Botched Garage Conversion

Le_Kirk

I've followed this thread with interest waiting for someone to ask the question. Some years ago when replacing my wood-framed floor to ceiling windows with brick built side and frontage; I was refused planning permission initially (it could have been building regs - can't remember, such a long time ago) because I wanted to maintain full width windows to maximise the light. I had to reapply showing a 500 mm return from the side wall which obviously cut down the width of the window. To the question; the OP's picture shows no such return; how has this passed planning/building regs?

Doozergirl

Le_Kirk wrote: »

I've followed this thread with interest waiting for someone to ask the question. Some years ago when replacing my wood-framed floor to ceiling windows with brick built side and frontage; I was refused planning permission initially (it could have been building regs - can't remember, such a long time ago) because I wanted to maintain full width windows to maximise the light. I had to reapply showing a 500 mm return from the side wall which obviously cut down the width of the window. To the question; the OP's picture shows no such return; how has this passed planning/building regs?

Your case is individual to you and I can't picture it particularly well, but if you're infilling, then there's no particular rule. I wonder if they interpreted your plans correctly.

Normally, building regs dictates 660mm(?) on the corner of the house where the wall is structural and you're removing wall. Clearly, this set up already exists and there would be no need to provide additional stability in the corner of the small single storey. In fact, the 660mm could be inside the garage on the main corner, or it's been engineered out.

Le_Kirk

I don't want to hijack the thread by talking about my circumstances(particularly as it was resolved and the room completed over 15 years ago) but just wondered how planning/regs had passed a conversion without the need for a return on the LHS looking at the pics that have been posted. If there had been a return then there would have been room inside for the curtain pole with a finial. Of course then there would not have been room for the wide window (that someone suggested the builder just happened to have handy!) and a narrower window would have lined up with upstairs better.

Doozergirl

Le_Kirk wrote: »

I don't want to hijack the thread by talking about my circumstances(particularly as it was resolved and the room completed over 15 years ago) but just wondered how planning/regs had passed a conversion without the need for a return on the LHS looking at the pics that have been posted. If there had been a return then there would have been room inside for the curtain pole with a finial. Of course then there would not have been room for the wide window (that someone suggested the builder just happened to have handy!) and a narrower window would have lined up with upstairs better.

Why do you think it's a 'need'?

It's likely to be PD (it may not be), but there are no rules surrounding how big a window can be downstairs.

There's no structural issue for it to fail building regs either.

Le_Kirk

I think it was/is a need because that is what I was told all those years ago but I also accept that regulations can and do change - certainly in my business area they used to change almost weekly or so it seemed. Anyway I am happy that I have raised the question and had it answered so speedily.