Extension behind an attached side garage

[Newbie To Extensions]

Dear all,

 

I would like to construct a small room behind the attached garage of my detached property. The house currently has the garage attached to its side. (picture provided below). The entire house with the attached garage all originally constructed together. I am going under 3 metres and the extension will end well before the current rear wall of my house. I believe this should be a simple extension and well covered under the permitted development, there is plenty of curtilage after extension. The architect says this would require planning permission as construction behind a garage is not permitted development. Please could some one advise if they have done a rear extension behind the garage under permitted development?

 

Thanks in advance

[DevilDamo]

If the depth does not exceed 4m and the overall width does not exceed more than half the width of the original house, then it may well be considered PD.

 

Any reason why you’re trying to avoid Planning? Are you within the Green Belt?

Edited May 9 by DevilDamo

[Newbie To Extensions]

Thanks for your response, I am keen on starting the work in a month's time as need the extra space for urgent personal reasons. Planning would mean waiting for atleast 2 to 2.5 months. The builder is available to start the work too. The overall width at the widest - if it is widest measured from outside (inside would lose out the wall width) then the extension will not exceed more than half the width of the original house.

 

Hence why wondering taking PD route is fine, once the work is started is there a chance for council to make random visit and question the construction. It usually doesnt work that way right, they don't bother unless someone complains isnt it? In this case as it is straightforward and not impacting any neighbours there should not be an issue in work getting stopped etc?

 

[ProDave]

Will you get a building notice in time to start that quick?

[Newbie To Extensions]

11 minutes ago, ProDave said:

Will you get a building notice in time to start that quick?

Building notice need to be just given before 5 working days isnt it?

Edited May 10 by Newbie To Extensions

[DevilDamo]

8 hours ago, Newbie To Extensions said:

Thanks for your response, I am keen on starting the work in a month's time as need the extra space for urgent personal reasons. Planning would mean waiting for atleast 2 to 2.5 months. The builder is available to start the work too. The overall width at the widest - if it is widest measured from outside (inside would lose out the wall width) then the extension will not exceed more than half the width of the original house.

 

Hence why wondering taking PD route is fine, once the work is started is there a chance for council to make random visit and question the construction. It usually doesnt work that way right, they don't bother unless someone complains isnt it? In this case as it is straightforward and not impacting any neighbours there should not be an issue in work getting stopped etc?

 

It would appear to comply with the PD requirements. If you want that formally confirmed, you would need to submit a Lawful Development Certificate application. Btw, assume this is not a bungalow?

 

You will require Building Regulations. A BN application is fine providing you’re not excavating over or within 3m of a public sewer. Otherwise, you would need to submit a FP application. Or if you get the Build Over Agreement sorted before you submit a Building Regulation application, then a BN application would be ok.

 

Will your excavations be within 3m of a neighbours’ building?

[Newbie To Extensions]

1 hour ago, DevilDamo said:

It would appear to comply with the PD requirements. If you want that formally confirmed, you would need to submit a Lawful Development Certificate application. Btw, assume this is not a bungalow?

 

You will require Building Regulations. A BN application is fine providing you’re not excavating over or within 3m of a public sewer. Otherwise, you would need to submit a FP application. Or if you get the Build Over Agreement sorted before you submit a Building Regulation application, then a BN application would be ok.

 

Will your excavations be within 3m of a neighbours’ building?

LDC would still mean wait for 8 weeks, I am glad one person other than me says it is a PD. Atleast four other architects all said differently with reasons like - this could become wrap around, garage is not a main structure and extension to the rear of the garage is not a PD etc.  But I keep reading PD guide inside out and the more I read the more I am convinced it is a PD. Btw the property was once extended behind the main house for 3m. Now this rear and side is more of an infill but still not reaching the exisiting extended rear.

 

The excavation will be 2.5 m of the neighbours' garden alleyway but atleast 3.5 metre from the neighbours' garage. No public sewer at all.

[DevilDamo]

LDC applications are optional. If you’re confident the proposals are PD, there’s nothing stopping you in submitting a LDC application, then a BR application and then starting works.

 

Wrap arounds are not normally PD. But primarily because they fail the “no more than half the width” rule. This one would appear to meet that, especially if the garage is original.

[Newbie To Extensions]

16 minutes ago, DevilDamo said:

LDC applications are optional. If you’re confident the proposals are PD, there’s nothing stopping you in submitting a LDC application, then a BR application and then starting works.

 

Wrap arounds are not normally PD. But primarily because they fail the “no more than half the width” rule. This one would appear to meet that, especially if the garage is original. 

Sorry, when you say 'This one would appear to meet that' - you mean wrap around or no more than half the width rule hence qualifies as PD?

[DevilDamo]

This design would appear to meet the PD rules.

[Newbie To Extensions]

44 minutes ago, DevilDamo said:

This design would appear to meet the PD rules.

Thank you so much for your responses, I was wondering if it would help if I give you a diagram explaining the full picture here. The house went through its very first PD extension a year ago and this is hopefully the second PD to go through. I would be grateful if you could let me know your thoughts why the architects may say this would not qualify as PD.

 

Thanks in advance

[DevilDamo]

Ok, now I’ve seen that… my opinion changes.

 

If the yellow part connects to the green part, it isn’t PD. If the above layout is what you want, you will require Planning. Otherwise, reduce the depth of the yellow line part so there is no physical connection to the green part.

[Newbie To Extensions]

1 hour ago, DevilDamo said:

Ok, now I’ve seen that… my opinion changes.

 

If the yellow part connects to the green part, it isn’t PD. If the above layout is what you want, you will require Planning. Otherwise, reduce the depth of the yellow line part so there is no physical connection to the green part.

Ah, that is disappointing but good to find out now than when it is too late! I was wondering if I am not seeing something that the others who suggest planning are actually seeing. But only you have clearly explained why it requires planning. The point that the new extension cannot connect the old extension is a new thing that I don't think I have read anywhere in the PD document. Should be one of those construed rules, would you mind me asking which rule of PD would it break when the new extension meets the old extension?

 

Unfortunately reducing the depth of the yellow part is'nt a viable option as I will end up with a very odd space and the rear will be at three odd levels. So I have to take the planning route. Really appreciate your prompt and timely response.

[DevilDamo]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5d77afc8e5274a27cdb2c9e9/190910_Tech_Guide_for_publishing.pdf
(Page 26)

 

In your situation, the resulting extensions would not meet PD as they would fail to meet the PD rules for a side extension, as elements would come off a side wall.

 

PD doesn’t just focus on extensions in isolation but the “resulting” extensions which do not form part of the original house.

[Newbie To Extensions]

32 minutes ago, DevilDamo said:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5d77afc8e5274a27cdb2c9e9/190910_Tech_Guide_for_publishing.pdf
(Page 26)

 

In your situation, the resulting extensions would not meet PD as they would fail to meet the PD rules for a side extension, as elements would come off a side wall.

 

PD doesn’t just focus on extensions in isolation but the “resulting” extensions which do not form part of the original house.

Got it, its very clear now. The width calculation for my new side extension will start from the end and will only stop when it meets an old existing structure. But in my diagram it will continue with the new existing structure, hence the extension of width will be the entire width of the property. 

 

Now that it is clear that it has to be a planning, in your experience do you think this application would be straightforward and will not be room for any rejection? I am not obstructing any neighbours light or access with this construction. No trees impacted and boundary is much further too. Is there any precaution you suggest/ any area I need to be careful?

Is there any article on things that become ground for planning rejections that you could advise? I could go through them.

[DevilDamo]

That’s right. Your proposed extension along with the existing extension would be 100% of the overall width of the original dwelling, hence why it would not constitute PD.

 

The majority of single storey extensions go through Planning with no issues. There shouldn’t be any major reason as to why yours wouldn’t go through too. If they were to be difficult, you could argue that you have a potential PD fallback position. But as mentioned above, that fallback position would be a slight reduction in the depth (so the extensions do not connect).

[Newbie To Extensions]

17 hours ago, DevilDamo said:

That’s right. Your proposed extension along with the existing extension would be 100% of the overall width of the original dwelling, hence why it would not constitute PD.

 

The majority of single storey extensions go through Planning with no issues. There shouldn’t be any major reason as to why yours wouldn’t go through too. If they were to be difficult, you could argue that you have a potential PD fallback position. But as mentioned above, that fallback position would be a slight reduction in the depth (so the extensions do not connect).

Thank you so much for your responses, it has been very helpful.

[Newbie To Extensions]

On 10/05/2024 at 22:36, DevilDamo said:

That’s right. Your proposed extension along with the existing extension would be 100% of the overall width of the original dwelling, hence why it would not constitute PD.

 

The majority of single storey extensions go through Planning with no issues. There shouldn’t be any major reason as to why yours wouldn’t go through too. If they were to be difficult, you could argue that you have a potential PD fallback position. But as mentioned above, that fallback position would be a slight reduction in the depth (so the extensions do not connect).

Hi again,

What is the risk involved in applying for planning retrospectively? Will the building control raise the issue of lack of planning or PD rights during their inspection? Does the council discourage retrospective applications by being harsh with their decisions? I am thinking as this is a straightforward extension and I am in a bit of a rush for the additional space plus my builder is available to start the work should I consider taking the route of retrospective planning application? As I will still be doing the building control, the development should be adhering to the development norms and requirements aiding my retrospective planning permission application. Your thoughts please.

 

 

[ProDave]

What happened to the idea of build it so the new extension does not quite reach the old extension so it would qualify?

 

Then later apply for PP to bridge the tiny gap between the two PD extensions?

 

Build footings etc to allow that right from the start.

[Newbie To Extensions]

10 minutes ago, ProDave said:

What happened to the idea of build it so the new extension does not quite reach the old extension so it would qualify?

 

Then later apply for PP to bridge the tiny gap between the two PD extensions?

 

Build footings etc to allow that right from the start.

Mmm, that is an option but the builder would like to finish the work start to finish than a two job, the bridging one separate from first one!

[ProDave]

How about this.  Excuse the lousy picture.

 

 

Build the extension as shown in yellow.  It does not join the existing extension.  Yes you have to go outside and then back in through a door to get to the new extension.

 

Then later (with PP) build the link, which is little more than put a door on the back and a roof over the link.  Easy if the foundation work is done at the time of the main build.

[DevilDamo]

@Newbie To Extensions What’s the point in applying retrospectively? Why not just submit a Planning application, submit a Building Regulation application and start building? Although it isn’t advised to start works before or without receiving Planning approval, it’s better to apply before than doing it after.

 

@ProDave Although the OP was wanting to avoid the “lengthy” Planning process but have what they need (which requires Planning).

[Newbie To Extensions]

3 hours ago, ProDave said:

How about this.  Excuse the lousy picture.

 

 

Build the extension as shown in yellow.  It does not join the existing extension.  Yes you have to go outside and then back in through a door to get to the new extension.

 

Then later (with PP) build the link, which is little more than put a door on the back and a roof over the link.  Easy if the foundation work is done at the time of the main build.

Thanks for taking the effort to do the drawing, but working on a tight budget. I have a feeling that doing it this way will escalate the costs, but I will check with my building about this.

[Newbie To Extensions]

2 hours ago, DevilDamo said:

@Newbie To Extensions What’s the point in applying retrospectively? Why not just submit a Planning application, submit a Building Regulation application and start building? Although it isn’t advised to start works before or without receiving Planning approval, it’s better to apply before than doing it after.

 

@ProDave Although the OP was wanting to avoid the “lengthy” Planning process but have what they need (which requires Planning).

Didnt realise that was an option,,, I thought council wouldnt take it well if the work is already started when they come over for an inspection. Would they not instruct to stop until approval is received?

[DevilDamo]

You wouldn’t be in their best books whichever way you decide. But by applying before you start is better than during or after. They cannot tell you to stop works if there’s a live and pending application. They could potentially tell you to stop should you not submit an application and are reported for potentially unauthorised works. But the first thing the LPA would or should do is invite you to submit an application.