Separate PD and PP approvals for different elements of the build - do we have permission?

[Jaffa]

We are trying to build a side return extension in Birmingham. Working through an architectural/planning practice, we initially applied for Permitted Development. We were not able to get the full plan approved due to the length of our existing rear wing (7.5m), being told that PD would only apply for up to 6m from the rear of the building, with planning officers judging our home to have two rears; one from the main part of the building and one from the rear wing.

 

We altered our PD application to cover up to the 6m mark and then applied for Planning Permission for the remaining 1.5m. We were also not able to get this full plan approved as Birmingham only enable applications based on work that is ‘substantially completed’, meaning that we couldn’t put in an application based on the approved PD element.

 

We couldn’t get the full plan through just PP due to the 45 degree rule. As such, we revised the PP so that the build began approx 3m from the back of the main part of the house (meaning it was in line with 45 degree requirements) and then reached to the end of the rear wing.

 

This means that across the two applications we have approval for all the elements that we want to build, but neither application shows the full build in itself.

After initially suggesting that we should build the PD element to ‘substantially complete’ and then re-apply (something we really don’t want to do), our architect has now suggested to us that we do in fact have permission to build everything that we want to build and are good to proceed.

 

We are very nervous about this idea, as we are unsure that the council would see it the same way.

 

Do people on this forum agree with our architect that we have the approvals that we need?

[DevilDamo]

You mentioned you don’t have an approval for the complete works, but in phases. If so, why does your Architect think you have?

[Jaffa]

17 hours ago, DevilDamo said:

You mentioned you don’t have an approval for the complete works, but in phases. If so, why does your Architect think you have?

Thanks for your reply. He believes that this is effectively the same thing; that we can demonstrate that we have approval via PD for the bit that would be impacted by the 45 degree rule, and that we have approval via PP for the bit that reaches 6 metres to 7.5 metres from the back of the main part of the house, and approval from both PP and PD for the rest of the planned extension. I’m just not sure that the planning department would see it the same way.

[torre]

A plan showing existing and what you think is covered by each of the PD and PP would make it much easier to understand exactly what you mean, I can't really follow what's going where!

 

On the face of it though, if you couldn't get planning approval for the whole scheme it seems pretty unlikely you have permission for the whole based on the sum of two parts, as it sounds like each was approved without regard for the impact of the other.

 

Did your neighbours object during the prior approval process for PD? It sounds like they'll be looking at a lot of your wall and losing a lot of light.

[Jaffa]

12 minutes ago, torre said:

A plan showing existing and what you think is covered by each of the PD and PP would make it much easier to understand exactly what you mean, I can't really follow what's going where!

 

On the face of it though, if you couldn't get planning approval for the whole scheme it seems pretty unlikely you have permission for the whole based on the sum of two parts, as it sounds like each was approved without regard for the impact of the other.

 

Did your neighbours object during the prior approval process for PD? It sounds like they'll be looking at a lot of your wall and losing a lot of light.

Yes, sorry. I hope the attached helps with a very simplistic drawing. Blue is what we had approved by PD, yellow is what we had approved by PP and green is what we were actually wanting to build. Black represents the walls of the existing building.

 

There’s been no objection from neighbours. We have a two 6-foot fences between us and the neighbours window (each fence located right next to our respective windows), so the extension’s impact on the neighbours light would be marginal to zero.

[Jaffa]

I should also add to give an idea of scale, the full length of the extension that we want to build is approx 5m. The length approved by PD and PP are both approx. 3.5m. 

[DevilDamo]

Your Architect is wrong. You cannot combine PD and PP connecting extensions to achieve what you want. Your options are to build out the PD or PP extension.

 

You can of course submit an application that combines both extensions and should that be refused, Appeal. Obviously there is a chance of the Appeal being dismissed and there are long extended time periods with that approach.

[Tetrarch]

Does the PP you have approved remove your PD rights as a condition?

 

Regards

 

Tet

[mjc55]

Have to say that trying to combine PD and PP sounds a bit bizarre to be honest!  Also don't quite understand what your architect was trying to do, surely they understand that you can't apply for PD on an approved application or am I missing something here?

[EdHat]

I know of a similar situation so I can comment as to what my LA planners agreed.

- Had PD for a ground floor extension.

- Applied for PP for a part single storey part two storey extension which would breach the 45degree  rule.

- The single storey portion was the same as that approved under PD.

- Planners understood that if the ground floor portion was constructed under PD then the two storey portion would get PP and the result would be the same, although with a lot more work finishing the ground floor only to add a first floor. They agreed to include the ground floor in the application and waive the 45 degree rule  

There exact words were

"The ground floor extension would require planning permission if it is not fully completed before the first floor works start. Obviously it would not be reasonable to require the ground floor extension to be fully roofed etc to allow the first floor to be built, and as such, I take the view that although the ground floor extension should be included in this application for planning permission, it would not cause any additional harm whether it is built by itself (under permitted development) or with a first floor addition. As such, I would not be looking to refuse the application on the basis that the ground floor breaks the 45 degree rule, as long as the first floor extension is compliant."

 

At the moment you have two separate permissions, not one for the combined structure. You should resubmit but mention you have PD for a portion and make the point that if you complete the PD and then applied for PP for the extra, the result is the same, so it would be unreasonable to enforce the 45 degree rule. 

[DevilDamo]

If only all LPA’s were as pro-active.

[Skoot3D]

I didn’t want to start a new topic, so I’m posting my question here.

 

I live in an end-of-terrace property and received planning permission last year for a two-story rear and side extension on one side of the building. The building work hasn’t started yet, but I’m also considering extending the living room by 3 meters under Permitted Development (PD) rights. The living room is adjacent to a neighbouring property.

My question is: Can I first build the 3-meter single-story extension under PD rights and then, after a few months, start the larger project that already has planning permission?

I’ve checked the planning permission letter, and there’s no mention of PD rights being removed.

 

I’d appreciate any advice or guidance on this.

[DevilDamo]

@Skoot3D Technically yes but to dot the i’s and cross the t’s, you should look into submitting a Variation of Condition (Section 73) application as the resultant build will not look like the originally approved drawings.

[Skoot3D]

@DevilDamo Thank you for your advice. 
Can I start the 3-meter single-story extension build and then apply for consent under (Section 73)?

[DevilDamo]

@Skoot3D I cannot see why not.