Extension Regulations Interpretation

[spongobongo]

If I might be so bold as to add my twopennorth:

The 2008 amendment to General Permitted Development Order is a total mess. We warned the Communities and Local Government department about this when the draft Order was published for consultation last year. It should come as no surprise that despite all of the warnings from local planning authorities, the Government enacted the new Order without taking any of the warnings on board.

Now that I've finished my rant, I'll let you into a little secret: us planning officers don't know the definitive answer to the question either.

First up, I am assuming that neither Wall A nor Wall B has previously been extended. If they have been extended, you're into a whole new ball game.

In the scenario that you want to extend wall B by 3m and then build straight across the full width of the plot, you'll require planning permission. That's beyond dispute.

In the scenario that you want to build A+3 and B+3, the logical way of reading the 2008 Order is that it would be permitted development, especially if both walls are part of the original rear elevation.

However, some authorities (mine included) take the view that it's 3m from main rear elevation only, and in your instance the main rear elevation is Wall A. I happen to disagree fundamentally. But I know the Director of my department sought for clarification on the issue from the Communities Secretary and got nowhere. Instead, he sought the views of fellow directors in other London Boroughs. Basically, they all have different views.

The simple fact is that we're all waiting for someone who has an application for an A+3 and B+3 lawful development certificate refused to then appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

I know, I know. It's crazy. And I'm rather ashamed to be a part of it.

 

[hotrod]

I know, I know. It's crazy. And I'm rather ashamed to be a part of it.

You're not kidding Spongo. That's an absolute farce. If I was the OP I would be half tempted to just do it and claim it as Permited Development. If the LA gets shirty - let them try and prove it isn't PD! Retrospective permission would be granted even if the courts deemed it not PD.

At the end of the day though, the rules should have been clarified at the consultation stage. There must be hundreds of thousands of houses with dog leg elevations such as this.

 

[7omkin]

OK, guys, the update is that I met the duty planner at the council office and she reckons I need planning permission if I extend B+3 and then match A in straight line with B.

But, I A+3 and B+3 is permitted development. The lady was talking sense though. I do understand her point that for some houses A may need to go 10m to match B in a straight line.

Now in my case and similar cases all over the country, as per the duty planner, we have two rear walls and you can extend each by 3 mts.

But again the guidance can be interpreted as B being my rear(est) wall and not A. So I can extend A to match B+3 under PD.

Have asked my architect to get the full drawings done to apply for planning permission.

Will keep you posted.

 

[7omkin]

I know, I know. It's crazy. And I'm rather ashamed to be a part of it.

You're not kidding Spongo. That's an absolute farce. If I was the OP I would be half tempted to just do it and claim it as Permited Development. If the LA gets shirty - let them try and prove it isn't PD! Retrospective permission would be granted even if the courts deemed it not PD.

At the end of the day though, the rules should have been clarified at the consultation stage. There must be hundreds of thousands of houses with dog leg elevations such as this.

Spongo, why can the councils not make a decision on the most confused bit of extensions PD. I mean I am really at loss, its been a year since this was introduced (and you say you got the draft early was well). Not having a go at you but I hope you understand my frustration. Thanks heaven that there is no similar guidance for doctors

Especially in London where people like us who go to council to seek guidance try to adhere to the rules. And on the other hand property developers flaunt the rules and play with the loopholes and take system for granted and council can only sit and watch like a toothless tiger.

Well my rant over

hotrod/spongo,

I am tempted to build it (I do want to play by the rules, but if the rule makers are not clear and I disagree with them, where am I supposed to go). What if i build it and council declares that it is not PD and refuses my Planning Application. What are the consequences ??

 

[7omkin]

If the LA gets shirty - let them try and prove it isn't PD! Retrospective permission would be granted even if the courts deemed it not PD.

How do you think the retrospective permission would be granted ??
Wouldn't my actions count negatively towards the application ??

 

[spongobongo]

why can the councils not make a decision on the most confused bit of extensions PD.

We are making decisions on the most confused parts of the PD Order. My point is that from local authority to local authority you will find very little consistency. Until someone has what they think is a PD extension refused and then goes to appeal, we won't have a definitive answer.

I am tempted to build it (I do want to play by the rules, but if the rule makers are not clear and I disagree with them, where am I supposed to go). What if i build it and council declares that it is not PD and refuses my Planning Application. What are the consequences ??

I wouldn't bother appealing against the refusal of permission (although that is one option available to you). In this instance I would wait for the Council to issue an enforcement notice. If (and only if) they issue a enforcement notice, I would appeal against the notice on two grounds:

1) That permission is not required because it is PD.

2) That even if permission is required, it should have been granted.

If you lose the enforcement appeal, the likelihood is that you will have to tear down the extension. However, as I've said on this board before, enforcement an expensive process for a council and they will only pursue enforcement action where they are confident of winning and where there is a wider public interest in pursuing enforcement action.

Be aware that the first step in taking enforcement action is the issuing of a Planning Contravention Notice. This is NOT the same as an enforcement notice. It is simply a way for the council to fish for information such as the date the works were carried out and by whom. You must complete the form truthfully (it's a criminal offence to lie on a PCN).

We issue more than a thousand PCNs each year but far fewer enforcement notices.

How do you think the retrospective permission would be granted ??
Wouldn't my actions count negatively towards the application ??

Shouldn't make a jot of difference. All applications have to be treated in exactly the same way regardless of whether they are speculative or retrospective applications. You can't be refused permission just because you've already carried out the development.

My advice would be to apply for a lawful development certificate and then see what happens. You might be slightly surprised. The advice of one lowly planning officer might well be overruled higher up the food chain.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Yea but when alls said and done, at some point, someone, somewhere in the country will lose an appeal and have to take down their extension and will become the test case for everyone else.

 

[7omkin]

Yea but when alls said and done, at some point, someone, somewhere in the country will lose an appeal and have to take down their extension and will become the test case for everyone else.

I honestly don't want to be a test case, hence have asked my architect to prepare the application


Another related question guys, my common wall neighbor has a shed extension at the back (adjoining my proposed extension).

I proposed to demolish their wall (its wooden cladding) and build a new common wall their and they have accepted my proposal.

Do i need to get any documents signed by them to apply for Planning Permission ? If so, where can I get hold of the draft content ??

 

[RedHerring]

I'm sure one of the other more experienced posters will give you a definitive answer.
But my experience is that your neighbours will be made aware of your application and their objections will be invited. If they do not object you and the council can assume that they accept your application. But more importantly you ought to get a party wall agreement signed between you and your neighbour for the work on that party wall. Just google Party Wall Agreements, or Party Wall Act.

 

[7omkin]

I understand i need to serve a notice to my neighbors or get a letter from them.

Does any of the above need to got with the Planning Application ??

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Oops wrong thread!

 

[RedHerring]

This should give you all the info' that you need.
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/133214.pdf

it clearly states that the council do not need to be informed.