Rear Extension on stepped back wall

[Higgy28]

Hi all,

We engaged an architect to draw up a rear kitchen extension on our 1930s semi, but because the original back wall was stepped (kitchen protrudes an extra 1m), and the dining room side (attached to neighbours) is more than half the width of the property (dining room 3.5m wide and kitchen 2.5m wide) we would need to apply for planning permission as it is classified as a "Rear and Side Extension" so not covered by permitted development... As we were going through planning permission anyway we decided to extend slightly further to 3.4m on the dining room side / 2.4m on the kitchen side.

We went through the planning permission process but the planning officer advised that he wouldn't allow a pitched roof and to limit the height of the flat roof to 2.5m (despite our attached neighbours being to our South and many other properties on the street having high pitched roof extensions...). At the time we didn't think much of this and the plans are now approved, but when talking to builders to get quotes we are realising that this means the ceiling height would only be 2.2m when accounting for the warm flat roof which will feel very low inside, not the airy open plan space we are planning!.

Our architect doesn't seem to be able/willing to provide a solution to this ceiling height issue, blaming it on the planning department.

I've gone back and read through the permitted development guidelines for stepped back walls (which are not very clear), but I don't really understand why we couldn't do this under PD which allow up to 4m height, and currently up to 6m rear extension with neighbour approval?

Thanks

 

[DevilDamo]

but I don't really understand why we couldn't do this under PD which allow up to 4m height

Because as you’ve already mentioned, the PD rules for side “and” rear extensions make it difficult for you to achieve that.

Ask the architect to design a cold roof as that would increase your internal floor to ceiling height.

 

[Higgy28]

Because as you’ve already mentioned, the PD rules for side “and” rear extensions make it difficult for you to achieve that.

But could I not (hypothetically) build a 6m long, 4m high extension off the dining room under PD? Why would planning for a 3.4m long, ~3m high extension get rejected on the basis of imposing on the neighbours when this would be acceptable?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Because planning rules suck sometimes! But they are what they are and you have to work within them. But your architect should have told you you'd end up with a crappy floor to ceiling at the time (assuming he didn't) but we don't know how hard he fought (or didn't) to get a decent outcome.

 

[Higgy28]

But your architect should have told you you'd end up with a crappy floor to ceiling at the time (assuming he didn't) but we don't know how hard he fought (or didn't) to get a decent outcome.

Nobody made this clear until we were looking at the drawings with builders unfortunately... It definitely sounds like we would be fighting a losing battle trying to convince planning dept that we should be able to do what is effectively allowed under PD.

I'd prefer not to go with a cold roof to gain back the height - a 1930s house is cold enough after moving from a newbuild flat..!
We currently have a step down into the garden, so wondered if we made the extension level with this and removed the suspended floor from the dining room and set a new solid floor 20cm lower to regain the ceiling height? Has anyone ever done this? Would this cause other problems?

 

[^woody^]

Find a proper designer who knows planning matters and reapply for an extension and roof that meets your requirements. That includes not bowing down to the whims of a planning officer if the design does in fact meet the planning policies.

 

[wessex101]

But could I not (hypothetically) build a 6m long, 4m high extension off the dining room under PD? Why would planning for a 3.4m long, ~3m high extension get rejected on the basis of imposing on the neighbours when this would be acceptable?

This is a very good point. As others have suggested, those of us who deal with this on a regular basis have realised our Planning system is rubbish but you have to learn how to play the game. It seems like your designer just gave up and went for the easy result.

It could be worth at least theoretically confirming what you could achieve with permitted development and then using that as leverage to get the planning case officer to see sense. Generally they are not supposed to reject things that would be permissible under permitted development so how they came up with the maximum roof height of 2.5m is beyond me.

 

[A_Novice]

Find a proper designer who knows planning matters and reapply for an extension and roof that meets your requirements. That includes not bowing down to the whims of a planning officer if the design does in fact meet the planning policies.

For most people it isn't easy to simply "find a proper designer". They all talk the talk but seems not many have a clue.

 

[^woody^]

For most people it isn't easy to simply "find a proper designer". They all talk the talk but seems not many have a clue.

You have a point.

But now the OP at least now knows what a shiite designer looks like.