converting door to window ?

[ragsta]

Hi all, Does anyone know if planning perm. would be required to change an exterior side alley door from the old kitchen to a window. So brick half up and then get a new window installed. There will be units installed all along this wall, but it will be more of a utilities area. The kitchen has moved to the rear of the house with a new door. Other extension work is ongoing.

had a search could only find answers for totally bricking it up. Have contacted planning but got.. 'hi out of office'

Cheers.

 

[lpasengland]

Hi Ragsta,

The 'short' answer is that you can probably change the door to a window under government "permitted development" rights without requiring planning permission from your Council. The only relevant condition is that the materials that you use for the window must be "of a similar appearance to those used in the construction of the exterior of the existing dwellinghouse".

The 'long' answer (!) is that with PD rights you always have to be careful, because there are a number of "exceptions" to the above "rule". For example:

1) Your property must be a C3 house - if it's a flat, C4 small HMO, or a sui generis large HMO then the above rights won't apply.

2) If your property was built, or converted from another use, from the 1960s onwards, then it may have had its PD rights removed by a condition on the original planning permission (this is fairly common).

3) If your property has been extended from the 1960s onwards, then it may have had its PD rights removed by a condition on the planning permission for the extension (although this is very unlikely).

4) If your property is subject to an Article 4 direction, then some or all of its PD rights will have been removed.

5) If your property is a listed building, then although you would still have the above PD rights, such works would still require an application for listed building consent.

6) You can't combine (as a single operation) PD works with works that are granted PP by the Council. For example, if you get PP for an extension with a door, then you can't built an extension with a window and rely on PD rights for the change of the door to a window.

7) PD rights don't apply to buildings or uses that are unlawful.

Although the above list might look fairly intimidating (!), in practice if your property is a house, was built before the 1960s, and is not subject to an Article 4 direction, then it's highly likely that it has PD rights.

Thanks,
Steve

 

[^woody^]

Hi Ragsta,

The 'short' answer is ......

LOL.

The short answer is "No"

 

[lpasengland]

Ha ha - fair point!

 

[tony1851]

if it's a flat, C4 small HMO, or a sui generis large HMO then the above rights won't apply.

That's not strictly true.
A C4 is described as a dwellinghouse shared by 3-6 unrelated persons who share amenities (kitchen, bathroom etc).
As the law describes it as a 'dwellinghouse,' then it has the same p.d. rights as an ordinary C3.
Some maintain it is a 'grey' area, but our LPA has accepted that C4s have p.d. rights.

 

[big-all]

you must also not remove a second exit point in case off fire
in other words if there is a fire in another room would this be your means off escape ??[await to be shot down in flames by woody ]

 

[tony1851]

Where does it say that? Prepare to be shot down by He Who Knows Everything

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Though HE can be a bit naive sometimes.

 

[^woody^]

Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
Where there is injury, pardon;
Where there is doubt, faith;
Where there is despair, hope;
Where there is darkness, light;
Where there is sadness, joy.

Amen

 

[big-all]

Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
Where there is injury, pardon;
Where there is doubt, faith;
Where there is despair, hope;
Where there is darkness, light;
Where there is sadness, joy.

Amen

phew dodged a bullet

i thought it was advisory about not removing the second exit route

knowing incorrect information will be corrected i would rather be oversafe and wrong than say nothing and be dangerous

 

[ragsta]

hahaha ^

Very comprehensive responses thank you. Oh i see now this may be classed as works coming under Gov. PD. rights. I guess they will check with the address but i don't think any of the exceptions apply but it gives me some confidence its ok.

lpasengland, The house is a semi-detached in west london from around 1930's (we found 3 layers of lino and newspapers from the war time, lots of papers about hitler ha). has always been a 3 bed house.

It's had a double storey extension, a kitchen extension 2010 - building notice, and another alteration to this extension - planning permission, form to be filled.

bigall, There are two passages to the rear door, old kitchen(the door in question is here) to new kitchen and the living room to the new kitchen.

Thanks for the time and effort in your responses.

 

[planningjungle]

Hi all,

Apologies - the post above from "lpasengland" was from me - I stopped using the username "lpasengland" about a year ago (it corresponds to my old email address), but accidentally logged into it yesterday when I wanted to post a reply.

Hi tony1851 - I agree that the question of whether a C4 small HMO benefits from Part 1 of the GPDO is still a "grey" area, but overall I think the arguments against are stronger than the arguments for.

In terms of arguments against, all three appeal decisions that I've seen that have directly addressed this question have concluded that a C4 property does not benefit from Part 1 of the GPDO - please see APP/T5150/C/11/2160981, APP/G5750/C/12/2179136, and APP/X5210/X/12/2177760.

In terms of the arguments for, I do appreciate your point that the definition of Use Class C4 includes the term "dwellinghouse" - i.e. "Use of a dwellinghouse by not more than six residents as a “house in multiple occupation”". However, the counter-argument to this is that it's definitely possible for something to be referred to as a "dwellinghouse" in another part of planning legislation and not benefit from Part 1 of the GPDO. For example, for the purposes of section 171B of the TCPA 1990, and for the purposes of the version of Part 40 of the GPDO that was in force from 06/04/2008 to 30/11/2011, the term "dwellinghouse" includes a flat, which doesn't benefit from Part 1 of the GPDO. Furthermore, even though the phrase "HMO" includes the word "house", it's still accepted that a sui generis large HMO doesn't benefit from Part 1 of the GPDO.

Thanks
Steve

 

[ragsta]

Got a reply from planning today, just for anyone else's reference.

"The works you are describing would be lawful provided that they comply with the limitations of  permitted development rights, please see: www.planningportal.gov.uk for more information on these. If your proposal does not meet these tests, you must first obtain planning permission."

Seems got to go. I will probably note this change in the current planning app. Thanks to all.

 

[tony1851]

"The works you are describing would be lawful provided that they comply with the limitations of  permitted development rights, please see: www.planningportal.gov.uk for more information on these. If your proposal does not meet these tests, you must first obtain planning permission."

ragsta;

In other words they don't know if it's pd or not, and have thrown the ball back in your court!

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

tiring ....