DevilDamo

The existing main house has a flat roof, which you want to replace with a pitched roof? If so, then yes... it would need formal Planning as you’ll be increasing the overall height of the building. Whether the LPA would approve it is anybody’s guess. Are there other local properties who already have the design that may set a precedent?

No they don’t. One LPA near me suspended their Pre-app service around 4/5 years ago. However, the majority of LPA’s do offer it. That process isn’t for people to ask whether they need Planning or not as that is what the CoL application process is for. Pre-app relates to formal and Full Planning applications where Council’s advise on compliance with policy.

That may have worked many years ago but not now. It’s now more of a case, submit a CoL application and they’ll tell you whether or not it’s PD.

Although "highway" is not defined in the Order, common law usage is that a highway is a way over which the public are entitled to pass and re-pass, including a footpath. You will therefore require Planning to erect a wall or fence over 1m in that location.

The original dwelling will be the current dwelling.

The definition is not dis-similar to that as referred to in the Permitted Development handbook... “Original means a building as it existed on 1 July 1948 where it was built before that date, and as it was built if built after that date.” The percentage increase would only normally apply to dwellings within the Green Belt. If however you are trying to explore the maximum uplift, you could utilise PD rights on the original house and secure them via a LDC application. Your LPA may request you build out the PD extensions before submitting an application for a replacement dwelling based on the PD/extended floor area plus 30%. LPA’s have different rules and regulations on this.

In the majority of cases, that will be fine. However, you may need to check with your LPA as to the exact classification of this piece of land. Even though it may be in your ownership, there may be a clause somewhere that states this area as being ‘public amenity’ land. Your other option is to enclose the space and after four years, submit a Lawful Development Certificate application for an existing use.

What’s the existing situation as in who already has the ‘good’ side?

Is there scope to accommodate a pitched roof as a 3m eaves height and 4m overall height is usually a lot more achievable?

Yes it is. The BCO wants confirmation (usually via an engineer) that the existing structural elements are suitable to receive the additional loading. These elements usually include but are not limited to lintels, steels and foundations.

Just refer to the Building Regulations that are not specifically related to dwelling houses. The Approved Documents to differentiate between them where applicable.

Hip to gable roof extensions can be carried out under PD providing they meet the requirements. If however the OP is proposing a two storey side extension with the gable roof over that, then that’s not PD and the LPA will determine the proposals including roof type/shape via Planning policy.

Probably more so for those historical works. Will also depend on what the Planning/PD rules were then as we all know things have become more stringent as time passes by. I was also thinking if you were going down the LDC route, this may well trigger CIL... something you don’t really want to start getting into. There may also be other policies that come into effect, e.g. impact on any SPA, etc... Let sleeping dogs lie ?

The LDC application fee for an existing use is the same as that if it was a Full application. I’d therefore say you’d be looking at £3696, i.e. 8 x £462.

You would if there’s an Article 4 Direction, the volume uplift has already been used up, the property is in a designated area or the side elevation may be the principal elevation which fronts a highway.

PD is split into various use classes, i.e. extensions, loft conversions, outbuildings, etc... You are not allocated a certain percentage before requiring formal Planning. Applicants can choose to obtain a CoL should they require confirmation from the LPA works are PD. This is not mandatory. Obtaining the relevant approvals/confirmations is always better and easier than having to worry about if/when you come to sell. The PD rules for outbuildings are here... https://www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200130/common_projects/43/outbuildings The PD rules for loft conversions/extensions is here... https://www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200130/common_projects/36/loft_conversion Note these rules and guidance only relate to Planning and does not exempt you from Building Regulations. Some outbuildings are exempt from BR’s (check the Planning Portal website) and loft conversions/extensions will require BR’s.

So your revised application would include all three plots again!?! Depending on the amendments, they may be considered Non-material or material alterations that would warrant a S73/VoC application.

@Suffolk_J What changes are you proposing as it would help dictate what Planning application is required? And as @the_r_sole mentioned, you can only utilise PD rights upon completion of the build, subject to them not having been withdrawn obviously.

The LPA wouldn’t request the extension is pulled down as it’s beyond the time for enforcement action. For that added piece of mind, you could submit a Lawful Development Certificate application to confirm its status. This is used a lot for those to confirm something that didn’t at the time obtain Planning has been in-situ for at least four years. Any future Planning or Building Regulation application to alter the windows/doors would solely deal with those elements.

In ‘normal’ Planning terms, I would say that’d be classed as a front/infill extension as you’re increasing the habitable floor space. Under PD, I would therefore say infilling that space would count towards your PD limit. You have already provided a porch over an external door and if it already measures 3sq.m, anything more would require Planning.

Hopefully they were talking about Building Regulations as Planning is very different. The Permitted Development rules for flats are different to houses. Have a read here... https://www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200130/common_projects/21/flats_and_maisonettes/5 Are there any particular Planning restrictions, i.e. Listed Building, Conservation Area, Article 4 Direction? Building Regulations would apply to replacement windows.

You cannot utilise PD on an extension as PD relates to the ‘original’ house. If you’re looking to deal with it post completion of the extension, you’d have to submit another Householder application. There may be an option to deal with it now but you’d need to speak to the Planning Officer to establish the best way to deal with it. A Variation of Condition/Section 73 application may be an option.

It’s always common to have the enhanced architectural details and features on a front elevation, especially when that is considered to be the principal elevation. It’s very rare to continue this to the rear elevation, especially as it adds additional costs.

If your LPA offer it, you could choose to submit an informal Pre-application enquiry. However, I am 99% sure their response would confirm the proposals would not constitute PD and a formal Planning application would be required.

This would be down to the PO’s interpretation and is determined on a case by case basis. The bay windows are located on the rear elevation but I suppose there is a ‘part’ argument they do form some kind of side elevation, albeit angled. Are the trees protected because it not, you’ll struggle to use them to afford privacy and reduce overlooking to neighbours? If I was in your position, I’d argue to leave the windows and if Planning is refused, Appeal it. I’d be surprised if Planning were to refuse the whole application based on angled bay windows. If anything, they can condition them to be obscured and have no openings below 1.7m, etc... But I feel that would be a little harsh and you could challenge that condition via a Section 73 application post Planning approval.