DevilDamo

Planning If it’s considered to be PD and you submit a CoL application before it’s built, it’ll cost £103.00. If it’s considered to be PD and you submit a CoL application after it’s built, it’ll cost £206.00. If it’s not considered to be PD, it’ll cost you £206.00 irrespective if a HH application is submitted before or after. Building Regulations If it requires BR approval, you apply by submitting a BN or FP application before it’s built with the standard fees. If it requires BR approval and you apply after it’s built, you’ll have to submit a Regularisation Certificate application which if I remember correctly, the fees are approx. 20% more. I think I’ve covered all situations ? So it’s cheaper and can also be quicker to deal with it sooner rather than later, i.e. before it’s built.

Your other ‘option’ and I use the word loosely is to build the workshop, wait to see if it’s picked up and if so, deal with it retrospectively. In the long term, this could actually work out more expensive.

This is why the Planning Portal isn't the best thing for you because it doesn't go into detail for these kind of situations. In my opinion and if you were to attach a building to an existing outbuilding, the buildings 'together' would need to comply with the PD rules... if you were looking to go down that route. In that respect, the building as a whole would need to have eaves no higher than 2.5m and an overall height that does not exceed 3m. For a dual pitched roof, the overall height is increased to 4m but I do not think the LPA would consider the resulting design as a dual pitched/gable roof. You mentioned the overall height of the extended part would be 2.4m so does that imply the overall height of the existing Garage may exceed 3m? In terms of Building Regulations, they may also look at it as an outbuilding. Under their guidance, any outbuilding that exceeds 30sq.m in (internal) floor area require a BR application. If you were to physically separate the workshop from the Garage, I think you could get that through PD as well as being exempt from BR's. That is why on another forum, I mentioned to you about providing a gap of approx. 300mm. I know this isn't ideal as it means more excavation and another new wall but if you are wanting exemption, then this may be the only way to go. A 300mm gap isn't great for access and could provide an area for bits and pieces to gather but there'd be no harm in sealing off the gap at the head in order to help prevent this. Just out of interest, what are your reasons in wanting to try and avoid seeking Planning and Building Regulation approvals? I can't see any issue why you wouldn't secure approvals anyway.

That’s the one @Mike!

@starbuckhouse Weren’t happy with the advice and guidance we provided on DIYnot then ? It’s not as clear cut as you think hence why the advice is to really check with both Planning and Building Control. Just out of interest, is the double garage existing and was built at the same time as the original house? That may help in advising the Planning side of things.

Those plans are somewhat "interesting" and upon first impressions, do appear to present an interim/temporary measure. The Kitchen/Dining area is huge!!! It'd be interesting to see what Building Control think of not having a W.C. on the ground floor. Both Bedroom's on the first floor have En-suite's, which is fine but my preference would be to have a family/shared Bathroom. It does look like you could get quite a bit more from that development, unless Planning restrictions dictated otherwise. But anyway and back to your original question, I can't see why you could not obtain Prior Approval for converting part of the building to residential while retaining some office space.

Have just seen you’re from Devon way so not sure their procedure on PSN’s, so get in contact with them yourself to see what the situation is. I deal with the Home Counties a lot and all, if not the majority require PSN’s.

As we’re all talking from our own experiences, it appears it does differ from LPA to LPA where as I mentioned, we’ve always had PSN’s put up on the site. In relation to site visits, this may also different from LPA to LPA as we’ve always had those too, irrespective of the size of the development. We even have visits for CoL applications, but not for NMA’s. VoC applications also attract site visits.

@nod Where did you get that information from? Planning Site Notices are required for the majority of applications where public comments are accepted. Some LPA’s put these notices up themselves, some send them to the applicant and some send them to the agent. If a PSN is not up and present for when the Planning Officer carries out their site visit, this could potentially delay the determination of the application. Due to how the country is dealing with the current situation, there may be delays to the process. If you’re unsure, get in contact with the Planning department.

If only!!! The LPA’s argument has been that any application is determined on the ‘current’ situation, so they could not agree a respectable percentage increase on something that doesn’t exist.

The Approved Documents (for England) state... "A room (which may be a WC/cloakroom or a bathroom) containing a WC is provided on the entrance storey or, where there are no habitable rooms on the entrance storey, on the principal storey or the entrance storey" I have come across the requirement for a Bathroom or Shower provision (usually the latter) on the entrance storey of a new dwelling but that was something to do with designing for the ageing population. I'm not even sure it's still a thing to be honest as I haven't been asked to do it for new build dwellings recently. The guidelines stated that a W.C. should be capable of being adapted to a wet room in the future along with a habitable area becoming a Bedroom. In addition to this, we also had to make sure an area of the dwelling was suitable to accommodate a lift so would need to demonstrate trimming and strengthening of floors, etc... As mentioned, I'm not even sure it's still a thing/requirement anymore unless it is with specific LA's.

These balconies can be installed under PD providing they comply with the PD guidelines. So in most cases, they have nothing to do with Planning or potential neighbourly concerns. Only if installed to new habitable rooms at first floor level.

Just out of interest, what do the Planning approved drawings show... a gap or no gap? The first thing to note is to build in accordance with the approved drawings and if changes are needed to the drawings as a result of this gap, then that could potentially warrant a revised application.

That is a good result! With some of the LPA’s down this way, they have stated we’d have to build out the PD works before submitting a Full application for a replacement dwelling within the Green Belt plus any increase. This is obviously a massive inconvenience along with substantially additional and abortive costs, but the LPA aren’t too concerned about that. On one particular project, which were extensions to a dwelling within the Green Belt, we did finally reach an agreement with the LPA. We presented them with outline drawings illustrating what could be done via PD, which they came back and said to not worry about submitting a CoL application but just submit an application for a 50% increase. This did involve several emails and telephone conversations with the original Planning Officer but ended up going direct to the Head of Planning.

Glad this is now sorted James ?

A change of use from B1 to C4 isn’t covered via Permitted Development/Prior Approval. Under Class O, did he therefore seek PA for a change of use from B1 to C3 but was always going to use the building as an HMO?

As mentioned already and it depends how different the rules are for Scotland but for England, first floor windows to habitable rooms would require escape windows.

Are you at all surprised because of what has happened? Of course they’re going to want to cover all basis in the unlikely event of a problem arising in the future. The majority of contractors prefer to use Approved Inspectors for reasons not dis-similar to this, i.e. Council inspectors requesting more and more reassurances. There are less AI’s nowadays, which therefore restricts your options.

You may not require Planning approval for the roof alteration providing you have PD rights and the alterations comply with those set out by the PD guidelines. You will require Building Regulation approval as it involves changes to an element. Building Control would like to know the size of the new rafters, insulation and ventilation provisions. You could deal with the BR side of things via a Building Notice as opposed to a Full Plans application.