Side extension: combining PD rights and planning

[mori neshat]

Hello,

I've been searching the forum and cant find a solution so thought I would ask instead.

I have a bungalow (12m x 7m) that has never been extended or altered since built in the 1950s.
It is in the greenbelt so I am allowed to extend by 40% of the volume under planning permission.

Is it possible to do a side extension 1) half the width of the original bungalow under PD rights i.e. 6 meters and 2) 40% of the volume beyond the 6 meters i.e a further 8 meters so total = 14 meters!

Is this possible on 1 planning application?

I am on a 1 acre plot with plenty of space around me.
Thank you in advance.

 

[garyo]

If you fancy your chances, then what you propose may now be possible following the recent high court decision to redefine the meaning of 'original dwelling' - see the other thread on that subject. i.e you'd get PP to add the 40% first, and then use your PD rights, using the [now extended] 15 metre building as the starting point.

see //www.diynot.com/diy/threads/permitted-development-rights-class-a.461957/#post-3683978

 

[mori neshat]

Thank you for your reply.

I have emailed my local council planning department to see if the High Court decision Hilton v secretary of state is applicable here.

Cheers

 

[garyo]

Thank you for your reply.

I have emailed my local council planning department to see if the High Court decision Hilton v secretary of state is applicable here.

Cheers

Please let us all know how they respond.

 

[tony1851]

You would have to build to completion the 6m side extension as one operation.
Once this is completed, you would then consider the enlargement of the extension.
If you did the whole lot in one go, it would not be permitted development.

Regarding your email to the council; the High Court decision will be applicable everywhere - councils will not be able to ignore it. As Garyo said, we
would be very interested to hear of your LPA's response. I suspect it unlikely that you will get a quick reply as they will probably be just as
in the dark as the rest of us.

Quite likely, the DCLG will push for new legislation to overturn the judgment as quickly as possible because it has far-reaching implications.

 

[Nakajo]

"If you did the whole lot in one go, it would not be permitted development." I understand why you say that, but in light of the judgment, I wonder if a court would really support that position (That said, I'm not going to find out!)

"Quite likely, the DCLG will push for new legislation to overturn the judgment as quickly as possible because it has far-reaching implications."

I don't know if you've noticed, but we don't really have a functional government at the moment.

 

[tony1851]

I don't know if you've noticed, but we don't really have a functional government at the moment.

LOL! Actually I did refer to that issue in the opening post of the 'Permitted Development:Class A' thread.