DevilDamo

Having read more into it, it appears you don’t need an existing building to benefit from those temporary PD rights. Is this outbuilding solely connected to the construction of the new dwelling and is not a storage container of furniture (for example) from the demolished dwelling?

If the existing house has been demolished, what PD rights are you trying to benefit from? PD rights cease to exist upon the demolition of a building.

In which case the outbuilding requires Planning. Assume no outbuilding was indicated on the main approval, which you could use to submit a Variation of Condition application?

Does the outbuilding not meet the PD requirements?

Correct but a maximum height of 2.5m when positioned within 2m of a boundary.

What relevance does that have to do with the OP’s question on PD?

Anything attached to the house would be deemed and treated as an extension, not an outbuilding.

Where have you got that information from?

Are you referring to the decelerations that the client, designer and contractor need to sign as part of the Dutyholders requirements?

It depends upon your LPA’s policies. If it already comes forward, you can still make the front element appear sub-ordinate/servient.

You need to answer it in conjunction with the previous CIL Form 1.

If your positive interpretation of that will help, then so be it. They would have suggested “minor” amendments if it would result in an approval.

What is the application for? There is no such thing as a free go anymore. Any revised application will attract a new application. Wait for the formal determination and address the reasons for refusal along with the additional information within the Officers’ Report. Then decide whether to re-submit or Appeal. In my opinion, a pre-application enquiry wouldn’t be of any benefit as the Officers’ Report should provide you with enough information.

https://mflinsurance.com/expertise/affinity/ciat/

Maybe so. But if that’s the OP’s end goal, then why beat around the bush!?!

Why don’t you just submit a Householder application for the erection of a detached annexe ancillary to the existing dwelling? One application, one fee, one Planning process, less headache?

Count yourself lucky the fee is per application and not per condition. The LPA still have to carry out consultations and the fee you pay nowhere near covers their fees in processing the application. And… you could have challenged to remove said conditions if you felt the information had already been provided.

Why didn’t you submit the NMA application as I thought that is what you are/were doing to save costs? Just submit the one VoC that covers all items.

Two things… - What made you think those changes would be considered as minor amendments? - Your LPA must be going through a very quiet phase if they’re turning around NMA applications within 2 days. Just submit a Variation of Condition application and deal with all the changes in one go.

Are there any previous PD restrictions which relate to the outbuilding? If not, then providing you meet the PD requirements, then nothing to do with Planning. It would require Building Regulations.

But you are also assuming the gable is a projection where it could be and may well be on a flat elevation. Remember OS maps are not 100% accurate.

Yes you are. The OS map shows the approx. outline of the existing house. The south-west wall is the front elevation which comprises the front gable on the photo. The rectangle behind the house is or was an outbuilding. But we don’t have a photo of that (which isn’t really relevant anyway). The OP is proposing to erecting an outbuilding to the front (small office/gym) and another outbuilding to the rear (double garage).

What are you asking… if it’s PD or would Planning be refused?