Side Extension Half Width of Existing House...What about attached garage?

Joined
4 Jul 2013
Messages
1,370
Reaction score
249
Location
Dorset
Country
United Kingdom
Quick question for you clever people.

Proposed side extension on 1980's link detached with original attached garage to other side joined to next door.

Planners are saying proposed side extension needs planning permission because it exceeds half width of house. Now I took width of "original dwelling house" to include the original attached garage, but Planners say it is just the house not the garage. I did some research a while back before I put in the pre-app. and as usual some people say you can include the attached garage in the width measurement others say you cant.

What are the views of the great and the good here?
 
Sponsored Links
There are a couple of appeal cases in PJ in which inspectors have determined that an attached, original structure (in one case a garage and the other an outhouse) does form part of the dwellinghouse and can be taken into account for the one-half rule.
 
Thanks Tony, I was really surprised by the lack of guidance on this, it cannot be that uncommon surely?

I couldn't find a definative answer which is why I submitted the pre-app. Before I submitted the pre-app I found an appeal, extract for relevant section below if anyone is interested.

"The parties take different views on whether the garage forms part of the original dwellinghouse. The Appellant places before me historic plans not before the Council when they determined the application. These plans are dated 1932 and appear to show that the garage was part of the original dwellinghouse. This supports the application which refers to the property, including the garage, being built in 1932. There is nothing before me to counter the Appellant’s submission that the original dwellinghouse includes the garage and whilst I recognise that the Council did not have the historic plans before them when they determined the application I must base my decision on the evidence before me in this appeal. I determine this appeal on the basis that the original dwellinghouse includes the garage."

I have written back to planners quoting this, I'll let you know the outcome. I know the client will not want the delay of fighting this so I suspect we will just submit an application, it is a small unobtrusive flat roof extension so shouldn't be too contentious.
 
Quick update: I thought I would have one last try on the phone and after going through the Councils most annoying automated telephone system with countless recorded messages and choosing a multitude of options and eventually "holding to speak to a member of staff on the helpdesk" I managed to get through to the elusive planner case officer who confirmed as long as their manager agrees the attached garage can be included in the width of the dwellinghouse and therefore the side extension is permitted development. To use a current popular phrase...winner winner, chicken dinner.

That only took 9 weeks with numerous emails and phone calls. Which reminds me, I'm still waiting for that bloody LDC for a loft conversion which must be 10 weeks by now and a good 2 or 3 weeks since I last emailed revised drawings to the case officer. I'm going to have to increase my charges for jobs in that Council area just because their planning department is so slow and needs constant chasing. The same local authority building control managed to approve the building regs application in just over 2 weeks so its got bugger all to do with so called "austerity" and "budget cuts".
 
Sponsored Links
Didn't see this post before - I had always thought it quite common knowledge / straightforward though.

If it is an original attached garage, then I would be extremely confident arguing through an LDC / Appeal that you include that in the width of the main dwelling.

The definition of 'original dwellinghouse' in the regs is basically how the house sat in 1948. So that is any conservatories or attached garages / extensions etc. You calculate the widest part using this layout, so in this case, the garage and the house combined.
 
The same local authority building control managed to approve the building regs application in just over 2 weeks so its got bugger all to do with so called "austerity" and "budget cuts".

Building Regs isn't a monopoly in the way that Planning is. They know you have a choice.
 
Building Regs isn't a monopoly in the way that Planning is. They know you have a choice.
Agree, it's pretty clear whenever I've spoken with an LA BC that they're well aware they're competing with the real world. They have to make a profit.
 
Hi wessex 101 - would you have the details of the planning appeal you've reference above please? I'm potentially going to have the same debate with my local planning officer and want to be forearmed if possible. Thanks in advance.
 
Hi wessex 101 - would you have the details of the planning appeal you've reference above please? I'm potentially going to have the same debate with my local planning officer and want to be forearmed if possible. Thanks in advance.

Appeal Ref : APP/Q1445/X/16/3165939 Land at Gateways, Highdown Road, Hove, BN3 6EE. Good Luck, hopefully you won't get a pedantic fresh out of college numpty like I did.
 
Appeal Ref : APP/Q1445/X/16/3165939 Land at Gateways, Highdown Road, Hove, BN3 6EE. Good Luck, hopefully you won't get a pedantic fresh out of college numpty like I did.

This appeal was dismissed though?
 
This appeal was dismissed though?

It was dismissed because of the width of the new extension still being > 50% (appellant claimed it was 4M, council measured it as 8M). However the inspector concluded that the garage should be taken into account when determining the width of the original dwellinghouse:

These plans are dated 1932 and appear to show that the garage was part of the original dwellinghouse. This supports the application which refers to the property, including the garage, being built in 1932. There is nothing before me to counter the Appellant’s submission that the original dwellinghouse includes the garage and whilst I recognise that the Council did not have the historic plans before them when they determined the application I must base my decision on the evidence before me in this appeal. I determine this appeal on the basis that the original dwellinghouse includes the garage.
 
This appeal was dismissed though?

Yeah sorry I should have made that clear. It was just the inspector's interpretation of the inclusion of the garage that I was interested in and I think that part is still worth quoting if you run up against a stroppy planning officer.

It would be useful to have a more comprehensive list of evidence here for people to use so anyone with references to appeals or cases feel free to add.
 

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