Planning permission refused - options

[newhome]

2 hours ago, oldkettle said:

I am not a big fan of getting out of the house and talking to people in person ? so I try anything to avoid it first.

 

Lol. I prefer to rely on fact and detail if I can rather than mostly anecdotal over the garden fence info lol. Sometimes it's the only way though. I hope Google will help highlight what you need unless someone here has another suggestion.  

[oldkettle]

1 minute ago, newhome said:

 

Lol. I prefer to rely on fact and detail if I can rather than mostly anecdotal over the garden fence info lol. Sometimes it's the only way though. I hope Google will help highlight what you need unless someone here has another suggestion.  

Well, I wanted to get the precise measurements so yes, the hard facts. Yet from the map it seems their house is smaller than what we propose, so I probably won't be able to use it for comparison anyway. 

[oldkettle]

I probably search using a wrong set of terms and cannot find anything regarding building the largest house on the street. Is there a limit on how much larger than neighbours we can go? 

 

I guess nothing is set in stone otherwise our experienced architect would certainly let us know but any rule of thumb may be? 

[newhome]

Doesn't it tend to be the planners who decide whether the scale is 'out of keeping'? Might be worth having a look through the planning portal to see if you can find evidence of other houses in the local area being refused due to size. My house here is pretty large compared to the small listed cottage next door, but about half the size of next door but 1 (that is huge and at least 400 yards up the road). 

 

 

[oldkettle]

1 minute ago, newhome said:

Doesn't it tend to be the planners who decide whether the scale is 'out of keeping'? Might be worth having a look through the planning portal to see if you can find evidence of other houses in the local area being refused due to size. My house here is pretty large compared to the small listed cottage next door, but about half the size of next door but 1 (that is huge and at least 400 yards up the road). 

 

 

Oh, I did. There haven't been much development in our area over the last 15 years for which documents are available. 

 

There are houses with larger footprint but these are bungalows. One of them is absolutely massive semi-detached, but who can see from the outside that it is indeed the case?

 

Anyway, I was going through his document again and it finally struck me that there are more interesting measurements.

He claims that the depth is going to be 13.25m, where is it is clear from the plans the north wall (exposed, according to him) is 11.49, and the south one is 12.71. I guess he's measured the roof size but even my usually calm wife was disgusted when she saw it. He also claims our ridge is going to be 1m higher than that of the neighbours where as it is no more than 0.65m. 

 

I've created a couple of superimposed images - I know they are amateurish but that's all I've got. In black - our neighbours, in grey - our current house, dashed and dotted - the proposed size. Honestly, can't see what all the fuss is about - but I am biased.

 

 

The satellite image to confirm I have not invented the sizes.

[Triassic]

I’m sure I read that the EPC contains the floor area of each property. Obviously not every house has had an EPC done, but where they have this is public data.

 

https://www.epcregister.com/reportSearchAddressByPostcode.html

[Jeremy Harris]

The floor areas on a rdSAP created EPC  will probably be in error, though.  Ours is over 10% out, and that's after I gave the assessor a scale plan with the correct floor area marked on it, along with the dimensions.  If the assessors doing house sale EPCs are as crap as the one that did ours (at the place for less than ten minutes, didn't take a single measurement or even check the obvious stuff, like the loft insulation) then I doubt that the area on an EPC means much, TBH.

 

If any houses have had extensions or loft conversions there may well be plans lodged on the local authority planning website, though, and they may be good enough to use, although may not be accurately scaled.

[newhome]

Just now, JSHarris said:

The floor areas on a rdSAP created EPC  will probably be in error, though.

 

Lies damn lies and statistics! ? You can use the info if it says what you want and leave it out if not ?. 

 

If any of the houses have been up for sale in recent times you may find sales particulars from the last time they were marketed on something like Zoopla. They should have room sizes albeit they may not be accurate either ... 

[billt]

31 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

The floor areas on a rdSAP created EPC  will probably be in error, though.

 

Yes.

 

Not only that but they will be internal areas, the planners are interested in the external area.

[Ferdinand]

OTOH, the EPC figere is a regulated number from a regulated process, so is harder to question casually.

 

And GIAs may still be comparable wrt you and next door - if for example your Gross Area including walls is less than their GIA that is proof of difference plus a margin of 5-10%.

[oldkettle]

Thank you for the suggestions. 

In our case it is the external size that is the issue and taking into account a lot of our neighbours have been here for 30 years (and more) only a couple of properties have been on the market. 

 

Called the council today and got a confirmation I will not be allowed to speak (unless someone objects) but I am welcome to send the comments. Not surprisingly, the lady who is a maternity cover and probably contacted the planners, asked for a copy to sent to her to share with the planners ? Not sure yet whether I want to give them the opportunity.

[Jeremy Harris]

I would definitely see if you can persuade someone to apply to "object", so that you get your 3 minutes to address the committee.  Anyone can "object", they don't have to be a neighbour, or even live nearby, so if you can persuade someone to request to speak to the committee to object, but in reality only object about some very trivial non-planning policy point (like they don't like the style of something that you're not intending to fit anyway), then you should be OK and get your opportunity.

 

I did something similar for our neighbour, who found his application for a granny annex going to committee, really just because he'd managed to upset a  lot of people in the village by trying to sell the land behind his house to a developer, who got PP to build 24 houses on it (another story).  People being what they are, when he put in a quite reasonable application he had a lot of objections in writing, so it was automatically called in to committee.  None of the objectors registered to speak at the committee meeting, so he asked if I would, really so he could address the committee himself.  He was planning to move a phone pole as a part of the changes, a pole that was a nuisance in that it narrowed the pavement and caused people with prams to walk into the lane.  The movement of the pole wasn't in his planning application (no need for it to be) so my reason for standing up and objecting was to request that a condition be placed on the application, if it were approved, such that the phone pole was relocated in order to reduce the risk to pedestrians walking past the new entrance he was creating for his granny annex. 

 

I stood up, made the point about pedestrian safety and that the pole needed to be moved, then went on to say that other than that I supported the application as it closed off his old double garage entrance to the lane and so made more parking spaces available for churchgoers. 

 

Both points were noted by the committee, and then my neighbour stood up, made his case for needing accommodation for his ageing Mother and mentioned at the end that he accepted my point about moving the pole.  His application was approved.

 

He did come around later that evening with a bottle of wine, but I felt I had to refuse it, as it sort of seemed to seal the fact that we'd colluded to give him his chance to speak.

 

So, I'd suggest you try and do something similar, just so you can get your three minutes of fame.,

[oldkettle]

Thank you, Jeremy.

 

Well, I think there are a couple of points that we could suggest to be spoken about safely, such as maintaining the height of the shrubs between our front gardens, i.e. not replacing with a standard low fence. He could also mention that there is a phone cable above both his and our front garden serving our other neighbours. I would probably accept having to arrange for a new pole or underground cable to replace it - but I don't think it has anything to do with planning.

 

On the other hand I wish I didn't need to speak as I am certainly not good at it. I've gone through the document so many times and have not found a single point he made that I - trying go be absolutely objective - could accept as a real problem and would complain if somebody else was doing it. Not one. Makes me so angry.

Edited August 30, 2018 by oldkettle

[joe90]

We went to committee and previously I had spoken to a couple of the councillors and they told me they would support us. We had our three minutes (wife did this well) then an objector (who we knew would object)had his say and he told lies, sorry, he made statements that were not correct. I tried to demand that I could refute these but was told we had already had our three minutes. Planning officer then told lies, sorry, made statements that were wrong, and I could prove it but was not allowed to respond. Every councillor voted against our proposal and the councillors I had thought would support us could not look me in the eye. I was told off the record that the councillors were told to vote against it. I went to appeal with evidence of untruths and won hands down, the appeal officer even told the planners they were not abiding by their own policies and pointed out their inaccuracies. 

 

You dont need to ask  me what I think of planners do you. ?‍?. (That’s the nearest I could find to a cowboy).

[JamesP]

19 minutes ago, joe90 said:

You dont need to ask  me what I think of planners do you. ?‍?. (That’s the nearest I could find to a cowboy).

All I can say is well done for persevering, we had an awful planner at DNPA who from day one refusal was her only recommendation.

After a chance meeting with a senior planner from the same department who was in the process of puttting through their own application for a replacement dwelling did ours start to progress and be granted.

It took six years but still worth it.

 

Edited August 30, 2018 by JamesP

[Jeremy Harris]

Just to add, if you are granted permission to speak to the committee, on the basis that someone has requested to speak as an objector, you don't have to speak yourself, you can appoint someone to speak on your behalf.  Very often people get their planning consultant to stand up and speak on their behalf, but you can choose anyone who you think may present your case more clearly and confidently than you may feel you may be able to.

 

 

[oldkettle]

Unfortunately, the councillor said he talked to the senior planner and "the bulk and mass" were too important to him as well, so not getting any help from there. 

 

Our architect has offered to speak for us. He is a nice guy but he had a few conflicts with the planner in the process. I spoke with the Councillor so it is probably down to me - if I can get the neighbours on board of course. 

 

The planner raised 2 issues, requesting to hip the roof (which we did but at the front only, not at the back) and to decrease the depth by "at least 30cm" (which we did not). So I was quite surprised to find references to the height of the house and the ridge level difference with the neighbours among the issues - these were never raised as concerns. 30cm on 11.75m or 12.71m wall - and impossible to see from a public land. 

[oldkettle]

Sorry, as I still can't find a good online source explaining it - may be our resident architects could comment please ( @Dudda @Temp @caliwag ) ?

 

Reading about "bulking and massing" of a house, I found that at a very basic level a mass is a visible area of the building.

 

From http://mcmansionhell.com/post/148605513816/mcmansions-101-what-makes-a-mcmansion-bad

 

The primary mass is the largest shape in the building block. The secondary masses are the additional shapes that form the façade of a building. 

Windows, doors, or other openings are called voids. Voids allow creation of negative space that allow for breaks within masses. Placing voids that allow for natural breaks in the mass create balance and rhythm across the building’s elevation. 

Looking at our plan and comparing with the neighbours, I naively say: we are a bit higher in the ridge but since our ridge is perpendicular to the road the area and our house is less wide our roof area and hence the mass is lower than that of our neighbours' houses.

 

So - question one: is this completely wrong, wishful thinking?

 

And question two: does visibility of the house, i.e. whether the walls are fully exposed or partially hidden affect the massing? 

I.e. comparing say the house on the left - this is the closest to our plans in terms of shape, having its walls hidden to a large degree so that only the top 1m is visible

 

with the house on the right here

 

I feel that the latter has a 5.5m*10m brick wall fully exposed hence even though it may be a bit smaller in size it looks heavier to me. Am I completely wrong again?

 

Thank you in advance.

Edited September 1, 2018 by oldkettle
typo

[Gone West]

13 hours ago, oldkettle said:

 

Reading about "bulking and massing" of a house, I found that at a very basic level a mass is a visible area of the building.

 

You have discovered, as did I many years ago, that planners have only a small vocabulary and the same words are used whether correct or not. Those were exactly the words used for our application. We had to hip the roof and dormers to get around that one. I can't see what they are talking about in your case.

 

13 hours ago, oldkettle said:

does visibility of the house, i.e. whether the walls are fully exposed or partially hidden affect the massing?

I can't see how something that is not visible can add to the massing but unfortunately there is no logic to their thinking.

[oldkettle]

1 hour ago, PeterStarck said:

You have discovered, as did I many years ago, that planners have only a small vocabulary and the same words are used whether correct or not. Those were exactly the words used for our application. We had to hip the roof and dormers to get around that one. I can't see what they are talking about in your case.

 

I can't see how something that is not visible can add to the massing but unfortunately there is no logic to their thinking.

Thank you, Peter. 

 

The reason I am asking these questions is two-fold. 

First, I don't want to be kidding myself. I am not a professional and there are plenty of things that are not common sense. 

Second, and it is based on the first of course, I want to know whether - in case of a rejection - we have a good chance at appeal. If my common sense guesses are correct, I would think with a reasonable consultant the chances would be there, but only in that case. 

[joe90]

I am not a professional but did my appeal myself based on plain evidence and common sense, we won on all points.

[oldkettle]

Well, we lost

 

We took a report prepared by the planner and added our comments, showing every bit of misinformation. We put it in an email, attached pictures demonstrating our statements and added a summary. Sent it to every committee member. My wife was worried delivering letters in person was a bit of "we know where you live". SHMBO. 

 

The first disappointment was when no-one else but the head of the committee replied saying he forwarded our email to the planner asking to prepare a presentation. That was the sign for me he was not on our side despite calling the case to the committee in the first place. The second disappointment was that even though our neighbour was happy to come and speak it was not allowed as there were no objections in the first place, hence I was not allowed to speak either. So it works like this apparently: the planner presents the case repeating all the lies, then the councillors discuss the case, some of them citing the lies told by the planner as concerns, then they vote. 4 vs 4 twice, then back to square one where the head joined the vote against us. Shocking process.

 

I honestly can't believe the answer to our statement about say the discrepancy in the size of the building stated was "I measured their plans". How about the size that we specify - does it count for nothing??? He then on a request of one councillor presented the net increase in the footprint which is way over the real one. He claimed we have a ground floor front extension - porch - pointing at the roof above the front door. All is recorded on video. They are clearly not afraid to be caught. 

 

Anyway, on every item they voted as planners told them. 

 

Sleep now. 

 

Prepare to appeal later. 

 

The only good news is we talked to someone else who had a similar problem with the planners and they won the appeal. Seriously considering getting a consultant for this as it just takes too much time and I would rather be told right now if it is hopeless. 

[newhome]

I'm sorry to hear your news but time to fight back and tomorrow is a new day. 

 

 

[Gone West]

@oldkettle Stick with it and don't give up. You can beat the buggers.

[joe90]

As above, stick with it, get the appeal in, yes a consultant might be good as they tend to understand the complicated policies (mumbo jumbo language) better than us lay people. I found the appeal office very helpful. (And we won hands down ?).