Ferdinand

Here you go. He also did a good series called "Playing at Spraying".

It did but there is a consultation process attached, with an "amenity evaluation" process triggered if anyone objects. Came in 2013. Made permanent 2019.

I'm sure there's a video in the 10 Minute Workshop series where he was experimenting with paint sprayers and came out looking like Frosty the Snowman ... SWMBO can make a model of "Painting Pocster" for the Christmas Cake.

Is that really the mean size of a new-build in the UK? Does that include flats That is from a 2011 RIBA report. More here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14916580#:~:text=The average UK home - including,15.8 sq m per room. Report here: https://web.archive.org/web/20140606025449/https://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/HomeWise/CaseforSpace.pdf I think the figure is everything. The sample was big developers on big sites. For a 3 bed it was 88sqm average. TBH we need up to date numbers, as space standards are in place in many places now. F

I think there's a little bit of comment at cross-purposes on this thread, as some commenters seem to have assumed that Planning Permission has been refused, whilst according to the OP the refusal has been to a Prior Approval Notification process under the Neighbour Consultation Scheme (that is the one relating to larger than normal single storey rear extensions built under PD). Sorry to flag that, but a lot is in the detail. Under NCS the Council are required to assess the impact on neighbour amenity for all neighbours if one neighbour objects; if no objection is received then the Council is required not to do the assessment of amenity. Does this affect the @timsk comment 1? I hope it perhaps does not. I do not know the exact process for evaluation Prior Approval Applications in practice, and how different that is to assessment of Planning Applications. You should imo be able to get hold of the reasons for refusal of your Prior Approval Notification and related correspondence (probably redacted for names etc). I am not aware that objections to PAN applications are in confidence under law. Ferdinand

Welcome. *Waves to Dave*

There's nothing to stop you proposing wording agreed between you and neighbour. If you were to get that done by a Planning Lawyer, then it is more likely to mean what you want than Council boilerplate. The Council need to adopt it, but I think this is quite regularly done. Ferdinand

Tan line for houses ...

It's your judgement as to what point you declare "too much aggro" over "please the neighbour". I think if you do it anyway then your neighbour's feathers will become unruffled surprisingly quickly, but the future relationship may be civil but wary on that topic. Your call if it matters. Personally I like the pitched roof, which gives you both what you want without paperwork. The main issue I can see with that 2nd approach is that the Council might not respect the wording you jointly propose, which is unpredictable. Your neighbour's position would be weaker but maybe resentful. It is your call whether that matters. That's not quite it. Planning and Civil law sit alongside each other, and you are subject to both. If you come to a private agreement, that will be regulated as an agreement under 'non-Planning Law' eg contract law, and any obligations under that agreement where planning law applies to the obligations will still be required to meet Planning Law. You could not, for example, come to a private agreement to put your drive in a place which violates visibility splay requirements. F

We have all sorts on BH - and at least a couple with the downstairs loo in the utility. Or you could just treat the utility as a sort of lobby with 600 cupboards one side and say floor to ceiling shelves the other, and a door at the end into the loo. So you get to the loo from the hall through the utility. A loo linked onto the end of the utility is more logical than access via the playroom - visitors can get to it without going "wey hey hey" on an errant skateboard. F

I think you are also better with the utility and WC being combined, and the entrance to the utility off the hall, with the WC at the end, ideally with a shower in it as well ... dogs and guests who cannot climb stairs. F

Depending on how the detail works, your "view through" could be a tall, thin window instead next to the patio door instead of the door yourself; it is working out what is best by sweating the detail as your design develops. Below I will add a piccie of the one I have in my 'fat at the back' extension. It just has a tall flower arrangement there. This is the concept I am talking about, with the hob in black. Having drawn it, the space is compact so you need to take care and get it exactly right. To have the hob there ideally the peninsula would be somewhat larger. Even without a hob a BB is a good thing there, as you get the kitchen-diner through sweating the space.

My first thought to improve that plan and make it a little more flexible would be: 1 - Move your patio doors slightly to the right - enough such that there is room at the LHS to put a sofa or a desk along the side wall should you wish to do so without blocking the window - say to give you 800-900 mm of wall between the window and the corner. 2 - The same move should give people coming into your front door a peep-view of the back garden, which is always a good thing architecturally, and a straight path through when needed - also good. 3 - I would turn the bottom arm of the G into a worktop perhaps 300 longer and 850 to 900 wide, so that the end and the back can be a breakfast bar with approx 2.2m run of seating which would be enough for 4-5 people if you need and 6 at a squeeze with one on the other size. That should still leave a comfortable access gap. Barstools will add almost nothing when under a 250-300mm overhang. If wanted you could extend the "G" to the LHS to align with the stair wall; that would be neater but would need a detailed workthrough. 4 - Then the LHS can become more than a formal dining space, and you could treat it as more a multifunctional with eg a table against the wall. I have a desk that folds in half lengthways and becomes a shelf against the wall, for example. 5 - Many people put their hob in such a location for socialising whilst cooking. Ferdinand

Or you could still be talking about it on BH ?.

Where's North, your best view, and any closeby neighbour houses? Am I correct the kitchen is the RHS of the diagram?

I think you also need to list your requirements, and how you will use it. What is it for? What are your priorities? Really this is a subquestion of "how shall we live?". I would suggest start with a plan if you have a defined space already and a half page Statement of Needs, including a list of stuff that needs to be in there. Just on the size, there is space for almost anything normal, probably including a breakfast bar plus perhaps a dining table. In normal house terms, that is a medium large sized reception room.

Aha. Southern Flatlanders ? . TBF I should have got that far with the location under my own steam. But I'm just thick.

Welcome. Were are you (ish) in the EM?

If you are going to be the villain filled with devious cunning, you could write them a "is it this or that" letter. Personally I would do it in 2 halves.

I would put a an access to the paddock in first from the road, if they may insist it is some sort of separate unit. Then obvs you need one from the house curtilege to access the horse.

You've borrowed the pointing hand from @Onoff ... Looks good.

What sort of pipes are you needing? Concrete or plastic? Don't buy this at all often, but when I buy heavy things my best local place in Buildbase Civils and Lintels.

Swimming hole or small natural lake? (Depends on the water of course) Gets you boasting rights over mere wildlife meadows.

Sorry - this published too soon. More content is required. And now I can't edit it due to the Lockdown.

I would JFDI unless there is a good reason not to. I think there is also the principle that people with a right of way can improve the surface, and that it is less than 30cm high, which excludes that reason for needing PP. I think the @Temp comment nails it.