larger extensions without planning permission.

[JohnD]

"Homeowners in England are being given the green light to build larger extensions without planning permission.

Temporary rules, which allowed bigger single-storey rear extensions without a full planning application, are being made permanent.

Additions to terraced and semi-detached homes can be up to 6m, while detached houses will be able to add even larger structures, up to 8m long.

Neighbours will still be consulted and can raise objections to extensions.

Since 2013, 110,000 people have taken advantage of the temporary rules, which doubled the previous limits of extensions that didn't require planning permission from the local authority.

Instead of waiting possibly months for approval, homeowners notify the council of the building work beforehand, and council officials inform the neighbours."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-48405569

 

[tony1851]

It's a further step in the right direction, but the real improvement in providing more space would be allowing two-storey side extensions to be permitted development.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The problem is that councils can (and have) simply removed permitted development rights for extensions, thus rendering this new regime useless.

My council, Hillingdon, did just that with an Article 4(1) Direction in 2013 in direct response to, and in order to frustrate, the originally temporary larger limits introduced in 2013.

I'd be surprised if they were the only ones.

 

[Nakajo]

They may change their minds when the compensation claims start rolling in

 

[tony1851]

They may change their minds when the compensation claims start rolling in

I'm not sure there is any mechanism for claiming compensation for an Article 4 direction.
When a LPA wants to apply for one of these, it has to go to DCLG (or whatever it's called now) for permission and, they have to give at least 12 months notice, so that anyone who wants to use the system for a larger extension can get their application submitted in the meantime.

 

[Nakajo]

Unless the rules have been recently amended, where a Local Planning Authority refuses permission for development which would have been permitted were it not for an article 4 direction then they can be liable for compensation.

Also to note, planning applications required as a consequence of an article 4 direction are exempt from fees.

 

[tony1851]

Unless the rules have been recently amended, where a Local Planning Authority refuses permission for development which would have been permitted were it not for an article 4 direction then they can be liable for compensation.

Compensation for what?
Many high-density modern estates have p.d. rights withdrawn so as to enable the LPA to ensure that open space on such estates doesn't get even more whittled down.

 

[^woody^]

Unless the rules have been recently amended, where a Local Planning Authority refuses permission for development which would have been permitted were it not for an article 4 direction then they can be liable for compensation.

Also to note, planning applications required as a consequence of an article 4 direction are exempt from fees.

None of that has got anything to do with this

 

[LukeB123]

Unless the rules have been recently amended, where a Local Planning Authority refuses permission for development which would have been permitted were it not for an article 4 direction then they can be liable for compensation.

? Be useful for some reading on this? seems against the whole point of having an Article 4.

Also to note, planning applications required as a consequence of an article 4 direction are exempt from fees.

This was altered last year; they would require the same fee as if they were a full planning application now if they are under an Article 4 direction. LINK: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/1314/pdfs/uksiem_20171314_en.pdf (Section 7.9)

Little bit harsh I think as some Councils (as ban-all-sheds said) have lots and/or very wide reaching Article 4's. Thems the rules though.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The one I referenced was imposed over the entire borough, with no regard to any specific housing densities in any locations.

 

[Nakajo]

Actually, I see that compensation can only be claimed 12 months from the earlier of either the date when the council gave notice of the Article 4 Direction, or the date that it took effect - so no compensation after all. And thanks for the 'heads-up' on the fee change. Either I missed it or (more probably) just plain forgot. (Yep, I know that none of this is relevant to the OP, but I didn't start it, did I, and anyway there's some threads here that run to 15 pages of inane drivel - not all of which is mine - so give me a break)

 

[^woody^]

but I didn't start it, did I, and anyway there's some threads here that run to 15 pages of inane drivel - not all of which is mine - so give me a break

I've posted off a couple of chill pills to you. Enjoy.

 

[Leofric]

It's a further step in the right direction, but the real improvement in providing more space would be allowing two-storey side extensions to be permitted development.

Shouldn't there be some concern about the appearance of building extensions ? I thought that was one of the reasons for Planning

 

[^woody^]

Shouldn't there be some concern about the appearance of building extensions ? I thought that was one of the reasons for Planning

Not at the back. No one cares .... except the two neighbours.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Depends on the building line - neighbours further away might care. If you've got pair of semis a couple of m apart, someone 2 doors down could easily be only 8-9m away from the extension.