Just posing this question for clarification by more knowledgeable members, because when I applied for my planning permission it was not at all clear what the council meant by "site". Usually they ask you to mark your land boundary in blue and the development "site" in red on your drawings.
Was it the whole of the land I own? Was it the footprint of the building? Was it some particular area around the new hut? The path to the hut? The place where the car is parked?
It matters, because if the site is small then it is less hassle/work to answer questions about the "site" and what is happening on it. In the abscence of any definition, I decided that the "site" ( to be marked in red) was just the building itself, plus the muddy footprints that I would make around it when building. This kept things more simple. Nothing else in the land would be changed in any permanent or visible way.
Just wondering what the "proper" definition is and what others have done in their own applications? Or any opinions?
As you did: keep it small as possible. 1m around the hut. No paths (planning required) no parking (not required).
Denise: you did not need to have parking. You can walk, para-glide, horseride, levitate, cycle, helicopter, burrow, swim, or just appear there (aka Beam Me Up Scotty). There is no requirement for parking (see NPF4 and Good Hutting). It is not a residential dwelling (which will have local parking requirements). Having anything other than your hut in the application is giving the planners something to object to: been there, done that.
See my application and my planning appeal. If your council says you need a big area send them a copy (a) NPF4, (b) Good Hutting Practice, (c) my successful Appeal. This was a ScotGov appeal and not a local appeal.
The 'site' in our planning application included the woodland ride and clearing where the hut is located. We also had to include the entrance as we needed to show that we have off-street parking available. Also, the fee you pay for the application was based on the site area, so it makes sense to focus only on the relevant stuff/area.
In my experience, sometimes the council will accept just the footprint of the building and sometimes they will insist in outlining the whole site in red even if nothing else is to be changed. It is worth trying to keep the outline as small as possible for the reasons you explained, but the planning offices don't always accept that in which case you just have to redraw the plan. It's a bit random, depending on who looks at your plans.