Its a mad, mad, mad planners world

Welcome to the maze that is the world of local council planning.

Following the refusal of our application I decided that I would try for a change of the approved house position to something that suits our needs better, and gives more useable garden. All I've done is to turn the house through 90 degrees and move it nearer the garage. It is still the same basic shape and style of that which was approved in 2006. If anything, its an improvement as it has a smaller footprint and is less obvious from the nearest road. So an appointment with the planning officer this afternoon was eagerly awaited. The first problem was a call this morning to say that the planning officer had called in sick. However, another officer agreed to meet me so off I went.

"Hmmm, hmmmmm, ho hum, hmmm" - said the planning officer, "need to see my boss". 2 minutes later and a shake of the head. No can do - it needs another full planning application with the attendant delay and cost. The only good news was the comment that it would probably get approval! Note the use of the word "probably". There are no certainties in planning it seems.

And so we have a dilemma. The existing planning permission expires in April next year. Once upon a time a renewal was just a simple process, but not any more. A renewal now has to be a full re-application and subject to all the vagaries that any plan is subject to. With a timescale of at least 10 weeks from commissioning a drawing to getting planning permission (or more likely, refusal), we're running dangerously close to that deadline. So, I have devised a cunning plan Baldrick. Apparently, I will get an amendment if I move the existing property along the plot a little (what's "a little?), so I intend to present my revised floor layout in the same line on the plot and seek approval so that in the event of a further refusal we have at least got an alternative. Mind you , we'll have to have the full engineering drawings produced and then get started before April, but that can be done.

In the meantime I will get the revised application under way for where we really want the house and present this for approval. If it fails then we do still have something.

Its like walking in treacle!

Exhausted of Clifton

The Wee House is dead! Long live Wee House II

Yes - I'm sorry to say that the design of Wee House just will not stand the modifications that have been suggested for the roof. It results in an ugly looking house with insufficient room on the upper floor. So, after considering the negative comments from the parish council, and thinking about timescales, we've decided to go for a slight modification of the plan already approved by Mid Beds Council.

The approved design was for a single storey house which occupied a central position on the plot. The layout was not at all to out liking, but at this stage, its the basic outline and elevations that the council are interested in. So, we've shrunk the size to about 75% of the original, and turned it through 90 degrees on the plot so its parallel to, and about 4 metres from, the garage. We've also radically altered the layout to create what we think is a much more useable arrangement. As so was born Wee House II!

As this looks exactly like the approved plan we're hoping that we can get this through as a simple amendment to the original. The other advantage is that if we can get it through, we may not have to pay the dreaded 106 section charge as the approval was given before the 106 was implemented. We'll see what is said by the planning officer on Monday. Fingers crossed.

Trainee architect of Clifton

Mid Beds Council 1 Wee House 0

I discovered earlier in the week that the Parish Council had decided that they objected to our plans because "it will have a detrimental impact on the visual aspect when entering the village". This seems quite perverse as they had already approved the 3 previous plans submitted for our plot, the first two of which were for much larger four bedroomed houses. Enter the world of planning applications, where there's no such thing as consistency. Whilst the Parish Council's opinion is often ignored by the district council, I did feel that things were stacking up against us.

Sadly, and not entirely unexpectedly, worse was to come in the form of a 'phone call today from the Mid Beds planning officer. She explained that she would be recommending rejection of our plans on the basis that there was too much bulk in the house - primarily the roof. Had we submitted plans with hip ends for the roof rather that gable ends, she would have recommended approval. I can't criticise the planning officer at all - she is doing her job to the guidlines she has. I blame our architect who should have discussed this with the planners before submission of the plans as this would have saved us time and money.

I have requested that our plans be withdrawn in favour of a redesign which at last saves us another planning application fee.

We now have a couple of options - modify the existing plan to include hips rather than gable ends, or come up with a new design. I really don't think the existing plan will work with hips so its back to the drawing board it seems.

I have arranged to meet the planning officer on Monday and will have to come up with some outline plans to discuss with her. Trouble is the impending Christmas / New Year holiday is going to delay everything by a several weeks (again!)

Disprited of Clifton

What are the odds of approval?

I arranged to meet the lady responsible for our planning application at Mid Beds Council. She is a little sweetie, but I suspect we may not get our plans approved without some changes. It looks as though there may be a perceived problem with the bulk of the roof in relation to the style of the property for which approal has been granted. This had hips at each end of the house, and at each of the front and rear extended bits, whereas our design has two gable ends. The net result is that our design presents a larger area of roof that might have to be changed, Trouble is, I'm not sure how we could add hips to the roof without ruining the space and features inside the house.

So, the application goes forward to the planning committee comprising senior planners, who are able to approve it, or they may pass it on to the full planning meeting in January, at which all the councillors will be in attendance, and I can plead our case. Fingers very much crossed. If I were a betting man I would say there is a 40-50% chance.

A couple of legal bits

First bit of good news is that I have discovered what's known as "inherited access rights". In essence, the right of access over the driveway was given to the new owners of 5 Brookvale when they bought their house in 1992. That right of access was granted to the whole property and a plan of the plot accompanied the deed. This clearly shows the section of garden we have bought as belonging to number 5. Apparently, any sub-set of that original plot is automatically granted "inherited rights" of access. In other words, we have legitimate right of access over the drive leading to all the cottages at Brookvale and our very nasty near-neighbour who has been making noises about our lack of access can go fish (or something)!

Second development today was the receipt from our solicitor of the Deed for the infamous 106 Agreement. Its only taken 5 weeks for the combined skill of our solicitor and Mid Beds legal team to produce an exact replica of the form that I downloaded 6 weeks ago! Now this document commits us to pay our local council the sum of £3505 for the privilege of building our house. Not only that, but I have to pay the council £310 for submitting this document, and a further £175 to allow them to "monitor" its execution. That means collecting the cheque from me. I really wish I could try this at work - I'd make a fortune. Oh, and of course, there's my solicitor's costs as well.

Abba come to mind - Money, money, money........

Penniless of Clifton

Its curtains for Jim - he appears to have lost his ruler!

An envelope arrived in the post yesterday. Who could this be from? Ah, the revised plan for the house no less. I looked at the changes and words almost failed me. I wasn't quite speechless you understand, but VERY unprintable words were uttered. Our architect had scaled the house more or less correctly but had positioned it in the the wrong place on the plot! Given that the council approve the exact position of the house and any change requires a request for an amendment, this was a serious professional error. Not only had he moved the house nearer the driveway, but also moved it much closer to the garage to create two potential problems. Firstly, there was insufficient room to turn a car round without reversing onto the driveway (yes I know, its not Regent Street exactly, but you have to play the game), and secondly, the house was now nearer the existing cottages and there is some regulation or other about being no closer than 25 metres. So Jim had done it again.

A rather curt email this morning, and yet another revision is being done, but will be copied to me before going to the council. What is particularly galling is the fact that within the "design and access statement" we've had to submit with the plans, the distance between the house and the garage is clearly show and Jim had written (corrected by me as you might now imagine). I had also given him a drawing showing the measurements of the house on the plot, so no reason at all for this mistake apart from carelessness. Jim is soon to be our ex-architect.

But...with every cloud, comes another one. Well, not really. After nearly 4 weeks of pestering by my solicitor, the council have finally responded to his request for an answer to a question about the dreaded 106 agreement. So, now we'll have to wait and see just what the council make of our one-bedroomed house and whether they try to suggest its too big for just one bedroom! I feel another battle coming on.

Another odd call today with a local firm specialising in building project management. They were replying to an email I sent at the weekend. Right from the start the man seemed quite aggressive as I explained that I was looking for someone to manage the project but that I had various trades lined up so really needed the project management skill only. He rather pompously told me that they wouldn't entertain such an idea, but wanted the whole project - tenders to local builders, choice of sub contractors, total management of the build, etc. "OK" I said, "if I were to take that approach what would be the cost". "6% of the build cost" he said. "Right" says I "if I send you the plans, can you estimate the build cost". "Only if you pay us" was the somewhat suprising reply. "Sorry" says I, "I think I've got confused here. I want you to tell me how much your charges will be based on the estimated build cost which you can surely calculate very quickly based on the size of the house." "Thats right, but you'll have to pay us for that information". To summarise then, this man wanted me to pay him to work out how much he should charge me. Having suggested that for those of us living in the real world, his attitude was rather hard to understand, I told him that the only real value in the call was that it had made me schedule another customer service course for my staff, and bade him goodbye. Amazing.

However...there was a silver lining late this afternoon when I took a call from a local firm of building surveyors who had been recommended to me. Not only can they produce the detailed building control drawings we need with all the engineering aspects, (Jim would have done this but as he's soon to be an ex...) but also have good contacts in the form of a recently retired house builder who would be pleased to take on the project management and help me set up accounts with local builders merchants using his many years of knowledge. He's happy for me to employ my own sub contractors and pay them directly, so the day ended on slightly higher note than it started. His name is Roy. I hope his surname isn't Rogers!!!

Bemused of Clifton