Planned replacement garage near listed building...advice required please

[jim]

We plan to demolish a decrepit flat-roofed double garage and some smaller outbuildings and replace with a (better) larger garage with an attached greenhouse all within the yard area of our *unlisted* house. However our neighbour=92s house *is listed*...

Reading "The Planning Game", (Dijksman 2007 Ed) - it appears I do not need Planning Permission, as under PD rules, as long as:-

- the new structure is no nearer the highway than any existing part of the house (a bridleway runs adjacent to the house and yard so it's hard to see how we could fall foul of that)

- no more than half the area of land around original house should be covered (the yard and garden come to more than enough to not fall foul here either)

- the structure would be less than 4m ridge (yes as currently envisaged)

(we plan to build the new structure no closer than 5m to existing house to maintain PD rights)

So far would I be correct in my assumption that no PP is required as long as above conditions are satisfied? Have I missed anything?

Does the presence of the Listed Building alter things? if so in what way(s)?

Building Regs:- As the garage is ultimately to be more than 30m2, if I understand correctly, Building Regs come into it =96 is there any mileage in building the thing in =93less than 30m2=94 stages (garage 1, extend with garage2, then add greenhouse)? Or any other =93tricks of the trade=94 to avoid BRegs?

Thanks for any help/pointers JK

[dom]

It sound like you're free of planning constraints - however it may be worth making a written enquiry to your local planning dept so that you have written confirmation that it's not necessary.

I'm not sure about the exception to Building Control inspections for buildings of less than 30m2 - however don't see BC as an adversary - generally they're interested in buildings being safe and are more of a help than a hindrance. Whether you need your structure inspected or not - you're still required to conform to the regs.

The only other potential issue is if you live in a Conservation Area. Again informal enquiries to planning control will answer that.

[jim]

Didn't I read in NGs about some legal "estoppel" that makes such "written confirmation" worthless in law (i.e. should one ever need it!)?

Jim

[dom]

Sorry - no idea.

However you don't get regular newspaper headlines "Planning Dept prosecute householder despite giving informal permission".

But you do (frequently) get "Planning Dept prosecute householder without PP".

[Peter Crosland]

You may need permission if the work affects the setting of a listed building. The sensible thing is to go and talk to the local planning department first. Other than that it is almost impossible to say without seeing the site itself. Assuming everything else does come under permitted rights then if you do need LB consnet then it does not cost anything.

Peter Crosland

[e-mail]

[Pete Verdon]

I'm certainly not a lawyer, but my understanding of promissory estoppel from a law course way back when would if anything be the other way round. If something would normally apply, but they tell you (even "unofficially") that you can ignore it, then you're entitled to rely on that.

I don't remember it being that simple when I was being taught it, so there's probably much more that I've forgotten.

Pete

[Kevin Poole]

My understanding is that if extending a building takes it over 30m2, building regs apply to the extension, and possibly to some aspects of the original structure. Oddly, there appears to be no minimum separation between 1m from the property boundary to avoid potentially onerous fire resistance requirements. These areas are internal floor area, so if you happen to stray a little over you could always put a false wall inside if visited - "for some insulation".