Permitted Development rights for L-shape side extension

Joined
5 Feb 2020
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Country
United Kingdom
Hi first time poster on here. I am a structural engineer by trade but now and again get asked how big can i build my extension and sometimes the Permitted Development guidlines online just don't clarify certain things...
looking to build a side extension to an existing bungalow (not designated area) but the side extension is 'L-shaped' in order to prevent loss of light to two existing windows.

i understand width of new extension must be half the width of the main bungalow, the eaves height cannot be any higher than the existing (and less than 3m), the maximum height is 4m, 2m from the boundary,

therefore i believe the extension would 100% be PD if the extension was closed off rather than L-shaped. does the shape complicate the PD rights in anyway or is the worry over nothing?

any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Ian

upload_2020-2-5_14-51-0.png
 
Sponsored Links
thank you tony for your answer. much appreciated. Ian
 
Or is it? What was the footprint of the house when first built. I thought that if that extension is beyond the original rear boundary (or boundary at some time over 50 years ago (can't remember the date)) then it would be considered a side and rear extension happening at the same time, and the width would possibly exceed the PD rules.

But I might have (probably) misunderstood it !

For something like that I'd probably put in full planning, just to be safe. If you paid for those plans then the cost of planning isn't going to add much and you'll never have nosy neighbours raising concerns later on.
 
Sponsored Links
Or is it? What was the footprint of the house when first built. I thought that if that extension is beyond the original rear boundary (or boundary at some time over 50 years ago (can't remember the date)) then it would be considered a side and rear extension happening at the same time, and the width would possibly exceed the PD rules.

But I might have (probably) misunderstood it !

For something like that I'd probably put in full planning, just to be safe. If you paid for those plans then the cost of planning isn't going to add much and you'll never have nosy neighbours raising concerns later on.

You have a point; AFAIK, OP described it as a side extension, but is it? If the original entrance is at the top of the plan, then yes, it's a side extension. But if the entrance is the doorway on the right (?) that makes it different.
 
it is 100% a side extension. the previous architect tried to claim the extension was a rear extension due to the location of the front door (and then tried to go for the extra large rear extension application). needless to say he was put right by the planning department. the front door does not make it the principal elevation.
 
the footprint of the original bungalow was everything you see in the drawing with the exception of the rear addition named playroom. Ian
 
If the LPA have determined that the previous (failed) application would not be a 'rear' extension, then their implication would have to be that yours is in fact a side extension, so you're in the clear.
Thanks for clarifying.
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top