Getting on for 20 years ago we had a struggle with our local
authority planners to get detailed planning permission for a house,
although outline had already been granted. The planners (all of whom
were strangely cleared out in a matter of days for reasons unknown
some time back) were opposed to anything non-pastiche which didn't
look like a Barratt house. They wanted a box to match 60s and 70s
estate development, even though the plot wasn’t on an estate, and
wasn’t in any kind of restricted development area. The house was
architect-designed, green, and reflected contemporary design, though
not remotely outrageous.
The upshot was that the officers were overruled by the planning
committee (we were there and put our case) but in what looked very
much like a fit of pique, or at least a face-saving exercise, the
officers persuaded the planning committee to remove the permitted
development rights. The final consent contained this clause:
"No building, extension or structure shall be erected or placed
within the curtilage of the dwelling without express planning
permission from the District Planning Authority."
The reasoning being:
"Due to the nature and limited extent of the site, and in order
that the District Planning Authority may assess the acceptability of
such proposals in the interests of amenity."
The site, incidentally is around a third of an acre, no other houses
within 75 metres, and the footprint of the house is at most 250 square
metres, with garden all round it.
Over recent years we've put up two small sheds and a greenhouse - all
compliant with the permitted development rules. I emailed the local
authority about these and was advised that no planning permission was
needed. I did not, admittedly, refer to the removal of permitted
development rights, but I did give full name and address.
My concern is that there may be problems when we, or our children,
sell the house. My view is, though, rightly or wrongly, that:
1 The removal of permitted development rights was unreasonable and
unenforceable, and
2 The confirmation by the local authority planning department that
the buildings did not need planning consent puts a final seal on it.
I'd very much appreciate the views of someone with expertise in these
matters, as to whether there’s likely to be any problem on sale in a
few years’ time. I’m tempted to challenge the removal of permitted
development rights, but I have no idea what the chances of success
might be, how long it might take, and what it might cost. I’m also
loath to stir up a potential hornets’ nest, particularly when the
email would seem to cover the situation anyway. One of the buildings
has been up for 10 years, and one for 5 – not sure whether this is
also relevant.
