Is this permitted development?

[Steveg1]

Hi, does this count as permitted Development? I’ve read the rules over and over. It’s 3.95m to the ridge, 4m out from the rear wall and 2.6m to the eaves. I’m just not sure about the utility on the back of the garage (garage is original) many thanks

 

[^woody^]

No.

 

[Steveg1]

No.

Thanks for the reply, how come? Is it the utility part?

 

[wessex101]

Assuming the property is detached and the extension eaves height is not higher than original then I would say it is PD.

If the garage is original then it should be classed as part of the "dwelling" and therefore it is a rear extension and seems to meet all the criteria for a permitted development rear extension.

 

[^woody^]

Thanks for the reply, how come? Is it the utility part?

Yes that's the normal interpretation as it extends past the side wall, however I've just remembered Heading 9 (brighton-hove.gov.uk) an appeal case that includes the side garage in the overall width measurement

 

[Steveg1]

That’s good to know. A friend of mine had an extension built last year that was permitted Development. That was build 6m out on a detached house, going the full width of the rear of the house.

we’ve had a planning enforcement officer saying it doesn’t comply with permitted Development as the extension is more than half the width of the bungalow (I thought that was only on side extensions) I’ve read and re read many times this https://assets.publishing.service.g...e/830643/190910_Tech_Guide_for_publishing.pdf I can’t see a reason why it won’t comply. The planning officer is going to highlight the section and email me it tomorrow.

 

[Steveg1]

That’s good to know. A friend of mine had an extension built last year that was permitted Development. That was build 6m out on a detached house, going the full width of the rear of the house.

we’ve had a planning enforcement officer saying it doesn’t comply with permitted Development as the extension is more than half the width of the bungalow (I thought that was only on side extensions) I’ve read and re read many times the 50 page PD rules on the gov website. I can’t see a reason why it won’t comply. The planning officer is going to highlight the section and email me it tomorrow.

Read more: https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/is-this-permitted-development.586331/#ixzz7KEY3d6Et

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

As you are also extending off the side of the garage it would need to meet all of the criterea for a 'side extension' as well as a 'rear extension'. And as Mr Planner has pointed out it's non compliant as it's too wide.

 

[Steveg1]

But with the garage been part of the original dwelling then surely it’s just a rear extension?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

An extension can be both a rear and side extension at the same time. The side wall of the garage ...... is a side wall.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...e/830643/190910_Tech_Guide_for_publishing.pdf page 23

 

[Steveg1]

Ours is stepped the opposite way, the garage is originally set further back from the rear of the bungalow. On page 23 the steps are forward if you get what I mean?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

You built against the side of your existing garage have you not?

 

[Steveg1]

The first doodle I’ve uploaded is like the example in page 23 but ours is the the 2nd doodle. Is it the same thing? I’m genuinely confused. Are you saying If I didn’t build behind the garage then it would be PD but because I’m building behind the garage then that’s why it doesn’t comply?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

 

[freddiemercurystwin]