Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in “Planning Appeals Case Studies”

Two Story Side and Single Storey Rear Extension Planning Appeal Walsall Borough Council

We were contacted by our client after their recent application had been refused by Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council planning department and a decision notice had been issued to our client refusing the application. The refusal was issued on the 4th November 2020 and as a House Holder Application, the appeal had 12 weeks from the decision notice to be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate. Our client felt the decision was very unjustified as they feel the property is situated on a significantly oversized plot. Additionally he felt the council was causing unnecessary expense by requesting a bat report survey and did not substantiate the reasoning as to why they needed that report during the determination process as the likelihood of bats on or around this property in this built up locality was minimal. The client instructed us to proceed with around 8 weeks to produce the appeal documents. We always…

Retrospective Rear Extension Planning Appeal Birmingham City Council

We were contacted by our client after their recent retrospective application had been refused by Birmingham City Council and a decision notice had been issued to our client refusing the application, a previous Lawful development Application had also been refused for this development. Our client was aware the next step was for Birmingham City Council to issue an enforcement notice to take the development down and wanted to avoid that if at all possible. The refusal reasons given by the Birmingham City Council this case were that the proposed extension does not comply with the 45 Degree Code for House Extensions and would lead to a loss of outlook and light to No 194 Alexander Road. For this appeal we produced a 13 page detailed appeal statement, working our way through the delegated officers report and decision notice, dismantling their objections and reasons to refuse. Providing a comprehensive and robust…

New Dwelling All Matters Reserved Planning Appeal AONB Somerset West and Taunton

Planning Appeal Case Study for a New Dwelling All Matters Reserved AONB Somerset West and Taunton Planning Application we were contacted by our client after their recent application had been refused by Somerset West and Taunton Council and a decision notice had been issued to our client refusing the application. The refusal was issued on the 21st October 2020 and as a Full Application, the appeal had 6 months from the decision notice to be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate. Our client informed us that they felt the decision was unfair and felt the refusal was fuelled by members of the local parish council who had voiced strong objections. The client did not waist any time and instructed us to appeal on 30th October 2020 and as such we had plenty of time to produce a comprehensive and robust appeal. The refusal reasons were focused on the fact the dwelling…

Enforcement Planning Appeal Rear Extension Barking Dagenham

This case started for us when we were contacted by our client because they had received from Barking and Dagenham Enforcement team an enforcement notice stating that there was believed to be a breach in planning control. The enforcement notice stated that the rear extension due to its size, design and scale of the development results in an increased sense of overbearingness and harmful to both neighbouring properties and the appearance of the house. Barking and Dagenham Enforcement were also claiming that the development was contry to Policies BP8 and BP11 of the LDF Borough Wide Development plan Policies DPD dated March 2011. The enforcement notice from Barking and Dagenham Council stated that to comply our client should 1) Remove the unauthorised extension in its entirety, or reduce the dimensions to 3m in overall height and 3m in depth. 2) Remove all subsequent waste material from the premises. Barking and…

Planning Appeal Change of Use Garage to Annex in the London Borough of Brent Case Study

This appeal is for a full planning application against the London Borough of Brent. The application was for an application to convert a detached double garage into ancillary residential accommodation and was refused by the London Borough of Brent for the following reasons; The outbuilding for residential accommodation is country to Brents development plan policy BMP18 of Brents Development Management Policies 2016 and could not be secured as ancillary accommodation due to the positioning of the outbuilding and the provision of a separate gated entrance making it capable of being independently accessed from the highway. The outbuilding is considered to provide an unacceptably poor standard of residential accommodation, due to the lack of satisfactory outlook, privacy and amenity space for residents, contry to policies DMP1 and DMP19 of Brent’s Development Management Policies 2016. The application does not make adequate provision for parking to serve the proposed residential unit and the…

Removal of a Condition Planning Appeal to Create a New Dwelling in East Suffolk Council Area

in this video we take a look at a Removal of Condition Planning Application Appeal for a dwelling in the open countryside, with a local neighbourhood plan present and that is a European protected zone located in East Suffolk Council’s area. This appeal is for a Removal of Condition Planning Application against East Suffolk Council. The application was for a Removal of Condition Planning Application Appeal for a dwelling in the open countryside, with a local neighbourhood plan present and that it is a European protected zone and was refused by East Suffolk Council for the following reasons; Outside of the defined settlement boundary contained in a local Neighbourhood Plan. The proposal would create an unrestricted residential unit of accommodation in the countryside. Not a sustainable location Within a European protected area The Policies used to refuse were Local policies SP19, DM3, MEL1, DM27. National policies Section 15 of the…

Householder Front Rear Side and Loft with Dormer Planning Appeal Welwyn Hatfield Council Case Study

This video is a case study detailing a recent planning appeal in for a part two story and part single story side and rear extension, 2 story front extension and construction of a rear dorms and loft conversion in the Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council Planning Area. This case started for us when we were contacted by our client after their recent part two story and part single story side and rear extension, 2 story front extension and construction of a rear dormer and loft conversion was refused. Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council issued the refusal on 24th August 2020 for the following reasons; Rear dorma’s width and scale not being subservient to the roof of the dwelling and would distract from the areas character. Providing a poor standard of design. Policies D1 and D2 of Welwyn Hatfield District Plan 2005, Supplementary Design Guidance 2005 and the National Planning Policy Framework. Full…

Extension Planning Appeal

A planning application had been submitted by an architect who was looking to extend the house to the rear and side. The justification from a planning perspective did not address some of the environmental issues in the neighbourhood, nor the impact upon amenity. We undertook an objective assessment of the reasons the Council used to refuse the permission and presented a case that dealt with these issues. This included resolving the environmental concerns that were quoted. Permission was granted at appeal and the development was carried out.  

Small Infill Development Planning Appeals

The architect had produced a good design for the development but had not presented a full planning statement addressing the national planning policy framework considerations. As a result, permission was initially refused. We dealt with the appeal and permission was granted.

Infill Residential Development Planning Appeals

When we were instructed to undertake the appeal, it became clear an alternative strategy may provide a better chance of success. So, we presented what is known as a Wheatcroft case. By doing so, we gained planning permission for the client. This did require some additional work on the plans which led to some additional costs, but the client got the permission and from that enhanced value for the site, so the additional costs were worthwhile.