site boundaries

kili

if a party (who is granted permission to construct a one-off house) is purchasing the site (which is part of a larger field) from a farmer consequent to the grant of permission, do the boundaries of the site actually purchased have to match exactly the boundaries as shown in the planning application? Could this affect certificate of compliance with planning even if house is located and built in compliance with planning?

Poor Uncle Tom

The boundaries should be the same. A Declaration of Identity can not issue if the boundaries are not the same.

From a planning permission point of view if the boundaries are not where they were granted planning then it may not be possible to comply with all requirements, open sapce to the rear of a house, landscaping and planting arangements around and on boandaries, adequate space for sewerage treatment and seperation distances.

Also, a lot of planning permissions have a condition which states that the works should be carried out as shown on the drawings, this also includes boundaries and distances from and to boundaries.

Jimbo

It's worth noting that the site can purchased can be larger than the site for which the planning relates.
So as long as the entire planning site is comprised totally within the purchased land and all works shown on the planning drawings are completed, the boundaries don't necessarily have to be the same.

mickdw

You need the land contained in planning site layout as a minimum.

kili

thanks for the info.
the site in question (as shown on planning application) is approx 1.5 acres. the actual site being purchased is larger, approx 1.9 acres, but a small strip (to provide access for farmer) from the original site is not part of the sale. Both sites are largely the same and the strip being retained by the farmer does not affect any distance requirements/landscaping etc. Can the problem be solved by giving farmer right of way instead of ownership over the strip of land in question?

sydthebeat

kili wrote: »

thanks for the info.
the site in question (as shown on planning application) is approx 1.5 acres. the actual site being purchased is larger, approx 1.9 acres, but a small strip (to provide access for farmer) from the original site is not part of the sale. Both sites are largely the same and the strip being retained by the farmer does not affect any distance requirements/landscaping etc. Can the problem be solved by giving farmer right of way instead of ownership over the strip of land in question?

it MAY be possible to apply for the 'permission consequent' at the same time as applying for the relocation of said boundaries (within the one application)

assuming that all significant factors ie the dwelling, entrance, septic tank and percolation area wont have to move because of these neew boundaries, i wouldnt expect there to be too much issue from a planning point of view.
as security however, id only agree to purchase subject to both being granted.

i wouldnt consider 'rights of way' as these, can and do, lead to messy situations in the future ie is it an agricultural access, or a domestic access etc

YouWantWhat

Be careful where you draw your red boundary line on the planning application. If you are buying 1.9 acres and you are putting the red line around the whole area, then thats what you have planning for - a house on a 1.9acre site. If in the future you want to divide a section off, or sell a piece of it, then that will invalidiate your planning permission. If I were you, I would put the red line around an area of about 0.5 acre, which will be the residential site and put a blue line around the rest as land in the same ownership, unless of course you want an extra large garden for that ride on lawnmower.