Successful appeal secures new home

Planning Appeal

Planning & Design Practice have successfully overturned a decision to refuse to grant planning permission for demolition of an existing bungalow to be replaced with a 1.5 storey house in Quarndon, Derby.

An appeal statement was prepared by Planning & Design Practice on behalf of our clients. the appellants, against Amber Valley Borough Council’s decision to refuse the application. The Council resolved to refuse planning permission for the proposed development for the following reason:

“The proposed development is materially larger than the existing dwelling and is therefore an inappropriate form of development within the defined Green Belt as it does not comply with any of the criteria set out in paragraph 149 of the NPPF. In the absence of ‘very special circumstances’, the proposed development would, by virtue of its definition as inappropriate development, result in harm to the openness of the Green Belt and failing to safeguard the countryside from encroachment. As such, the proposal is contrary to saved policies LS1 and EN2 of the Adopted Amber Valley Local Plan 2006, Policy QH1 of the Quarndon Neighbourhood Plan 2019 and Part 13 of the NPPF. The proposal fails to meet the environmental objective of sustainability as set out in paragraph 8 of the National Planning Policy Framework. The proposed harm identified results in a clear reason for refusing the application in accordance with paragraph 11 d) i of the NPPF.”

During the appeal process, we argued that there have been two prior approval applications which, if implemented, would significantly increase the size of the dwelling and result in a much larger house. Therefore, given the fallback position it is considered that there would be no harm to the openness of the Green Belt. Additionally, we argued that the majority of dwellings adjacent to the appeal site, also within the Green Belt have been replaced, extended or altered. This has meant the scale of dwellings and the character of the street scene has changed to that of large, modern dwellings.

The inspector found that although the increased floor area and height of the dwelling would result in a significant increase in the bulk and mass on the site and the development would harm the openness of the Green Belt, given the expense of the applicant preparing prior approval applications, substantial weight is given to the fall-back position. Therefore, there were very special circumstances to justify the granting of planning permission.

Planning Permission refused? Helping you appeal

Had Planning Permission refused? All is not lost. Planning & Design Practice specialise in appealing planning decisions.

We have extensive experience with the many types of planning appeals, from written representations to informal hearings and public inquiries. Our expert team at Planning & Design Practice can help you to navigate the complex appeals process and give you the best chance of a favourable outcome.

For a no-obligation consultation to discuss your planning appeal, don’t hesitate to get in touch with us on 01332 347371.

Appeals – a beginners guide

Planning & Design_Appeals

The planning appeals process is often seen as something of a dark art shrouded in secrecy. Here, our Director Richard Pigott seeks to demystify the process with some key facts about what you can expect when you seek to challenge a council’s decision.

Planning appeals are decided by the Planning Inspectorate (PINs), an independent governmental body based in Bristol but with Inspectors based all over the country.

Appeals are typically lodged by an applicant against the refusal of planning permission, although it is also possible to appeal against specific planning conditions on an approval. In fact, you don’t actually have to wait for the council to make a decision before you lodge an appeal – if the application is not determined within the statutory time frame (8 weeks for householder and minor applications and 13 weeks for major applications) you can appeal against non-determination of the application. However, you should think twice before doing so as appeals are not a quick option – they generally take 4-6 months to decide. But if you know which direction the application is heading you can effectively take matters out of the council’s hands and leave it to PINs to decide.

There are 3 types of appeal procedures: written representations; an informal hearing; and an inquiry.

It is possible to request a particular procedure, although PINs will ultimately decide on the most appropriate procedure based upon a number of criteria.

Most appeals will be decided by way of written representations, with only the more complex and/or controversial appeals being determined by hearings or inquiries. The informal hearing takes the form of a round the table discussion led by the Inspector whereas the format of a Public Inquiry is more adversarial and legal representation in the form of a barrister is often sought. A benefit of these processes is that they provide opportunities for presentation and discussion of the evidence from both the Council and the appellant and 3rd party expert witnesses can be invited. Thus, your credibility as appellant and the positive aspects of a project can be promoted to best effect. It follows, therefore, that appeal costs can ramp up significantly, particularly for a public inquiry.

Something we are often asked by clients is whether they will get their costs back if they win the appeal. Parties in planning appeals normally meet their own expenses and costs do not, as a rule, follow the result. However, where a party has:

– (1) behaved unreasonably; and
– (2) this has directly caused another party to incur unnecessary or wasted expense, they may be subject to an award of costs.

In practice, examples where costs may be awarded include, inter alia, failure to substantiate a stated reason for refusal; Planning Authorities clearly failing to have regard to government policy or its own adopted policies; Appellants pursuing a clear ‘no hope’ case; Late withdrawal of an appeal, late cancellation of an event or late cancellation of an enforcement notice.

Another question we are often asked is what are the chances of success at appeal? For householder appeals in 2021/22, 36% of appeals were allowed. For all other appeals (excluding enforcement and listed building appeals) the figures for 2021/22 show that the percentage of appeals allowed was 28% for written representations, 37% for hearings and 55% for inquiries. Nationally the average success rate is around 36% of all appeals, although this varies significantly depending on the type of appeal.

It is clear, therefore, that the chances of success improve significantly when the appellant is able to put their case more extensively and persuasively at a hearing or inquiry. It is, however, also fair to say that a well-argued case will significantly improve one’s chances of success whichever procedure an appeal follows. At PDP we pride ourselves on doing exactly this and in this link will showcase some case studies which illustrate the breadth of our appeals experience.

Richard Pigott, Director – Chartered Town Planner, Planning & Design Practice Ltd

GET IN TOUCH