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

Rear Extension to sidewall of existing rear extension.

Discussion in 'Building Regulations and Planning Permission' started by Dan gmail, 26 Feb 2021.

  1. Dan gmail

    Dan gmail

    Joined:
    20 Feb 2021
    Messages:
    14
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Yeah that's what I thought, so you think the officer is incorrect in this case that it's connected?
     
  2. Sponsored Links
  3. DevilDamo

    DevilDamo

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2010
    Messages:
    1,936
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Below is an extract from the Officer’s Report...

    The enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would have a single storey and –
    (i) extend beyond the rear wall of the original dwellinghouse by more than 4 metres in the case of a detached dwellinghouse, or 3 metres in the case of any other dwellinghouse, or
    (ii) exceed 4 metres in height

    YES – The proposed depth is measured at approx. 4.61m. Moreover,
    there is an existing original double storey rear extension at the property which has been extended on the ground floor (by approx. 3.9m). The proposed structure would be structurally joined to it and hence, cumulatively the depth would exceed 3m.

    The enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would extend beyond a wall forming a side elevation of the original dwellinghouse, and would –
    (i) exceed 4 metres in height,
    (ii) have more than a single storey, or
    (iii) have a width greater than half the width of the
    original dwellinghouse

    Yes to (iii) the proposed extension would be joined with an original rear extension and when combined, the two structures would have a width greater than half the width of the original house

    @Dan gmail You are aware this is a LDC and not PA application? I was wondering why the Officer’s Report made reference to the length if it was as you mentioned a PA application. I’d probably suggest for you to not worry about other people’s applications... unless you have some kind of direct connection to the applicant, agent or application?
     
  4. wessex101

    wessex101

    Joined:
    4 Jul 2013
    Messages:
    1,144
    Thanks Received:
    193
    Location:
    Dorset
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    100%, although to be generous it was DevilDamo's aerial photo that was the clincher so if you did not make it clear to the planning officer that it was an original 2 storey outrigger it is a natural assumption for the planning officer to make.

    Sometimes you have to spoon feed the information to them to get the result you want. Don't rely on them to go hunting for it.
     
  5. Dan gmail

    Dan gmail

    Joined:
    20 Feb 2021
    Messages:
    14
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I am not concerned about other peoples application, as I said previous its for the purpose of research as is one of the reasons councils put this information in the public domain. The PA application is 21/00152/PRH I must have pasted the wrong one.
     
    Last edited: 1 Mar 2021
  6. DevilDamo

    DevilDamo

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2010
    Messages:
    1,936
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    That reference does now relate to a PA application and which has been granted.

    The Officer’s Report from that application states...

    “Although the scheme would not be permitted under Class A, an amenity assessment has been carried out and it is considered that the proposal would cause no substantial harm to neighbour amenity and therefore Prior Approval is NOT REQUIRED.”

    Can you clarify what the issue is? Are you agreeing or disagreeing with the outcome of the PA application?
     
  7. Dan gmail

    Dan gmail

    Joined:
    20 Feb 2021
    Messages:
    14
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    The PA is granted because it doesn't effect amenity but that's not the question, its this "Although the scheme would not be permitted under Class A" according to gov guidance you can build a staggered extension off each rear wall so long as they dont overlap, so I don't see why its not permitted.
     
  8. DevilDamo

    DevilDamo

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2010
    Messages:
    1,936
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I think you'll find they do overlap, which may have just been a minor error by the architect. LPA's are very strict on PD...

    https://ibb.co/KsV3Kgk

    https://ibb.co/QYcBc83

    (Original = Red, Blue = Previous extension, Green = Proposed extension)
     
  9. Sponsored Links
Loading...

Share This Page