1. Visiting from the US? Why not try DIYnot.US instead? Click here to continue to DIYnot.US.
    Dismiss Notice

Prior Approval

Discussion in 'Building Regulations and Planning Permission' started by Nakajo, 8 Jun 2017.

  1. Nakajo

    Nakajo

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2014
    Messages:
    2,012
    Thanks Received:
    178
    Location:
    Berkshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    In light of the Hilton judgment and the subsequent clarifying amendment to the GPDO (so ignoring the presently incorrect technical guidance), my understanding is that the attached is Permitted Development (subject to Prior Approval Notification).

    Why?

    Because the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would have a single storey and would not extend beyond the original dwellinghouse by more than 8m.

    It seems to me that this is the same test as applied to the Hilton case (although in that instance, the existing double-height extension was full width):

    http://pa.bexley.gov.uk/online-appl...tails.do?activeTab=dates&keyVal=NN7CIPBE06400

    In the Hilton case, the appellant proposed a further, full-width, single-storey extension to an existing full-width, part single- and part two-storey extension.

    Agree?

    Existing:

    existing.jpg
    Proposed:

    proposed.jpg
     
    Last edited: 8 Jun 2017
  2. Sponsored Links
  3. wessex101

    wessex101

    Joined:
    4 Jul 2013
    Messages:
    1,165
    Thanks Received:
    196
    Location:
    Dorset
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I haven't checked so off the top of my head (so probably wrong) post Hilton we are back to where we were, I thought if you propose an extension that joins to an existing extension they can take the proposed and existing extensions as one unit and would therefore be outside PD.

    Even if they accept the existing extension as part of the "original" house the proposed extension becomes a wrap around side/rear extension so outside the scope of the larger home extension scheme.

    Having said that I have seen examples with one of my local Councils where they have approved wrap around side/rear extensions under this scheme so probably worth putting in the application anyway.
     
  4. Nakajo

    Nakajo

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2014
    Messages:
    2,012
    Thanks Received:
    178
    Location:
    Berkshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    With regards to the wraparound argument, the net result is the same as building out the first 3.5m under 'normal' PD. Completing that. Waiting a respectable amout of time, and then submitting a Prior Approval Notification for the remaining 2m. However, because the PD part would be completed without any notification, the LPA would have no knowledge that it wasn't there to begin with!
     
  5. wessex101

    wessex101

    Joined:
    4 Jul 2013
    Messages:
    1,165
    Thanks Received:
    196
    Location:
    Dorset
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I agree, but rather a long drawn out process. I cannot imagine many clients would be prepared to undertake such a convoluted project.

    Personally I would advise the client that it appears not to be PD (obviously I would do more research first) but worth banging in larger home extension/prior approval application on the off chance that the planners are having an off day (and be rather careful what I showed on the application, not deliberately misleading just economical with the facts)
     
  6. Nakajo

    Nakajo

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2014
    Messages:
    2,012
    Thanks Received:
    178
    Location:
    Berkshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    My recollection is that PA requires 'a plan' - and that the LPA have no provision to request additional information unless their is neighbour objection - which I think highly unlikely in this context.
     
  7. wessex101

    wessex101

    Joined:
    4 Jul 2013
    Messages:
    1,165
    Thanks Received:
    196
    Location:
    Dorset
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Whilst the larger home extension scheme only requires a very basic plan the one thing you want to avoid is a neighbour objection so why wouldn't you produce a plan that shows the scheme in it's best light to show to the neighbour before you submit the application to make sure they are on side? Lack of detail and communication is probably far more likely to receive an objection.

    Having said that this project looks well screened from the neighbours but I would still produce a drawing, probably not to full planning application standard but certainly so the neighbour could understand what was proposed and get the client to go and see the neighbours and butter them up.

    Where are all the usual suspects? their planning knowledge is far better than mine. Are they Corbynista's nursing a massive hangover after all the celebrations or maybe devastated Tories crying into their cornflakes?
     
  8. geraldthehamster

    geraldthehamster

    Joined:
    7 Feb 2010
    Messages:
    2,969
    Thanks Received:
    320
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Isn't that a 5m deep extension with two storeys? I.e., not PD
     
  9. LukeB123

    LukeB123

    Joined:
    4 Nov 2014
    Messages:
    207
    Thanks Received:
    38
    Location:
    West Midlands
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I think I am in the same boat as Gerald / Wessex - although I have not really checked the new legislation thoroughly, but would like to hear some clarification.

    I assume that he wrap around extension shouldn't be an argument because it's not extending off an original side wall, just the original rear wall? However, the height of the non original extension would mean that you couldn't gain Prior Approval?
     
  10. Sponsored Links
  11. Nakajo

    Nakajo

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2014
    Messages:
    2,012
    Thanks Received:
    178
    Location:
    Berkshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Gerald and Wessex are in different boats. As is the way of things in the internet, I realise now, that I really only asked in order to confirm my prejudice. So, I'm just going to proceed on the basis of my existing understanding.
     
  12. wessex101

    wessex101

    Joined:
    4 Jul 2013
    Messages:
    1,165
    Thanks Received:
    196
    Location:
    Dorset
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I think me and my little ship mates are all in the same boat, it aint PD, not even under prior approval larger extension rules. To paraphrase the revised GDO, the total enlargement is taken as the new extension with the existing enlargement, so it is a 2 storey extension deeper than 3 metres etc. (you made me sit down and read small extracts from the my bloody GDO so now I am an expert!)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Nakajo

    Nakajo

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2014
    Messages:
    2,012
    Thanks Received:
    178
    Location:
    Berkshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    If that were true, then the Bexley scheme wouldn't be PD+, but the High Court has confirmed that it is. My understanding it that the subsequent amendment to the GPDO supports the position of the High Court.
     
  14. wessex101

    wessex101

    Joined:
    4 Jul 2013
    Messages:
    1,165
    Thanks Received:
    196
    Location:
    Dorset
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I took the exact opposite conclusion, I thought the revised GDO was specifically brought out to close the Hilton loophole.

    I can't keep up with this Planning malarkey, it's worse than politics.

    There were a few regulars who were more up to speed on the Hilton case and subsequent fall out so hopefully they will be along soon to put me out of my misery.
     
  15. Nakajo

    Nakajo

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2014
    Messages:
    2,012
    Thanks Received:
    178
    Location:
    Berkshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Well, we agree on one thing; it's immensely confusing. :)
     
  16. freddiemercurystwin

    freddiemercurystwin

    Joined:
    21 Jan 2007
    Messages:
    19,345
    Thanks Received:
    2,164
    Location:
    Devon
    Country:
    United Kingdom
  17. garyo

    garyo

    Joined:
    11 Apr 2006
    Messages:
    2,107
    Thanks Received:
    196
    Location:
    Berkshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Me too. My existing extension would benefit with it still being open so I'm very interested in this thread. I tried to understand the judgement previously posted on another thread and couldn't make sense of it.
     
Loading...

Share This Page