Tweet
My neighbour built a large dormer extension which has three large picture windows less than 5m from our boundary overlooking our property. Planning permission was applied for using plans showing a small dormer 1/3 the size of what was built. We did not object to that as it seemed reasonable. When we reported a breach of permission to the Planning Authority, they said it didn't need planning permission because a prior set of plans had been submitted for a 'permitted development' certificate. I pointed out that planning legislation doesn't work that way and if the development exceeds 60 cu metres, it needs planning permission. Eventually, the Planning Authority agreed and a letter was sent to my neighbour and, after a delay to allow the construction to be completed, a retrospective planning application was eventually submitted. The original permission for the small dormer had been granted with a condition of obscure glazing because of the overlooking issue. Although it was close (two Planning Committee meetings and a full site visit) permission was granted in February on a split vote BUT with the same conditions applying to all windows.
Just before midnight on the 1st May (the date set when the condition should have been met) a Section 73 application was sent in for a 'Minor material' amendment to the condition
Section 73 of the TCPA is vague to say the least - my argument was that the Authority should not have allowed the application as it is a misuse of Section 73 because, in this case, the condition had been debated and applied after the development had been completed and nothing has changed since the Authority made its decision in February. True, it would have been a brave Planning Office that would have disallowed it as it could easily have sparked a judicial review - which, in my opinion, would be a real benefit in this case. Surely, you can't just use Section 73 to execute an Appeal against a Planning Authority decision by the back door?? Or can you - the legislation - or more accurately, the 2010 government guidelines were clearly not intended for this but seem to allow it. The development has now gone to full consultation and will go to Committee - again!
Any views or thought would be welcome...
Just before midnight on the 1st May (the date set when the condition should have been met) a Section 73 application was sent in for a 'Minor material' amendment to the condition
Section 73 of the TCPA is vague to say the least - my argument was that the Authority should not have allowed the application as it is a misuse of Section 73 because, in this case, the condition had been debated and applied after the development had been completed and nothing has changed since the Authority made its decision in February. True, it would have been a brave Planning Office that would have disallowed it as it could easily have sparked a judicial review - which, in my opinion, would be a real benefit in this case. Surely, you can't just use Section 73 to execute an Appeal against a Planning Authority decision by the back door?? Or can you - the legislation - or more accurately, the 2010 government guidelines were clearly not intended for this but seem to allow it. The development has now gone to full consultation and will go to Committee - again!
Any views or thought would be welcome...
