Retrospective Planning Permission Archives

Retrospective planning permission

22nd November 2023 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice is delighted to have assisted in securing retrospective planning permission for the installation of an oil tank associated with a recently constructive new build house.

The retrospective application related to work that had already commenced on site due to an honest error by our client who believed that planning permission was not required, as the installation of an oil tank fell within the limitations of Class E ‘buildings etc incidental to the enjoyment of a dwellinghouse’, Part 1 ‘development within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse’, of Schedule 2 of the General Permitted Development Order (2015).

However, following by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) it was advised that planning permission is required as a small part of the building is situated on land forward of the principal elevation of the original dwellinghouse.

It is first worth clarifying that the carrying out of ‘development’ (i.e. building works, material changes of use or engineering operations) without the benefit of planning permission is not, initially at least, ‘illegal’ but is better described as ‘unauthorised’. ‘Breaches of planning control’ are normally anonymously flagged by the general public to the LPA. In other words, the system is reactive – rarely do LPA’s proactively monitor compliance with planning consents.

Once a ‘breach of planning control’ has been identified the local planning authority (LPA) will often invite a landowner to submit a planning application to ‘regularise the breach’ – in other words to retrospectively obtain planning permission for development. In these circumstances, the LPA must assess the application in the same way as if it were a proposed development and not let the fact that it is a retrospective application affect the outcome either way.

If the application is approved, that is generally the end of the matter, with consent issued subject to any relevant conditions minus, of course, the usual 3 year commencement time frame. If the application is refused, however, the landowner then has the option to appeal the decision or rectify the breach of planning control (i.e. to correct the unauthorised works or cease the unauthorised use).

In most cases, we recommend that you appeal against the Enforcement Notice. We can help prepare, manage and submit your appeal. For more information on our enforcement service click here.

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

Planning Success: Biodiversity gains in rural Derbyshire

28th November 202225th May 2022 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice is pleased to announce that retrospective planning permission has recently been secured for the retention of two wildlife ponds at Woodhay Farm, Marston Montgomery, Derbyshire, creating biodiversity gains.

Woodhay Farm is in the process of diversification and this latest approval relates to two wildlife ponds reconfigured following the change of use and conversion of a modern steel portal framed building under Class Q that we had obtained prior approval for.

The development provided an opportunity to maximise landscape, wildlife and biodiversity benefits through the reconfiguration of the ponds, creating an attractive landscape feature with excellent wildlife and biodiversity advantages.

A previous land owner diverted effluent from the farmstead into the pond for several decades which resulted in an extremely smelly and unattractive blot on the landscape.

The creation of the two wildlife ponds have significantly improved the character and appearance of the immediate and wider landscape through appropriate management. The ponds were designed to encourage wildlife to thrive on site and the surrounding land providing a great habitat for invertebrates, newts and frogs alongside attracting other wildlife such as snails, insects and birds.

When having regard to the condition of the pre-existing ponds the development has significantly increased the ecological value of the area and will benefit many different habitats within and immediately surrounding the site.

The assessment of Biodiversity Net Gain has become an increasingly important consideration for landowners, developers and Council’s following the publishing of the Environment Act (2021) which came into law in November 2021. An article on the importance and benefits of the Environment Act can be found here.

We have vast experience of working on rural projects for homeowners, landowners and farmers in rural areas. We can provide you with expert advice on issues to be taken into account prior to submission of your application through to receiving the decision. For a free, no obligation consultation to discuss your project, please don’t hesitate to get in touch on 01332 347371.

Andrew Stock, Principal Planner, Planning & Design Practice Ltd.

A porch too far?

29th November 202221st October 2020 by Gary Stringer

We recently secured a retrospective planning permission for a client who had started to build a porch structure around the front door of their Class Q barn conversion. The converted building was formerly a piggery before the landowner approached us to submit a successful Prior Notification Application under Permitted Development Rights legislation. During the design process, great care was taken to ensure the agricultural character of the building was preserved. This was achieved by utilising the existing openings on the structure for windows and doors, and we proposed the converted building be clad in timber to soften its appearance in the landscape.

Permission was duly granted and the works carried out within the 3 year timeframe required by the legislation. However an issue arose when a member of the Local Authority’s Enforcement Team became aware that the landowner had begun to erect a porch structure around the front entrance of the property. For many domestic properties similarly modest extensions would be permissible under the General Permitted Development (England) Order 2015. However, the problem in this particular situation was two-fold. Firstly, extensions to the primary elevation of a dwellinghouse are not permitted by virtue of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A.1 (e). Secondly, the legislation is clear that any former agricultural building that is converted under the provision of Class Q does not benefit from Permitted Development Rights.

To remedy the situation, we produced a full planning application to gain retrospective permission for the extension. Our argument focused on how the porch was acceptable from a design perspective, in so far as it was subservient to the original dwelling in size and scale, and that the use of the same timber cladding would tie the porch in visual with the rest of the site. We also highlighted the functional need of the space. The landowner is still involved in the agriculture business and needed the porch as a “boot-room” space where they could easily get in and out of muddy boots and clothes. We successfully explained that the extension was compliant with the requirements of the Authority’s countryside and landscape protection policies. We also took the opportunity to apply for an extension to the dwellings domestic curtilage, which is also restricted under Class Q, which now means the landowner can enjoy the area of land which encompasses their building more freely than the legislation permits.

Sometimes people undertake building work or they use land in a different way without applying for planning permission when they should.

The planning system is complex and mistakes happen. We are always willing to provide help and advice, and are able to provide an initial consultation without charge. Please contact us if you have a project or property you would like to discuss.