Planning Appeal Archives - Planning Design Ltd

Statements of Heritage Significance

21st February 2024 by Gary Stringer

Statements of Heritage Significance are vital when it comes to judgements on what forms part of the curtilage to a listed property, they can set out the significance of the building and its relationship with adjoining land and give an accurate history that will aid the decisions of the local authority. Recently Planning & Design Practice were tasked with writing a Statement of Heritage Significance for owners of The Toll Gate House on the outskirts of Ashbourne to aid with planning permission for a dwelling to be built on land they own adjacent to the property.

The Toll Gate House was listed 14-Feb-1974 Grade II: for its special architectural or historic interest. The listing describes Toll Gate house as;

‘Mid C19, on the Southwest side of the later part of the Derby Turnpike Road. Victorian Tudor. Red brick, slate roof with bands of fish scale tiles. Gabled with fretted bargeboards and finials. Tudor style windows with elaborate glazing. Massive chimney stack and subsidiary chimneys. T shaped building with the stem of the T facing the new road. Below the gable is the former signboard, now blank.’

The Toll Gate House at Ashbourne is typical of its type. The original architectural design of Toll Gate House had similarities with the demolished Duffield Road Toll House at Darley Abbey, and with the refurbished Kedleston Road Toll Bar House. These Toll houses were used by the local Turnpike trusts to collect money to maintain the local roads. At the time of building of the Toll Gate House at Ashbourne , many turnpike trusts saw a serious decline in income as long distance traffic was drawn away to the railways. On a restricted budget, some trusts built additional gates on the roads leading to stations. These tollhouses were often much simpler than those built at the height of the turnpike era and may have originally been a narrow cottage alongside the highway not unlike the Ashbourne Toll House.

It was discovered that over the years, using documents provided by the client, the Ashbourne Toll Gate House has undergone many structural changes resulting in the footprint of the building now being dramatically different to when it was initially listed in 1974.

We also discovered it was built up close to the roadside (due to its original purpose) on a narrow plot, it was not until 117 years later that the adjacent land became part of the property, this land has never been fully integrated in use by the property and has even been used until recently for agricultural purposes. Recent high-density development in the immediate area also meant that there is no longer a rural aspect to the property. Therefore, it was concluded in our Statement of Heritage Significance that the proposed development of the adjacent land does not impact on the integrity of the listed building.

Permission was initially refused but we won on appeal and the planning inspector agreed with what we found stating:

‘Overall, I find that the proposed development will not harm the understanding and experience of the listed building. Accordingly, the effect of the development on the setting of Tollgate House, and to its significance would be negligible.’

Detailed factual historical research enabled Planning & Design to prove that the land being built on was never a factor in the significance of Toll gate House and that recent developments had compromised any argument for it being in a rural location. It is a great result for our client.

Statements of Heritage Significance, Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas

Planning & Design Practice have in house heritage specialists who work on a variety of projects that are concerned with Listed Building Consent, Conservation Areas and World Heritage Sites. We always work with the client and the councils to get the best outcome. If heritage is a deciding factor in your future development plans, please get in touch to find out how we can help you, on 01332 347371 or email enquiries@planningdesign.co.uk.

Successful appeal secures new home

16th January 2024 by Gary Stringer

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.

Appeal success for barn conversion and extension in Derbyshire

13th December 2023 by Gary Stringer

We are pleased to announce that working as Architects, alongside Bagshaws LLP acting as planning agents, we have been granted planning permission by the Planning Inspectorate for the conversion and extension of a disused stone barn in Derbyshire. The standout feature of the scheme being the proposal of the modern Corten clad extensions to the barn.

A contentious scheme, in the planning authority’s eyes at least, from the start, this is one we are very proud of. The project was carried out in multiple stages, the first being to secure permission under Class Q of permitted development, to establish the principle of residential conversion. Following this, full planning permission was obtained to simply replace the monopitch roof with a traditional dual-pitched roof. This provided the main part of the barn with a more spacious head-height throughout and opened the door for the barn to be converted, and increasing its value, with or without the extensions.

Following the approval for the new roof, a further application was submitted to infill the existing stone-walled pig sties at each end with modern ‘Corten’ steel clad extensions. The extensions bring the dwelling to life, providing more useable space and allowing it to properly function as a family home, as well as providing much needed natural light and making the most of the spectacular views over the countryside.

Obtaining permission for the extensions proved tricky however, initially being refused permission by the Council. However, our proposal was successfully pushed through the appeal process by Bagshaws.

The Planning Inspector noted that “The extension has been deliberately designed to have a contrasting, contemporary appearance to the main building,…” which along with its subordinate appearance in relation to the main building, as a result of its lower ridge height, would ensure that it would not overwhelm the appearance of the main building or the site.

He concluded that “Its contemporary design and rustic style would achieve a high quality and sympathetic design, as opposed to it appearing as a domestic extension.” meaning that the resulting development would appear as a converted agricultural building. Also that the setting of the proposed development, with its secluded position in the rural landscape and the backdrop of trees, would ensure that it assimilates well within the landscape.

As the Architects for the project, we are delighted with the outcome and are looking forward to progressing the scheme in the near future – and even more so, to see the scheme built and brought to life.

Barn Conversion and extension – before and after

Appeal secures garage success

17th May 2023 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice have successfully overturned a decision to refuse planning permission for the erection of a garage in Stanley, Ilkeston. The site is located in the Green Belt and a Conservation Area. An appeal Statement of Case was prepared by Planning & Design Practice on behalf of our client, the Appellant against Erewash Borough Council’s decision to refuse the application.

In line with our clients brief our Architectural Team, in collaboration with the Planning Team, prepared a scheme that would sit comfortably within the aesthetic of the Conservation Area whilst also considering the rural surroundings of the site. The scheme took into consideration the potential impact on the character of the area and the high boundary walls. These considerations informed the final scheme.

The garage was designed to be as in-keeping as possible with the surrounding area and match the design of the existing dwelling and boundary walls. The infilling nature of the development ensured that the garage was not out of the place in the area, due to the domestic nature of the site. The garage would also not impact the amenity of the area due to the fact that it will not obtrude from the domestic curtilage and will remain consistent with the nature of the area.

The Council refused planning permission under delegated powers on the grounds that the development was “inappropriate development in the Green Belt” and “it would fail to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area”.

The Planning Inspectorate found that:

“The proposed garage would be positioned within the curtilage of the dwelling, between the existing house and the neighbouring property to the north. The garden area where it would be located appears as a small gap in a linear, relatively close pattern of development along Morley Lane. The built-up area of Stanley continues to the north, up to the junction of Morley Lane with Common Lane, and I consider the appeal site to be within the village.”

The Inspector goes on to state:

“The garage would have a contemporary design, with a flat roof that would differ from the traditional pitched roofs on buildings in the area, as would the green roof finish that is proposed. Despite this, the flat roof form and the positioning of the garage adjacent to a high wall, would result in the proposal being well contained, even without the presence of boundary planting. Only a small section of the roof would be visible above the wall, but given the verdant character of the area, I do not consider this would appear incongruous.”

The Inspector resolved to grant the appeal and allow the erection of the garage.

Planning & Design Practice Ltd is a multi-disciplinary team of Charactered Town Planners, Architects, Architectural Assistants and Heritage Specialists. Gaining planning permission is a key step in almost any development. We can take a project through from inception to completion, but we also offer the flexibility to engage a client’s own architects and provide a planning service, whilst our design team can also work with clients who have engaged other town planning professionals.

Planning & Design Practice Ltd are well versed in researching and understanding local Council’s policies to ensure the best possible case if put forward for our clients.

For a free, no obligation consultation to discuss your project, please don’t hesitate to get in touch on 01332 347371 or enquiries@planningdesign.co.uk.

Planning Inspectorate refuse planning permission for solar farm in Alfreton

13th December 2022 by Gary Stringer

Amber Valley Borough Council have been successful in defending their decision to refuse a full planning application for a major solar farm on the outskirts of Alfreton, Derbyshire. The Appellant (a subsidiary company of Kronos) took the refused application to appeal via a public inquiry where a government planning inspector ultimately determined that it was correct to refuse the application and dismissed the appeal.

What development was proposed for Alfreton Solar Farm?

It was proposed to develop the Site into an array of free-standing solar panels and associated infrastructure, to generate just under 50MW of electricity. Following submission of the application and subsequent comments, the Appellant reduced the physical extent of the scheme from c.105 to c.75 hectares. However, the reduction in site area did not reduce the overall electrical output, which remains at just under 50MW (49.9MW) of electricity. 50MW is the threshold for a “nationally significant infrastructure project” within the Planning Act 2008 which meant that the application would have been determined by the Government and not the Local authority.

What was the process to refuse the application for a Solar Farm at Alfreton?

The application was heard at the Planning Board meeting held on Monday 6th December 2021. Following representations made by members of the public, Alfreton Park Community Special School, the applicant’s agent and other interested parties the application was unanimously refused by members of the Planning Board.

Following this, the applicant pursued an appeal against the Local Planning Authorities Decision to refuse the application and a public inquiry was held in The Post Mill Centre in South Normanton for a total of 6 days which included a site visit. Many members of the public were present throughout and were given opportunity for their individual and collective case against the development to be heard.

Why was Alfreton Solar Farm refused?

Careful site selection and design is the best way to avoid or minimise potential adverse landscape and visual impacts arising from solar development. In this case, the sensitivity of the location for large scale ground mounted solar PV was fundamental to the decision to refuse planning permission for the solar farm.

The proposed site was not within a designated landscape, but was in an historic parkland site recognised as a non-designated heritage asset (Alfreton Park) with six public footpaths passing over it, used heavily by residents of Alfreton.

The Inspector found that the panels “would present as a starkly industrial mass of metal” given their prominent location, visible from as far away as 4-5 kilometres. The development would have a significant effect on landscape character and would be significantly out of scale with the landscape and attractive valley landform. He commented that the value of the landscape was enhanced by its accessibility from Alfreton and local footpaths. The inspector found that the proposed new hedging would also serve to be harmful to the landscape, in “stark contrast” to the prevailing situation. The humming noise of inverters would add to the impact for those walking through the site.

On heritage, the Inspector found that there would be harm to the settings of a listed church and manor house and that the heritage significance of Alfreton Park would be seriously compromised. He also found a degree of harm to the more distant, but Grade I listed, Wingfield Manor given the visibility of the site from the west.

A potentially significant issue arose at the inquiry as to impacts upon hypersensitive pupils at a special needs school immediately adjacent to the site. While there was no evidence as to extent of some of these impacts and the Inspector could not draw a firm conclusion, it was a matter that weighed against the scheme.

The Inspector had regard to the need for renewable energy and the lifespan of the development, but he considered that the landscape and visual impacts were decisive, and that 40 years is a very significant period over which those impacts will be felt.

Our Role

Director, Michael Bamford acted on the Council’s behalf to defend the decision to refuse the application. Working with Barrister Ned Westaway, Mel Morris Conservation and Deborah Evans.

No long faces at Long Meadows Farm following double Appeal success!

5th December 202216th November 2022 by Gary Stringer

Discharge of Planning Conditions HIgh Peak

Planning & Design Practice Ltd successfully overturned two separate decisions (which ran concurrently with each other) to refuse planning permission for the erection of two agricultural buildings at the same remote farmstead, Long Meadows in Derbyshire Dales.

Appeal Statement of Cases were prepared by Planning & Design Practice’s Planning Team on behalf of the Appellant, against Derbyshire Dales District Councils decision to refuse the applications. The Council resolved to refuse planning permission for the proposed developments under delegated powers for the following reasons:

Appeal 1: The Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that the new building, which is remote from the applicant’s main farm buildings and land holding is justified or necessary to sustain the needs of the agricultural enterprise, in addition to the existing building at this location. As such, the development is considered to constitute unwarranted and encroaching development that is intrinsically harmful to the character and appearance of this part of the countryside contrary to Policies S4, PD1 and PD5 of the Adopted Derbyshire Dales Local Plan (2017) and guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

Appeal 2: Based on the information provided, the Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that the new building, in addition to the existing building on site is necessary to sustain agriculture on the unit/holding and as such constitutes unwarranted and encroaching development that is intrinsically harmful to the character and appearance of this part of the countryside contrary Policies S4, PD1 and PD5 of the Adopted Derbyshire Dales Local Plan (2017) and guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

The Council argued that the buildings were not necessary to sustain agriculture on the unit/holding when having regard to existing buildings on site. The Council further contended that no justification has been submitted to justify the siting of the building on this specific parcel of land, and therefore the building is not justified.

The applications and appeals were accompanied by a detailed assessment of our clients farming operations, as well as supporting letters from the National Farmers Union which reaffirmed the need for the additional agricultural buildings on site.

The Planning Inspector agreed with our assessment, stating:

“Whilst there is an existing storage building at the appeal site, it was clear from my observations on site that this building is near to its practical capacity for storage. The provision of a further storage building at the appeal site would ensure that more of the agricultural paraphernalia, such as machinery, feeds stuffs and fodder, can be stored inside rather than, as at the time of my visit, outside the existing building. This storage building would therefore also help support the agricultural business and its growth.”

The Inspector, when considering Paragraph 84 of the National Planning Policy Framework, which supports rural development where it would enable the sustainable growth and expansion of businesses in rural areas including agricultural businesses, resolved to allow both appeals stating “it has been demonstrated that both proposals would be necessary to support and grow the existing agricultural business”.

If you have had planning permission refused or would like to discuss your options or chances at appeal, please get in contact for a free no obligation discussion.

Andrew Stock, Associate Director – Chartered town Planner, Planning & Design Practice Ltd.

Decision overturned allows conversion to flourish

28th November 202222nd March 2022 by Gary Stringer

Decision overturned! Planning & Design Practice successfully overturned a decision to refuse prior approval for the change of use of an agricultural building to three dwellings at Flourish Farm, Dale Abbey, Derbyshire under Class Q of the General Permitted Development Order (GPDO).

The building is a simple structure, enclosed on three sides with concrete block work walls. Above the block work the walls of the barn are finished in vertical timber cladding on two sides (north and west elevations), the east elevation is clad in profiled steel cladding above this, the roof is corrugated metal sheet roof.

The main issue the Inspector had to consider was whether the appeal building would be capable of functioning as a dwelling and whether the proposed development would fall within the definition of development permitted by the GPDO.

The Inspector found that the building would be capable of functioning as three dwellings, concurring with the appellant’s position that the building is structurally sound, and no significant improvements or modifications are required to facilitate the conversion.

The Inspector also agreed that the installation of new external walls only represents a small percentage of the building, disagreeing with the Council’s position that the closing of these openings would be so significant to amount to a rebuilding of the barn.

On the basis on the above the Inspector resolved to grant the appeal and allow the conversion of the building under Class Q of the GPDO.

Class Q’s are something Planning & Design Practice Ltd are well versed in, having helped lots of home owners imagine and realise their dream homes. The permitted development right is a notoriously complicated and thorny issue with many Planning Authorities. Since the permitted development right was introduced, there have been several notable appeal decisions which have altered and clarified how Class Q applications should be dealt with by an Authority. You can read more about this here.

We have vast experience of working on rural projects for homeowners, landowners and farmers in rural areas including barn conversions (both via a planning application and Class Q) and farm diversification schemes. Please don’t hesitate to contact us for a no obligation consultation to discuss your project or property.

The extension of Denby Hall Business Park

29th November 202222nd September 2021 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice Ltd are delighted that outline planning permission with all matters other than access, for an extension to Denby Hall Business Park has been granted following a positive appeal decision.

The successful appeal, following a Public Inquiry is one of the largest permissions of its kind which will help create jobs and boost the local economy of Amber Valley. On behalf of our client, we were able to demonstrate that very special circumstances did exist for development within the Green Belt, including the economic benefits of significant job creation and retention.

The outline proposal sought the erection of 3 industrial buildings to expand the Business Park to provide a new production facility for Garner Aluminium Extrusions Limited, a new warehouse for HL Plastics Limited and a new production facility for LB Plastics Limited. The development would cover 16 hectares of land for industrial development with the land to the west providing biodiversity mitigation. Approximately 423 parking spaces would be provided on site to serve the development.

Collectively, these companies have led the delivery of new window frame manufacture in the UK since the 1970s. Their products have been installed in hundreds of thousands of homes, offices and other buildings across the UK. They occupy an important role in the manufacturing sector for the UK’s construction industry, with an expanding international market.

The development is necessary to allow these businesses to grow existing operations, as they now require larger, purpose-built production space. There were no other equivalent sites capable of providing the required space in the Borough, alongside the benefits of concentration of activities.

The companies employ 700 individuals altogether and the delivery of the scheme will allow the retention of 100 jobs and the creation of a further 680 new jobs in the first 5 years, in a range of skilled occupations. This makes the companies one of the larger manufacturing employers within Derbyshire and Amber Valley, and within the immediate local area (including the towns of Alfreton, Ripley and Belper). They therefore contribute significantly to the local economy, directly and indirectly, and have led in the transformation of the local economy following the closure of Derbyshire collieries from the late 1960s onwards.

There is strong support from national to sub-national levels of policy and strategy for economic development projects and investments which create jobs, and help “build back better” to aid economic recovery from Covid-19. Unemployment almost doubled in Amber Valley between January 2020 and February 2021 as a result of the pandemic and the economic shocks that this created. There are currently 2720 people in Amber Valley currently claiming unemployment benefits and whilst unemployment is going down the level of unemployment is higher than before the pandemic and this provides evidence of a local need for more skilled and semi-skilled jobs to support people and the economy of Amber Valley.

The scheme demonstrated that it would provide undeniable social, economic and environmental benefits which have been attributed significant weight. Combined with the specific type and nature of the scheme, the context of the site and the lack of alternative provision of employment land, the Inspector concluded that “the other considerations in this particular case clearly outweigh the harm by reason of inappropriateness and the harm to the openness of the Green Belt”.

Have you had planning permission refused? Planning and Design Practice Ltd specialise in undertaking planning and enforcement appeals. We have extensive experience of the many types of planning appeals, from written representations to informal hearings and public inquiries.

For more information on this appeal, Denby Hall Business Park or to discuss your own project, please don’t hesitate to contact us on 01332 347371.

Appeal success means Derbyshire couple can stay in their dream self-build home

29th November 202220th January 2021 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice Ltd has successfully overturned an enforcement notice that sought to evict a Derbyshire couple from their dream home, writes Director Richard Pigott. The converted barn, completed in late 2019 using Class Q permitted development rights, was subject to enforcement action by Erewash Borough Council who considered that the dwelling was a new building rather than a conversion, and therefore contrary to Green Belt policies. The appellants had secured prior approval under class Q of the GPDO to convert a farm building on a smallholding to a dwelling. The council took enforcement action when they discovered, soon after building work had commenced, that the original timber roof support frame had been replaced with a steel frame. At this point PDP were engaged to advise the appellants. A retrospective application to regularise the work was refused and the council subsequently issued an enforcement notice directing that the building be demolished.

However, following an appeal hearing held in December Planning Inspector Melissa Madge concluded that very special circumstances justify retrospective approval of the barn conversion. The inspector agreed that the building operations undertaken exceeded what had been reasonably necessary to facilitate change of use from an agricultural building to a dwelling and had resulted in the erection of a new dwelling. Turning to the deemed application, whilst determining that the dwelling was an inappropriate form of development in the Green Belt, she noted that during the course of the works, the appellants had been advised that the timber frame would not support insulated roof panels and had failed to appreciate that replacing it went outside the scope of class Q. The inspector was satisfied that the appellants had intended to implement the approved scheme and worked with the existing building as much as they felt was necessary. Since the resultant dwelling was not dissimilar in appearance to what it would have been had the timber framework been retained and strengthened, she concluded that it did not harm the area’s character. She also gave weight to the appellant’s health and financial circumstances in deciding that the very special circumstances needed to justify inappropriate development in the Green Belt had been shown.

Commenting on the decision, Richard Pigott said “we are delighted to have won this appeal for our clients who have faced over 2 years of stress and uncertainty. The threat of eviction has now gone and they can finally settle in properly without the enforcement proceedings hanging over them.” Richard said that the case highlighted two important lessons. Firstly, Class Q is a complex piece of legislation with many ‘grey areas’ and, with this in mind, it is important to have in place a set of parameters in a construction method statement that has been agreed with the council as this will clearly identify what can and cannot be done to a building with class Q consent. Secondly, the particular circumstances of this case were pivotal – the fact that this was a self-build project by ‘lay people’ who clearly attempted to convert the building afforded them a degree of leniency which could not always be relied upon. A link to the Inspector’s decision letter can be found here:

Richard has produced a webinar on Class Q permitted development rights which can be found here:

If you would like to discuss whether your barn qualifies for Class Q permitted development rights please get in touch.