Get permission before you act

You might think that minor developments such as putting up a garden shed, inserting a new window or installing a satellite dish are things that you are allowed to do without a planning application. If your property is a flat or maisonette, however, you may have to think again. Any external alteration, whether affecting the building itself or within the garden, will almost certainly fall within planning control. If you or your freeholder have any proposal in mind, you should not assume anything where planning permission is concerned: this could be a very costly mistake.

So-called householder "permitted development" rights are reserved for single dwelling houses only (ie, residential properties that have not been sub-divided in any way). This means that a house converted into flats, a purpose-built block of flats, a pair of maisonettes or even a house in multiple occupation has no planning "privileges" and every alteration or other development must be scrutinised by the local planning authority. There is an obvious reason for this, since a sub-divided property contains a number of separate households, all of whom have rights to privacy, light and outlook, which could very easily be harmed by an unsympathetic alteration. Furthermore, a building covered in numerous satellite dishes is not a pretty sight.

It is perhaps understandable that some flat or maisonette occupiers are tempted to go ahead with relatively minor developments without planning permission even crossing their minds, particularly those with direct access to a garden or to a roof (and an absent landlord). The need for freeholder consent should normally correct matters (they ought to have a grasp of the relevant statutory requirements), but not always, as the following readers' questions illustrate.

Q
I occupy a ground-floor flat in a converted three-storey house and our freeholder has recently built a large shed close to my rear patio windows. While I recognise that the freeholder probably has the right to do this, it has really worsened the outlook from my flat and reduced the light. Should he have applied for planning permission and do I have any redress?

A
He certainly should have applied for planning permission, but I am quite surprised at his lack of prior consultation. Is there nothing in the lease to protect you in this regard? (Your solicitor may be able to advise on this point.) As far as planning is concerned, you should check if the council planning department has received an application. It would be best to visit the council offices in person and anonymously examine current applications for the property. If you reveal the situation to an officer, enforcement investigations may begin which will not be popular with your landlord and could make life difficult for you. If you find no evidence of an application, you should simply contact the freeholder (in writing, preferably) and ask for an explanation and request that the building be relocated (subject to planning permission, of course).

Q
I live in a first-floor maisonette and have been meaning to install Velux rooflights and convert the loft into a study/extra bedroom. I have asked the freeholder, who has no objection, and he seems to think that I can go ahead without planning permission because the property is detached and in residential use. Is he right?

A
The freeholder ought to have been a little more careful with his advice. His reasons for claiming no planning permission is required are quite wrong, for reasons set out in my introduction above. However, the question for the local planning authority is whether or not your proposed rooflights will constitute "development" as defined in planning legislation. If you propose only one or two small rooflights, which would not be readily visible from public vantage points (ie, the street), it is possible that you could argue no "material effect on the external appearance" of the property, in which case no development will be deemed to have occurred and a planning application will be unnecessary. You would be better off obtaining a proper judgment from your local council planners before doing anything.

Q
I live in a 1950s purpose-built block of flats, and want to put up a satellite dish on the outside wall of our balcony, which overlooks the front garden of the block. The balcony is at the top of the building, so other flats would be unaffected by the dish. There are no other dishes as far as I am aware, and the building is set well back from the public highway, so I cannot see that it would do any harm. Surely planning permission would not be required?

A
I am afraid that permission almost certainly will be required, and it may even be refused due to concerns about a domino effect of other dishes, ultimately ruining the appearance of the front of the building. You will probably need the permission of the freeholder, too, and this may not be granted for the same reasons.

However, while individual flats do not benefit from specific "permitted development" rights to erect a satellite dish outside their property (for obvious aesthetic reasons), such rights do allow the installation of one satellite dish for a block of flats no taller than 15m, and two satellite dishes where the block exceeds 15m in height. Several criteria need to be satisfied to avoid the need for a planning application; for instance, the diameter of the dish should not exceed 90cm and it should be sited so as to minimise the effect upon the external appearance of the building. If you live in a conservation area or the dish would be on a wall or roof slope fronting a highway, planning permission will automatically be required. Your proposal as it stands would certainly fall foul of a number of these criteria and if undertaken unilaterally would set an undesirable precedent. It would be far better to negotiate with the freeholder for a single satellite dish serving all the flats, utilising these permitted development rights to best effect.