New self-build project - design method question

[Alan Ambrose]

>>> removal of PD rights is not looked on favourably by appeal inspectors.

 

Removal of PD seems to be standard practice with my LPA. I have an appeal in for re-instatement - it's been in now for 33 weeks - so far no decision.

[SBMS]

3 hours ago, saveasteading said:

The justification would be that you have submitted your proposal and are not asking for more space. So you don't need it. Whereas with an old house it can need enlarging to modern expectations.

Otherwise every application would be on the understanding that it will be extended. 

I don’t think that would be clearly justifiable or necessary. The principle when granting planning permission is that the new dwelling that is approved is assessed for approval in the context of retaining its PD rights. The removal or those rights via a condition should be justifiable in the context of the application and site. For example, a contentious site that only just passed in green belt would typically have PD rights removed so as to afford the LPA the ability to control future development of the site. It should be site specific and necessary and justifiable. 
 

Our LPA no longer adds this condition by default (it used to) following a number of successful applications to remove the condition post approval by a fairly industrious local planning consultant… each time he asserted the test of necessity and justifiable to the site and the LPA didn’t even question it. I think an earlier post regarding appeal inspectors dim view to removal

of these rights is valid.

[Oz07]

9 hours ago, SBMS said:

I don’t think that would be clearly justifiable or necessary. The principle when granting planning permission is that the new dwelling that is approved is assessed for approval in the context of retaining its PD rights. The removal or those rights via a condition should be justifiable in the context of the application and site. For example, a contentious site that only just passed in green belt would typically have PD rights removed so as to afford the LPA the ability to control future development of the site. It should be site specific and necessary and justifiable. 
 

Our LPA no longer adds this condition by default (it used to) following a number of successful applications to remove the condition post approval by a fairly industrious local planning consultant… each time he asserted the test of necessity and justifiable to the site and the LPA didn’t even question it. I think an earlier post regarding appeal inspectors dim view to removal

of these rights is valid.

They seemed to be an a standard part of the approval round here but I noticed them being dropped in last few years