PP where rear of house faces the road

[tekhoi]

My house is a semi built the other way round to normal, the rear faces the road and the front faces a park.

There is a detached garage at the rear with small driveway onto the road.

If I want to add a conservatory to the rear of the house, is this something that will need planning permission?

 

[tony1851]

No, as long as it does not project more than 3m.

 

[southwesterly]

it depends which elevation your planning department regard as the front

 

[luisdesign]

This will depend on various factors as to whether you can get the addition to fall within your permitted development rights.

The important wording you need to establish is not "front" or "rear" but is actually what is considered the "principal" elevation.

This is because the permitted development rules limit development if an addition would be on the "principal" elevation AND face a highway.

In your case, it may be argued that the elevation facing the highway is not the principal elevation, and this the addition would not be on the principal elevation AND the highway (it would just be on the highway).

This is really down to the planning officers judgement though, and will be determined based on the appearance of the elevations. It should be noted that the principal elevation is not necessarily the one that has the front door in it.

You should speak with a local planning officer for their comment. However, be careful how you word the questions... try to keep things vague as most authorities will try to claim control. Just go in with pictures of your elevations along with a site plan and ask them to confirm which they would consider as the principal one.

 

[tony1851]

most authorities will try to claim control.

We actually agree on something!
My LPA tried to convince a client of mine that a hip-to-gable conversion on a 1930s semi needed p.p. The client thought I was incompetent until I showed him the diagram from the 'loopholes' on Steve Speed's planning site.

The OP seems to know which is the front (sorry, principal) elevation and which is the back. If I was in his shoes I wouldn't even waste time asking someone at Planning as by default they usually say 'yes, it does'.
Another ruse the OP needs to be careful about is the "you-can-apply-for-a-LDC" line. I hope he doesn't fall for that one; some LPAs try anything to get the fees in and keep their work.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Ignoring the rest of this thread, on the subject of LDC's they're not so bad, solicitors have little to no knowledge of PD so are duty bound to ask for confirmation permission was granted or was not required and LDC's accommodate that. Otherwise an indemnity has to be paid for and nervous buyers can pull out.

 

[rjm2k]

Check your councils planning website for applications on similar properties nearby, read the reports to see if you can work out the councils view on this (if you are lucky, they might be consistent rather than appearing to make things up as they go).

 

[luisdesign]

Ignoring the rest of this thread, on the subject of LDC's they're not so bad, solicitors have little to no knowledge of PD so are duty bound to ask for confirmation permission was granted or was not required and LDC's accommodate that. Otherwise an indemnity has to be paid for and nervous buyers can pull out.

I'd agree with this.

I would always suggest to clients that a LDC is the safest way to proceed as you never know when it might come back to haunt you. You have to remember that if you do not apply, then the council could still come along and ask you if that extension is lawful... you'd need to provide a certificate you wouldn't have... and the cost for a LDC application is double if you've already carried out the work!

I'd say just swallow it early on and you won't ever have to worry about it.


As for solicitors, they are almost as bad as estate agents...