Arggh - NO!

You do not need planning approval for solar panels on a domestic roof anywhere in England or Wales* - whether it is a conservation area, AONB, NP or even a World Heritage Site. If any of these 'authorities' are saying otherwise then they are plainly mistaken.

Only if Part 40 PD rights have been removed for a property, or if your installation falls foul of any of the other conditions required by PD, do you need planning approval.

(* I'm not sure if Scotland have caught up with the change to roofs in conservations areas. They also have a condition the removes PD for solar panels within 3km of an aerodrome.)

Ted: “I'm not sure if Scotland have caught up with the change to roofs in conservations areas.�

No, they haven't; the relevant PD rights (Class 2B) do not apply in a conservation area.

Ted: “They also have a condition the removes PD for solar panels within 3km of an aerodrome.�

Are you sure? The document here:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2012/02/9140/downloads

doesn't contain the strings "3k", "3 k" or "three k".

It does mention safeguarding of aerodromes - it's one of the reasons you have to ask the planners before putting up a wind turbine. However, there's nothing special about solar panels - Class 2B allows lots of stuff (almost everything except balconies and wind turbines) within 1 metre of the walls or roof of the building and I can't see anything there related to safeguarding or whatever.

Ah, I knew I had read it somewhere - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2011/136/made

It looks like my local authority have been telling me porkies (oh, what a surprise!), however a couple of PV suppliers I've spoken to have said the same thing about the Cranborne Chase AONB having had PD rights removed for PV installations, too.

In my case PD has been removed as part of the PP, as seems to be the case with the majority of new planning approvals granted here, but all the same the LA told me clearly that all PV installations in this AONB had to have PP. In fact the same story is also still on the Navitron site, here: http://www.navitron.org.uk/page.php?id=65&catId=71

Quote: <i>"If you live in a Conservation Area or in the Cranborne Chase or Dorset Downs Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, you will need planning permission for any solar panels that are to be installed on a wall or roof slope that faces a road or public footpath."</i>

Other solar panel suppliers are still giving the same advice, it seems, so there may well be some degree of misunderstanding going on that's quite widespread.

<blockquote><cite>Posted By: windy lamb</cite>I think that some Planning Dept (in order to preserve the aesthetic of their patch) give fairly broad, if not misleading, advice relating to some development - just to put you off. This unprofessionalism has been creeping ever more into Local Authority Departments where once qualified professionals were employed, now "technical" staff sit. You get what you pay for.........</blockquote>

I think you're right. I challenged the charge for a telephone call to a planning officer last year (£90!) as I felt the charge was disproportionately high (I'm still awaiting the outcome). One thing I did was make an FOI request for the planning officers employment costs (not just salaries) so that I could work out what half an hour of their time really cost the LA. I was surprised to find that the most senior planning officer earned around the national average, as I'd rather suspected they'd be paid a bit more. Ordinary planning officers in that authority earn around £22k, IIRC.

That first paper accurately reflects the position of my planners - if solar panels project above the surface of the roof then they will refuse permission (it's why I was researching in-roof solutions a couple of months ago on here). They have been ignoring the not more than 200mm projection guidance, and interpreting "projection above the roof" as being about the same as a roof light. Given the hoops they are making me jump through on roof lights this seems to fit.

It very much look as if the planners aren't staying up to date with amendments that have taken place over the past three years or so, which doesn't wholly surprise me. I am a bit annoyed to have been misled, though, especially when you have to pay a fee to get the advice in the first place.

JSH, Why not ask for your money back as their answer was not "fit for purpose" and you may go to trading standards!!!!!

Anyone care to take a bet on how likely they are to give me money back? I reckon the chance is somewhere between zero and bugger all..............

What's worse is that a neighbour had to fork out for PP for a roof mounted PV installation last year, so they seem to have been using it as a bit of a "nice little earner" for a while. I'm not sure whether it's just ignorance or deliberate misuse of legislation in order to increase revenue. I suspect the latter, from the way they have been carrying on generally over the past year or so.

JSH - As I recall a planning officer (proper one not a technical assistant) costed the LA £48/hr - about the same as an Environmental Health Officer, that included wages, NI, pension, office, admin support, etc - these for 2008 rates. We had to work this out for a contract we were doing, anyway- £90 for a phone call is taking the pee.

If the LA charge you for a service (professional advice) and then give demonstrably incorrect advice, ask for your money back. If they are not forthcoming make an official complaint, through their formal complaints procedure, and then complain to the Local Authority Ombudsman for maladministration and ask for your money back plus compensation. That always but always got my managers focused (I used to work in LA). One thing the Ombudsman really didn't like was LAs giving the public incorrect advice. Once you make a complaint to the Ombudsman your name is never forgotten and the service you receive is double checked. Oh what fun!

A case in Epsom was lost at appeal but I haven't tracked down the decision..

http://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/news/epsom_residents_fight_for_their_solar_panel_rights_5478/

http://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/news/we_will_not_be_moved_epsom_resident_loses_solar_panel_appeal_5478/

I think this is the house..
http://www.epsomguardian.co.uk/resources/images/1744449/?type=display

If this is the house http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/resources/images/1770983/ my sympathies are with the council. It is an eyesore installation.

From http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/9250289.Man_refuses_to_remove_solar_panels_despite_losing_appeal/

Posted By: JSHarrisAnyone care to take a bet on how likely they are to give me money back?

Small Claims Court?

Emma
Still not read it but here is a scan of it
https://skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?cid=698cc0950b10ccbd&resid=698CC0950B10CCBD!948&parid=698CC0950B10CCBD!123&authkey=!AEuK8qL_WyIE6A0

I read the rest today, shall scan it later, must have turned two pages when I looked at it this morning, sorry all

Yes, seems a waste of money to me. Why not just ask them to get on an serve the enforcement notice so you can appeal that? It'd be cheaper but have the same effect - and they might back down.