DevilDamo

You would require Prior Approval and neighbours that share a boundary with you would be notified. If nobody objects, then fine. If however the most impacted neighbour objects on loss of daylight, then the LPA may well look into the 45 degree lines. That being said, some LPA’s adopt a 45 degree line for two storey extensions and a 60 degree line for single storey extensions. The impact would also depend on what room(s) the windows or doors serve as it mostly applies to habitable rooms.

@Russell griffiths Paragraph 1.17c states the basin should not impede the space. Diagram 1.4 on the following page however does show a slight basin encroachment.

Although it’s actually a rectangle, 900mm wide x 750mm deep 😄

@Temp Not an option if the Phase 1 survey/assessment has picked up bat potential.

Like with anything, always obtain more than one quote. Also check lead in’s and timescales.

Did your BR approval include a number of conditions that listed the various reports/tests/certification required either before you completed that particular element or pre-completion? Where have you got the response within 8 weeks from? Is that the “rule” for your particular LABC? LABC’s can request additional information. But to keep asking for things that were never mentioned previously is not that fair. The LABC should be approached and asked to sign off the project. Take it to their senior should they not be pro-active or forthcoming with it.

You had stated a minimum size of 1.5 x 2.2m which is therefore larger than the 3sq.m allowance. If you’re sticking with the 2.2m length, then the width would need to reduce down to 1.35m which will give you a little more than 1m width internally. If you factor in an inward opening door on the side (like you have at present), it doesn’t leave you much circulation space. The only way for you to know if your proposals constitute PD, you will need to submit a Lawful Development Certificate application to the LPA. They will check the plot and site history along with the proposals meeting said requirements.

@Ryan Turner Didn’t put two and two together and didn’t realise you’re the same person who created the other post. The conversion doesn’t sound like it needs Planning. But your porch will (on the assumption you’re sticking with the dimensions as noted on the other post). Because of that, why not include them both under one Householder application?

Is it… integral, attached or detached? Are there any Planning conditions that restrict its conversion?

PD is PD. There isn’t any lenience one way or another. The OP would just need to apply for Planning and tbh, what are the chances a small porch extension wouldn’t go through?

Yeh, if the OP is willing to reduce it to 3sq.m, then that is a possibility. They’d still need to check the PD situation and rights being intact. Same with the garage conversion.

It projects forward of a principal elevation so would require Planning.

Not being within a CA isn’t the only trigger for these works not requiring Planning. Edit: And as a side note, the porch would exceed the PD requirements anyway so Planning would be required for that element for starters.

Eaves heights are irrelevant. It’s the overall height.

For example and illustrative purposes, houses like this would require Planning for a porch.