You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I live in a listed building & I want to build a pergola on an existing area of decking. This is situated in a garden that is separate to the cottage garden (through a gated fence, over a shared access track & beyond an existing garage).
In any other circumstance this would be considered a permitted development, except that in my case ”the building, enclosure, pool or container would be situated within the curtilage of a listed building”.
So a few years ago a planning officer at my local authority explained that in the circumstances whereby it would normally be a permitted development but you live in a listed building, you then submit a “listed building” application, which is exactly the same as a full application, plans etc. but is free. The reason for it being free is that otherwise you’re being penalised for something which is beyond your control (i.e. I didn’t chose for my house to be listed).
However, my local planning officer is saying I need to submit a full application & pay the £200+ fee. His reasoning is:
The pergola is not within the curtilage or attached to a listed building (I assume because of it location beyond the bounded cottage garden area).
But by virtue of Schedule 2 Part 1, class E(G) of the GPDO, planning permission is required:
”G) The building, enclosure, pool or container would be situated within the curtilage of a listed building”
So on the one hand, I am being told that my pergola is not considered within the curtilage, so therefore listed consent is not required, but in the other hand, because it is within the curtilage of a listed building planning permission is required…
This to me is wholly contradictory, yet I feel I’m getting nowhere. Can anyone with professional knowledge of this area of planning provide me with any insight?
Is what I have been told previously about listed consent correct, or is it a misinterpretation?
ta
I think you'll find that although the structure isn't part of the house it is within the curtilage and therefore is of interest to a planning officer. And they'll interpret the rules as they see fit. You can probably get some sort of pre-planning advice along the lines of "am i likely to be granted permission for a pergola?" for free but I suspect if the answer is encouraging and you want to press ahead you will have to then submit detailed plans for a fee. I Am Not a Planning Expert.
NB Unless it is a very recent development, although you didn't choose for the house to be listed you did choose to buy a listed house and all that comes with it.
Will anyone be able to see it?
A listed consent application has been submitted, which is effectively a full planning application, but without the fee.
My confusion is based upon what I’ve previously been told, and the way in which a different planning officer within the same authority is interpreting the guidelines. My contention is that it is either within or without the curtilage. If it is within the curtilage, then listed consent is required; if it without the curtilage then no permission is required because it falls within a permitted development.
Unless it is a very recent development, although you didn’t choose for the house to be listed you did choose to buy a listed house and all that comes with it.
I’ve got no problem with all that comes with it but I do have a problem with inconsistencies within the rules. It appears to boil down to a very subjective application/interpretation, which does not seem right or fair.
As far as I understand from what you've said, it's either a free application or an unrequired application. Does it matter either way so long as they're prepared to put their decision in writing?
Do want they ask, dont anger the planning gods (or the building control ones). If you do you will get nowt. Do what they ask and don't argue finer points and you have a better chance of getting what you want.
Does it matter either way so long as they’re prepared to put their decision in writing?
Yes it’s the difference between paying £200+ or nothing.
Do what they ask and don’t argue finer points and you have a better chance of getting what you want.
My issue is that their reasoning is contradictory. It just doesn’t make sense - it can’t be in & out of the curtilage simultaneously. I’m being required to pay a fee for something that I’m not supposed to pay. The fee is more expensive than the project..!
Most of the buildings near me are listed. There is a massive variation in what people bother to go to planning for. Some people will get planning to paint their windows the same colour as they are already painted, others don't get planning at all for fairly extensive refurbishments. I feel some of onus is on the owner to do the right thing. A previous owner of my house put up a pergola without consent, nobody batted an eyelid. Then they covered the entire garden in decking with benches that meant people could stand on them and see directly into the neighbours house. The neighbour forced them to get retrospective permission which was rejected and they had to remove it. So if what you are doing is sympathetic, reversible and nobody is likely to complain then why bother going to planning.
So a few years ago a planning officer at my local authority explained that in the circumstances whereby it would normally be a permitted development but you live in a listed building, you then submit a “listed building” application, which is exactly the same as a full application, plans etc. but is free.
This just sounds wrong, I'm not aware of a free listed building process at my local authority.
If your pergola cost less than £200 just put it up, and if told take it down. At that cost it must be tiny. If you are asked to take it down, its likely you won;t get retrospective planning
I've found planning and BC is very subjective to who you are speaking to, I'd advise to just play along, if you start pointing out their inconsistencies there is a reasonable chance they might find something to throw a spanner in the works of your project.
Planners are much more interested in external works than internal works (as long as you don't remove or irreversibly alter interesting stuff) and they are much more relaxed about temporary structures than permanent ones. Also the interpretations vary between authorities and over time. And true, there is a lot of work undertaken without asking beforehand. Although the pergola may not be within the immediate curtilage they might interested in the fact that you want to add a man made feature to what might be considered field or paddock. It's pedantry but that's a pre-condition of being a planning officer i suspect.
Will anyone be able to see it?
No public paths or right of ways go anywhere near; neighbours could just about see it if they looked - they’ve been consulted & there’s been no objections.
This just sounds wrong, I’m not aware of a free listed building process at my local authority.
Listed consent is free otherwise you’re being penalised. I’ve previously submitted 3 such applications without any fuss or bother. Totally free.
If your pergola cost less than £200 just put it up, and if told take it down. At that cost it must be tiny.
It is just over 9 sq metres. So yes, relatively tiny. I already have much of the wood needed, hence the low cost.
Yes it’s the difference between paying £200+ or nothing.
But unless I've misunderstood you (which is wholly possible), that's my point. If they're insisting that you pay for planning permission then ipso facto you don't need planning permission.
(i.e. I didn’t chose for my house to be listed).
You chose to buy a listed property though - unless it was listed while you were living in it!
I bought a house last year in a conservation area which means anything that you'd normally crack on with through permitted development has to have a lawful development sign-off (planning permission by another name). Which I've just done for a small (3m x 3m) extension. Not as expensive as full planning, but a hoop you have to jump through.
From my local council - your local council should have a similar page...
https://www.ambervalley.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/listed-buildings/#:~:text=There%20is%20no%20fee%20for,make%20a%20planning%20application%20page.
Yes we bought the house knowing it was listed. Having previously successfully submitted 3 different planning applications for different projects, for listed consent I’m no stranger to what it entails; I’ve never before had an issue or cause to moan. This application has thrown up some quirks that seem to contradict previous advice.
What prompted my question is what I see as a contradiction; to repeat what I’ve been previously advised - if it would otherwise be considered a permitted development, but falls within the curtilage of a listed building then planning permission in the form of listed consent is required but nothing more.
To obtain this you still have to submit, via the Planning Portal, full plans, site plans, scale design drawing etc. the only difference (again, having done this a few times) is a drop down menu that asks whether it is a full planning application or whether it is for Listed Building Consent. The only real difference is for a full application, it cost £200+ whereas for listed building consent it is free.
The question over fees boils down to the National desire to maintain/protect structures of historic or architectural interest combined with the acknowledgment that in order to do this, people need to be able to live in them. That is, they need to be habitable by todays standards. In other words, if a house/building/structure isn’t habitable then nobody will want to live there. If nobody wants to live there then these buildings will call into disrepair.
So, whenever you want to do anything to a listed building or anything within the curtilage of a listed building, you go through this planning process to ensure you’re not ruining a historic building. It keeps an eye on folk. I’m fine with this & fully on board.
My problem is that either my pergola is within the curtilage, & therefore requires (free) listed consent, or it is not within the curtilage & therefore requires no consent. In one sentence I’m being told it’s not within the curtilage, but then in the next that it is…
EDIT: My point above about habitable buildings is that if the owner of a listed building had to pay a full planning fee every time they made a repair to their house (such as when I did a like for like replacement of my windows), it unfairly penalises people who live in them, which can hardly be seen to encourage people to live in them, can it? This is not a mansion we’re talking about but a tiny rubble built workers hovel.
An important point which I might not have made clear is that if any project would ordinarily require planning permission then yes, you still have to pay like everyone else, but if it is o it required by virtue of it’s listed status, then no, it should be free.
I have already submitted the application, all neighbours have been consulted & there are no objections (as far as they’re telling me). It just kinda feels like I’m being rinsed of some money that I shouldn’t have to pay.
Is the whole plot listed? Is there a single title for the house and the bit of land you want to out the pergola on? Or is there another boundary which identifies the extent of the listed status?
If listed status applies to the whole plot then it should be a listed consent application. If the curtilage of the listed bit doesn't include where you want to build the pergola than it should be permitted development.
Personally, I'd review the deeds and proceed according to my own interpretation and let them challenge it. I wouldn't be asking for any more advice or clarification from the planners.
It seems to depend on whether the track separating the two parcels of land is a public road or not. If its a public road then its not within the curtilage, if its something else then it might be!
It’s always been considered to form part of the listed status, hence me submitting listed building application.
At a recent appeal by the owners of Thornbridge Hall, Derbyshire, the LPA argued that the listing included not just the hall but all the grounds, gardens, grassland etc. The planning inspector did not agree, allowed the appeal on the basis the development was not close to the hall.
It doesn’t really matter what it’s considered to be, until it’s tested in court then it’ll only ever be an opinion if there is doubt which there clearly is in this case. One planning officer has one opinion, another has a different one! Luckily we only have one conservation officer in our planning department 🤣
It seems to depend on whether the track separating the two parcels of land is a public road or not. If its a public road then its not within the curtilage, if its something else then it might be!
Surely then a close inspection of the definitive map of the local RoW would clarify that. If it’s tarmacced, then it’s most likely a public road, but if not it’s an unadopted road, a BOAT or RUPP, or a footpath.
Actually, looking at a 1:25k OS map might give you all the info you need. Does it connect to places away from the property at both ends, for example? If only at one end, then it may have just been created as a ‘desire line’, just a handy line that developed between two points that people tended to use regularly over time, and not used by others within the local community.
Do want they ask, dont anger the planning gods
Agree. They are people who have more power than they should ever have been given. I bought a house with planning permission for a very big extension that was approved in 97. The work was started and the first part was build of a bathroom and it was then stopped and like that when I bought it in 2001. When I then wanted to proceed with the build 20 years later it was a nightmare with planning. The area is now a conservation area so I am not allowed anywhere near as big an extension so it was important to be allowed to proceed with original plan but it started off by the planning office not believing the work had been started (even though the building was there!) and went downhill from there for a few years (no records of sign off as records only get for 10 years and so on)
Took 18 months to get resolved and after all that time and cost I can now go ahead with what I should have been able to go ahead with anyway if it wasn't for ridiculous planning office.
If the area is not within the curtalige of the property then the permitted development right probably doesn't need exist. Most of the common permitted development rights are for within the curtalige. So the planning officer is right that if it's outside the curtalige it needs an application.
To be honest for £200 if the pain of fighting one of the oddest institutions is not worth it.
TBH I wouldn't have even discussed it with them, you're putting up a (very) temporary structure (4 corners bolted onto steels out of the ground), it's barely more 'structural' than a quality gazebo.
But you did, how much is £200 worth to you and how long do you want to argue about it before you can put it up?
Does it connect to places away from the property at both ends, for example? If only at one end, then it may have just been created as a ‘desire line’, just a handy line that developed between two points that people tended to use regularly over time, and not used by others within the local community.
No it’s an entirely private track - we’re part of a row of 300+ year old cottages, all of which have a “cottage garden”, which would have originally been the extent of their property. However, at some point in the last 100 years the local landowner sold each of the cottages to the tenant & included the land to the rear of the cottage garden. The track is made up of several pieces of land belonging separately to each householder, but with a covenant or provision within the deeds that it must be kept open for access by residents & their guests.
My pergola won’t even be visible from this track.
My pergola won’t even be visible from this track.
This is one of those instances where you have to deploy some common sense (a rare talent these days, I know) and just get the thing built.
That has occurred to me, but I’ve now flagged up that I’m doing it… knowing my luck I’ll get a spot check.