Can a garden room be attached to the house?

[freddiemercurystwin]

Not if it complies (with regs).

 

[Gazman16]

I will keep you posted.
Hopefully it can just get retrospective PP. Will have to see what the BCO comes up with when he comes for a visit.

 

[geraldthehamster]

Appearances aside, the eaves are too high for it to be Permitted Development. It needs planning permission.

Clearly so, from the diagram in the guidance. However, this does raise the question of how it's possible to build a PD flat roofed extension on a bungalow at all, with a properly insulated roof, and still get a decent ceiling height.

Regards
Richard

 

[tony1851]

Appearances aside, the eaves are too high for it to be Permitted Development. It needs planning permission.

Clearly so, from the diagram in the guidance. However, this does raise the question of how it's possible to build a PD flat roofed extension on a bungalow at all, with a properly insulated roof, and still get a decent ceiling height.

Regards
Richard

How high do the eaves look to you?

 

[geraldthehamster]

How high do the eaves look to you?

It’s clear from the photographs that the eaves of the extension are higher than the eaves of the house.

For the definition of "eaves", see the two diagrams on p.11 of:

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/100806_PDforhouseholders_TechnicalGuidance.pdf

Do you disagree?

Cheers
Richard

 

[tony1851]

[


Do you disagree?

No.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

However, this does raise the question of how it's possible to build a PD flat roofed extension on a bungalow at all, with a properly insulated roof, and still get a decent ceiling height.

No not really, some houses just do not lend themselves to extensions within the limits allowed under PD. In other words, tough!

 

[noseall]

Yeah tough - seek PP. No big deal.

 

[geraldthehamster]

However, this does raise the question of how it's possible to build a PD flat roofed extension on a bungalow at all, with a properly insulated roof, and still get a decent ceiling height.

No not really, some houses just do not lend themselves to extensions within the limits allowed under PD. In other words, tough!

I suppose you could dig out the floor, and tank it?

Cheers
Richard

 

[planningjungle]

Hi all,

The term "conservatory" isn't defined by PD legislation, and it's not covered by the DCLG "Technical Guidance" (2010). This means that it's difficult to know whether a building classified as a "conservatory" for the purposes of the Building Regulations should automatically be classified as a "conservatory" for the purposes of PD legislation, or whether a different interpretation should be applied. Although the latter approach might seem illogical, I believe there are already other examples (e.g. a "porch") where a structure can be classified differently between these two different areas of legislation.

From a planning background, my personal opinion would be that this particular structure almost certainly isn't a "conservatory" - for example, I don't think the average man on the street would refer to it as a conservatory. This means that even if it met all of the other tolerances of Class A, it would fail condition A.3(a).

Thanks,
Steve

 

[geraldthehamster]

Hi all,

The term "conservatory" isn't defined by PD legislation, and it's not covered by the DCLG "Technical Guidance" (2010). This means that it's difficult to know whether a building classified as a "conservatory" for the purposes of the Building Regulations should automatically be classified as a "conservatory" for the purposes of PD legislation, or whether a different interpretation should be applied. Although the latter approach might seem illogical, I believe there are already other examples (e.g. a "porch") where a structure can be classified differently between these two different areas of legislation.

From a planning background, my personal opinion would be that this particular structure almost certainly isn't a "conservatory" - for example, I don't think the average man on the street would refer to it as a conservatory.

Thanks,
Steve

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it irrelevant in PD terms whether it is a conservatory or not? PD is concerned with the dimensions of a rear single storey extension of any description; it's only Building Regulations that differ for a conservatory.

Cheers
Richard

 

[planningjungle]

Hi Richard,

For the purposes of PD, it's mostly irrelevant whether or not the structure is a "conservatory". However, Class A condition A.3(a) states the following:

... the materials used in any exterior work (other than materials used in the construction of a conservatory) shall be of a similar appearance to those used in the construction of the exterior of the existing dwellinghouse ...

This means that, if the structure is NOT a conservatory, then it would need to be finished in materials that are similar to those on the existing house, which for most properties would rule out timber cladding.

Thanks,
Steve

 

[noseall]

This means that, if the structure is NOT a conservatory, then it would need to be finished in materials that are similar to those on the existing house

I don't know about anybody else, but i could hardly tell the difference between the existing and the new building from those images!

 

[geraldthehamster]

Hi Richard,

For the purposes of PD, it's mostly irrelevant whether or not the structure is a "conservatory". However, Class A condition A.3(a) states the following:

... the materials used in any exterior work (other than materials used in the construction of a conservatory) shall be of a similar appearance to those used in the construction of the exterior of the existing dwellinghouse ...

This means that, if the structure is NOT a conservatory, then it would need to be finished in materials that are similar to those on the existing house, which for most properties would rule out timber cladding.

Thanks,
Steve

You're right, of course - I'd forgotten that.

"Conservatory" isn't defined in Building regs either, of course - a conservatory is exempt from Part L if it meets certain requirements, but there's no definition of a conservatory itself. Common usage I suppose. And there must be some interesting conversations going on with Building Control Officers, as many councils (including my own) are still promulgating the obsolete requirements concerning glazing, on their websites.

Cheers
Richard

 

[planningjungle]

Hi Richard,

Thanks for your post - until reading this thread, I was still under the impression that the Building Regulations defined a "conservatory" in terms of the proportion of glazing. I've never worked in BC - it was just one of those things that a BC officer told me a few years ago, and which I haven't spoken to anyone about since.

Thanks,
Steve