Rear 3m Extension next to Garage- is it PD or Wraparound?

[LaurenJ]

Hi, 

 

Please may I query whether the following proposed extension falls under permitted development rights or whether a full planning application is required.

 

We are looking to complete a rear extension to our detached house by 3 metres, complying with all PD legislations. The house has no existing extensions.

 

The house has an attached garage that spans half of the side of the property and 1.5metres into the rear garden. See below floor plan.

 

 

 

Under the techical specification, would the garage form part of the Original Dwelling? (it was built at the same time as the house).

 

Therefore, an extension on the rear of the property (see red below) which would adjoin to the garage would notbe classed as a wrap around extension, as the garage is original?

Thanks,

Lauren

[DevilDamo]

You would require Planning.

[ToughButterCup]

We are not expert Planners (or if one of us is, she is - sensibly - keeping it quiet).

In my considerably inexpert opinion, there are sufficient ifs and maybes in this case to warrant expenditure on a professional opinion. I follow your logic. You need to find out from someone who knows the extent to which a garage can be considered part of a Dwelling House - and not merely ancillary to the enjoyment of that Dwelling House.

 

One way of finding out for yourself would be to review similar Applications and developments in your area. The LPA will have a database of applications you can review.

In this kind of  -what appears to me to be - finely balanced question, I would always err on the side of caution. What is to be lost by asking your LPA? 

[bassanclan]

1 hour ago, DevilDamo said:

You would require Planning.

On what grounds?

It looks completely PD.

Assuming not in a conservation area or listed or had PD rights removed.

Single storey rear extension less than 4m deep.

The only thing I can see that might be a problem is the roof height if you wanted a pitched roof

[DevilDamo]

4 minutes ago, bassanclan said:

On what grounds?

It also comes off a side wall and the width is more than half the width of the house. Therefore, not PD.

[bassanclan]

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/permitted-development-rights-for-householders-technical-guidance/permitted-development-rights-for-householders-technical-guidance#class-a-enlargement-improvement-or-alteration

 

Where the original rear wall of a house is stepped, then each of these walls will form ‘the rear wall of the original dwellinghouse’. In such cases, the limits on extensions apply to any of the rear walls being extended beyond. In the example below showing a plan of a semi-detached house with an original ‘stepped’ rear, each of the extensions (shaded) would meet the requirements for a single storey extension as they do not extend more than 6 metres beyond the rear wall (or more than 3 metres on article 2(3) land or sites of special scientific interest).

 

Looks pretty clearly covered in this technical note 

 

 

[DevilDamo]

@bassanclan You will also note those individual extensions

are not greater than half the width of the house, which is why they comply.

[bassanclan]

6 minutes ago, DevilDamo said:

@bassanclan You will also note those individual extensions

are not greater than half the width of the house, which is why they comply.

I am struggling to see the area of the technical guidance that agrees with you

[DevilDamo]

@LaurenJ If you’re adamant in wanting to go down the PD route, you have two options. The width of the extension has to be reduced by approx. half (so it isn’t flush with the right hand side wall). Or you leave a gap between the garage and extension. The latter would then solely be treated as a rear extension without any additional “side extension” PD rules or requirements.

 

If you want this confirmed or clarified, join the “Planning Geek” Facebook group of which the majority of contributors are Planning Consultants.

[DevilDamo]

@bassanclan https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5d77afc8e5274a27cdb2c9e9/190910_Tech_Guide_for_publishing.pdf (Page 23).

[bassanclan]

It is not a rear and side extension.

It is only a rear extension.

The side elevation of the property is the garage.

The example on page 27 is more relevant

[DevilDamo]

@bassanclan For somebody who advises and does this for a living, I’m afraid you are incorrect. The extension would infill the gap between a rear and side wall so the rules for rear and side extensions come into play. If you want clarification on that, then ask the question on the Planning Geek Facebook group.

 

Also Page 27 states those extensions are not PD. So I’m not sure how that helps to back up your thought process.

[LaurenJ]

Thanks everyone for your feedback. I’ve  contacted the LPA and they have asked that a Lawful Planning Form is completed. I’ve looked at this and unsure on all of the fields. Has anyone ever completed this? 

[DevilDamo]

@LaurenJ That would be a waste of time as the LPA will confirm it isn’t Lawful, i.e. Permitted Development. As mentioned, speak to professionals on the Planning Geek Facebook group. They will advise and confirm if it’s PD or not, without any fee or timescales.

[LaurenJ]

Thank you @DevilDamo I’ll message on the FB group 

[Temp]

23 hours ago, bassanclan said:

It is not a rear and side extension.

It is only a rear extension.

The side elevation of the property is the garage.

The example on page 27 is more relevant

 

If it touches the garage it would be considered both a side and rear extension. 

 

The most problematic PD rule is is the one that precludes side extensions being more than half the original width of the house and garage. It looks like yours would be about 2/3rds of the width.

 

I think you will need Planning Permission for that reason. 

 

 

Edited August 14 by Temp

[DevilDamo]

@Temp It’s literally this and the OP’s proposal does not comply with part iii.

 

Edited August 14 by DevilDamo

[bassanclan]

Apologies you are correct it will not be permitted development.

 

The side of the garage is considered a side elevation, so it becomes a side extension.

 

The bottom Page 19 seems to be a bit misleading, suggesting that if the extension was only 6m deep instead of 9m it would be permitted development, but it wouldn't.

 

You would definitely get planning permission though, because if the bit of garage sticking out was demolished, you could then extend across the whole width of the rear under PD. Slightly bizarre.

 

 

[DevilDamo]

6 minutes ago, bassanclan said:

because if the bit of garage sticking out was demolished, you could then extend across the whole width of the rear under PD

Not necessarily as you’ve now removed an element of the original building. PD wouldn’t allow demolition in that situation.

[LaurenJ]

Thank you all for your help and I put. I understand your points and will apply for planning. Thanks again.