PP includes demolition. Is this part of the "development"?

[howplum]

Me again!

 

The plot I want to buy has PP to "demolish an outbuilding and erect a new bungalow". The owner has now demolished the structure but done nothing else at the moment, pending negotiations about a strip of land next to the plot. Maybe I am reading things too literally, or being obtuse, but does demolition of the structure constitute commencement of the development, thereby removing the 3 year time limit?

 

I assume/hope this does not preclude me from submitting a new application once the plot is acquired, should I choose not to use the currently approved plan.

 

Apparently "minor" changes can be made to the current PP online, without the need for a new application, but as yet I'm not sure what constitutes "minor".

[joe90]

Not sure about your position but I had a row with our planners about building my garage under permitted development and won the day because I proved I had demolished the previous garage by a certain date and this was classed as starting my development. Probably best to contact planning and ask them.

[ProDave]

Ask your local planners.

 

In my case condition 1 of the planning permission was we must form the entrance from the highway onto the plot first.  When I queried this with the planners, they told me that creating the entrance counted as "commencing" the development, so in theory that will have locked in the planning permission.

 

It was irelevant for us because the actual house was started very soon after that.

[the_r_sole]

.

Edited September 26, 2019 by the_r_sole

[bassanclan]

I doubt it will constitute commencement of the planning permission development. I don't think you actually need planning permission to demolish a building unless listed or in a conservation area. 

[Tony K]

This question is asked a lot, and the answer always depends on the circumstances of the case.

 

You can seek a certificate of lawfulness from the council to confirm that the planning permission has been commenced (anything less is not secure enough in my opinion). Whether the council grant one is likely to depend on whether you can demonstrate that the demolition was intended as part of the redevelopment rather than an unrelated operation. Anything you can supply to prove that will help. 

 

Alternatively, you only need to dig a foundation trench on site to keep the permission alive, so it may be easier to do that and record it properly. 

[howplum]

Thank you all. So, not quite so simple then. The seller is apparently complying, or has complied, with the three conditions that must be met "prior to commencement of the development".

 

As more than one person has said, it's obviously best for the seller to speak to the Planning Dept. to get a formal response.

[the_r_sole]

.

Edited September 26, 2019 by the_r_sole

[Temp]

Is the CIL in your area? 

 

To qualify for the self builder CIL exemption you must do some paperwork before starting any work on site. I think you may need advice on how to proceed given he may have started some work. Perhaps if you now got permission for a new design (with no demolition mentioned) you can argue that no work has been done on the new application ??

 

Edited October 16, 2018 by Temp

[PeterW]

3 hours ago, Temp said:

Is the CIL in your area? 

 

To qualify for the self builder CIL exemption you must do some paperwork before starting any work on site. I think you may need advice on how to proceed given he may have started some work. Perhaps if you now got permission for a new design (with no demolition mentioned) you can argue that no work has been done on the new application ??

 

 

So....: this is a fun one as in starting the “development”, the vendor will have triggered the CIL liability. It is now their liability so unless @howplum accepts the liability for the CIL as part of the purchase using a transfer of liability, that remains with the vendor. 

 

I had this recently where a vendors solicitor didn’t understand the CIL process and I had to tell them that legally they were two separate processes. If the vendor doesn’t transfer CIL liability and you start, they become liable for the payment and there is nothing they can do. 

[howplum]

From what I have found on the local Council's website, updated only last month, the CIL has not yet been instigated in Milton Keynes.

[Temp]

Its horribly complicated but I think they normally assume the land owner is liable for the CIL unless someone takes liability for it.  I think (but I'm not sure) that liability transfers automatically to a/the new owner when the plot is sold.

 

My concern is that if you buy a plot with PP and work has already started you probably can't claim the self builder exemption. That could cost someone £lots they weren't expecting.

[Temp]

Just now, howplum said:

From what I have found on the local Council's website, updated only last month, the CIL has not yet been instigated in Milton Keynes.

 

Phew. Keep checking as it maybe on the way. Any applications not completed when it arrives could be caught.

[PeterW]

18 minutes ago, Temp said:

Its horribly complicated but I think they normally assume the land owner is liable for the CIL unless someone takes liability for it.  I think (but I'm not sure) that liability transfers automatically to a/the new owner when the plot is sold.

 

My concern is that if you buy a plot with PP and work has already started you probably can't claim the self builder exemption. That could cost someone £lots they weren't expecting.

 

Transfer requires two signatures - vendor and buyer. If the CIL has been triggered and the buyer doesn’t accept then the vendor takes the hit. 

[howplum]

IF I ever manage to acquire the plot I cannot see anything being built before 2020, by which time the CIL may well be applicable. I  could not find any national charging information, so I am assuming it is determined by the local Council. However, it would seem self-builders can claim exemption, even if the net floor area is over 100 square metres.

 

If I understand correctly there are a couple of possible scenarios:

 

1. If the act of demolition is deemed to have started the development, which can only determined by the Planning Dept., then presumably there is no need to claim CIL exemption because it doesn't yet apply in our area. Hopefully the CIL cannot be applied once development has started, because as far as I can see, exemption can only be claimed BEFORE development starts.

 

2. Don't invite the Planning Dept. to rule on the demolition aspect, but submit revised plans, without mentioning demolition, perhaps different enough from the original plan to justify a new application. In fact, the seller said he was going to do this anyway, to include an additional two bedrooms and a bathroom in the roof space.

 

On balance then, option 2 is probably the best course.

 

In any event, an eye has to be kept out in case the CIL does become due, presumably by keeping in touch with the Planning Department.

[Temp]

1) is correct. They can't add the CIL to an existing PP started or not.

 

As for 2).. If they introduce the CIL before you can get the new PP done then I would avoid including anything on it that has already been started. For example I would ask the planners to rule that anything done to date such as the demolition or site  clearance is lawful under the existing PP even if it's not fully implemented.  If they say you need retrospective PP for anything the existing owner has done I would apply for it separately to the application for your new house. That way their is no possibility they can say you have started your development before claiming the CIL exemption.

Edited October 17, 2018 by Temp

[howplum]

Thank you @Temp, excellent advice.

[Adam2]

From a meeting with my architect today there is a word of caution I'd like to pass on. Our situation is we have planning permission for a rebuild which will increase m2 by about 40m2 so only an incremental potential CIL liability and that for a self build can be removed if forms filled correctly. BUT, we're planning a few changes which will likely mean a new planning application gets submitted - considering risk for approval as v low. We're keen to get moving by starting demolition before new planning is approved and this may be an issue. When the new planning is assessed if there is no existing house then there may be no incremental element so all considered as new construction with a high CIL charge - which, should be OK for self build but any mistake made in that could result in a big CIL bill. Will look into this more to fully understand the risk of starting early.

[Temp]

My understanding is as follows...let's suppose the existing area is 200sqm...

 

Simple extension...there would be no cil liability as the increase is under 100sqm of new space.

 

Knock down and rebuild 40sqm larger... The new building is 240sqm. Since thsg is bigger than 100sqm there will be a cil liability. However it would be calculated on 240-200 = 40sqm eg the increase in area only. Not on the total area 240sqm. This is provide the new pp is granted before demolition.

 

You sould also get the self builder exemption if you do all the claim paperwork before starting.

 

See also..

 

https://www.khub.net/web/planningadvisoryservicepas/forum/-/message_boards/message/28062398

 

So yes you should avoid doing any work on site including demolition before you have the new pp and cil exemption paperwork done.

Edited November 24, 2018 by Temp

[Randomiser]

I had always understood demolition to be considered somethjng which does indeed mean development has started.  When I previously asked a local planning officer they printed this page from the Town & Country Planning act off to show me that it was.

 

=====

56Time when development begun...

 

...(2)For the purposes of the provisions of this Part mentioned in subsection (3) development shall be taken to be begun on the earliest date on which any material operation comprised in the development begins to be carried out...

 

...(4)In subsection (2) “material operation” means—

(a)any work of construction in the course of the erection of a building;

F4[(aa)any work of demolition of a building;]

(b)the digging of a trench which is to contain the foundations, or part of the foundations, of a building;

(c)the laying of any underground main or pipe to the foundations, or part of the foundations, of a building or to any such trench as is mentioned in paragraph (b);

(d)any operation in the course of laying out or constructing a road or part of a road;

(e)any change in the use of any land which constitutes material development.

 

=====

 

So I would say development has commenced, but there is then a question as to whether there is a breach of the planning consent by commencing development if all the pre conditions have not been satisfied.  Irrespective of a planning consent do you not usually need a demolition order for demolition of more than a certain cubic meterage?  Do you not also need to submitted a demolition methods statement as a pre condition.

 

Randomiser.