Planning case studies
13th December, 2016
To quickly access the case you wish to view, please click on the links below.
Objection to planning application, Newcastle
Retrospective planning permission, Gateshead
Replacement dwelling, Northumberland
Conversion of existing barn to form agricultural worker dwelling, Yorkshire Dales National Park
Residential development, Sunderland
Replacement agricultural buildings, Northumberland
Housing development, County Durham
Renegotiation of S106 Agreement, Housing development, Newcastle
Houses in Multiple Occupation, Newcastle
Planning Permission sought for Children’s Home (Class C2), Newcastle
Unauthorised garden extension, County Durham
Unauthorised Private Gypsy Site, North Yorkshire
Unauthorised Private Gypsy Site, Darlington
Private Gypsy Site, Darlington
Unauthorised erection of a house, Northumberland
Section 215 Notice served requiring demolition of building, Durham
Section 215 Notice served requiring alterations to building, Gateshead
Windfarm proposals, Northumberland
Occupancy condition on dwelling, Northumberland
The Situation – Objection to Planning Application in Newcastle
Client: Private Individual
A planning application was submitted for the erection of a replacement community building in Newcastle. The proposed replacement building was substantially larger than the original and was to be positioned closer to the boundary.
The Solution
Instructions were received from the owner of the neighbouring property to object to the proposal they being concerned amongst other things that the development would harm residential amenity. Following a site visit a detailed letter of objection on planning grounds was prepared and submitted.
The Result
Following receipt of the letter of objection the Council’s Planning Officers reviewed their initial stance in relation to the application, agreed the points being raised, negotiated with the applicant
and secured the withdrawal of the application such that further discussions could take place it being common ground that in principle a replacement building was acceptable.
The Situation – Retrospective Planning Permission, Gateshead
Client: Small Business
A retail unit had been established in a car showroom. The Council had noted this was in breach of planning control and entailed the loss of employment land. The Council were therefore considering enforcement action requiring the cessation of the retail use.
The Solution
A dialogue was opened with officers and subsequently a retrospective planning application was submitted. Amongst other things this included an assessment of available premises and a sequential
assessment of the application site against the alternatives.
The Result
The Council approved the application subject to a number of conditions including the stock which could be sold.
The Situation – Replacement dwelling, Northumberland
Client: Private Individual / Small Business
A replacement dwelling was being erected following the grant of planning permission. Various issues arose and the Council served a Breach of Condition Notice. An application for an amendment to the original planning permission was being treated as invalid despite its original validation.
The Solution
Outstanding conditions on the original planning permission were discharged. It was agreed with the Council the original planning permission was being lawfully implemented. It was also agreed that the amendment application should be re-validated.
The Result
Following presentations at Planning Committee by objectors and ourselves, the application was approved.
Following the discharge of conditions on the new permission, the Breach of Condition Notice was withdrawn.
The Situation – Retention of dwelling, Leeds
Client: Private Individuals
Temporary planning permission had been granted in 1989 for a prefabricated dwelling. Conditions on the planning permission restricted occupancy and required the removal of the dwelling upon the expiry of the permission in 1994. The dwelling had been retained after the planning permission had expired and for a number of years had been rented out to a series of tenants.
The Solution
An application was made for a Certificate of Lawfulness seeking to confirm the lawful use of the property was a dwellinghouse (Use Class C3). The application was made on the basis that the use, building works or activity in breach of condition began more than 10 years before the date of the application.
The Result
The Council granted a Certificate of Lawful Use confirming the retention of the building as a dwellinghouse (C3) was lawful.
The Situation – Conversion of existing barn to form agricultural worker’ dwelling, Yorkshire Dales National Park
Client: Private Individuals
We were brought in to assist in relation to a planning application which had been submitted for the conversion of an existing barn into an agricultural workers dwelling. Amongst other things, Planning Officers considered the proposed development unacceptable they considering it necessary for there to be a Section 106 Agreement restricting the occupancy of a dwelling in third party ownership and / or restricting occupancy of the barn conversion to owner occupied farm land.
The Solution
Over a number of months we worked to narrow down the issues between parties but ultimately the application was recommended for refusal, our clients not willing to enter the Section 106 Agreement officers desired. Our clients were not willing to enter the Section 106 Agreement considering it unnecessary and unreasonable.
The Result
Following a presentation to Planning Committee it was resolved that planning permission be granted.
This resolution was referred back to the subsequent Committee meeting under the Park’s referral back procedure and the decision ratified.
The Situation – Residential development, Sunderland
Client: Public sector organisation
An appraisal was undertaken of our client’s land portfolio. This exercise identified a number of possible development opportunities, some in the short term and some in the longer term.
The Solution
A planning application for residential development on one of the identified sites was submitted.
The Result
Planning permission was granted.
The Situation – Replacement agricultural buildings, Northumberland
Client: Private Individual
Our client’s agricultural buildings had burned down in a fire. Following complaints about rebuilding work the Council invited a re-application and works were put on hold.
Our client submitted a planning application seeking planning permission for rebuilding the buildings similar in size and scale to those which had been damaged in the fire. The planning application was subsequently refused at Planning Committee.
The Solution
An appeal was submitted against the Council’s decision.
The Result
The appeal was allowed and planning permission granted, subject to conditions.
The Situation – Unauthorised dwelling, Durham
Client: Small Business
Our client had positioned and moved into a chalet on his farm and the Council were threatening enforcement action to secure the removal of the chalet and the cessation of the use.
The Solution
A business need for the dwelling was presented along with a wider justification for the dwelling in a series of retrospective planning applications.
The Result
A temporary planning permission was granted.
The Situation – Housing Development, County Durham
Client: Private Individual
Advice had been given to a land owner in relation to the development potential of a parcel of land in a Durham village.
After a number of years of monitoring the Development Plan, making representations to the Local Planning Authority’s SHLAA and emerging Local Plan, it was deciding there was a window of opportunity to seek a planning permission on the site.
An initial application on the 0.4 hectare of land was withdrawn to allow for discussions in relation to issues arising and notably in relation to the proposed layout.
A further application was made but this was unanimously refused by the Council’s Area Planning Committee.
The Solution
An appeal was made against the refusal of planning permission.
The Result
Evidence was submitted in support of the appeal including in relation to the Development Plan and the landscape impact of the proposal. Having reviewed the evidence and seen the site the Inspector allowed the appeal granting planning permission subject to conditions.
The Situation – Housing Development, Northumberland
Client: National house builder.
A national house builder had made a planning application to redevelop their offices with a residential development.
This gave rise to a number of issues including in relation to the loss of employment land, principle of development, flooding, ecology and amenity issues.
There had been a significant amount of local opposition to the scheme notwithstanding the changes that had been made to the scheme during the application period.
The house builder was concerned that notwithstanding that they had managed to obtain an officers’ recommendation of approval, that this may not be followed at the Committee in view of local opposition including by the Town Council.
The Solution
In view of the importance of the scheme to the house builder we were asked to speak in support of the application at Planning Committee, responding as appropriate to issues raised during the debate including by the objectors during their presentation to Members.
The Result
The Committee resolved to grant planning permission subject to detailed controlling conditions.
The Situation – Renegotiation of S106 Agreement, Housing Development, Newcastle upon Tyne
Client: National house builder.
Outline planning permission had been granted in 2002 for residential development on a 6 hectare brownfield site.
Reserved Matters approval was subsequently obtained in 2010 for in excess of 500 dwellings on the site.
Both the outline planning permission and the Reserved Matters approval were subject to a Section 106 Agreement.
In the light of the guidance in relation to the renegotiation of Section 106 Agreement to help development come forward following the economic downturn, in parallel to an application to extend the life of the permission, the Section 106 Agreement was renegotiated.
The Solution
An application was made to the Council to amend the Section 106 Agreements which was made.
The Result
The Council agreed to amalgamate the two Section 106 Agreement. The Council additionally agreed to
amend the phasing of payments to made spreading them more evenly through the scheme thereby assisting the development to come forward by reducing the up front costs of implementing the planning permission.
The Situation – Houses in Multiple Occupation, Newcastle
Client: Private Individual.
Our clients had made a Certificate of Lawfulness application seeking to confirm that the lawful use of one of their rental properties was within Class C4 (Houses in Multiple Occupation) of the Use Classes Order.
During the course of the application period, the Council advised that the application was to be refused as there had been a period when there had been less than 3 occupants due to maintenance work and a change over of tenants.
The Solution
We became involved when it became evident the application was running into difficulty. The evidence was viewed and a comprehensive response submitted to the Council detailing amongst other things that the C4 (House in Multiple Occupation) Use had not been abandoned and that it remained the lawful use of the property.
The Result
The Council sought a barrister’s Opinion. Whilst we did not see that Opinion the Council subsequently
issued a Certificate of Lawful Use confirming that the lawful use of the property was within Class C4 of the Use Classes Order.
The Situation – Planning Permission sought for Children’s Home (Class C2), Newcastle
Client: Limited company.
Our client had made a planning application for the conversion of a House of Multiple Occupation into a children’s home for up to 5 children aged 12 – 16.
The application encountered substantial local opposition and we became involved shortly before a public meeting about the proposal which had been organised by the LPA. We attended that meeting and subsequently advised on how the matter be progressed.
The Solution
We worked with the case officer and our client and were successful in securing an officer recommendation of approval.
We subsequently attended Planning Committee to speak on our client’s behalf, to respond to any issues raised by the objectors’ planning consultant and to respond to any questions which may be raised.
The Result
The Council’s Planning Committee heard the various views expressed at the Meeting and following a debate resolved to grant planning permission.
The Situation – Unauthorised Garden Extension, County Durham
Client: Private individual.
Our client’s property backed on to farm land. They purchased an area from the farmer and placed a number of structures upon it including sheds, greenhouses and a number of planters. In addition they undertook some planting.
The Council considered there had been a material change in the use of the land to use as domestic garden and served an Enforcement Use requiring the cessation of the use and the removal of the various structures which had been placed.
The Solution
An appeal was made against the Enforcement Notice on various grounds including that there had been no change of use or therefore breach of planning control.
Further grounds of appeal included that without prejudice to the contention that there had not been a breach of planning control, that planning permission should be granted.
The Result
Following the Inspector’s site visit, a letter was received from the Planning Inspectorate advising that in view of case law that had been brought to the Inspector’s attention, he was minded to quash the Notice.
This case law found that allotments came within the statutory definition of agriculture. The Council did not dispute Inspector’s findings and withdrew the Notice before the Inspector quashed the Notice.
Subsequently, following discussions with the Council, a retrospective planning application was made seeking planning permission allowing for the retention of the sheds, greenhouses and planters.
This application was approved shortly thereafter.
The Situation – Unauthorised Private Gypsy Site, North Yorkshire
Client: Private individual.
A gypsy and his family moved onto a site in the York Green Belt and established a private encampment for themselves.
This was in breach of planning control and the Council were considering Enforcement Action which could at the worst require the cessation of the use of the land and the removal of other development which had taken place.
The Solution
Make a retrospective planning application for the change of use of the site to a private gypsy site.
The Result
There was considerable local opposition to the planning application and this was a factor leading to the refusal of the application by the Council.
An appeal was therefore made against the decision and this was considered by way of a hearing.
Having heard the evidence the Inspector allowed the appeal granting retrospective planning permission subject to conditions.
The Situation – Unauthorised Private Gypsy Site, Darlington
Client: Private individual.
A Gypsy family wished to establish a private encampment on a parcel of land which at the time was used as a paddock. A planning application was made for the establishment of a private gypsy site.
The Council refused the application, the family moved on to the site in breach of planning control and the Council served an Enforcement Notice requiring amongst other things that they leave the site and reinstate it to its previous condition.
The Solution
Appeals were made against the refusal of planning permission and against the Enforcement Notice.
The Result
The appeals were linked and considered by way of a Hearing. Having heard the evidence the Inspector allowed the appeal granting retrospective planning permission subject to conditions.
Subsequently a further application was made to comply with conditions to ensure lawful implementation of the permission.
The Situation – Private Gypsy Site, Darlington
Client: Private individual
A gypsy owned a parcel of land which at the time was used for stables and a paddock. He wished to establish a private encampment to complement the stables on site.
An application was made but was refused by the Council. After this decision he moved onto the site in breach of planning control.
The Solution
An appeal was made against the refusal of planning permission and this was considered at a Hearing.
The Result
Having heard the evidence the Inspector allowed the appeal granting planning permission subject to conditions. In addition the Inspector made a costs award against the Council he finding one of the Reasons for Refusal unreasonable.
Subsequently for the same client planning permission was granted following a second application and appeal for an extension to the gypsy site such that additional caravans could be accommodated upon it.
The Situation – Promotion of Land, Hambleton
Client: Private individual.
Following the obtaining of planning permission for a number of residential barn conversions, we are asked to promote land for development on farm land adjoining a market town in the District seeking its future development.
The Solution
Appropriate representations were made to the emerging Core Strategy including at the Examination in Public.
Subsequently further representations were made to the Council’s Site Allocations Development Plan Document.
In a revision of these the site was proposed to be allocated for development and the Plan was subsequently Adopted by the Council.
The Result
The Council granted planning permission subject to a Section 106 Agreement for a mixed use development including 925 dwellings, an extra care facility,
a medical centre, school, retail and business use across an area extending to 72.5 hectares.
The Situation – Unauthorised Erection of a House, Northumberland
Client: Private Individual.
Outline planning permission for an agricultural worker’s dwelling in Northumberland. Reserved Matters consent was subsequently granted.
The dwelling was however built materially larger than the approved scheme.
This came to the Authority’s attention and they were considering Enforcement Action which at the worst could require the demolition of the house, it not benefiting from planning permission and the original consents having expired.
The Solution
Make a retrospective planning application for the retention of the dwelling with appropriate supporting information.
The Result
After a lengthy application period and numerous discussions with the Council retrospective planning permission was granted permitting the retention of the house.
The Situation – Section 215 Notice Served Requiring Demolition of Building, Durham
Client: Private Individual.
A series of planning applications had been refused seeking planning permission for the conversion of a building into a dwelling.
Ward Hadaway became involved when the Council served a Section 215 Notice requiring the demolition of the building.
If the building was demolished, there would then be no future opportunity to seeks planning permission for its conversion. In turn acknowledging the site was in the Green Belt, the site would have little if any future development potential.
The Solution
Appropriate grounds of appeal were prepared and subsequently an appeal was made to the Magistrates Court seeking that the Section 215 Notice be withdrawn.
The Result
Evidence in support of the appeal was presented to the Magistrates Court. The Magistrates upheld the appeal and the Notice was withdrawn allowing the building to remain as an asset to be re-used.
The Situation – Section 215 Notice Served Requiring Alterations to Building, Gateshead
Client: Small housebuilder.
Planning permission had been granted allowing the conversion of a former Pit Head Baths which was Local Listed into a number of flats.
The building was subsequently damaged in a fire and fell into a state of disrepair. The Council served a Section 215 Notice requiring either works to the building within a specified period or its demolition.
The specified works did not reflect the grant of planning permission and the timescales were not achievable. The alternative requirement to demolish was not attractive the site being in the Green Belt and in a Conservation Area.
The Solution
Appropriate grounds of appeal were prepared and subsequently an appeal was made to the Magistrates Court seeking amendment to the Section 215 Notice.
The Result
Following negotiations with the Council the original Section 215 Notice was withdrawn and a revised Notice issued.
Amongst other things allowed works to take place in accordance with the planning permission such that the client could either make the building good, or progress further and build out the permitted scheme.
Timescales for undertaking the works were additionally extended.
The Situation – Windfarm Proposals, Northumberland
Client: Private individual.
A planning application was made for the erection of a 78 metre high wind turbine in the countryside designated as Green Belt. Instructions were received to object to the application and to seek the refusal of planning permission.
The Solution
A written objection was made to the proposed wind farm on planning grounds. The application was subsequently referred to the Council’s Planning Committee with an officer recommendation of approval. Advantage was taken of the opportunity to speak at Planning Committee.
The Result
In the light of representations made, including in relation to the impact the development would have an neighbour amenity and having regard to the emerging Wind Turbines (Minimum Distances from Residential Properties) Bill
which it was argued was a material consideration, the Committee resolved to refuse planning permission and a refusal notice was subsequently issued.
The Situation – Occupancy Condition on Dwelling, Northumberland
Client: Private individual.
A dwelling was subject to a condition which required that occupancy of the dwelling be limited to a person solely mainly employed in the equestrian business premises located adjacent to the site.
General occupation of the dwelling was not allowed and as worded the condition did not allow our client to retire, the condition requiring employment in the equestrian businesses premises located adjacent to the dwelling.
The Solution
An application was under Section 73 (1) of the Town and Country Planning Act seeking the deletion of the condition.
The Result
The Council approved the application and granted a new planning permission allowing for occupation to allow unrestricted occupancy of the house.
The Situation – Removal Section 52 Agreement restricting occupancy to Local Needs, Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority
Client: Private individual
Planning permission was granted in 1990 for the conversion of a barn into two dwellings. Because of an Interim Housing Policy in force at the time the applicants as part of obtaining the planning permission were required to enter a Section 52 Agreement restricting occupancy to persons with a local need.
The Interim Housing policy was subsequently found flawed and was withdrawn.
It also became evident that decision making in relation to barn conversions and the requirement to enter a Section 52 Agreement had been inconsistent.
In 1997 a request was made to remove the Section 52 Agreement but was refused.
The Solution
1. Objections were made to the emerging Housing Development Plan Document that the Plan should include a policy on circumstances where there had been an inconsistent application of local needs occupancy restrictions
2. A further request was made to remove the Section 52 Agreement.
The Result
Evidence was submitted in support of the request and at the third Committee meeting where the matter was considered, it was resolved to agree to the removal of the Section 52 Agreement and the Authority subsequently issued the following press release:
“Planning Committee Members at the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority (YDNPA) yesterday (Feb 13) agreed to lift a 23-year-old restriction on two homes in Hawkswick, near Kettlewell.
A Section 52 restriction, agreed to by the owners in 1990, on Hawksnest and Holme Barn, limited occupation to people with a local housing need.
But the current owners, Mick Hawkins, his wife Ginette and sister-in-law Michelle Pickles argued that the agreement was unfair because other barns in the village were converted into homes at the same time without the same restriction.
They asked for the agreement to be removed and the majority of the Committee Members agreed.
Speaking after yesterday’s vote, Committee Chairman Harold Brown said: “This was one of the most difficult applications we have had to deal with for many years. The officers’ recommendation was consistent with the Authority’s policy to support and protect housing for local people and that remains a cornerstone of our approach to housing policy.
“However, Members had to balance the absolute importance of retaining local housing in the National Park against the unique circumstances of this case.”
The required legal documentation was subsequently prepared and agreed, removing the original agreement.
Please note that this briefing is designed to be informative, not advisory and represents our understanding of English law and practice as at the date indicated. We would always recommend that you should seek specific guidance on any particular legal issue.
This page may contain links that direct you to third party websites. We have no control over and are not responsible for the content, use by you or availability of those third party websites, for any products or services you buy through those sites or for the treatment of any personal information you provide to the third party.
