My MP, Robert Walter, has tells me that he has received a number of letters and that he shares our concerns. He takes the trouble to show the difference between the PPG3 and PPS3 footnotes:
PPG3
"The curtillage is defined as the area of land attached to a building. All the land within the curtillage of the site (as defined above) will also be defined as previously-developed. However, this does not mean that the whole area of the curtillage should therefore be redeveloped. For example, where the footprint of a building only occupies a proportion of a site of which the remainder is open land (such as at an airfield or a hospital) the whole site should not normally be developed to the boundary of the curtillage. The local planning authority should make a judgement about the site layout in this context, bearing in mind other planning considerations......"
The equivalent footnote in Draft PPS3 is different:
PPS3
"The definition of curtillage is subject to the interpretation of the Courts and regard should be had to case law. All of the land within the curtillage of the developed land will also be defined as previously-developed."
He tells me that he has written to Yvette Cooper MP, Minster of Housing and Planning and will let us know her response.