

The last message said:

 

The distance between the rear of the bungalow and the two-storey property would still result in an overbearing impact upon future residents of the bungalow, given this is their main rear outlook and amenity space.

It is likely that only a single storey dwelling would be accepted here due to the plot restrictions.

 

When referencing BRE guidelines we are significantly better than 25 degrees for protection of light and outlook. Additionally, the two "affected" rooms in the bungalow are dual aspect, with entirely unimpacted views retained to the west and south.

 

There are two images attached of our plan and one of another approved application where a bungalow was demolished and replaced with a larger two bed. Our proposed footprint is very similar to the neighbouring bungalow with a ridge difference of 1.4m. The approved example has a closer spacing and a ridge difference of 1.9m and is situated to the south east. By definition it is larger in relative mass and more overbearing than our proposal, yet the delegated report stated that it was not overbearing on the neighbouring bungalow (note there are habitable rooms on the south east side of that bungalow). We are proposing that all glazing on the western upper floor is obscured to protect privacy, similar to the approved example, and also to modify the boundaries further to give a larger rear garden to the bungalow.

 

Maybe I am reaching at the comparison, but it feels that we are being held to a different standard to other recent applicants, which is somewhat frustrating.

 

 

Edited May 30 by Havkey100

[joe90]

Typical of planners not being consistent, I still think you have a good case stating BRE guidelines and previous planners notes on the other application that was passed.

[Indy]

I posted a thread elsewhere on the forum and the exact same thing happened to us. Our case office kept telling us everything was on track and due to be approved, and then on the day the decision was due - his line manager overruled him and recommended refusal. While he was open to discussing how we could tweak the application to make it more compliant - that didn't help as we'd spent over 6m giving in to their demands and they still weren't happy. My architect recommended taking the refusal so we could appeal.

 

We then submitted a separate planning application which was basically what the council wanted and it was granted.

 

Do not underestimate the amount of time an appeal takes though. You may or may not win, and ours has been going on for over 9m now. I'd like to believe it should be done in the next month or so but I've had my hopes dashed before...  

[garrymartin]

33 minutes ago, Indy said:

Do not underestimate the amount of time an appeal takes though. You may or may not win, and ours has been going on for over 9m now. I'd like to believe it should be done in the next month or so but I've had my hopes dashed before...  

+100

 

Our appeal was submitted on 28 Jul 2023. It took until 02 Nov 2023 for it to be determined valid, which is the date from which all the timings for appeals are taken. This is very misleading when people look at 29 weeks (currently) as a median time to determine - it's NOT from the date you submitted the appeal. My dates;

 

Appeal submitted - 28 Jul 2023

Application valid - 02 Nov 2023

Start date - 22 Jan 2024

Questionnaire due - 29 Jan 2024

Statement(s) due - 26 Feb 2024

Final comments due - 11 Mar 2024

And then there is just complete radio silence until it is determined. You can't chase it and you have no indication of when your appeal will be determined. Whilst the times have reduced a little over the last few months, these were the stats I gathered for Written Representations when looking at things.

 

25% of appeals are determined within 21 weeks

50% of appeals are determined within 30 weeks

Median is 32 weeks

Mean is 34 weeks

75% of appeals are determined within 44 weeks

90% of appeals are determined within 60 weeks

 

An appeal is a very long, drawn-out process where you have pretty much zero visibility of whether anything is *actually* happening to move it closer to determination.

 

[Indy]

Ours are along similar lines:

 

Appeal filed: 28 August 2023

Start date: 02 Feb 2024

Questionnaire due: 09 Feb 2024

Statements due: 08 Mar 2024

Interested party comments due: 08 Mar 2024

Appellant/LPA Final comments due: 26 Mar 2024

Planning Inspector Site visit: 28 May 2024

 

Decision now due as there's nothing else we can do. 

 

There was a long waiting period between August and Feb where there was literally nothing we could do - no chasing up or trying to get information. I got told off by my architect for sending a chaser email too many to the Planning Inspectorate and their response was basically that we're overwhelmed, don't contact us again and we can't tell you anything.

 

In the meantime, we've had the case officer assigned to our case change 3 times (which inevitably means more time as each officer needs to acquaint themselves with the details of the case).

 

In the end, it may turn out to be a pyrrhic victory due to the amount of time it's taken and how much life has moved on since the time we submitted the appeal. Still hanging in there though... 

 

[garrymartin]

3 minutes ago, Indy said:

Planning Inspector Site visit: 28 May 2024

 

We've not had a site visit recorded, but then given the circumstances of the refusal, we don't believe one would be required (the refusal is all about sustainable transport options).

 

4 minutes ago, Indy said:

In the meantime, we've had the case officer assigned to our case change 3 times (which inevitably means more time as each officer needs to acquaint themselves with the details of the case).

 

My understanding was that the case officer is just an administrative role and that it is the Planning Inspector who would need to acquaint themselves with the details of the case if they were changed.

 

9 minutes ago, Indy said:

In the end, it may turn out to be a pyrrhic victory due to the amount of time it's taken and how much life has moved on since the time we submitted the appeal. Still hanging in there though... 

 

Whilst we're still hanging in there too, it feels like our life hasn't moved on and many decisions are stalled.

 

If we're successful at appeal, it's only the first stage (Planning in Principle) and we'd still then need to get Technical Details Consent. All sorts of decisions feel impacted, especially as I'm nearing early retirement age and what I choose to do will be substantially affected by whether we'll be building our own home or not...

[Temp]

2 hours ago, Havkey100 said:

The distance between the rear of the bungalow and the two-storey property would still result in an overbearing impact upon future residents of the bungalow, given this is their main rear outlook and amenity space.

It is likely that only a single storey dwelling would be accepted here due to the plot restrictions.

 

There are whole estates or two storey houses closer together than your proposal.

 

One option might be to mirror your design left to right and possibly reduce the resulting part of the L nearest the other house to one storey. Do this and rotate it to the same angle as the other house?

 

You might also consider making a street scene ddrawing as proposed showing both houses as viewed from the road showing the heights and gap between them to scale. Perhaps run that drawing past a planning consultant before submitting it. 

[garrymartin]

2 hours ago, Havkey100 said:

The distance between the rear of the bungalow and the two-storey property would still result in an overbearing impact upon future residents of the bungalow, given this is their main rear outlook and amenity space.

It is likely that only a single storey dwelling would be accepted here due to the plot restrictions.

 

Which Local Authority is this and what does their guidance say? For example, mine states a distance of 22m as a considered minimum between facing/backing dwellings. I know distance can be reduced depending on the number of stories and the angle of the buildings to each other (e.g. if the angle is greater than 30 degrees) but what is stated in your local plan and any supplementary planning guidance? They may be suggesting a single storey due to the 11.7m and 12.4m distances which are very much on the low side.

 

 

Whilst referring to BRE guidelines may be helpful, it's really the LA documents that will prevail here. If you can meet the LA requirements, then it's plain sailing. If you can't, then it's down to what your planning officer might be willing to accept when considering the scheme as a whole. 

[Havkey100]

Thanks. We originally considered the mirrored option but wanted to remain within the main build line of the row of adjacent houses (the edge can be seen in red). This was seen as best practice to give a consistent build line as we are on a corner plot, the bungalow acts as the 45 degree pivot to the row of houses to the west.

 

We have elevations and street scene and will update for the changes we have made so far.

 

There is another property approved nearby where they place 5 houses in front of a bungalow, the nearest of which is 1m from the fence line of the only amenity space available. This is 400m from our site.

[Havkey100]

25 minutes ago, garrymartin said:

 

Which Local Authority is this and what does their guidance say? For example, mine states a distance of 22m as a considered minimum between facing/backing dwellings. I know distance can be reduced depending on the number of stories and the angle of the buildings to each other (e.g. if the angle is greater than 30 degrees) but what is stated in your local plan and any supplementary planning guidance? They may be suggesting a single storey due to the 11.7m and 12.4m distances which are very much on the low side.

 

 

Whilst referring to BRE guidelines may be helpful, it's really the LA documents that will prevail here. If you can meet the LA requirements, then it's plain sailing. If you can't, then it's down to what your planning officer might be willing to accept when considering the scheme as a whole. 

South Glos. Back to Back is 20m

 

The technical guidance states:

 

Where houses face each other at an angle:

The more oblique the relationship between dwellings (typically 30⁰ or more), the less likely it is that there would be inter-visibility between rooms. In these instances, the separation distance may be reduced without a detrimental impact on privacy levels

 

Where the impact on privacy levels can be satisfactorily mitigated:

For example, through the use of obscure glazing and restricted openings (for the avoidance of doubt, it would not be acceptable for principal rooms to only have obscure glazed windows).

 

We are oblique, side to back and have proposed obscured windows to fully mitigate privacy concerns to kitchen sink it.

 

There is also this in the technical guidance:

 

There are no minimum separation distances where dwellings front one another across the public realm, for example a street, as the land is usually already subject to overlooking. However, consideration will be given to the prevailing separation distances in the locality. Proposals that fail to respect the existing development pattern are unlikely to be considered to meet the highest possible standards of design.

 

Everything else in the area is built closer.

[Havkey100]

3 hours ago, Indy said:

I posted a thread elsewhere on the forum and the exact same thing happened to us. Our case office kept telling us everything was on track and due to be approved, and then on the day the decision was due - his line manager overruled him and recommended refusal. While he was open to discussing how we could tweak the application to make it more compliant - that didn't help as we'd spent over 6m giving in to their demands and they still weren't happy. My architect recommended taking the refusal so we could appeal.

 

We then submitted a separate planning application which was basically what the council wanted and it was granted.

 

Do not underestimate the amount of time an appeal takes though. You may or may not win, and ours has been going on for over 9m now. I'd like to believe it should be done in the next month or so but I've had my hopes dashed before...  

Devastating isn't it!

[Thorfun]

might not be financially feasible but can you put an application in to demolish the bungalow and build 2 x 2 story houses orienting them to suit? could be a nice profit in it?

 

otherwise maybe a planning consultant could help? our case officer was against our development. we got a planning consultant involved to fight our case and we got an approval. sometimes it's worth the money to pay someone to fight for you!

[Mr Punter]

8 minutes ago, Thorfun said:

sometimes it's worth the money to pay someone to fight for you!

 

It always worked for Arthur Daley.