Extend in place of linked detached garage

[EvilDonut]

Am planning on demolishing existing linked detached garage (linked to neighbour's garage) and rebuilding two storey extension in its place (plus single storey wrap around bits not relevant to this question). To avoid any chance of the property becoming a semi-detached in future I was thinking of building a few inches back from the boundary line, effectively fully detaching our properties.

My questions are:
1) Anyone aware of any issues with this plan?
2) Any regulation for how far back from the boundary to build? The garage is 2460mm wide, so not much width available! I was thinking of leaving a 250mm gap. Can I get away with less, do I need more, or is this fine?
3) Anyone done this before and have any general tips for planning/construction?

I'm aware this is a party-wall and that I would need to 'make good' the neighbour's wall, possibly by building a second skin of bricks. I want to get on with the neighbours and so will make sure they're not out of pocket at all, etc. All subject to planning permission of course!

Thanks!

 

[^woody^]

Check if your council allows building at the boundary at first floor level. Most do not to avoid terracing.

 

[EvilDonut]

There are a few houses on my road that have done this, so definitely precedent had been established. None of them were previously linked by semi detached garages though.

The house opposite me knocked down their garage and built two storey extension. Their roof doesn't even slope towards the boundary - it is a gable end - which makes the terracing effect quite noticeable. I'll be proposing a slope.

 

[^woody^]

There is no precedent in planning. It is the current planning policy that matters.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

There is no precedent in planning. It is the current planning policy that matters.

Sometimes it helps though. Do you ever bother applying for anything doesn't strictly comply with the guidance woody?

 

[^woody^]

There is no precedent in planning. It is the current planning policy that matters.

Sometimes it helps though. Do you ever bother applying for anything doesn't strictly comply with the guidance woody?

Is that the same as wasting people's money?

I'd like to think that anyone submitting plans will know what will be approved, and what should be approved, and what has got as much chance of being approved as Ban-all-sheds has of getting a "Talks a bit of sense" award.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

So have you never had anything approved that was outside of the guidance then?

 

[^woody^]

Guidance is not policy. One can be argued the other can not.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Keep digging woody, again.

 

[^woody^]

Arrh, the answer that's not an answer

 

[EvilDonut]

OK thanks - so the terracing thing could be an issue, subject to current policy.
How about the effective conversion of a linked detached into a fully detached? Are planners likely to take issue with that?

 

[^woody^]

It depends if it looks like terracing - which is the biggest problem with extensions towards a boundary at the front of houses. It does not matter if detached or semi detached.

You need to check the council's policy as it could scupper your plans or require design that is unacceptable or unacceptably expensive.

The policy is everything. Whilst as my cream-tea loving friend should know, guides are not absolute, just guides.

 

[EvilDonut]

Pictures paint a thousand words (ours, after proposed extension, on the right):

 

[^woody^]

Have you actually looked at your council's policies yet?

That design had no significant front set back either, and the new ridge line is not lower than the existing. These are common requirements.

And you are losing a garage and don't look to have enough room on the drive for a car. Off road parking is a planning issue.

 

[EvilDonut]

I had originally planned a set back and a ridge line drop, however looking at the other houses that have extended on the street (the last one was 2011), none of them have set theirs back or even dropped the ridge line. I was surprised at this, as I'd read online these things usually cause refusals.

I've had another (better!) look online and I managed to find our council's 'residential design supplementary planning document' buried in their website ( http://www.tameside.gov.uk/planning/rds/spd/spd.pdf ). It's quite large, just going through it now. It has a long section on home extension policy - just what I was looking for I think.

I see what you mean about parking - that would only leave 4 metres of driveway, and the Mrs wouldn't want to convert the front garden into a car park. Might have to scale back or completely remove the front single storey extension.
Thanks!