Additional Storey – Permitted Development Detached Semi and Terrace (2020)

Starting in 2020 through 2021 I submitted numerous (planning fee-free) prior notification planning applications for the newly announced Permitted Developments for Additional Storey on various types of dwellings.

Almost all of these prior notification applications fail and many go on to a planning appeal. The Planning Inspector decision is largely a second opinion of the initial “Planning Judgement”…

In general, across the country there are 3 kinds of determinations:- 

A) Where the context is ignored and the dwelling or dwellings are considered in isolation – a special kind of blinkered planning officer or inspector is needed for this  “positive” outcome. Here the Inspector, when considering the “external appearance of the building”, indicated that it was not necessary to assess the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area. Summary: 

Examples of A) are 

APP/J1535/D/21/3266264 ‐ 1 The Cedars, Buckhurst Hill, Essex, IG9 5TS

https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3266264

APP/X1735/D/21/3269472 ‐ 6 London Road, Cowplain, Waterlooville PO8 8EW

https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3269472

APP/T1410/W/20/3263486 ‐ Seaforth Court, 91 Victoria Drive, Eastbourne, BN20 8LA

https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3263486

B) Where the context is considered and the additional height does not disrupt the rhythm of the street scheme and in this case forms a crescendo – full stop to a cul-du-sac. Here the Inspector, when considering the “external appearance of the building”, assessed the impact of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the surrounding area and concluded that this would be acceptable. – but Unacceptable is a more likely outcome. Summary: If you don’t appeal you won’t know if – You might be lucky…

An example of B ) is as illustrated here at 5 &6 Miles Hill Square, Miles Hill, Leeds, LS7 2EN

https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3267819

Postscript: This paired additional storey can be combined with a larger single-storey rear extension (up to 6m x the full width)  to the rear to truly supersize this pair of semi-detached houses under permitted development rights.

C) Where the context is largely non-existent eg. a bungalow in green-belt – here the additional storey permitted development comes into its own as it drives a coach and horses through the green belt policy. Summary: If you don’t appeal you won’t know –  You might be lucky the second time round…

Examples of C) are:-

Reva Bungalow, Goose Lane, Hawksworth, Leeds, LS20 8PL at

https://publicaccess.leeds.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=QQTXA3JB0C000

Highfield Farm, Mall Lane, Guiseley, Leeds, LS20 9QA at

https://publicaccess.leeds.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=QOKT6XJB0FZ00

Randomly however other situations can be approved by the Local Planning Authority such as at 

6 Purbeck Grove, Garforth, Leeds, LS25 1HP

https://publicaccess.leeds.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=QVIJUMJB2O200

Ultimately the court decided on how to interpret the legislation and we now have a Court ruling report of Feb 2022

In summary, this states that the context needs to be considered when exercising planning judgement – and a good thing that is too!