Planning / Building regs?

This picture shows an existing lean- to / outbuilding which the owners wants to replace with a new block rendered structure with slate roof, like how the neighbours have done it. It's a terraced house.

The new building would remain the same width (2800) but depth would increase from 2500 to approx 3100 to match in with neighbours. The new finished height of the roof at the highest point would be be approx 4000, again, the same as the neighbours.

Would this need planning permission? If I remember correctly, is it 3000 depth for a terraced house? Also, new footings will have to be dug for the front elevation. Obviously it's only very slightly increasing the original footprint.

Will it need Building regs regardless of what happens? As the owner doesnt seem to think so, and doesn't want to get involved with any of that. Next doors extension was built by a team of Bulgarians apparently.

At 3.1m, stictly it would need planning permission, though at 0.1m over, it wouldn't be a serious risk without.
It WOULD need Building Regulations approval.

PS, Sorry, just looked at your pic again. If the lean-to is original, you could extend 3m from the outer wall of THAT, so at 0.1m extra it would be permitted development and would not need planning.
Would still need b/r, though.

"Original" above includes non-original features added before 1 July 1948. So if the lean to is that old, your PD rights are on top of that. Make sure you document the lean to with photographs and any other info you can to prove when it was most likely built.

When you say "front elevation", do you mean "rearmost wall of the extension" ?

Indeed, find out a) if you have PD rights and b) whether the leanto predates 1948

It should have buildings regs if it's to be joined to the main house via means of a door internally and as used as part of the living accommodation. They aren't too onerous with regards to a small extension like this - stuff that's genuinely in the interests of the owner such as insulation levels, damp proofing, electrical safety etc
He can proceed without it, and take the risk that they won't notice (they probably won't) but if he plans to sell the house within the next few years it may cause a problem during the sale - one sharp eyed solicitor saying "it appears to have been extended without regs approval) and he might be looking at a financial punch on the nose in terms of the buyers making a lower offer, that is greater than the cost of obtaining regs approval

Yes, by saying front elevation i mean rear most wall. So if the 'lean to' predates 1948, you get your planning allowance on top of that, i.e. you could build a further 3 meters out from existing?

Whereas if it was built after 1948, you would most likely need planning permission to go out any further?

rbdrifter said:

Yes, by saying front elevation i mean rear most wall. So if the 'lean to' predates 1948, you get your planning allowance on top of that, i.e. you could build a further 3 meters out from existing?

Whereas if it was built after 1948, you would most likely need planning permission to go out any further?

Click to expand...

Yes, but the 3m allowance would only apply to the lean-to part.

tony1851 said:

rbdrifter said:

Yes, by saying front elevation i mean rear most wall. So if the 'lean to' predates 1948, you get your planning allowance on top of that, i.e. you could build a further 3 meters out from existing?

Whereas if it was built after 1948, you would most likely need planning permission to go out any further?

Click to expand...

Yes, but the 3m allowance would only apply to the lean-to part.

Click to expand...

by this tony means you can build a wall that is at most 3 m backward from every rear wall of the house i.e. You can replicate the shape of the house exactly, 3 metres away. What you cannot do is build a wall that is 3m away from the back of the lean to and have it a straight wall so part of it is 6 metres away from the house..

..unless you go for the neighbour consultation scheme