Planning permission (or lack of)?
Discussion
Long story short, a property opposite us has a fair bit of land and the owners have begun constructing what appears to be a large double garage. The existing property is a nice little cottage, probably late 19th century, not a listed building. I can't find any trace of planning permission for the work whether it's a notice which usually appears on the nearest lamppost around here, or on the council's online interactive tool thing which does seem to accurately list all other local planning notices, active and historic.
The building being erected has the front of a large double garage but walking down a footpath next to the land, one can see the property stretches back probably 3 times as large as it's front width. The construction work is clear for all to see thanks to the largely bare trees at the moment and work vans coming and going. Some fairly substantial plumbing and foundations were being installed for just a double garage, and there is clearly a bespoke kitchen being installed.
It's an old couple living in the existing property with their younger family, so one would assume that they are going to move into the new property all together and either demolish the old cottage or their kids will live in the new place. It's not exactly the Cotswolds but it's just a bit of a shame our view of the fields opposite will now have a large double garage in the middle of it with apparently zero consultation.
It's not our intention to see it torn down brick by brick and get a contravention notice served, but can/will they just erect whatever they want and apply for retrospective planning permission, or is that a gamble?
The building being erected has the front of a large double garage but walking down a footpath next to the land, one can see the property stretches back probably 3 times as large as it's front width. The construction work is clear for all to see thanks to the largely bare trees at the moment and work vans coming and going. Some fairly substantial plumbing and foundations were being installed for just a double garage, and there is clearly a bespoke kitchen being installed.
It's an old couple living in the existing property with their younger family, so one would assume that they are going to move into the new property all together and either demolish the old cottage or their kids will live in the new place. It's not exactly the Cotswolds but it's just a bit of a shame our view of the fields opposite will now have a large double garage in the middle of it with apparently zero consultation.
It's not our intention to see it torn down brick by brick and get a contravention notice served, but can/will they just erect whatever they want and apply for retrospective planning permission, or is that a gamble?
Okay well I've been directed to the decision document, drawings and plans by the local planning office, who aren't sure why it isn't appearing on the city council's interactive map. It states:
Complies.
The Council are satisfied that the outbuilding would be sited within the residential curtilage. The garden area
is immediately adjacent to the west side of the dwelling.
MHCLG Permitted Development for Householders Technical Guidance (2019) gives examples of permitted
outbuildings which could include garden sheds, storage buildings and garages, so long as they can properly
be described as having a purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the house.
It is for the applicant to show that what is proposed is genuinely and reasonably required or necessary for a
purpose incidental to the use of the dwellinghouse as a dwellinghouse. The onus of proof, on the balance of
probabilities, is on the applicant.
The submitted information, which includes the description of the intended use and the proposed floor plan,
shows that proposed use would be for personal enjoyment of the occupants of the dwellinghouse.
Complies.
The Council are satisfied that the outbuilding would be sited within the residential curtilage. The garden area
is immediately adjacent to the west side of the dwelling.
MHCLG Permitted Development for Householders Technical Guidance (2019) gives examples of permitted
outbuildings which could include garden sheds, storage buildings and garages, so long as they can properly
be described as having a purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the house.
It is for the applicant to show that what is proposed is genuinely and reasonably required or necessary for a
purpose incidental to the use of the dwellinghouse as a dwellinghouse. The onus of proof, on the balance of
probabilities, is on the applicant.
The submitted information, which includes the description of the intended use and the proposed floor plan,
shows that proposed use would be for personal enjoyment of the occupants of the dwellinghouse.
fred bloggs said:
If you dont want it torn down, what is the intension of the thread ? Just to vent annoyance? ...
Pretty much, yes.Some extracts from the planning docs for clarity regarding the above points:
Development is not permitted [...] if
- the total area of ground covered by buildings, enclosures and containers within the curtilage (other than the original dwellinghouse) would exceed 50% of the total area of the curtilage (excluding the ground area of the original dwellinghouse);
- any part of the building, enclosure, pool or container would be situated on land forward of a wall forming the principal elevation of the original dwellinghouse (complies: the outbuilding would not project forward of the front wall, which is considered to form the principal elevation of the original dwellinghouse.);
- the building would have more than a single storey;
- the height of the building, enclosure or container would exceed-
(i) 4 metres in the case of a building with a dual-pitched roof,
(ii) 2.5 metres in the case of a building, enclosure or container within 2 metres of the boundary of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse, or
(iii) 3 metres in any other case; (complies: the outbuilding would have a pitched roof and would not exceed 4m in height.)
Development is not permitted [...] if
- the total area of ground covered by buildings, enclosures and containers within the curtilage (other than the original dwellinghouse) would exceed 50% of the total area of the curtilage (excluding the ground area of the original dwellinghouse);
- any part of the building, enclosure, pool or container would be situated on land forward of a wall forming the principal elevation of the original dwellinghouse (complies: the outbuilding would not project forward of the front wall, which is considered to form the principal elevation of the original dwellinghouse.);
- the building would have more than a single storey;
- the height of the building, enclosure or container would exceed-
(i) 4 metres in the case of a building with a dual-pitched roof,
(ii) 2.5 metres in the case of a building, enclosure or container within 2 metres of the boundary of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse, or
(iii) 3 metres in any other case; (complies: the outbuilding would have a pitched roof and would not exceed 4m in height.)
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff