3m eaves height on PD, how flexible, 3.1m?

[Adam_151]

I have a bungalow, backing onto the kitchen is a flat roofed utility room extension, appearing to date from the 70's, it is in poor condition and unsightly as well as being far off from meeting modern construction standards (inadequate footings, single block walls no insulation).

I am exploring the possibility of removing this and adding a sun-room come dining area extension with pitched roof.

The existing roof is a hipped pitched roof, in my mind this would look best if the new extension shared the eaves height of the existing roof (the extension being at 90 degrees to the existing) and the ridge of the new roof met the corner of the existing roof at the the 'corner' between the hip and the main part of the roof (if that makes sense).

The problem is that the existing eaves height is 3.1m, and I under stand the maximum for P.D is 3m. But is there any flexibility on this, on account its only 100m, the old extension proposed to be removed is an eyesore and matching in with the existing is more visually appealing than dropping it a little bit to meet a strict 3m?

There was an extension in 1993 to the other end of the property, however the plot is such that there is no danger of exceeding 50% of the free space in 1950 being covered by existing and proposed extension

 

[cjard]

Just because someone builds something that falls foul of the planning rules, doesn't mean the council will take action; there's supposed to be an assessment as to whether pursuing legal action against someone is in the public interest. While no one can say for certain, I think it unlikely that anyone will care about the 100mm, or they will class it as a minor technical breach and not worth pursuing. If you get on with your neighbours and they're happy with you putting the extension there, then I'd say it's near certain no one will come knocking. If you live next door to the world's biggest NIMBY, who has nothing better to do than write letters to the council complaining about every slightly rowdy barbecue you have, then you might save yourself a lot of pain by applying for permission for your ext, point out that the only reason you're doing so rather than doing it under PD is because the eaves are slightly higher than permitted. If the council says no, it doesn't preclude you from doing an extension, with a lower eaves, under PD

Remember that the eaves height is measured from the highest point of natural ground around the extension, so if your garden sloped upwards as it heads away from the house by even 4 inches, it's PD

 

[Adam_151]

Many thanks for your reply.

I forgot to mention that because I'm looking at perhaps 5-6m depth from the original house, which I understand is permissable under P.D until may 2016, that it has to be drawn and sent to them to consult with neighbours? In that case will they see that its slightly outside the officail eaves height guideline and chuck it in the bin. Or will they see that its generally in the spirit of P.D. and send it out for neigtbour consultation anyway?

The other thing is, now reading around this section of the forum, I'm not sure i measured eaves height right, I measured from the ground to the underside of the soffet

 

[tony1851]

The eaves height is measured from ground level, up to the point where the outer face of the wall intersects with the roof slope.

So in your case, if it is 3.1m to the soffit of the projecting eaves, your 'eaves height' for the purposes of the regulations will be higher - possibly around 3.3m.

If you intend using the prior notification scheme, you have to state in writing the maximum eaves height. If you then declare it would be (say) 3.3m, the LPA will probably refuse to accept the Notice, as it would not in any case be p.d.

As above, your safest bet is to apply for p.p.

 

[noseall]

With regards the drawing you send in - put some nice trees, cars and people on it (like expensive architects do) and it'll sail through!

only kidding.

 

[tony1851]

it'll sail through!

At 5 - 6m? Hmm.

 

[Adam_151]

So it looks like full planning is required for an extra 300mm.

Damn. Can some one tell me that if they take exception to something, whether the plans can be altered on the same ticket, or whether its closed down and you have to sumbit it again at a cost of £175?

2.5m of the proposed is taken up by the delapidated utility room at present, so its not as big of an increase as it looks. I assume it is preferable to apply for the planning permission before knocking down the existing utility room, i.e., its more likely to go through?

The other thing of note is that before I bought the property, planning permission had been granted to put three 2 story houses on the plot, despite some objections from the neighbours, this was foiled by a covenent from 1937 which only permits one dwelling to be present. Do I have any sort of leverage from this if they reject my plans... or argue that they have previously approved a far greater degree of development?

 

[tony1851]

In a case like this, the council would be unreasonable if they refused it out of hand. Most councils suggest amendments first to give you a chance to alter the design if you are prepared to compromise.

Even if the application was to be refused for any reason, you are allowed one free re-submission of plans within 12 months of the refusal date.

 

[RogueHanger]

I appreciate that you've started out by deciding that you want the eaves and the ridge of the proposed extension to match the existing eaves and ridge of the existing roof. That may not be the best starting point.
I would aim for matching the existing pitch of the existing roof.

There's no reason why the proposed extension would look out of place if the new ridge was lower than the existing ridge on the existing roof.
In fact a lot of extensions are designed like that. Most dormer windows (with a pitched roof) will have the same arrangement.

Indeed it would probably be better if the pitch of your proposed extension matched the pitch of your existing roof.
Thus, if you matched the eaves, and the width of the proposed extension was narrower than the main house, then the new ridge will be lower than the existing ridge of the existing roof.

You'll need a bit of trigonometry, and the exisiting pitch to calculate the ridge height of the proposed extension.

Additionally, and I know some might cry "yeuk" but if you use roof trusses, you will also have the reducing trusses to meet the existing roof.

Moreover, assuming that your exisitng hip will continue into the new proposed roof, the pitch will have to match.
You could have a duo-pitch roof, where the new roof meets the existing hip roof, at the same pitch, and the other side is a different pitch, but that's over-complicating things.

 

[D_Hailsham]

You need to check that your local Planning Authority has not withdrawn PD rights by issuing an Article 4 direction.

The existing extension may have used up your PD rights. Daft, I know, but I had a similar problem when I replaced an ancient conservatory.

The house had been extended, with full planning permission, after the conservatory had been added. When I enquired about replacing the conservatory, I was told that I would need PP.

PD Guide has some useful information.

 

[Adam_151]

Thanks for your reply RH, I must admit that the thought of that did cross my mind, but I couldn't picture how it would work.

If I post some pictures later on, perhaps you are someone else could say what is likely to be the most straightforward option?

Actually just read what you wrote, Just to clarify I was thinking of eaves and pitch the same as existing, ridge lower. Are you suggesting that there is someway eaves lower than existing could work?

 

[Adam_151]

You need to check that your local Planning Authority has not withdrawn PD rights by issuing an Article 4 direction.

I did consider that, but I assume as the existing extension was done in 1993, this was two years before there was a such a thing as PD to revoke?

Even if that was the case, it'd not be too bad as I'd not have to pay to apply for PP, I gather?

 

[RogueHanger]

Thanks for your reply RH, I must admit that the thought of that did cross my mind, but I couldn't picture how it would work.

If I post some pictures later on, perhaps you are someone else could say what is likely to be the most straightforward option?

Actually just read what you wrote, Just to clarify I was thinking of eaves and pitch the same as existing, ridge lower. Are you suggesting that there is someway eaves lower than existing could work?

No, I was talking eaves and pitch matching existing.

Sorry, my mistake, I thought you mentioned existing ridge height, but now reading your explanation more carefully I realise that you were talking existing eaves height.

Pitch, especially exisitng hip-continuation into new roof is important, and I was suggesting that should be your starting point.

TBH, I thought the regulations covered ridge height, not eaves height.

 

[D_Hailsham]

I did consider that, but I assume as the existing extension was done in 1993, this was two years before there was a such a thing as PD to revoke?

Never make assumptions where PP is involved.

Article 4 directions apply to an area, e.g. a road, village, etc.

Even if that was the case, it'd not be too bad as I'd not have to pay to apply for PP, I gather?

Where did you gather that from?

 

[tony1851]

[

I did consider that, but I assume as the existing extension was done in 1993, this was two years before there was a such a thing as PD to revoke?

Even if that was the case, it'd not be too bad as I'd not have to pay to apply for PP, I gather?

You might be a little confused here: P.D. was around long before 1995.

If your P.D. rights have been removed, you only get a free application if what you are applying for would normally be P.D. If it's something larger or outside the limit, you still have to pay like everyone else.