Planning condition changes

[nickw]

So we had the full planning given with something like 9 conditions of which no real issues are expected. Originally we had put in for a slate/tile roof as the mortgage company had said thats all they would be ok with, subsequent to the planning going in the mortgage company then agreed a standing seam metal roof.

Planning given with the original slate/tile and architect said we could put in a variation, just had this back from architect/planners

"

Regarding the details that have been submitted to discharge conditions 3, 4 and 5 of the above application, please see my comments below:

 

3.      Prior to their use on site, details/samples of the materials proposed to be used on the external surfaces of the buildings, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved materials shall be so used and retained thereafter.

 

Please note that this requires details of the materials for all the buildings. I note the proposed change in roof material from natural slate to the standing seam metal (Anthracite colour), whilst I do not object in principal to the use of the metal roofing this change to the approved plans cannot be made via a discharge of condition application and having discussed with Adrian we would suggest that you need to submit an application to vary the approved plans, this could be done either as a section 73 application or as a revised scheme however in either case the new applications would require a new unilateral undertaking and contribution to public open space in accordance with policy AL/DE/3. We are not able to refund the contribution in respect of either application until there is conclusive evidence which consent has been implemented. "

 

Is this really all I can do?

 

Also they came back with this on another condition

"

Prior to its installation on site, details of the proposed heat pump shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include manufacturers specification, including noise levels generated by the pump.

 

I note the technical details that have been submitted in relation to the Samsung EHS Monobloc GEN5, please confirm which model is proposed"

 

I did send them a sample of the roof (colourcoat urban) and also the samsung latest heatpump brochure and seems that is not good enough.

 

Just more delays in getting started it seems.

Thanks for any advice

 

[nod]

I think when I posed a simalar question a couple of years back 

The most accurate response I received was Playing with our lives 

The short answer is They are doing this because they can 

We have had little stress throughout the build 

But the stage you are at For us and I guess you Is the most stressful part of the build

When you get your commencement notice this will just be a bad memory

and end any dealings  with the planners 

Hang on in there 

[epsilonGreedy]

I think you have misunderstood the advice from your architect. He was not suggesting you can effect a major change to the outward appearance of the property by switching a slate sample to a metal roof panel example as you satisfy the existing slate roof condition.

 

The architect is indicating such a significant change will require a new planning amendment application. From the perspective of the planning department the dialogue between you and the mortgage company is irrelevant.

[lizzie]

For such a major change it is normal to have to go back to planners.  We changed from a green roof to a lead look single ply membrane and had to put in an NMA.

 

Anything that changes external appearance needs their approval they have no interest in your mortgage or insurance situations just in the look of the place in the locale.

[nickw]

I realise the planners arn't interested in the mortgage stuff, I am annoyed at the architect as he tried to change the roof type under fulfilling the planning conditions, it's only now with the planning response that he has come back and said  "this isn't possible as the planers have said we need the NMA. He didn't advise us of this and now several weeks down the line I get this email. Also annoying to pay the 106 AGAIN as thats a few grand out the bank for awhile. The mortgage side of things I mentioned as they haven't agreed everything yet and of course they are only agreeing to whats given in the planning, whereas we did all the prep work for the self build, costings and the like on a standing seam roof as the the architect had said that should be fine. Now I will re cost for a slate roof and hopefully the mortgage will be fine with the submission and then put in for a change of roof material afterwards. 

The main trouble is I have an option on the land, this was subject to planning being given and mortgage being given and each delay gets closer to where my option runs out and the land can then be retained by the farmer or sold to someone else with a possible extra 50k because we have spent the last 9 months getting the planning by converting a q class to full planning. 

[Temp]

Regarding the Section 106 agreement...

 

The government changed the rules in 2015 so that councils can only collect ("pool") 5 different section 106 contributions for the same thing (That's five after April 2010). It seems very likely your council will have asked for more than 5 unilateral undertakings for "open space" since 2010 so how can they still be insisting on more?

 

That said I've read here that some councils are bending/breaking the rules. 

 

More on this here..

 

https://www.ashfords.co.uk/news-and-events/general/pooling-contributions-regulation-123-of-the-community-infrastructure-levy-regulations-2010

 

I could probably find a link to the legislation if needed.

 

[Temp]

PS This change was meant to encourage councils to adopt the CIL to which you would be exempt.

[nickw]

1 hour ago, Temp said:

PS This change was meant to encourage councils to adopt the CIL to which you would be exempt.

 

Yep ours apparently turned the CIL down on what was offered and are probably putting the CIL in this year on a higher rate or something according to the head planner last year. Of course the other surrounding areas are already CIL , I just happen to be in one that has not adopted it yet so they were happy when the funds rolled in knowing that from this year onwards  I would be exempt. 

[Ferdinand]

I think we want a comment from one of our resident architects on this ... afaics the terminology is at cross purposes.

 

eg Some people are talking about S106 contributions ie agreement with the council, whilst the op is saying this is a Unilateral Declaration, which is a Commitment signed as a Deed rather than negotiated. These two are treated differently in significant ways.

 

I had a Unilateral on the piece of family land we sold, and I think the developer who bought it missed that, because they had to go back for a completely new PP rather than the normal ‘renegotiate the S106’ approach when they wanted to save some money on the Planning Gain.

 

I have no idea of the interactions between two unilaterals on two planning apps on the same piece of land, though if I had one Unilateral in place that I had paid the contribution as well as the fee, I would go for a S106 on the second and try and rely on the dosh that had been paid, arguing that the second contribution should only be paid if the previous one had been recovered, or similar terms on a Unilateral Mk 2. I would try and make the second contribution payable only when the first one had been returned for whatever reason. I would expect to pay a second (possibly reduced) fee, since some of the work by the Council would have already been done.

 

However, it is a complex situation.

 

is @the_r_sole in the house?

 

Ferdinand

 

Edited March 31, 2019 by Ferdinand

[Temp]

18 hours ago, Ferdinand said:

eg Some people are talking about S106 contributions ie agreement with the council, whilst the op is saying this is a Unilateral Declaration, which is a Commitment signed as a Deed rather than negotiated. These two are treated differently in significant ways.

 

Good question.  Which is it?

 

 

 

[epsilonGreedy]

On 31/03/2019 at 13:13, nickw said:

The main trouble is I have an option on the land, this was subject to planning being given and mortgage being given and each delay gets closer to where my option runs out and the land can then be retained by the farmer or sold to someone else with a possible extra 50k because we have spent the last 9 months getting the planning by converting a q class to full planning.

 

 

Well in that case, crack on and follow the path of least paperwork, you can submit the slate to metal roof NMA later in the build. Check out discussions here about the Nulok slate roofing system as it reduces the amount of slate substantially which should help with the revised figure you submit to the bank. 

[Temp]

22 hours ago, nickw said:

 

Yep ours apparently turned the CIL down on what was offered and are probably putting the CIL in this year on a higher rate or something according to the head planner last year. Of course the other surrounding areas are already CIL , I just happen to be in one that has not adopted it yet so they were happy when the funds rolled in knowing that from this year onwards  I would be exempt.  

 

The pooling restriction applies to all areas regardless if they have introduced the CIL or not.

 

However I'm not 100% certain if the pooling restriction applies to ALL planning obligations or just S106 agreements.

 

As I understand it the pooling  restriction could apply to any planning obligation if it is a "reason to grant planning permission" but they don't usually say its a reason to grant.

 

[the_r_sole]

.

Edited September 26, 2019 by the_r_sole

[scottishjohn]

a good lesson for all 

 

sort all specs before going for planning  and don,t change things