Permitted Development

[PetrolTed]

I've been having trouble getting to the bottom of what I thought might be a simple question. I've had one planning officer give me a clear answer, but others have avoided giving me a yes/no response.

Question being, can "Permitted Development" rights be overruled by any "Local Plan"?

My layman's view is that it can't because by the very nature of it, you have implied permission to build within the guidelines and that the council wouldn't actually be involved unless you applied for a certificate of lawful development. At no point therefore could they object on the grounds that something you're building conflicts with the Local Plan (in this case restrictions on development due to flood plains).

Could someone give me some more confidence in my assessment?

[ianreeves]

Here is a copy of an email I got from the local planning bods when doing our conservatory.

From what I understand if it 100 matches the regs / development rights then your clear you don't need it. If you apply then yes it can be over-ruled if anyone objects..

Sounds stupid so guess when you come to planning it must be true



Dear XXXXs

Your enquiry has been passed to the Planning Department by Martin, and we would recommend that you initially take a look at the following guide:-

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/hhg/house...

I have checked our records and your property does benefit from Permitted Development rights, and therefore, if the proposed extension conforms with the regulations as shown at the above link, Planning Permission would not be required.

http://www.tewkesburybc.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid...

If the proposed development falls outside of the regulations in any way, then a Planning Application would be required.

Please feel free to contact us should you have any further queries, or require further clarification.

Best regards

Housing, Development and Environmental Services

techadmin.gov.uk 01684 272151

[andya7]

Simple answer - there isn't one!

By virtue of a previous planning permission, it is possible to restrict or remove existing rights on any given site. This would be controlled by a condition attached to the planning permission.

It is also possible through an 'article 4 direction' to control permitted development rights for any given area (this may be the reasoning behind your local plan query)

The only way to gain the definitive answer is to apply for a Certificate of Lawfulness. Be very wary of any 'officer guidance' as they will never stand by it and will generally offer it with the rider... 'this is opinion of an officer and does not constitute the opinion of the Council...'

With a CoL application they can't actually 'make up' legislation because they don't like the proposal, so there shouldn't be any interference by any officer dealing with the application, it either complies or doesn't and therefore 'subjectivness' doesn't enter the equation. BUT it is possible to enter into the realms of interpretation of the rules if you are proposing something that isn't clear cut and the Council decide that they do not agree and therefore not provide a CoL.

Does it help or hinder

[apguy]

I think permitted development can be overridden by local plan.

My own house is in a conservation area which was nominated/classified by local plan. This means all permitted development rights are rescinded and I needed planning permission for some of my works.

On the edge of my conservation area is an extended area with an Article 4 directive applied, this means the removal of most permitted development, but you have to ask the council which bits!!

[PetrolTed]

apguy said:

I think permitted development can be overridden by local plan.

My own house is in a conservation area which was nominated/classified by local plan. This means all permitted development rights are rescinded and I needed planning permission for some of my works.

On the edge of my conservation area is an extended area with an Article 4 directive applied, this means the removal of most permitted development, but you have to ask the council which bits!!

I think that is dealt with by the legislation. Conservation area is dealt within Permitted Development as 'designated land' and is subject to further restrictions. Article 4 does preclude Permitted Development specifically. That doesn't apply in this case.

[PetrolTed]

andya7 said:

By virtue of a previous planning permission, it is possible to restrict or remove existing rights on any given site. This would be controlled by a condition attached to the planning permission.

Checked that, and there is no such restrictions.

andya7 said:

It is also possible through an 'article 4 direction' to control permitted development rights for any given area (this may be the reasoning behind your local plan query)

Checked that and it doesn't apply.

andya7 said:

The only way to gain the definitive answer is to apply for a Certificate of Lawfulness. Be very wary of any 'officer guidance' as they will never stand by it and will generally offer it with the rider... 'this is opinion of an officer and does not constitute the opinion of the Council...'

With a CoL application they can't actually 'make up' legislation because they don't like the proposal, so there shouldn't be any interference by any officer dealing with the application, it either complies or doesn't and therefore 'subjectivness' doesn't enter the equation. BUT it is possible to enter into the realms of interpretation of the rules if you are proposing something that isn't clear cut and the Council decide that they do not agree and therefore not provide a CoL.

I'm happy to do that in due course. Basically we're trying to buy a house and I want to know if the option is there to extend out a bit. I'm happy to argue the pros and cons of a specific design down the line as long as I'm confident that the option is there to extend within the PD framework. The sticking point is that if I applied via normal planning permission it would be refused because of restrictions set out in the local plan. The planning officer reckons those restrictions can't be applied for PD because you have implied permission anyway (i.e. they need never be consulted unless you want a Cert of Lawful Dev).

Edited by PetrolTed on Friday 4th December 17:57

[Sam_68]

PetrolTed said:

Question being, can "Permitted Development" rights be overruled by any "Local Plan"?

I'm probably going to be banned after 6 years on PistonHeads for giving the wrong answer to The Boss, but yes, they can.

Permitted Development rights can also be specifically withdrawn by a condition on the original permission to develop - we frequently get Planning Permissions to build houses where PD rights are withdrawn either from the whole site, or from specific plots -or as a separate direction, quite independent of a Local Plan or Planning Permission, in order to control development that would otherwise be deemed automatically permissible.

It's called an 'Article 4 Direction', after Section 4 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development Order) 1995.

Some types of Article 4 direction need the approval of the Secretary of State, but since Local Plans are automatically subject to Secretary of State Approval, any such direction incorporated in a Local Plan document can probably be deemed to have been approved, anyway.

Unfortunately, you have to look upon Permitted Development rights as a 'favour' that's granted under the Planning system for convenience. Essentially all development is controlled, but the Permitted Development system is the authorities saying 'we can't be bothered with the trivial stuff, so we'll let you off in this instance'. They can withdraw that 'favour' at any time, however, with relatively trivial justification.

[PetrolTed]

Thanks Sam. That's useful.

But if Article 4 hasn't been implemented on a property, then PD rights remain don't they?

Or are you saying that I could submit an application for a Certificate of Lawful Development only to have an Article 4 served on the property?

Edited by PetrolTed on Friday 4th December 18:07

[Sam_68]

PetrolTed said:

Article 4 does preclude Permitted Development specifically.

I'm not sure what you're getting at, here.

Article 4 does not need to preclude all permitted development, if that's what you mean. For example, they can allow most permitted development rights to remain, but say that you need permission in a certain area before you're allowed to fit replacement windows or to paint your house (the latter being a case I've actually come across, in South Wales, where they wanted to maintain a limited 'palette' of traditional colours in a town).

Or is it that you think they need a specific Article 4 Direction before they can withdraw PD rights? Again, this is not the case. Article 4 is the legislative instrument that gives them the powers to withdraw PD rights, but the specific mechanism - whether it's by writing it in to a Local Plan Policy, by applying a condition to a Planning Consent, or by issuing a separate, stand-alone directive, is irrelevant.

PetrolTed said:

But if Article 4 hasn't been implemented on a property, then PD rights remain don't they?

No. It doesn't take a separate directive; Article 4 gives them the powers to modify or withdraw PD rights by whatever (legal) means they see fit. They can write it into a local plan policy, no problem.

PetrolTed said:

Or are you saying that I could submit an application for a Certificate of Lawful Development only to have an Article 4 served on the property?

They'd be on pretty thin ice implementing an Article 4 retrospectively, in response to an application for Certificate of Lawful Development.

That would be akin to placing a Tree Protection Order on a tree that's already been chopped down, then prosecuting the landowner!

It would be a case of proving that the development had already been implemented prior to the Article 4, though...

Edited by Sam_68 on Friday 4th December 18:54

[blueg33]

ianreeves said:

Here is a copy of an email I got from the local planning bods when doing our conservatory.

From what I understand if it 100 matches the regs / development rights then your clear you don't need it. If you apply then yes it can be over-ruled if anyone objects..

Sounds stupid so guess when you come to planning it must be true



Dear XXXXs

Your enquiry has been passed to the Planning Department by Martin, and we would recommend that you initially take a look at the following guide:-

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/hhg/house...

I have checked our records and your property does benefit from Permitted Development rights, and therefore, if the proposed extension conforms with the regulations as shown at the above link, Planning Permission would not be required.

http://www.tewkesburybc.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid...

If the proposed development falls outside of the regulations in any way, then a Planning Application would be required.

Please feel free to contact us should you have any further queries, or require further clarification.

Best regards

Housing, Development and Environmental Services

techadmin.gov.uk 01684 272151

Strueth! I wouldnt believe anything Tewkesbury Planners say! The have no idea about planning legislation. I am a professional developer and have done lots in Tewkesbury District, it normally takes my Planning Consultant to phone them and point ut that they know nothing to get things to happen.

[Sam_68]

blueg33 said:

ianreeves said:

I have checked our records and your property does benefit from Permitted Development rights, and therefore, if the proposed extension conforms with the regulations as shown at the above link, Planning Permission would not be required.

Strueth! I wouldnt believe anything Tewkesbury Planners say! The have no idea about planning legislation.

Tewkesbury's my patch, too, and I'd agree with your general sentiment completely, but to be fair to them, the bit I've made bold on Ian's post puts them in the clear (assuming they have checked correctly).

If they'd checked a similar enquiry on PetrolTed's property, presumably they would (should) have come back with 'We regret to say that Local Plan Policy XYZ withdraws the normal rights of permitted development that relate to work of this nature, therefore in this instance a Planning Application will be required'

[PetrolTed]

Sam_68 said:

If they'd checked a similar enquiry on PetrolTed's property, presumably they would (should) have come back with 'We regret to say that Local Plan Policy XYZ withdraws the normal rights of permitted development that relate to work of this nature, therefore in this instance a Planning Application will be required'

Thanks Sam. It really does look increasingly like I'm just trying to exploit a loophole that might otherwise prevent me from extending the property. What a can of worms.

[Busamav]

I may have missed it , but what are you actually trying to do ?

There are quite a few guys here with a lot of experience , tell us more , if you can of course

[Busamav]

PetrolTed said:

I'm happy to do that in due course. Basically we're trying to buy a house and I want to know if the option is there to extend out a bit. The sticking point is that if I applied via normal planning permission it would be refused because of restrictions set out in the local plan. The planning officer reckons those restrictions can't be applied for PD because you have implied permission anyway (i.e. they need never be consulted unless you want a Cert of Lawful Dev).

OK got you .

My take would be that your PD rights are in tact as confirmed by the planner and that no local plan could trump this .

Just have somebody who understands PD rights ,visit the property and actually look at the proposal on site . There are lots of ifs and buts in there that can trip you up .

Also look thoroughly at any previous approvals for alterations to the house , the planners may have slipped some onerous clauses in previous approvals that would affect PD rights .

[PetrolTed]

The property is in a flood plain. The Local Plan prevents development of a property beyond 30sqm of the original building.

The house in question has been extended by more than that to date and the council advise that this limit would be adhered to.

So, if we applied for planning permission it would be refused.

I was clutching at the possibility of using Permitted Development to build a 3-4 metre extension off the back of the original house.

This seemed like an option originally, but I'm getting a bit too uncomfortable with it now on a number of fronts.

The Permitted Development guidelines might actually compromise what we'd really like to build. Also, I don't think I'm going to get any real clarity on what could be done without submitting applications and that's not going to happen without buying the property.

[Busamav]

PetrolTed said:

Also, I don't think I'm going to get any real clarity on what could be done without submitting applications and that's not going to happen without buying the property.

If you wanted to get something formal before buying the house , you can .

It would take a days draughting to put some basic drawings together and apply for a Certificate of lawfull development .

Cost for drawings plus £75 for the application fee . These can be dealt with quite quickly , one council turned one around in under 2 weeks recently.

Edited by Busamav on Friday 4th December 20:51

[a boardman]

PetrolTed said:

The property is in a flood plain. The Local Plan prevents development of a property beyond 30sqm of the original building.

The house in question has been extended by more than that to date and the council advise that this limit would be adhered to.

So, if we applied for planning permission it would be refused.

I was clutching at the possibility of using Permitted Development to build a 3-4 metre extension off the back of the original house.

This seemed like an option originally, but I'm getting a bit too uncomfortable with it now on a number of fronts.

The Permitted Development guidelines might actually compromise what we'd really like to build. Also, I don't think I'm going to get any real clarity on what could be done without submitting applications and that's not going to happen without buying the property.

I might be wrong but always thought if the property hads been extended you have no pd rights left, unless the old extension and new extension fall under the pd allowance, if the extensions had formal planning permission then again pd rights have gone.

[herbialfa]

When you say off the back of the "original" house then you might be in with a shout!

If its off the back of an extension then you'll trigger a Planning application.

Exactly where has the house ben extended and exactly where are you looking to extend.

Try the Planning portal website (which i'm sure is posted above)

Forget the 70 cubic metre rule that went out the window a over a year ago!

[Shelsleyf2]

I ahve just built a large detached double garage under permitted development. I went to see the duty officer at the planning office and he told me that what i propsed would be covered by permitted development. Re your idea as I understood it the following were the permitted development "rules" The building has to be more than 5 meters from the existing building, it cannot be closer than the existing building to the roadway, it must not cover more than 25%? of the remaining plot, it must not be closer to the boundry of the plot than 4 meters, the ridge height cannot be above 4 meters measured from the highest ajacent point. Note while some of the distances may be incorrect...memory.

Book an appointment with the duty officer take along a google earth pic and tell him what you would like to do. Costs nothing and the officer I saw was very easy tro chat to and made it all easy.

Shelsleyf2

[PetrolTed]

The 30 sqm rule is related to flood plains not Permitted Development. The Local Plan bars any development over and above 30sqm. This was the original question - could I use Permitted Development to exceed that limit?

Also, the more I look at the PD rules, the more I think whatever design we come up with to fit within guidelines would be a compromise.