Please can anyone tell me if L>B>officer can impose a colour on a house. I thought the owner could propose and the LBC could 'oppose'. The enforced colour is one that has never been on the house before. I am not sure of the legal process of the way it should be done on their part. Thanks anyone. :roll:
- Thread starter butterfly
- Start date
Penners
Member
- Messages
- 17,294
- Location
- Suffolk, England
We had another thread about this recently. Technically, I don't think the Conservation Officer has the right to order you to use a specific colour. But he/she can instruct you to apply for Listed Building Consent if he/she is concerned about your choice.
This application will then be considered either by the CO (under powers delegated to him/her by the committee) or by the committee itself (who will listen to the CO's recommendations and may or may not agree with him/her).
I think that's broadly the way it works. But, as you can see, if the CO disapproves of your colour choice, it's not very likely that you will get LBC for it.
Gareth - would you care to elaborate?
This application will then be considered either by the CO (under powers delegated to him/her by the committee) or by the committee itself (who will listen to the CO's recommendations and may or may not agree with him/her).
I think that's broadly the way it works. But, as you can see, if the CO disapproves of your colour choice, it's not very likely that you will get LBC for it.
Gareth - would you care to elaborate?
Gareth Hughes
Member
- Messages
- 2,741
- Location
- In the wilds of East Anglia
Yes, we had a thread about this recently.
It too was started by Butterfly. I think Butterfly is, ultimately, going to be disappointed.
If you are proposing to change the colour of your listed house, then yes, the change is likely to require LBC, and therefore (by refusing consent for every colour you propose until you propose a colour they approve) the local council can enforce the colour.
It too was started by Butterfly. I think Butterfly is, ultimately, going to be disappointed.
If you are proposing to change the colour of your listed house, then yes, the change is likely to require LBC, and therefore (by refusing consent for every colour you propose until you propose a colour they approve) the local council can enforce the colour.
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,202
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
I appreciate why a colour change would require LBC but Butterfly's original question stated that the colour being "enforced" (presumably by the CO) had never been applied to the house before. How can that be possible?
The house must already be one colour and, as I understand things, no LBC is required to maintain that colour. So how can any body insist on and enforce a colour change, nevermind one that has never been used on the property before?
The house must already be one colour and, as I understand things, no LBC is required to maintain that colour. So how can any body insist on and enforce a colour change, nevermind one that has never been used on the property before?
Penners
Member
- Messages
- 17,294
- Location
- Suffolk, England
Aha! Searingly insightful logic!
To elaborate on this further. Retrospective application refused, then order to paint in
in 'former colour. I pointed out that thhis colour had not had LBC AND HAD never been applied for by former resident, but was this colour for approx.6 yrs or so. No objections were raised then. However the 'ordered' colour has never been the colour of the cottage at any time. Hence my enquiry. However i know I can appeal against an enforcement order. In the next county, some 20 miles away LBC was given for a grade II* listed property to be painted mauve!!!!! Also other properties in my area are various colours. My confusion is that there is no 'consistency at all. It all depends on the Officer employed at the moment, and can change from one Officer to another. And their opinions vary (like the weather)
I believe that John Gummer in l996 stated "colour is a matter of personal choiceand comes within permitted deveop ment!!!!!
So where are we now - in just the same muddle.
in 'former colour. I pointed out that thhis colour had not had LBC AND HAD never been applied for by former resident, but was this colour for approx.6 yrs or so. No objections were raised then. However the 'ordered' colour has never been the colour of the cottage at any time. Hence my enquiry. However i know I can appeal against an enforcement order. In the next county, some 20 miles away LBC was given for a grade II* listed property to be painted mauve!!!!! Also other properties in my area are various colours. My confusion is that there is no 'consistency at all. It all depends on the Officer employed at the moment, and can change from one Officer to another. And their opinions vary (like the weather)
I believe that John Gummer in l996 stated "colour is a matter of personal choiceand comes within permitted deveop ment!!!!!
So where are we now - in just the same muddle.
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,202
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
If I'm understanding this correctly;
1. The house was painted its current colour six years ago by a former resident without LBC.
2. You (presumably) applied for LBC to make this legal, but permission was refused and the council ordered the house to be repainted with another colour, which would be acceptable (possibly because they don't know the colour before it was repainted six years ago?).
3. You (presumably) don't like the council's choice of colour and are arguing against this 'enforcement' by saying that the house was never painted the council-specified colour.
Do you know, or even better have evidence to support, what colour the house was before being repainted six years ago?
It seems to me that the council could not force you change the original colour - because you would simply be un-doing the unapproved paintwork that was applied without LBC - but in the absence of any evidence concerning what that original colour was, it seems reasonable for the council to suggest an acceptable colour.
So, I'd say it all depends on what evidence you have about the original colour and, if you're happy with that colour, I don't think you need any permission to repaint the house in that colour.
1. The house was painted its current colour six years ago by a former resident without LBC.
2. You (presumably) applied for LBC to make this legal, but permission was refused and the council ordered the house to be repainted with another colour, which would be acceptable (possibly because they don't know the colour before it was repainted six years ago?).
3. You (presumably) don't like the council's choice of colour and are arguing against this 'enforcement' by saying that the house was never painted the council-specified colour.
Do you know, or even better have evidence to support, what colour the house was before being repainted six years ago?
It seems to me that the council could not force you change the original colour - because you would simply be un-doing the unapproved paintwork that was applied without LBC - but in the absence of any evidence concerning what that original colour was, it seems reasonable for the council to suggest an acceptable colour.
So, I'd say it all depends on what evidence you have about the original colour and, if you're happy with that colour, I don't think you need any permission to repaint the house in that colour.
Gareth Hughes
Member
- Messages
- 2,741
- Location
- In the wilds of East Anglia
If the "ordered" colour was the "former" colour, then clearly it has been that colour in the past.
Why, if the colour had been applied by a previous owner, were you the one who applied for retrospective consent, unless you've repainted it since?
What John Gummer did or didn't say 13 years ago in relation to a completely different case has nothing to do with it.
Anyway, what colour is it now, what colour was it when you bought it, what colour was it when listed, and what colour are you being told to paint it?
Why, if the colour had been applied by a previous owner, were you the one who applied for retrospective consent, unless you've repainted it since?
What John Gummer did or didn't say 13 years ago in relation to a completely different case has nothing to do with it.
Anyway, what colour is it now, what colour was it when you bought it, what colour was it when listed, and what colour are you being told to paint it?
Schoolmarm
Member
- Messages
- 1,894
- Location
- edgworth, lancs
I think current owner has painted it without consent.
Gareth Hughes
Member
- Messages
- 2,741
- Location
- In the wilds of East Anglia
I think "current owner" is in for a disappointment. Asking the question again when s/he didn't get the answer wanted the first time tends to show that.
Gareth Hughes
Member
- Messages
- 2,741
- Location
- In the wilds of East Anglia
http://www.winchester.gov.uk/Docume.../PDC0596 Schedule 9 November 2005 Item 10.pdf
A well-argued piece which carried the day.
A well-argued piece which carried the day.
biffvernon
Member
- Messages
- 4,607
- Location
- Lincolnshire
butterfly said:
I trust the building is post-1856.
:roll: From the link provided by Gareth.
I agree that the case for refusing the application is well reasoned. But it frustrates me when I see councils who ignore those flouting planning law, whilst others who (presumably as in this case) try to obtain the right permissions (although I agree that it should have been done before the change, rather than retrospectively). Will this council now be pursuing similar enforcement action against the properties which they know do not have consent?
It wasn't clear to me from the article what was being proposed in terms of new colours? Surely, if retrospective consent has been refused....all that can be enforced is for the unauthorised works to be 'undone'? Is that accurate?
If so, wouldn't that just revert the building to it's previous colour (as Gareth points out)...rather than a colour which the building has never been painted before?
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,202
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
It's not really relevant who re-painted the property without LBC. The question is can the council enforce re-painting in a colour that has never been applied before?
I would say they can't, as long as the current owner repaints the house in the original colour and can prove what that original colour was (which shouldn't be difficult). Such work needn't involve the council or LBC as it would just be undoing unauthorised alterations to restore the originally listed condition.
PS: The above assumes only the colour is a relevant factor and ignores the possible complication of the new paintwork being technically inappropriate.
I would say they can't, as long as the current owner repaints the house in the original colour and can prove what that original colour was (which shouldn't be difficult). Such work needn't involve the council or LBC as it would just be undoing unauthorised alterations to restore the originally listed condition.
PS: The above assumes only the colour is a relevant factor and ignores the possible complication of the new paintwork being technically inappropriate.