Permitted Development or not

[dk1uk]

Hi -

I'm planning on a rear extension to my house - before I bought it, it had already had a two storey extension and the additional of a bedroom above the garage. We're in an AONB.

However, I can't seem to get a straight answer from my local planning office and various online articles on whether I might be able to build my extension within permitted development.

The problem I have is whether the increase in cubic volume is relevant to permitted development anymore (as it was in the 1995 town planning act). The Planning Portal website on extensions makes no reference to cubic volume. The 2008 town planning act also makes no reference to cubic volume, however I have spoken with two separate planning officers and both think that I would need planning permission for my extension on the basis that the existing extensions are already over the permitted development cubic volume limit.

I realise planning laws are complex but is there an easy answer to this?

Many thanks![/url]

 

[^woody^]

AIUI, the 1995 GPDO was never repealed, just altered in 2008 with the new PD regime - so the previous volume limits would still apply for existing work

I am not sure if this has been tested though

In any case, you are only allowed a single storey rear extension in an AONB

 

[dk1uk]

Many thanks indeed Woody. Yes, we'd be building a single storey rear extension.

I think I see what you mean - the volume limits for the existing works are applied retrospectively? But if not works had ever been carried out before 2008, then the concept of volume limits wouldn't apply?

I think that I'm heading towards needing PP anyway as having studied the existing works' plans this afternoon, it seems that the "original" rear wall has already been extended, therefore reducing the PD of my proposed extension. Complicated all this isn't it.

 

[jeds]

The planning officers are wrong. The primary reason for the introduction of the 2008 GPDO was to reduce the high numbers of uneccessary planning applications. The report which led to the order specifically said that a large number of those uneccessary applications occured simply because the volume limit would be exceeded. It therefore recommended that, to avoid this situation, the volume limit be replaced by a dimensional limit.

So if the planning officers are right they are reversing the very reason why the order was introduced in the first place.

 

[chapeau]

The planning officers are wrong.

Absolutely. Permitted Development means what it says in the latest order that defines it, the 2008 order specifically says it substitutes new definitions for the 1995 definitions.

 

[dk1uk]

Thank you all. So basically even though the previous extensions (pre 2008) used up the old volume allowance and required planning permission, I can now potentially continue with a further extension subject to the newer permitted development rules?

How does one go about confirming all of this if you can't trust what the local council planning officer says?

Thanks again.

 

[chapeau]

Thank you all. So basically even though the previous extensions (pre 2008) used up the old volume allowance and required planning permission, I can now potentially continue with a further extension subject to the newer permitted development rules?

Yes, unless they removed your PD rights last time. Volume irrelevant for PD started today. Current law is from 2008 and replaces previous definitions.

How does one go about confirming all of this if you can't trust what the local council planning officer says?

Brown paper envelope?

Or just point out the law, might take a few emails to find somebody who understands it though. They prefer it when they can make it up as they go along.

 

[dk1uk]

Super - thanks again. I will try and get something in writing from them.

 

[chapeau]

Yes you need something in writing nowadays otherwise it can cause problems when you come to sell your house. Round these parts if you send them your plans the council will send you a letter telling you if you need permission, free of charge too, usually within the week. You would need to check with your outfit to see if they offer a similar service.

 

[^woody^]

the 2008 order specifically says it substitutes new definitions for the 1995 definitions.

Where?

The only mention of substitution is a "." substituted for a ";" and "World Heritage site"

There are no new definitions of any planning terms

 

[^woody^]

Volume irrelevant for PD started today. Current law is from 2008 and replaces previous definitions.

Nonsense

The previous Order has not been repealed, therefore anything done under it is still relevant and can be enforced against where the law allows

As for your reference to volume being "irrelevant for PD today", then how does that apply to roof extensions?

 

[chapeau]

Different class. My response was to his extension question as you will see if you read my post.

I never said the previous order was repealed, simply the definition of PD substituted. And it clearly says so in the law. You just need to search the document for a different form of the word 'substituted'. Then come back and tell us who is talking nonsense.

Understanding requires a lot more than being able to do a text search.... Also a basic knowledge of English grammar.....

 

[^woody^]

Also a basic knowledge of English grammar.....

You stick to grammar then, as you obviously know a lot more about that than you do about planning

 

[chapeau]

Well one out of two ain't bad.

Beats zero out of two, eh

 

[chapeau]

Ok

For all apart from woody who has been led to water but refuses to drink.

The part of the law which substitutes the definition of permitted development is here

Development within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse
3. In Schedule 2 to the 1995 Order, for Part 1 (development within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse) substitute the text set out in the Schedule to this Order.

Found in

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/2362/pdfs/uksi_20082362_en.pdf

Therefore the part of the schedule in the 1995 order is replaced in total by the schedule in the 2008 order. Or substituted.....

The 1995 definition of permitted development no longer applies.

At all

It is defunct, deceased, a dead definition.

Ta