DLBP secures rare permission for dual / alternative change of use as medical consulting rooms and / or a family home for a Grade II listed building in a Conservation Area

Location: 
Liverpool City Council

Issue:
Securing a change of use from mixed use medical consulting rooms and residential to dual / alternative use as medical consulting rooms (Class Ee) and / or a single family home (Use Class C3). 

How we helped and added value:
Having successfully obtained a rare permission for the dual / alternative use of a property as medical consulting rooms and / or a family home for the client at their property in Harley Street previously, DLBP was approached again by the same client to obtain a similar permission at a Grade II listed Georgian townhouse in a Conservation Area situated in the heart of Liverpool.  This oft-forgotten facet of planning law can provide a greater deal of flexibility for the use of the property over a ten-year period, enabling the client to make best use of the asset over a significant period of time.

We immediately identified the validation requirements for a change of use application and ensured we had the necessary supporting information to proceed with submission.  The application required careful navigation of the Council’s conservation policy as the building’s heritage value meant that any significant changes to the appearance or layout of the structure would require Listed Building Consent.  Through close collaboration with the local planning authority, the architect and the Council’s Conservation Officer, we presented a proposal that avoided the need for Listed Building Consent.  The Council agreed to the imposition of the aforementioned planning condition that would allow the applicant the flexibility of implementing the different uses for a period of ten years without further planning permission.  We also successfully avoided the imposition of a number of restrictive conditions regarding opening hours, cycle parking, and Service Management Plans which had been imposed on similar planning applications.  

DLBP’s specialist knowledge of the planning system enabled our client to take full advantage of lesser-known procedures and processes, providing an exclusive planning gain to the management of their asset.  Our professional approach and attention to detail ensured that the application was swift, succinct, and successful.

DLBP secures permission for changes at a 3-storey property in Southwest London

Location:
London Borough of Richmond-upon-Thames

Issue:
Securing minor material amendments for internal changes to facilitate improved communal space and reduce on-site parking and navigating the complex interplay between the various conditions attached to the original permission.

How we helped and added value:
We prepared a Section 73 application to amend the ground floor layout of the site at 18-22 Church Street, Hampton. We set out the planning argument and justified the proposed changes to the scheme in the Planning Statement and we regularly liaised with the case officer for updates on consultation responses throughout.

The new permission we secured for the site has meant that the internal changes to the ground floor to facilitate improved communal space and reduce the on-site parking spaces have now been approved by the Council. We also ensured that there is no further need to ‘re-discharge’ the cycle and refuse storage details and Construction Management Plan, both of which were approved in previous discharge of conditions applications. We did this by altering the wording of the conditions to turn them into ‘compliance’ conditions to ensure that development would take place in accordance with the updated plans/details, thus avoiding any conflict with the conditions attached to the original permission and ensuring the approved plans were consistent with our client’s development aspirations.

DLBP secures full planning permission to replace the cladding for an 8-storey mixed use residential and commercial building

Location:
London Borough of Southwark

Issue:
Securing full planning permission to replace the existing fire safety cladding with new polyester powder cladding for an 8-storey residential building with commercial uses on the ground floor.

How we helped and added value:
We immediately identified the validation requirements for a replacement cladding application and ensured we had the necessary supporting information to proceed with submission. We served notice to all residents living in the building to inform them of the application. Following the submission of the planning application, we regularly liaised with the case officer to understand whether further details would be required by the Council’s Building Control Division. In particular, we managed to ensure that no pre-commencement conditions were required in order to avoid the need to discharge these and so that development works on site were able to commence prior to 30 September 2021, the government’s deadline for Building Safety Fund applications.

We then advised the Council of our client's intention to change the proposed cladding material to polyester powder cladding, which provides a stronger finish and is more corrosion resistant than aluminium cladding. Whilst this material would result in a minor change to the external appearance of the building which would usually require new plans to be re-submitted, we successfully co-operated with the Council by submitting further photos to demonstrate that these changes were acceptable and would not harm the character and appearance of the area, particularly with respect to the nearby conservation area. This ensured that the Council did not have to re-consult on these changes and were able to decide the application without delay.

DLBP secures amendments to consented 68 bed elderly care home in record time

Location:
South Oxfordshire District Council

Issue:
Amending plans of consented care home

How we helped and added value:
Our longstanding client sought to amend the location and size of multiple windows of a consented scheme.  We advised that a section 96a (non-material amendment) application would be most suitable for this and so worked closely alongside the architects to prepare a scheme that would meet our client's requirements.

As part of the application, we provided supporting information to demonstrate that the alteration to the scheme would better suit the internal operations of the care home and would not materially change the previously consented scheme.  The Council agreed with us and issued the approval just 3 weeks after submission of the application, without any request for further information, clarifications or amendments required. 

Our considered approach and proactive engagement with the planning officer from an early stage allowed this application to be approved in record time and we can now assist our client with the discharge of conditions applications to allow construction to begin as soon as possible.

DLBP successfully amends a planning permission for a national house builder and care home operator

Location:
South Gloucestershire Council

Issue:
Amending description of development and satisfying section 106 legal agreement to secure the delivery of a high quality 75 bed elderly care home

How we helped and added value:
Our client wished to develop a high-quality care home in a location where outline planning permission had been granted for an "extra care housing facility". While both the care home and extra care housing facility fell within Use Class C2, the difference in the description of development could have meant the need for a brand new outline or full planning application. To avoid this, we advised our client that the care home could be achieved via a reserved matters application but that the description of development for the outline planning permission would first need to be amended via a section 96a (non-material amendment) application to reflect the proposed delivery of a care home in place of the extra care housing.

We secured the Council’s agreement to this strategy. To provide clear evidence that the principle of developing a care home, rather than extra care housing, was acceptable in principle, we sought to first satisfy obligations within the section 106 legal agreement attached to the outline planning permission that required details of the type of care to be provided. To do this, we prepared a care home specification including details of the intended occupiers, level of nursing care to be provided, the internal layout and landscaping. The Council agreed that the obligations of the section 106 legal agreement were satisfied.

We then prepared the section 96a (non-material amendment) application to alter the description. We argued that the amendment sought would not result in a significant change in the operation of the outline planning permission, and would instead allow for flexibility within the already specified Use Class C2. The Council accepted our argument and the application was approved.

The reserved matters application will now follow.

DLBP secures prior approval for large rear extension to a dwelling following previous refusal

Location:
Hounslow Borough Council

Issue:
Overcoming Council’s previous rejection of a similar development

How we helped and added value:
Our client approached us to seek prior approval for a large rear extension at their property after receiving a refusal for a similar scheme on the grounds of it having an overbearing impact, and resulting in a loss of privacy and light, to a neighbouring property.

We conducted a detailed review of the site’s planning history and context, and the Council’s residential extensions policy, to provide advice on a number of design options. It was our view that a scheme could be designed to accord with the regulations whilst also meeting the client’s requirements.

We worked closely with the architect to prepare a prior approval application for the chosen scheme to achieve the largest extension that would comply with both

Class A, Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended), and the Council’s residential extension guidelines, in the event that the Council was required to undertake an assessment of amenity. We also supported the preparation of a Daylight and Sunlight Assessment to demonstrate that the proposed extension would be acceptable in this regard. As a result, the Council accepted that there would be no adverse impacts with regards to loss of light or privacy, despite previously refusing the application on these grounds.

Before the application was determined, the Council requested for the extension to be reduced in width by 2m due to it having an overbearing impact on a neighbouring property. We contested the Council's argument, citing policy and guidance as to why our scheme would not have an overbearing impact. We successfully negotiated a much more modest reduction of just 1.5m for just part of the extension. The Council agreed with our arguments and granted prior approval.

Our thorough and considered preparation of the scheme, followed by regular discussion and negotiations with the Council, successfully achieved the desired development for our client.

DLBP secures permission to extend the hours of use for a roof terrace associated with an office building in the City of London

Location:
City of London Corporation

Issue:
Overcoming the City of London Corporation’s previous reluctance to allow longer hours of use for a roof terrace

How we helped and added value:
Our client approached us to seek consent to extend the hours of operation of a roof terrace. We identified that this could be achieved by varying a condition on the original planning permission. We then sought to agree this approach informally with the City of London, which was initially met with resistance from the planning officers on the basis that the current hours reflected the proximity of residents and the Corporation’s general approach to restricting hours of use of terraces.

We conducted a detailed review of existing planning consents in the vicinity of the area whereby an extension to the operating hours of external terraces had been allowed, and used these to demonstrate that a more flexible approach to the operating hours had indeed already been established in the City. We also advised the client to commission a Noise Assessment to help demonstrate that there would be no justification to restricting the operational hours of the terraces, given the existing background noise levels in the area and clarifying that the use of the terraces would remain the same as existing.

We liaised closely with the City of London Corporation’s Environmental Health Officer, who supported our request to extend the hours of use based on the evidence we had presented. We then held further conversations with the Planning Officer, who - based on the evidence and the view of the Environmental Health Officer - then agreed to the extended hours. He also agreed that no further conditions would be added that might restrict the number of occasions / events that the terraces can be used annually or to limit the number of persons that could occupy the external terraces.

Our considered preparation of the scheme strategy successfully achieved the desired development for our client in the face of the initial resistance received from the Council.

Discharge of conditions allows for construction work to continue on a high quality 70 bed elderly care home

Location:
Huntingdonshire District Council

Issue:
Above ground conditions for a care home to be discharged to allow for construction to continue in line with programme.

How we helped and added value:
We immediately identified the documents and information required to discharge the above ground conditions (encompassing materials, architectural details and appearance of the boundary treatment) and ensured that the contractor and architect were fully briefed to provide this information. We led a number of discussions with the Council’s Urban Design Officer and co-ordinated the production of information to respond to the various queries raised.

We formulated a strategy for the partial discharge of conditions to ensure that the client met their funding requirements as the programme progressed. This required us to work closely and develop good working relationships with the Council, and specifically the Urban Design Officer, to allow for the majority of the conditions to be discharged early. We then remained responsive to the Council’s requests for further information for the remaining conditions, co-ordinating the production of updated information thereby allowing these to then be discharged in April 2021. The Urban Design Officer thanked us for being so proactive in reaching an equitable solution.