1. Visiting from the US? Why not try DIYnot.US instead? Click here to continue to DIYnot.US.
    Dismiss Notice

Eaves height? Existing building?

Discussion in 'Building Regulations and Planning Permission' started by oculushut, 30 Mar 2019.

  1. oculushut

    oculushut

    Joined:
    2 Sep 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Hi - in the following post it was established that the proposed design was most likely within permitted development: https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/do-i-need-to-make-a-planning-application.508339/

    The wall I have highlighted in the following image would rest on an area which could be considered the existing.

    Is it still within permitted development if the wall that I have highlighted is basically sitting on where the eaves of the existing building?

    [​IMG]

    Existing looks like this:
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: 30 Mar 2019
  2. jasonzyx

    jasonzyx

    Joined:
    6 Feb 2019
    Messages:
    1,618
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Is that the rear of your house?
    I think it's a naff layout.
    Why not turn the new roof pitch through 90°, so that the eaves is above your new french window/patio doors?
    The new wall plate could even extend into the corner. You'll still have a box gutter to sort out, but whatever your design, you'll have that anyway.
     
  3. oculushut

    oculushut

    Joined:
    2 Sep 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Hi - yes, rear of the house and one of the main reasons for the design is to minimise the height at the boundary for our neighbour on the side where the eaves are right now (right hand side in this drawing). The other neighbour has a mirrored layout where the parapet wall at the boundary is the apex for their sloped roof with the eaves of their outrigger in the centre of their property. In terms of aesthetic appeal, personally, I think just turning the new section 90 degrees makes it worse, but that’s very subjective. The constraints of permitted development are fairly limiting and there is no way our council would allow any of this in a mid-terrace under a planning application.

    However, is the current design still within permitted development? Even with the new parapet wall being above the old building’s eaves?

    Additionally, in your suggestion, you mention extending into the corner. You mean, building even more over where the existing roof is? Is that allowed under permitted development?
     
    Last edited: 31 Mar 2019
  4. RichA

    RichA

    Joined:
    3 Aug 2005
    Messages:
    632
    Thanks Received:
    26
    Location:
    Surrey Hills
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Why are the eaves so high? 1m above the bifolds?

    Whilst you have reduced the actual eaves, I suspect the perceived overbearing of this design will be worse than sloping down to eaves over the bifolds.
     
  5. oculushut

    oculushut

    Joined:
    2 Sep 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    The increased height allows more light to pass into the back living room of the main house (the ceilings in the main house are also high so good to have them matched). The eaves are 3m at the boundary - maximum allowed under permitted development. Unfortunately, the local planning department rejected many designs which were submitted under the larger extension rules, objected by the neighbours and far lower (e.g. 2.1m), but longer (e.g. even 3.1m). We just want to build something with certainty now and not waste any more time and money with the uncertainty of seeking planning approval.

    Anyhow, any views on permitted development rules?
     
    Last edited: 31 Mar 2019
  6. ^woody^

    ^woody^

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2006
    Messages:
    26,039
    Thanks Received:
    3,197
    Location:
    West Mids
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Building on the existing has got nothing to do with whether the exention is PD or not.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  7. oculushut

    oculushut

    Joined:
    2 Sep 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Thanks Woody. Just wanted to make sure that there is no rule about not altering an existing roof slope or anything like that.
     
  8. ^woody^

    ^woody^

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2006
    Messages:
    26,039
    Thanks Received:
    3,197
    Location:
    West Mids
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    The only rule that would apply is that of when connecting to an existing extension, then the combined dimensions come into play. But that must surely have been discussed in your previous thread.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  9. oculushut

    oculushut

    Joined:
    2 Sep 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Hey Woody, I don’t think we discussed that in the previous posting, but I should be safe on this point since the extension is not touching any other extensions (no risk of a wraparound extension being created). Appreciate the warning!
     
  10. ^woody^

    ^woody^

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2006
    Messages:
    26,039
    Thanks Received:
    3,197
    Location:
    West Mids
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Whats that thing with the big red roof lower LH corner? Is that original?
     
  11. oculushut

    oculushut

    Joined:
    2 Sep 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    So, the original building looks like this:
    upload_2019-4-1_17-32-5.png
    The bit with the flat roof is a 3m extension that the original owners of the house built a long time ago... we are planning to rebuild this so that the roof lines up with the original outrigger... here's a better view of the final output - basically - 2 x 3m extensions off the back walls:

    upload_2019-4-1_17-35-51.png

    (Please ignore the pitch differences... my original model of the current pitch was wrong and I adjusted it in the new model, but not the old one. Also, the Parapet wall that is on the left of the last drawing exists already...)
     
  12. ^woody^

    ^woody^

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2006
    Messages:
    26,039
    Thanks Received:
    3,197
    Location:
    West Mids
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    You might want to recheck the PD guidance.

    That existing extension is non original, and so it is taken into account when adding to it.

    This may impact on your ability to extend sideways more than 50% of the house width and extend outwards as the existing extension already exceeds 3m by the looks of things.

    Was this not discussed in your previous thread?
     
  13. garyo

    garyo

    Joined:
    11 Apr 2006
    Messages:
    1,833
    Thanks Received:
    166
    Location:
    Berkshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I think the two three metre extensions dont touch each other though, although it looks like that existing portion of the original property will be heavily remodelled so you might get in to trouble if the whole thing then gets classed as an extension.

    Ocult- can you confirm that that single story pitched roof piece is original?
     
    Last edited: 1 Apr 2019
  14. oculushut

    oculushut

    Joined:
    2 Sep 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    The existing rear extension (current flat-roof section) which is attached to the rear-most part of the outrigger is 3m so we should be OK to just rebuild this. This is also < 4m at its peak and < 3m at the eaves.

    The extension which is closer to the main house is < 50% width of the whole house already.

    The classification of the extension closest to the main building as a side extension was discussed in the previous thread. It was at about this point which I started to be convinced that Sir Humphrey almost certainly helped write the PD rules and the local councils are probably trying their very hardest to make sure that PD looked like something which cannot work...

     
  15. oculushut

    oculushut

    Joined:
    2 Sep 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I can confirm that the single storey pitched roof part is original. We will keep the pitch the same and the footprint will also remain the same.

    Can they really class the original outrigger is part of the extension?
     
Loading...

Share This Page