6 meter rear extension

[firbest]

Hello All,

I have applied for 6 meter rear extension in my house via prior approval under permitted development which was granted in March 2018 and now that i want to build it i made a application for lawful certificate the council says :


"Just to inform you, we have to take into consideration the pre-existing bay window. The side elevations do not demonstrate a physical separation between the roof of the extension and the pre-existing bay window. This means that the extension would extend beyond a wall forming an original side elevation of the original house, therefore the total enlarged part of the house would have a greater width than half the width of the original house.
Based on this, the LPA considers the application unlawful and a decision will be issued shortly to this effect.

I have consulted with my manager about this case, it is not the gap between the bay window and the roof extension that makes it unlawful. The issue is with regard to the projection beyond the 'original' wall which would have been the ground floor pre-existing bay window, as it does not cease to be original despite its demolition.

As for 18/0953/PNH, Prior Approval is required where an extension is >3m and less than <6m in depth. In this case the reason for refusal is not related to the depth.
Notwithstanding Prior Approval, the proposal is still required to meet all of the other conditions of Class A, which in this case it does not as per the reasons stated below:
The side elevations do not demonstrate a physical separation between the roof of the extension and the pre-existing bay window. Just to clarify this means the ground floor pre-existing bay window and not the first floor. The extension would extend beyond a wall forming an original side elevation of the original house, therefore the total enlarged part of the house would have a greater width than half the width of the original house.
There are no amendments which can be made which would enable the scheme to be considered as a Certificate. Therefore we suggest that you resubmit this application as a householder application. However, please note that a HSE application would be assessed against the expectations of the Development Plan and not the conditions and limitations of the GPDO - and as such, unless the context indicates otherwise, some amendments may be required to bring the proposal in line with the expectations of planning policy."

So not sure now what to do. Is there any way to change the plans so council can accept it so i can start building? Please help . Thanks in advance. attached drawings.

 

[Notch7]

The extension would extend beyond a wall forming an original side elevation

A planning officers most favorite phrase.

My impression is they hate PD larger schemes.

Im sorry I dont have any advice with what to do.

 

[tony1851]

Was it perhaps a bay window like this, with a short wall below the window?
In this particular case, the planning dept passed a prior notification application and clearly took a reasonable view of what does or does not constitute an original wall forming a side elevation.
I think your LPA is being unduly pedantic as to the meaning of 'side-facing wall'; it means any rear extension on your property would not be p.d. and would require p.p. - just because of the bay.
You could appeal their interpretation of 'side wall' but you would probably be looking at a 6 months + delay before getting a decision.
There are a couple of appeal cases concerning bay windows; one determined that the wall was a 'side-facing wall' and the other that said it wasn't - so it's a moot point and probably depends on the inspector's mood on the day.

 

[firbest]

I don't have a bay window on the ground floor just a 3 meter extension. I have a bay window only on 1st floor see image. I will take a clear image tomorrow morning.

 

[tony1851]

Sorry - i misunderstood.
But before the 3m extension was built, the bay would presumably have been on the ground floor as well?
If so, it is being regarded by the council as an original wall forming a side elevation; the fact that it's no longer there is irrelevant for Planning purposes.

 

[firbest]

no idea if there was a bay on the ground floor as when i bought the house it was already having the 3 meters. the fact that it's no longer there is irrelevant for Planning purposes does that mean i can no longer get 6 meter extension.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

View attachment 168831

Good God that's horrific, I had to come out of retirement for this one, someone appears to have taken a massive crap on the back of your house, perhaps you should consider demolishing the lot and starting again, gotta feel sorry for your neighbour too, you've cost him about £20K if he ever wants to sell.

Hard to see definitively but it looks like your poor neighbour still has the original bay at ground level.

 

[firbest]

Good God that's horrific, I had to come out of retirement for this one, someone appears to have taken a massive crap on the back of your house, perhaps you should consider demolishing the lot and starting again, gotta feel sorry for your neighbour too, you've cost him about £20K if he ever wants to sell.

Hard to see definitively but it looks like your poor neighbour still has the original bay at ground level.

Once planning gives me a lawful certificate than only i can spend money to bring it up to the high standards i want. Neighbour house don't have the original bay also they have 3 meter extension also.

 

[^woody^]

Im only here for Freddie's 'back to work' party.

And why the hell would anyone get permission for an extension, and then apply for a LDC for the exact dance thing?

 

[Notch7]

Im only here for Freddie's 'back to work' party.

And why the hell would anyone get permission for an extension, and then apply for a LDC for the exact dance thing?

I seem to remember for these large extension jobbies the planning department consider they are 2 separate things.

Im sure I did one and the council told me you have to apply for the neighbour consulation pd bit first. Then you have to make LDC to see if its lawful.

That particular client was a Tory MP at the time........that was back in the pre Brexit era when politics was 'normal'.

 

[^woody^]

I seem to remember for these large extension jobbies the planning department consider they are 2 separate things.

Im sure I did one and the council told me you have to apply for the neighbour consulation pd bit first. Then you have to make LDC to see if its lawful.

That particular client was a Tory MP at the time........that was back in the pre Brexit era when politics was 'normal'.

The application under neighbourhood consultation is the permission. It effectively confirms that the design submitted and checked by the planners is permitted development.

 

[tony1851]

And why the hell would anyone get permission for an extension, and then apply for a LDC for the exact dance thing?

I wondered about that because as they'd given him the OK on his prior notification application (assuming he submitted the drawings
as shown here) then the council messed up first time.

If he'd then built it according with the submitted plans but without informing the council, and then applied for the LDC once the extension was completed, the council would realize its initial mistake, and would be in a bind. Technically the extension would never be permitted development but the council would almost certainly have had to give him planning permission, otherwise they could be liable for the 6m build cost, the cost of demolition and reinstatement of the (existing) 3m extension.

As it is, the council could probably only be found 'guilty' of maladministration because the OP has not actually paid for the extension - only the plans.

Possibly the OP has been wrongly advised by his agent/architect who should have realized the 6m extension could never have been p.d., but did not
take advantage of the council's initial error when they confirmed it could go ahead. It's unlikely the council would give p.p. for the 6m extension, so best the OP could hope for is to ask for a refund from the agent/architect on the basis of incorrect advice.

(This is not like the case of the house hidden by bales of straw because - in submitting comprehensive plans - the OP did not set out to deliberately mis-inform the council; the mistake was the council's in not spotting this first).

 

[tony1851]

I seem to remember for these large extension jobbies the planning department consider they are 2 separate things.

Im sure I did one and the council told me you have to apply for the neighbour consulation pd bit first. Then you have to make LDC to see if its lawful.

That particular client was a Tory MP at the time........that was back in the pre Brexit era when politics was 'normal'.

In that case the council gave you incorrect advice.

 

[tony1851]

m

The application under neighbourhood consultation is the permission. It effectively confirms that the design submitted and checked by the planners is permitted development.

Have to disagree there; if a council mistakenly approves something which could never have been permitted development, it does not make the development lawful.
Say an applicant supplies all required information for the prior notification; the council mistakenly believes that it is PD because they didn't notice that the maximum height of the proposed extension is clearly marked as 5m when it should have been 4m. Say the client builds according to the plan, and a neighbour complains. When the council look at it again, they realize their mistake - so they are in a bind.
They can't very well serve an enforcement notice on the applicant because the council could be sued for the build cost, the cost of demolition, and the cost of reinstatement.
To save their own skins, all they can do is to give the applicant retrospective planning permission, after which the complaining neighbour pursues a complaint for maladministration.

 

[^woody^]

Have to disagree there; if a council mistakenly approves something which could never have been permitted development, it does not make the development lawful.

In that case, if they mistakenly grant a LDC, or planning permission, or listed building consent .....

If you read a prior notice determination (yes a determination), it will say that the proposed development, built in accordance with the supplied plans complies with A.4 of Schedule 2 Part 1 Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015.

So they are saying (determining) that the work is PD.