Two storey extension

[Kate Higgins]

Hi,
I have a linked detached where my garage is linked to my neighbours garage. We want to put an extension above our garage which a builder has told us is fine. They would build a new wall so we would no longer be linked and then we can go straight up.
However, the planning office website says you have to leave a 1m gap from the boundary?
Obviously this would then be pointless.
Is this definitely the case or is it that the 1m is from his actual house?
Any help would be great.

 

[LemonSqueezy]

Im not sure where the 1m rule the planning officer quoted comes from. Greater concern would be the adequacy of the existing garage footings to take a 2nd storey - or are you demolishing the garage entirely and using digging out dedicated footings?

If the space and underlying services permits, you should be able to build up to your boundary line (in theory). In practice there may be a raft of other issues, light, PWA etc.

I stand to be corrected as im not a planning expert.

 

[Kate Higgins]

Yes we would rebuild so the footings would support the second storey.
Thank you

 

[DevilDamo]

The 1m rule is very common amongst LPA’s and is required in order to avoid the terracing effect. The distance is taken from the boundary line.

 

[LemonSqueezy]

The 1m rule is very common amongst LPA’s and is required in order to avoid the terracing effect. The distance is taken from the boundary line.

Looks like planning officer is correct. I was able to build within a ft of the boundary on an old property i owned but, the neighbouring semi was quite well set back and at an angle, so no chance of terracing effect.

 

[Kate Higgins]

Our neighbours the other side have done what we want with the people they are linked to. Would this make it more likely for us to get permission?

 

[LemonSqueezy]

Its an interesting point - You could raise this with the planning officer to determine if your proposal is an outright refusal or if there is some leeway for discussion.

It would be worth an email to them and copying in the local authority planning information (elevation, plans and decision notice) of the neighbors house found on the LA planning website. I would look at the decision notice anyway to check what was considered by the planners in their report.

To be honest, it would be the first question i would have asked after being told to set it back a metre from boundary.

 

[DevilDamo]

With there already being a precedent will help, but will not guarantee approval as each application is determined on its own merits.

Is the house opposite the exact same type as yours as well as it’s position within the plot, impact on neighbours, etc...? How long ago did the house opposite start their works as this may dictate if the 1m separation rule applied to them? You could also try to view the Planning Officers’ report for that extension to see as to how or why it was approved.

 

[^woody^]

There are no precedents in planning applications. They won't/ can't approve a proposal that does not meet the current planning policy just because there is something similar, or an existing contravention near by. ie they won't repeat poor planning decisions.

Some councils operate a first to the boundary rule and then make the other neighbour keep 2m away, others allow both neighbours to build up to 1m from the boundary, which gives a 2m gap.

The principle can be to avoid terracing, but also to maintain space and visual amenity. You need to find out exactly what the rule is, and what the reasoning behind it is - it won't be just for the sake of keeping 1 or 2 metres away, but our will be to achieve a specific aim.

 

[Nakajo]

What I do in this situation is play the precedent card. It might not get past the planning officer, but it usually satisfies the planning inspector, on appeal.

 

[^woody^]

What I do in this situation is play the precedent card.

The joker?

 

[Nakajo]

The ace.

 

[DevilDamo]

Precedent’s can help. For example... Replacement and raising of a roof by 1m to a detached property. The Pre-app advice was positive, the application was refused twice by the LPA but won on Appeal. The property opposite used that precedent to do the same and sailed through first time round.