Planning refused and we want to appeal. Is it worth it?

[Dee3003_]

We applied for planning 6 months ago and our planning was refused on the basis that it was impacting our neighbour significantly and overdeveloping the site. We 

 

Our proposal was to Demolish garage and part of existing rear projection, and construction of two storey side and rear extension, hip to gable roof extension along with raising the ridge height to incorporate accommodation in the roof, and rear dormers.

 

These were the exact reasons stated for the refusal: 

"1. The proposed side extension and raising of the ridge height by reason of their excessive size, scale and massing are considered to appear over dominant to neighbouring
occupiers, resulting in a significant visual impact which is also detrimental to character and appearance of the area. 

2 The proposed side extension and raising of the ridge height by reason of their excessive size, scale and massing would be over dominant, and would have an overbearing impact
on the residential amenity of the neighbouring property on the left of the front elevation."

 

It is strange that after negotiating for 6 months he failed to bring up the issues he mentioned in the rejection letter and was feeding us information in little bits and constantly complaining about things ghe never mentioned in the first place (Also this is our third revision and we have made several changes to the original plan to please the planning comittee). Also the planning officer did not send us how many objections we had and what exactly they we find suspicious. I think it in unfair for a decision to be made based on the opinion of 1 person on the street and all our neighbours should be involved.

 

After 6 months, we received an email demanding the withdrawal of our application, citing alleged issues with the roof design and parking. 

• Roof Design:  Our current roof design is fully compliant with planning guidelines. Specifically, it maintains a 45-degree angle from the midpoint of our neighbour's window, ensuring no obstruction of natural light, and is positioned 1 meter from the boundary. Furthermore, it is important to note that our neighbour who is 3 houses away from us with a property similar to ours, also features a gabled roof, and yet the house next to theirs, a neighbouring property with a gabled roof, received planning approval. 
• Subordination to Existing Structure: The proposed extension is clearly subordinate to the existing structure. It is designed to complement, not overpower, the original building. Specifically, the extension steps back 2.4 meters from the existing structure, and its roofline is 1 meter lower. This demonstrates a clear effort to maintain the visual hierarchy and character of the property. Again citing the example of the recently aproved property on our street with a gable roof which was 3 metres high under the same council, planning committee and regulations and did not step back at all. 

 

These are the elevations for reference:

PROPOSED

EXISTING

 

[Johnnyt]

An appeal costs nothing per se. Other than a new application or give up it is the only way to go.

However, if you feel strongly, go for it. The planning inspector will form their own opinion and it appears a significant amount of your decision was based on planning judgement rather than a diversion from policy.

De gustibus non est disputandem, it all a matter of opinion, but the LPA have got to have regard to consistency.

If you can show they have shown a lack of consistency, you have a chance.

The planning inspectorate are there for a reason, use it.

I did, and it reaped rewards, 2 dwellings rather than one, and an award of costs against the council.

[ToughButterCup]

Welcome.

You've had a hard time - you're amongst friends. Many of us have similar stories to tell.

 

One way of making progress is to take each point , and list the arguments the Officer  made rejecting your application.

For each point, in as few words as you can :

• list the ways in which you have sought to address those arguments
• look at recent builds where the LPA has not followed the advice given to you (I see you've started to do so already)

I 'see' more clearly in some form of table: arguments for in one column, against in a parallel column. That technique reduces mental clutter.

 

Present that table to a Planner (whom you employ) - with the end-in-mind being  - If we present this case for Appeal, is there a chance of winning? 

If you can clearly show that Planners have applied different criteria for your Application than those used in other Applications, then you've stated to weaken the LPAs case.

Brevity and clarity of presentation are powerful tools

Good luck,

Ian

 

[Mr Punter]

The refusal reasons sound weak.  You could win on appeal.  If you do, you could consider demolish and rebuild, where you would save all the VAT and start with a nice empty plot.  Why did you add the chimneys?