PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.

Permitted Development Outbuilding - distance from property

Options
PeteW
PeteW Posts: 1,212 Forumite
First Post First Anniversary Combo Breaker
in House buying, renting & selling
Our council have just refused a certificate of lawfulness for an outbuilding with a 150mm gap from our house. The permitted development guidance for outbuildings does not specify a minimum distance from the main house, and we have heard of others having gaps as small as 25mm deemed lawful.

As such, we're looking to appeal, and so I am looking to find examples where a Certificate of Lawfulness was granted for any outhouses 150mm or less from the main house. I have found one but it would be good to find any more.

Anyone know of any examples, or have been through this yourself?

Thanks

Pete
«13

Comments

  • System
    System Posts: 178,094 Community Admin
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    It would likely be easier and cheaper just to get planning permission for it rather than trying to appeal a technicality on the permitted development legislation...
  • PeteW
    PeteW Posts: 1,212 Forumite
    First Post First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Options
    That's where we started, and planning permission was denied.
    So we scaled it down to just what you can do under permitted development.
  • EachPenny
    EachPenny Posts: 12,239 Forumite
    First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    Did the council actually state the grounds for refusal of the certificate? If it is the 150mm gap have you asked them to quote the relevant policy/regulation/guidance?

    Did you need and/or apply for building regulations approval?
    "In the future, everyone will be rich for 15 minutes"
  • System
    System Posts: 178,094 Community Admin
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    Why have the gap at all? 150mm isn't a practical gap to have between two buildings, it'll just get filled with rubbish!
    Why was your planning application turned down? And why didn't you appeal that?
    There's clearly more to this than a gap between two buildings
  • EachPenny
    EachPenny Posts: 12,239 Forumite
    First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    the_r_sole wrote: »
    Why have the gap at all?

    If it is 'attached' to the house it cannot be Class E and would be treated as Class A instead.
    "In the future, everyone will be rich for 15 minutes"
  • System
    System Posts: 178,094 Community Admin
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    EachPenny wrote: »
    If it is 'attached' to the house it cannot be Class E and would be treated as Class A instead.
    And the only real difference then is how big it could be in footprint (off the top of my head) so sounds very much like there is some "playing of the system" going on, if it's already been refused planning permission and they are refusing a certificate of lawfulness, there's more going on than we know
  • lwhiteman88
    lwhiteman88 Posts: 106 Forumite
    Options
    What was the refusal reason. They would have given a reference to a schedule and class which it does not conform to in the permitted development legislation. Provide a planning reference and which borough it is in, happy to take a look.

    I would avoid appealing as this could take 6 months. You could submit 2-3 other applications in this time.

    There are hundreds of examples in London Boroughs where gardens are obviously a lot smaller.
  • lwhiteman88
    lwhiteman88 Posts: 106 Forumite
    Options
    the_r_sole wrote: »
    And the only real difference then is how big it could be in footprint (off the top of my head) so sounds very much like there is some "playing of the system" going on, if it's already been refused planning permission and they are refusing a certificate of lawfulness, there's more going on than we know

    I know many planning officers and local authorities who do not agree with the developments that are allowed under PD. Many of what is allowed is actually against their local policies so if they can find the smallest of reason to refuse a PD application they will. I have often had cases where between two boroughs they interpret the PD rules differently.

    Google 10 worst permitted development loopholes to give you an idea.
  • PeteW
    PeteW Posts: 1,212 Forumite
    First Post First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    edited 14 June 2017 at 10:27AM
    Options
    the_r_sole wrote: »
    Why have the gap at all?

    Because without it it's a Class A application which could be (and was) refused on basis of it being too large an increase of footprint over the original house (it's already been extended quite a lot).

    With the gap it's a Class E application where this consideration does not apply.

    However after some dithering, our council decided to evaluate it as a Class E application and so reject it. From what I've heard this is very unusual and not what other councils have done in similar conditions - hence I am looking for examples of this that I can reference in an appeal.

    The full officer's report is here: http://imgur.com/a/0EZHB

    But this is the pertinent bit:

    "It needs to be established which Class of Part 1, of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 the proposed development shall be assessed against. The separation distance between the proposed outbuilding and the existing two storey side extension would be 100mm. The Local Planning Authority considers that this would not not be a material gap and, as such, the proposed development would be considered as an enlargement of the dwellinghouse and therefore must be assessed under Class A, which allows for the enlargement, improvement or other alteration of a dwellinghouse. rather than Class E. it is also of note that the dwellinghouse has benefited from previous extensions which the current proposal would abut. Therefore the 'enlarged' part of the dwellinghouse would comprise the current proposal and those previous enlargements."
  • ProDave
    ProDave Posts: 3,724 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Combo Breaker First Post
    Options
    Nobody has asked yet what the intended use of this otbuilding are? or why it can't be sited further away from the house so the council consider it as a separate building/.
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.1K Life & Family
  • 247.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards