Case 3347474

2, Glynswood (Renamed Glyn House) , Camberley, Surrey, GU15 1HU

Surrey Heath Borough Council — appeal dismissed

Outcome
Dismissed
Decision date
18 February 2025
Authority
Surrey Heath Borough Council
Inspector
Redford R
Procedure
Written Representations
Casework type
Planning Appeal
Type detail
Planning Appeals - Other
Development type
Other minor developments
Appellant
Marie
LPA reference
22/0371/FFU
ONS LPA code
E07000214
Jurisdiction
Transferred
Link status
Not Linked
Start date
9 August 2024

Summary AI

The application for costs against Surrey Heath Borough Council was refused because the Council's actions were deemed reasonable and no unnecessary expenses were incurred by the applicant.

Generated from the decision letter — check against the original before relying on it.

PDF text

Page 1 · Chunk 0 Costs Decision

2, Glynswood (Renamed Glyn House) , Camberley, Surrey, GU15 1HU — Surrey Heath Borough Council — Costs Decision Site visit made on 7 February 2025 by R J Redford MTCP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 18 February 2025 Costs application in relation to Appeal Ref: APP/D3640/W/24/3347474 2 Glynswood, Camberley, Surrey GU15 1HU • The application is made under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, sections 78, 322 and Schedule 6, and the Local Government Act 1972, section 250(5). • The application is made by Ms Marie for a full award of costs against Surrey Heath Borough Council. • The appeal was against the refusal of planning permission for the erection of detached part single, part two storey dwelling without complying with a condition attached to planning permission Ref 22/0371/FFU. Decision 1. The application for an award of costs is refused. Reasons 2. The Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) advises that costs may be awarded against a party who has behaved unreasonably and thereby caused the party applying for costs to incur unnecessary or wasted expense in the appeal process. 3. The applicant considers the Council has acted unreasonably by failing to adhere to Circular 11/95 ‘The use of conditions in planning permission’ when considering the subject of conditions in planning matters. 4.

Page 1 · Chunk 1 Costs Decision

2, Glynswood (Renamed Glyn House) , Camberley, Surrey, GU15 1HU — Surrey Heath Borough Council — Costs Decision However, in 2014 Circular 11/95 was cancelled and replaced by the PPG ‘Use of planning conditions’. The PPG sets out what conditions should achieve if they are to be attached to a planning permission and broadly aligns with Circular 11/95. 5. The dwelling was approved by appeal and condition 4 listed the approved plans. A condition specifying the approved plans is necessary to provide clarity and specify what has been approved. It also allows the potential for the approved scheme to be altered by variation of the plans condition. This is what the appellant has sought to achieve in this case. The inclusion of condition 4 on the original permission and the reasoning for it therefore complies with the PPG. 6. On considering the proposed variation of condition 4, it is clear from the information before me, the Council undertook a thorough assessment of any potential impact and justified its reason to refuse with reference to relevant policies. 7. Accordingly, I am satisfied the inclusion of condition 4 on the original permission and how the Council has dealt with the proposed variation comply with the PPG so do not constitute unreasonable behaviour.

Page 1 · Chunk 2 Costs Decision

2, Glynswood (Renamed Glyn House) , Camberley, Surrey, GU15 1HU — Surrey Heath Borough Council — Costs Decision As parties are normally expected to meet their own appeal expenses, I do not find any unnecessary or wasted expense have occurred. An award of costs is not, therefore, warranted.

Page 1 · Chunk 3 R J Redford

2, Glynswood (Renamed Glyn House) , Camberley, Surrey, GU15 1HU — Surrey Heath Borough Council — R J Redford INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Extracted from the decision letter PDF and shown in full, chunk by chunk.

Main issues and findings

Conditions
Against appellant
¶4

The Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) has replaced Circular 11/95, and the PPG does not support the applicant's claim of unreasonable behavior.

Conditions
Against appellant
¶5

The inclusion of condition 4 on the original permission is compliant with the PPG.

Conditions
Against appellant
¶6-7

The Council's assessment of potential impact and justification for refusal were thorough and compliant with relevant policies.

Living conditions
For appellant

Parties are normally expected to meet their own appeal expenses.

Policies relied on

Reference Weight
Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) 'Use of planning conditions'
Substantial

Site constraints from the Casework Database

Conservation area
Green belt
Listed building setting
AONB
SSSI
Flooding an issue

Source

Decision letter, 1 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 18 February 2025 under the Open Government Licence.