Planning Applications, PD and the like (General Chat)

[livinthedream]

Thank you Dannewhouse. The cottage stood some 40 years ago, I have gone through all the maps and worked out it got demolished early 70’s. Dates back from 1800’s. I’m saying footings but a lot of earth covers over and there is rubble here and there. When you scrape back the earth some parts show remains of a small wall but only 1 or 2 bricks high, no concrete slab or anything and I dare say this wouldn't be sufficient enough to comply to building regs. Could you stil apply to replace a dwelling with this ? Would I have to excavate the whole area to establish the exact size of the building for building regs? Also I have heard that if you have class Q passed and go for the old residential curtilage instead it would make the class q part null and void because it wouldnt then be agricultural ??

 

[livinthedream]

Is that correct @GeorgieB82 ?

I'm led to believe that if all walls are down then full PP is necessary to rebuild.

Thank you Holwellcourtfarm . I dont mind submitting full PP if there is a chance it can be classed as a replacement dwelling. Again I have read somewhere that if its been demolished a long time ago then its classed as virgin ground . It’s in green belt and outside the settlement boundary so to try and get a dwelling will be very hard Ive now been told.

 

[George from SJM Planning]

Is that correct @GeorgieB82 ?

I'm led to believe that if all walls are down then full PP is necessary to rebuild.

That is not correct as per current legislation (as I interpret it). It may have been in the past but to reconstruct a previous dwelling even to its original condition would need planning.

In this case I would consider a pre-app with the council to discuss the possibility of redeveloping the cottage site instead of the PD using the justification that there was a dwelling there so you aren't increasing the number of dwellings in the countryside and ask that the floor area that would have been used for the PD be considered as an addition to the cottage footprint in exchange for not building the PD. The arguement to support this would be - at the current time there is 0 dwellings, if the cottage was to be rebuilt with an extended footprint to compensate for removing the PD from the barn then there would be 1 dwelling. If the council aren't happy with that then state you could continue down the PD route and still apply for the cottage to be rebuilt and then the council will be allowing 2 dwellings in the countryside.

 

[livinthedream]

That is not correct as per current legislation (as I interpret it). It may have been in the past but to reconstruct a previous dwelling even to its original condition would need planning.

In this case I would consider a pre-app with the council to discuss the possibility of redeveloping the cottage site instead of the PD using the justification that there was a dwelling there so you aren't increasing the number of dwellings in the countryside and ask that the floor area that would have been used for the PD be considered as an addition to the cottage footprint in exchange for not building the PD. The arguement to support this would be - at the current time there is 0 dwellings, if the cottage was to be rebuilt with an extended footprint to compensate for removing the PD from the barn then there would be 1 dwelling. If the council aren't happy with that then state you could continue down the PD route and still apply for the cottage to be rebuilt and then the council will be allowing 2 dwellings in the countryside.

Thank you GeorgieB82. That does sound like a good alternative. When you say footprint does that mean downstairs area only because ideally I would like to have an upstairs as well ?

 

[George from SJM Planning]

Thank you Holwellcourtfarm . I dont mind submitting full PP if there is a chance it can be classed as a replacement dwelling. Again I have read somewhere that if its been demolished a long time ago then its classed as virgin ground . It’s in green belt and outside the settlement boundary so to try and get a dwelling will be very hard Ive now been told.

The 1970's is not a long time ago in planning policy and if I was your planning consultant I would be arguing that the cottage site was Previously Developed Land) in the countryside. The NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) encourages development of PDL over the development of virgin countryside. Full planning in the countryside is never easy but having proof of a previous dwelling certainly gives you an edge.

As for your original question, I believe your lack of acreage is holding back more extensive works under PD; I would recommend looking more closely at the cottage as a dwelling.

Thank you GeorgieB82. That does sound like a good alternative. When you say footprint does that mean downstairs area only because ideally I would like to have an upstairs as well ?

It is the ground floor footprint that will be your limiting factor at this stage but providing adding a second storey would not cause overlooking and visual amenity issues to neighbours or look out of place in it surroundings then I believe and argument could be had for a second storey.

Please feel free to drop me an email if you want more specific information; we have just relaunched our website www.sjmplanning.com and you can contact us through there.

 

[livinthedream]

I forgot to start off with this question at the beginning to clarify things abit The site is two fields with a track in the centre which leads to where the old cottage and outbuildings once stood and now further along the cowshed resides, all incased with fencing and on every map dating from the 1800’s till present shows this same area that hasnt changed. There are fruit trees still growing and a well in the corner which has been capped off. It”s 750m2 in total. Can I presume this is the existing residential curtilage and can I be allowed to submit plans for any size dwelling or am I restricted to the cottage and PD footprint still?

 

[George from SJM Planning]

I forgot to start off with this question at the beginning to clarify things abit The site is two fields with a track in the centre which leads to where the old cottage and outbuildings once stood and now further along the cowshed resides, all incased with fencing and on every map dating from the 1800’s till present shows this same area that hasnt changed. There are fruit trees still growing and a well in the corner which has been capped off. It”s 750m2 in total. Can I presume this is the existing residential curtilage and can I be allowed to submit plans for any size dwelling or am I restricted to the cottage and PD footprint still?

I would imagine that providing that the land is not in agricultural use that you could claim it as residential curtilage. As for the size of building; if you want to try for more than the aforementioned area then I would start with a pre-app and let the council knock you down; don't go too big, but ask for slightly larger than what you really want and let them negotiate. That is the advantage of a pre-app, it is an informal discussion and providing you get a half decent case officer you should be able to garner enough information to gauge what the council would be happy with.

 

[livinthedream]

This is where its a grey area because it was we believe , a residential curtilage and now a cowshed has been built on it and used as agricultural use for a number of years (thats how we got class q passed) that we now don’t know where we stand and which route to go down. We definitely dont want to build outside of this curtilege but would like a bigger footprint.
Thanks GeorgieB82 by the way for your help

 

[George from SJM Planning]

This is where its a grey area because it was we believe , a residential curtilage and now a cowshed has been built on it and used as agricultural use for a number of years (thats how we got class q passed) that we now don’t know where we stand and which route to go down. We definitely dont want to build outside of this curtilege but would like a bigger footprint.
Thanks GeorgieB82 by the way for your help

If you have land around the former dwelling which is currently agricultural but could be added to the curtilage to make a decent plot then I would add a change of use for that part of the land into the house application.

 

[livinthedream]

This existing residential area would be more than enough for me because its 750m2 and yes we do own the fields either side.I just want to know (a) can i claim this is residential curtilage? (b) and would it then enable me to construct a larger dwelling for example a dwelling size of 500m2 in that curtilege?

 

[George from SJM Planning]

This existing residential area would be more than enough for me because its 750m2 and yes we do own the fields either side.I just want to know (a) can i claim this is residential curtilage? (b) and would it then enable me to construct a larger dwelling for example a dwelling size of 500m2 in that curtilege?

For the new dwelling you should be allowed to determine the boundary of the residential curtilage but you would not then be permitted to use this for agricultural purposes. There is no 'ratio' for dwelling to curtilage for full planning applications; for PD conversions it is 1:1 generally but providing the justifications were made you could have a curtilage that only encompassed the house.

 

[livinthedream]

Sorry I’m getting confused here. How do we have the right to determine the boundary in green belt? I thought you had to work with the curtilege that exists? Thats the reason why we were working within the 750m2 (residential) curtilege we feel already exists. We understand the change over from residential to agricultural but isn’t it a lot harder to convert to residential or wouldnt a lot of people be doing the same to get a bigger garden ?
So to recap would i be best to go for a slightly bigger house than intended (old cottage + PD class Q), saying one dwelling built is better than two and contain it all in the ‘claimed’ residential curtilage, even though there is an agriculural building standing on it now?

 

[George from SJM Planning]

Sorry I’m getting confused here. How do we have the right to determine the boundary in green belt? I thought you had to work with the curtilege that exists? Thats the reason why we were working within the 750m2 (residential) curtilege we feel already exists. We understand the change over from residential to agricultural but isn’t it a lot harder to convert to residential or wouldnt a lot of people be doing the same to get a bigger garden ?
So to recap would i be best to go for a slightly bigger house than intended (old cottage + PD class Q), saying one dwelling built is better than two and contain it all in the ‘claimed’ residential curtilage, even though there is an agriculural building standing on it now?

To enlarge a residential curtilage in the countryside is not too difficult but it has to be associated with a dwelling.

I think where things are getting confused is I believe as it stands there is no residential curtilage as there is no residential dwelling. What you do have is evidence that there was a residential dwelling on the site but the site is now agricultural as proven by the cow shed it what was the residential curtilage. Once you can get the council to agree that the land is PDL and that a residential dwelling was there in the past then you can argue that one could be built there as replacement. That new dwelling would not have a curtilage so it would be up to you to decide what land will be given over to residential. I hope this makes where I am coming from a little clearer.

 

[George from SJM Planning]

Sorry I’m getting confused here. How do we have the right to determine the boundary in green belt? I thought you had to work with the curtilege that exists? Thats the reason why we were working within the 750m2 (residential) curtilege we feel already exists. We understand the change over from residential to agricultural but isn’t it a lot harder to convert to residential or wouldnt a lot of people be doing the same to get a bigger garden ?
So to recap would i be best to go for a slightly bigger house than intended (old cottage + PD class Q), saying one dwelling built is better than two and contain it all in the ‘claimed’ residential curtilage, even though there is an agriculural building standing on it now?

To enlarge a residential curtilage in the countryside is not too difficult but it has to be associated with a dwelling.

I think where things are getting confused is I believe as it stands there is no residential curtilage as there is no residential dwelling. What you do have is evidence that there was a residential dwelling on the site but the site is now agricultural as proven by the cow shed it what was the residential curtilage. Once you can get the council to agree that the land is PDL and that a residential dwelling was there in the past then you can argue that one could be built there as replacement. That new dwelling would not have a curtilage so it would be up to you to decide what land will be given over to residential. I hope this makes where I am coming from a little clearer.

To make a more general point on this. Enlarging a residential curtilage still requires planning permission so if you wanted to take 10m of a field to enlarge a garden then it requires planning.

 

[livinthedream]

Yes you have said it in a nutshell what ive been trying to ask but going around in circles doing so. Thank you ..but you know what I’m going to ask next... how do you get the council to confirm the land is PDL ? Is there a form for this to apply for? I have all maps from Scotland stating different times up to the early 70s and on my deeds showing the cottage and fenced area. My only concern is that when you say ‘replacement’ the Local Plan says ratio 1:1 and if i get turned down negotiating with the potential 2 dwellings to 1 route, after they confirm its residential would they then say the class q is then void because its not agricultural anymore and I end up with nothing ?

 

[livinthedream]

I was just reading up on PDL and in the NPPF glossary it states that such land excludes land that is or has been occupied by agricultural buildings so because I have applied for Class q and got this then i guess I havent a chance in hell of obtaining PDL?

 

[George from SJM Planning]

Ok, I am going to be blunt and I hope I don't cause offence but my advice to you is not to take this on yourself. I would not take it on myself, as an individual, and I work in planning! You need to find yourself a planning consultant (I would suggest SJM Planning but we are the other end of the country) who in the very least has a degree in Town Planning, preferable is a member of the RTPI. To get this all passed in the correct order and not leave you up the creek without a paddle you need someone who has studied and practised planning policy. Even better would be to engage a rural planning consultant, they are out there but are few and far between. Don't settle for an architect or a land agent unless they can prove that they have town planning qualifications and experience in getting planning for new residential developments in the countryside.

As for proving it is PDL then this would be the basis for your/your agents pre-application advice application; you should collect all the information you can get; photographs, deeds, statements from locals who remember the house or even better former occupants. If I was your agent I would be putting in a pre-app asking to "establish the principle of erecting a new dwelling on the previously developed land on the site of [Insert former property's name]". The council will then provide a written response stating whether they believe the principle is there and that is what you base your application on. I would not state sizes or design of the proposed dwelling as you are just after the council to agree that it is PDL.

Do not at any point offer to give up your PD until the council have agreed that erection of a replacement dwelling is acceptable in principle and even then only offer to void that permission if they think you are asking for too much. If you can keep that in your back pocket until the last minute you never know you may get to hold on to both.

I strongly urge you to engage in a suitably qualified professional.

 

[George from SJM Planning]

I was just reading up on PDL and in the NPPF glossary it states that such land excludes land that is or has been occupied by agricultural buildings so because I have applied for Class q and got this then i guess I havent a chance in hell of obtaining PDL?

But is the agricultural building on the site of the original house? If not then I can still see and argument to be had.

Is there any ambiguity as to the age of the shed and/or when the house failed to be classed as a dwelling? If you can argue there was an overlap then the agricultural building was not build on the PDL.

These are some of the arguments that you will have with the council no doubt and that is why a professional would be of help. If you are worried about the cost, try to get your consultant to agree to work on a bonus i.e £1000 upfront plus 0.5% of the built out value of the new house (figures totally random) which could be your counter offer to any up front quotations they come up with. This way, they will honestly tell you if you have a chance and they will work their damnedest to get it through.

 

[livinthedream]

Thank you so much GeorgieB82 . No offence taken. You have been more than helpful. No I definitely will be using a professional. I just wanted to know what I could achieve and basically what I was going to be asking before I appointed someone and wasting vast amounts of money if nothing could be done. It’s given me hope which is more than I had this morning. Thank you

 

[George from SJM Planning]

Thank you so much GeorgieB82 . No offence taken. You have been more than helpful. No I definitely will be using a professional. I just wanted to know what I could achieve and basically what I was going to be asking before I appointed someone and wasting vast amounts of money if nothing could be done. It’s given me hope which is more than I had this morning. Thank you

I'm glad I've helped and that was my original aim of starting this thread. All the best for the future.