Negative pre planning report, section 73 or alternative applications?

[Jane W]

Sorry for the long post. I put in a pre planning application. In discussions with the architect we decided to make the application for what we really wanted to build   knowing that some elements would be contentious given that we were in a conservation area. The thinking was that they might single out the elements they were unhappy with, particularly the large full height oak glazed porch specifically.

The report was received a couple of weeks ago and I was a bit surprised at how many aspects they felt were unacceptable.

It is a tight site. They said our proposal was basically too tall, too deep, too wide, too close to the boundary on both sides, too close to the front boundary. 

I can take their analysis on board to a degree, we pushed those things a little. The height was the  same as the neighbours even though there is a slight slope in the land and road. On one side is a parish carpark and the proposed drawing was less than a metre from that boundary. The house continued the building line from the house next door which makes it slope towards the front boundary on the carpark side. The porch is a definite no.

They did like the dormers and segmental arches on the front elevation though, I think that was the total of the positive aspects!

The architect suggested bringing a planning consultant on board and we all met this week.

My outline planning runs out at the beginning of October.

The original drawings submitted were for a 1600 sq ft house.

The plan now is to apply for reserved matters for a 1200 sq ft house, not as tall, deep, or wide. 1.5m away from both side boundaries, in the hope it will gain permission. This is very removed from the house I want but the need for planning approval overrides that.

They feel that many of the statements that were made in the report could be countered and some were just incorrect, but I need approval. 

The thought is that we can then apply for section 73 variation.

A builder acquaintance suggested to put in 2 alternative applications, 1 for the 1200 sq ft house and another which scales everything down a bit but not as drastically...something that I would still be happy to build and live in, instead of waiting for the approval/refusal and then either having to apply for variation under section 73 or reapply for full planning anyway.

Would having 2 alternative schemes in at the same time be viewed negatively? Is it more likely to get closer to what I want doing it one at a time?

[Pocster]

I was advised not to have multiple applications in as it would “ muddy the waters “ . I guess it shows desperation maybe ?

My planning attempts took 5 years to get to fruition . My original application was 2 stories like all my neighbors but was deemed to tall and too near all boundaries . Not knowing your location or budget ( guess my response ! ) you can eleviate some problems by going underground 😊

Edited Sunday at 08:52 by Pocster

[MikeSharp01]

Feels like there is risk either way. My analysis runs thus:

 

A pre app and a full app are treated differently in my experience. Some things are fixed - boundary distances etc and going past them is difficult. The pre app is an opportunity for the planners to manage you into their preferred box - once you have a full app they are obliged to process that against the local plan etc and would want to be almost sure that they would win an appeal if you went to one. So the premise is you would likely get a bit more than they would encourage at pre app but won't let you bust any of the fixed / local plan points unless they feel they might lose an appeal. The 1200sqft version sounds like it overcomes the main objections so should go though but is is not what you really wanted so you risk getting that permission and not being happy with the house. The perhaps 1400sqft version does not address all the issues but might squeeze through on grounds of such things housing targets, the planners not being sure they would win on appeal and it being a good day in the planning office. Putting two in at once could both muddy the waters as @Pocster says and have the effect of encouraging the planners to go for the smaller house as it more closely matches their 'rules'. You can still appeal on either if you put both in however.

 

On the whole, if it were me, I would put in the slightly bigger one making sure the majority of the red lines highlighted in the pre app are addressed fully / carefully and the remainder are as minimised as your team can do - looking to max your appeal winning opportunity and so give the council more reason to let it through and so avoid losing an appeal. This outcome is more like the house you want and you can always revert to the 1200 model if knocked back and not confident of winning on appeal. I appreciate that your outline planning permission deadline is approaching and that this adds another dimension but getting one planning cycle in before October, without going to appeal, is more than possible.

[ProDave]

Is there a way you could get the house you want, by building a smaller one now to get planning, but designed in such a way you could add an extension later, i.e. almost immediately after you finish the main build?

 

I know someone that once had 2 planning apps in at once, and the day before the committee meeting one was withdrawn.  Having 2 applications at once confused the objectors and only one received objections, the one they withdrew, so the one that went to committee had no objections.

[Alan Ambrose]

I had two in at once, can’t quite remember why now. On the positive side, I think this naturally gave the LPA, parish council etc a ‘choice’ - which seemed to me to be positive i.e. they could have been against both but they seemed to naturally fall into ‘choice’ state-of-mind. It might depend how much time you’re prepared to wait - I think next time I might put in a bunch of applications in parallel, some going to appeal etc, and see what shakes loose.

 

Some here on Buildhub, not subject to CIL, have started on the smaller approved application while they took the larger one to appeal, and then switched when their appeal came through.

 

I won’t bother with a pre-app next time. Pre-apps seem to be given to the juniors at my LPA and don’t have any formal decision value anyway. We eventually got exactly what we specified in our pre-app even though the junior gave us a few reasons in our pre-app why ‘it would be refused’. I also think it’s a mistake assuming there’s joined-up thinking at any LPA - my LPA seems particularly capricious and applications are subject to the whim of the officer involved at any point in time.

[Jane W]

12 hours ago, MikeSharp01 said:

On the whole, if it were me, I would put in the slightly bigger one

Thanks Mike, you've made a lot of sense and very good points in your reply however I'm thinking that if I can get approval for the smaller, easier to pass application (if there is such a thing🤔) then I'm at least secure knowing I have a plot with permission to build. Then if that passes, apply for the slightly bigger house and go to appeal if necessary. If that all fails then I can at least sell the plot with full planning.

@Pocster and @ProDave I agree that it could muddy the waters and I'm sure if it came to a planners and neighbours' choice the smaller house would be the one to get the approval. As it's a conservation area there's no permitted development so I'm thinking they'd probably refuse an immediate extension. @Alan Ambrose My pre-app was signed by one of the most senior planners but the majority of the criticism was from the conservation officer. I'm not sure I'd do a pre app again, it was delayed, and a reserved matters application would have likely been just as helpful, If not more so, given your reasoning above.

[Conor]

We had a bullet list of 10 issues that came from the conservation / heritage officer. We put a counter argument against all of them and the planning officer agree with us and closes the comments.

 

Read the conservation area design guide and make you know how your proposal aligns with the guide so you are giving yourself the best chance and able to argue back.

 

Our design ended up with a a very simple frontage, with the design focus at the rear, which the planners didn't care about.

[Jane W]

If I was able to get planning permission for the smaller house and then put in a section 73 to put in new drawings for the bigger house, would I have the opportunity to put in a revised design and access statement so that I could argue all of the reasons that the conservation officer was not correct, or very pedantic about? So the rationale for allowing the bigger house was clearly laid out? Some points wouldn't be needed in the DAS for the smaller house.

[Mr Punter]

The principal of building a house is already agreed.  What was on the outline application?  They normally have some sort of drawing, so they could see what was being asked for in terms of no of storeys and bedrooms and proximity to boundaries.

 

Lose the porch if it upsets them.  Just do a reserved matters application and don't make it controversial or flash looking.  I would aim for about 1400ft2.

 

Have a look at