Updated 24 June – Now available: Prior approval notice for Change of Use from Business to Residential
The ‘Prior approval notice for Change of Use from Business to Residential’ available on the Planning Portal has been slightly amended:
This sentence has been added below the notice heading:
*Development is not permitted where the building is on Article 1(6a) land, is a Listed Building or Scheduled Ancient Monument, or is or forms part of a safety hazard area or military explosives storage area.
Two questions in section 4 ‘Description of the Proposed Development’ have also been re-ordered and slightly revised. The new questions are:
If the building was not in use immediately before 30th May 2013, when was it last in use?
What was the use of the building immediately before 30th May 2013 or the last use before that date?
The Change of Use from Business to Residential form is available here as a ‘fillable PDF’.
—
I’m pleased to report that we have now created a prior approval notice for Change of Use from Business to Residential schemes. This is only for use with LPAs in England.
This comes hot on the heels of the Larger Extensions notification we published a couple of weeks ago.
The Change of Use from Business to Residential form is available here as a ‘fillable PDF’.
As before, if you want to complete and save the form you’re best off doing so in a standalone PDF application (such as Adobe Reader) – filling it in the browser has mixed results, depending on your browser.
Please note that there is no guidance note associated with this form.
As with the previous notification, we have used the Statutory Instrument as the basis for the form.
Again, we are grateful for the rapid response from local planning authorities who offered to take part in the brief consultation process.
The Portal PDF elves are now hard at work developing the remaining prior approval forms.
We published the Larger Extensions notification on 3 June.
Planning Portal Blog 
Will this apply to farming businesses as it should do or are they to be discriminated against as usual? Will it apply to businesses in AsONB or are they to be discriminated against? There are certain councils in the south east that are so terrified of getting it wrong that they will pass nothing. Even when Government makes a statement they either ignore it or twist things in order not to pass applications. We all know what is going on but will you do anything about it? Appeal Inspectors just follow what the council says so the applicant never gets a fair hearing unless he is a simple householder. The system is the nearest thing this country has ever got towards state control and communism. All applicants want is a fair hearing and a reasonable attitude which can only come from sensible Appeal Inspectors that are not ex-planning officers. This is what lets the system down. You need more lawyers, surveyors, civil engineers etc as Appeal Inspectors and no ex-planning officers otherwise the appeal system will continue to lose credability. Name and address witheld for fear of the inevitable retribution!
I have great sympathy for you. I have been making planning applications in a professional capacity for some thirty years now and a certain council near me has perfected the art of not deeming an application valid; the latest example running to two pages of pure piffle. It is about time there was some standardisation in place of the get out phrase “suitable and sufficient”. If this particular planning department put as much effort into working with applicants as it does into dodging validation, we might even have an economy.
Thank you for your support and common sense Andrew Collier. Many of us had hoped the Planning Portal director would have jumped in with something to say about the behaviour of certain councils in the south east and the Planning Inspectorate, but he has kept his head well under the blankets. So much for the blunt speaking Yorkshire man. We want reform and fairness for all the people and the Planning Inspectorate needs to look at itself and make the system fair by getting rid of morally corrupt practices and inspectors who just grovel to really corrupt councils. What have you got to say on the subject Mr Portal Director? Anyone can e-mail him at: chris.kendall@planningportal.gsi.gov.uk but I suspect you will only get palmed off with the usual rubbish whilst he sits and waits for the criticism to go away. I know it takes courage to stand up and be counted but you know you need to do it for both you and your clients and because you know the current system is dishonest, flawed and biased against applicants. So let’s hear what you all have to say please! Let’s make it a public campaign!
Apologies once again but anonymous posts go direct to Spam.
I am not afraid of criticism in fact I and my team are very open to it if it helps us improve our service but I can’t comment on critiscisms made of others.
Neither do I hide under the blanket, hence this blog and why I make my email address available.
Where I can step in and help bridge gaps behind the scenes I will and have, but where comments are broad based or non-constructive I don’t feel its my place to become involved.
I am neither a planner nor a lawyer and although I don’t think I’ve ever described myself as a “blunt speaking Yorkshireman” I try and go by the maxim that if I’ve got nothing constructive to say, I’ll say nothing.
My team and I will continue to try and improve the planninmg application process and any comments you have about our service will be gratefully received.
I’d be careful about throwing accusations that label councils as “really corrupt” without any evidence to back up your claims.
I’m surprised your comment got published with that and your bizarre attack on the Portal Director. You do realise he’s the director of the planning portal and not the planning inspectorate?
I took the decision to publish because whilst I do not agree with the views expressed I did not wish to be accused of hiding away or above criticism.
As the anonymous correspondent didn’t name any specific LA’s or individuals I erred on the side of free speech.