Planning permission denied in Conservation Area - any way to get approval?

[LimitingFactor]

I live in a conservation area and I put in a planning application last year for a heat pump, but it was refused on two grounds; 1. it being inside the one metre rule and 2. the location being between the line of the house and a highway.

 

The exact wording for the second refusal came from Schedule 2 G.2 j(ii); “in the case of land within a conservation area or which is a World Heritage Site the air source heat pump—would be installed so that it is nearer to any highway which bounds the curtilage than the part of the dwellinghouse or block of flats which is nearest to that highway; or”

 

I understand that the motive behind this rule is to prevent units being installed in front gardens or somewhere that would be visible from the actual road. In this case though, I want to install it in the back garden and the highway in question runs down the side of the property. If it was located there it would be at ground level, behind a 6ft fence which in turn is behind an 8ft hedge so there is no issue of visibility. I’ll add a drawing to show the arrangement.

 

I have no other location that I can place the unit and now that the 1 metre rule has gone I would like to try again to get permission. Would anyone have any experience of this or advice on how to go about countering this objection? Thanks.

[JohnMo]

1m rule now gone as long as it passes noise assessment.

 

Other than objection move it elsewhere, what about behind the square building?

[JamesPa]

You have three options:

 

(I'm assuming this is England/Wales and that the refusal was in response to a full planning application not an application for a certificate of lawful development.)

 

1) submit a revised proposal to your local planning authority (lpa)

2) appeal to the planning inspector 

3) amend the proposal so that it falls entirely within pd rules.

 

1 or 2 will need to argue that it is in conformance with the local plan, IE the development plan made by your lpa.  The reference to schedule 2G2 is a bit spurious in a way because in the case of an express application it's the local plan that counts not pd rules.  I say in a way, because one appeal argument (which I used in my appeal) is that a more harmful development would be permitted under pd rules, and the lpa will be mindful of this argument.

 

You could try to talk to a planning officer about (1) to see if they would be receptive, but there is no guarantee that they will be helpful. 

 

Route 2 is independent of your lpa, it typically takes about 18-24 weeks.  Planning inspectors are often more logical than lpa officers.

 

Route 3 is the easiest and as @johnmo says the rules for pd have recently been relaxed.

 

I ended up doing (1), following advice from a planning officer and then, when they reneiged on the advice, (2).  The appeal was successful.

 

Appeals are free of charge.

Edited Sunday at 07:56 by JamesPa

[JohnMo]

21 minutes ago, JamesPa said:

pd rules

It's conservation area permitted development rules do not apply.

[JamesPa]

3 hours ago, JohnMo said:

It's conservation area permitted development rules do not apply.

PD rules do apply in conservation areas (in England and Wales - I dont know about Scotland/NI) unless either

 

1. The specific rule in question excludes conservation areas or

2. The LPA has made an article 4 direction removing them

 

In the specific case of ASHPs its clear that the specific rule in question does not  exclude conservation areas because of the presence of clauses G2J and G2K.  The LPA can still make an article 4 direction though; I don't know if OPs LPA has made such a direction.

[JohnMo]

2 hours ago, JamesPa said:

PD rules do apply in conservation areas (in England and Wales - I dont know about Scotland/NI) unless either

It may e the Scottish rules just read the English rules and it states

 

On land within a Conservation Area or World Heritage Site the air source heat pump must not be installed on a wall or roof which fronts a highway or be nearer to any highway which bounds the property than any part of the building.

[LimitingFactor]

This is in England and it actually was a certificate of lawful development that I put in rather than a full planning permission application. I was advised to go down that route by the planning department. I suppose that because selecting this particular location falls foul of that rule, a lawful development application might not be suited to considering the counter arguments about why it shouldn't be considered a problem. Perhaps a full planning application would be the better option?

[sharpener]

Because the 12kW outdoor unit is more than 0.6 cu m we needed full PP. Our site backs on to a river in an AONB so visual impact is important. As well as the specified plans I included (i) a photograph of the house from the river demonstrating that the HP would be out of sight and also (ii) a photomontage showing that it could not  easily be seen from the street either bc the level of the kitchen yard is about 5 ft below the surface of the road. The only objection was a technical one about my home-produced plans which was fixed by paying ~£20 for online ones.

 

52 minutes ago, LimitingFactor said:

Perhaps a full planning application would be the better option?

 

I would think so. Good luck!

[JamesPa]

1 hour ago, LimitingFactor said:

This is in England and it actually was a certificate of lawful development that I put in rather than a full planning permission application. I was advised to go down that route by the planning department. I suppose that because selecting this particular location falls foul of that rule, a lawful development application might not be suited to considering the counter arguments about why it shouldn't be considered a problem. Perhaps a full planning application would be the better option?

You can appeal (to the planning inspector) against refusal of an LD certificate, but of course this is only worth doing if if you actually meet the rules!  The rules for PD are strictly applied, there is no wiggle room, if you cant meet them then you need to submit a full application. 

 

Note that its not actually necessary to get an LD certificate, you can proceed anyway if the PD rules are met, but of course there is some risk in doing so if there is any ambiguity.

 

Full applications are judged against your LPAs local plan not PD rules*.  If you decide to go down the full planning route best make sure you know what the Local Plan says in relation to heat pumps and related things like noise, visual amenity etc; basically you need to demonstrate compliance with any relevant policies and its generally best to address this directly (ie for each relevant policy set out why you comply).  Some LPAs make you submit a full professional noise assessment for domestic heat pump installations.  If the LPA is advising that you try to use PD it might suggest that they are one of the awkward ones (mine was extremely awkward, but it got better immediately following my successful appeal).

 

*although if you can demonstrate that a more harmful development could be carried out under PD then you have a case for getting full permission even if your development is not compliant with the Local Plan.  This is known as the principle of fallback see eg  Mansell v Tonbridge And Malling Borough Council [2017] EWCA Civ 1314

 

 

Edited Sunday at 15:53 by JamesPa

[JohnMo]

8 hours ago, LimitingFactor said:

2. the location being between the line of the house and a highway.

 

2 hours ago, JohnMo said:

air source heat pump must not be... be nearer to any highway which bounds the property than any part of the building

So the way I read it you can't do anywhere I have highlighted in blue, so first application didn't comply. So no surprise it was rejected, so just choose somewhere else to site the heat pump. Do the new noise calc - done

 

 

 

[ProDave]

2 hours ago, JohnMo said:

On land within a Conservation Area or World Heritage Site the air source heat pump must not be installed on a wall or roof which fronts a highway or be nearer to any highway which bounds the property than any part of the building.

I would "just do it"

 

But I would not put it remote from the house as you have shown, I would put it adjacent to the house wall just around the corner on the side.  Hidden by a tall fence and hedge I bet nobody will notice and you will get away with it.

 

If you are served enforcement notice, then just move it around the corner so it is now on the back wall of the house and thus no closer to the highway than any part of the building.

[JohnMo]

6 minutes ago, ProDave said:

I would "just do it"

 

But I would not put it remote from the house as you have shown, I would put it adjacent to the house wall just around the corner on the side.  Hidden by a tall fence and hedge I bet nobody will notice and you will get away with it.

 

If you are served enforcement notice, then just move it around the corner so it is now on the back wall of the house and thus no closer to the highway than any part of the building.

If was a smelly oil boiler, that makes plenty of noise on full load you can put just about anywhere.

 

I am in the camp of just install it, that's what I did. No one can see or hear it except me, no one really cares, unless you ask a question.

 

If you want to get a grant however, the installer should be doing all this not you. He is supposed to know the rules and abide by them. So would locate based on PD rules and the noise stuff. 

[saveasteading]

They used to be, just a few years ago, very noisy.

 

You should minimise the distance from the house as heat is lost along the pipe unless you have stunning insulation.

[Dillsue]

1 hour ago, saveasteading said:

They used to be, just a few years ago, very noisy.

 

You should minimise the distance from the house as heat is lost along the pipe unless you have stunning insulation.

And watertight insulation if its going underground

[JohnMo]

2 hours ago, saveasteading said:

You should minimise the distance from the house as heat is lost along the pipe unless you have stunning insulation.

I do about (each way) 28mm pipe 2m above ground and then about 6m through an insulated shed and then about 5m underground. All done in 25mm closed cell insulation, below ground each pipe is in 110mm duct about 600mm below ground to the house.

 

Plus I have 15mm pipe with 19mm insulation, wrapped in foil tape (keep rodents off) from insulated shed to summer house above ground a run each way of 16m

 

It's do able and I don't see much effect.

 

Decent flow rates and velocity from heat pump helps.

[Temp]

I would reapply citing the change to the 1m rule. If refused on the road issue appeal with pictures. I would put a short section of fence or wall between it and the hedge in case they argue it would be visible in winter? I don't think you need PP for a 1m high fence but a 2m would.

 

Edit: Just read you applied for a certificate of lawful development. Those can only be considered on the rules/law. There is no discretion unlike a planning application. So I would apply for PP.

Edited yesterday at 12:38 by Temp

[saveasteading]

5 minutes ago, Temp said:

I would put a short section of fence or wall between it and the hedge

This should not restrict air movement, otherwise you draw back in air that has been expelled chilled. The planners may or may not be interested in the mechanics and efficiency.

Actually, I'd give them the credit of being interested, and that efficient air changes reduces running time too.

So a fence would be slatted or hit and miss (which is proven to reduce noise well..horiz slat on one face, then the next on the opposite face).

 

Thinking that this little item may be among major developments and disputes on their desk, I'd make it easy for them to approve.

A tick list of all the pros and cons and how the cons were imaginary or are now removed by your thoughtful proposal.

 

Put the draft up on here and get 20 sets of editor's comments.