Dorset Council: Chris Miell is excited to announce that he has secured planning permission for amendments to an extant permission for a replacement dwelling within the South East Dorset Green Belt, near to Horton, Wimborne.
In May 2022, planning permission was granted for the demolition of the existing buildings at the site and the erection of a replacement dwelling with associated garaging. Our clients purchased the site after the permission had been commenced through the demolition of the former buildings, but the new house had not been built. They sought our advice on redesigning the scheme to improve the design and appearance of the new building.
To avoid complications with BNG, we advised our client to pursue a Section 73 application, which allows the applicant to seek approval for changes to an existing planning permission. If the application is approved by the Council a new permission is created and the original permission remains extant and unaltered. The scope of Section 73 is wide ranging and it can be used to revise the design of an approved development, providing there is no conflict with the operative part of the permission i.e. the description of development on the decision notice. Case law has established that significant changes can be made to a planning permission, which are not limited to minor material amendments.
In this case, the applicant sought permission to vary the approved plans to materially change the architectural style of the proposed dwelling to improve the overall design and appearance of the new development. As the proposed development would still result in the “erection of a replacement dwelling and associated garaging” (the description of development on the original decision notice), we argued that there would be no conflict with the operative part of the permission, and thus such amendments were permissible by Section 73. This position was agreed by the Local Planning Authority.
The replacement dwelling has been redesigned by DMW Architects to provide a high-quality built form, which would contribute positively to the local distinctiveness of the area. Given the area’s rural character, the proposal maintains a traditional form and materials, such as timber cladding and slate roof tiles, but incorporates a contemporary fenestration design to uplift the quality of the overall development and create a sense of place.
To support the application, we prepared a planning statement which demonstrated that the proposed amendments to approved plans would not cause harmful impact on the character and appearance of the area and would not cause harm to the openness of the Green Belt.
As the proposed replacement dwelling would result in a replacement dwelling at the site, which had a greater volume than the original dwelling, we drew the Council’s attention to Paragraph 154, criterion (g) of the National Planning Policy Framework (December 2024), which provides support for the proposal.
This states: “Development in the Green Belt is inappropriate unless one of the following exceptions applies: (g) limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed land (including a material change of use to residential or mixed use including residential), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt.”
The ‘substantial harm test’ was introduced by the Government when the Framework was revised in December 2024 with the aim of encouraging new development on previously development land within the Green Belt. It differs from the provisions of Paragraph 154, criterion (d) which permits replacement buildings within the Green Belt which are not materially larger than the buildings they replace.
The Council agreed with our position that the proposed development would not be inappropriate development within the Green Belt because it complied with of Paragraph 154, criterion (g) of the Framework and proceeded to grant planning permission for the revised scheme.
In assessing the proposal, the Planning Officer found “The application site is considered to meet the definition of ‘previously developed land’ set out in Annex 2 of the NPPF. The changes to the dwelling now proposed when compared to the extant permission now involve a raising of the ridge with associated increase in roof massing, together with a single storey open-sided covered area on the west elevation. The increase in ridge height of the replacement dwelling and car port and associated increase in massing are not considered to cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt and on this basis, the proposal is appropriate development in the Green Belt under NPPF paragraph 154 g).”
If you would like to make changes to extant planning permission, then why not call Pure Town Planning on 01202 585524 or email info@puretownplanning.co.uk to see how we can help you.