'Original House' term. Is a canopy included?

[Council]

Hello,

Since the 1900's, our house had a canopy attached with side walls and pillars. Unfortunately, it got demolished after the 1950's and it is no longer there. However, in the place of a canopy, there is an extension built in the 1970's.

What I want to ask is whether a Canopy is included as an 'Original House'? The 1940's OS map clearly shows that a canopy existed.

Thank you.

* The term "original house" means the house as it was first built or as it stood on 1 July 1948 (if it was built before that date). Although you may not have built an extension to the house, a previous owner may have done so.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

That, is a good question, in the meantime what's the context?

 

[Council]

That, is a good question, in the meantime what's the context?

Hi,

So the reason I wanted to ask this question because I am looking to extend my house 6m full width. I have attached my drawing in the next post, so you can get a better idea

 

[Nakajo]

I think you have a very good case. Have we just identified an instance where an LDC might actually be useful?

 

[Council]

I think you have a very good case. Have we just identified an instance where an LDC might actually be useful?

Hey,

Sorry, what is an LDC? What can they provide?

I have updated my sketch so that it is clear to anyone reading
View attachment 84150

Top sketch shows the house and a canopy between 1900s - 1950s, before it got demolished and replaced with a proper extension.

Since the 1970s, this is how it looks like on the Council's OS map website.
View attachment 84151

 

[^woody^]

I don't understand the relevance of a canopy that is no longer there, but an extension that is in it's place

 

[Council]

I don't understand the relevance of a canopy that is no longer there, but an extension that is in it's place

So a Canopy which is no longer there means it wouldn't count as an 'original house' in your opinion? Just trying to figure out if i can extend my house full 6m from the rear of the canopy (which is no longer there) or from the rear of the actual house.

 

[^woody^]

In a planning context, you need to go from the house elevation, and not the edge of anything attached to the elevation such as a canopy - whether it is or was there.

 

[Nakajo]

I doubt if anyone would know what it was unless you told them

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

[QOTE="Nakajo, post: 3448729, member: 224668"]I doubt if anyone would know what it was unless you told them[/QUOTE]
Yes I was thinking that though could be quite a risky strategy.

 

[Nakajo]

I'm not saying one should lie, merely remove the word 'canopy'

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

I'm not saying one should lie, merely remove the word 'canopy'

If he was your client would you recommend that strategy?

 

[^woody^]

I'm not saying one should lie, merely remove the word 'canopy'

And what do you do when the planner does their site visit?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

 

[Nakajo]

And what do you do when the planner does their site visit?

You mean when the officer does their site visit and sees that the structure that isn't there (and hasn't been there for many years) still isn't there? Maybe nothing?