« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
PART 2 - General Issues
Summary of the Main Changes Proposed
2.1 We propose to increase the level of development by householders which is allowed without applying for planning permission by making the following key changes:
- Increasing the limit on such development within the curtilage of a house from 30% to 40 % of the curtilage;
- Increasing the proportional limit of the increase in the size of the original dwellinghouse from 10% of the total internal floor area to 50% of the development footprint of the original dwellinghouse (subject to a height limit);
- Relaxing the restrictions on roof alterations on certain rear and side elevations to allow the construction of dormer extensions or other extensions which enter the roof;
- Relaxing certain restrictions on development near roads;
- Introducing new rights covering decking, small porches and alterations to chimneys;
- Introducing a single height restriction of 4 metres for separate development within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse.
2.2 We intend to introduce the following changes to standard conditions and restrictions to prevent overdevelopment a result of these changes:
- An absolute limit of 60 square metres on the area of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse which can be developed;
- A limit of 40% on the area of the rear curtilage which can be developed;
- No permitted development within 1 metre of the property boundary;
- No permitted development over 1 metre in height within 5 metres of a road if it is nearer to the road than the original dwellinghouse.
2.3 In a number of areas we have sought to simplify terms used in order to make it clearer to people what they may do without having to apply for planning permission. We also intend to produce illustrated guidance to accompany the finalised legislation.
Development Footprint
2.4 Under the current GPDO a number of controls on householder PDR refer to limits on floor area or on extensions being limited to a proportion of the floor area of the house. Consequently, in order to confirm whether a proposal requires a planning application or not, the floor area within each floor of a house has to be calculated and the floor area of, for example, any extension.
2.5 We propose to move towards a combination of controls based on the ground area covered by development - "the development footprint" - and its height (See paragraphs 2.16-2.18 on controls on area).
Q1. Do you agree with this change from floor area to development footprint/ ground area?
Principal Elevation, Side Elevations and Rear Elevation
2.6 We propose a new approach to distinguishing between the various elevations of a house. The current GPDO restricts certain householder PDR within 20 metres of a road and if closer to the road than that part of the original dwellinghouse nearest to it (the road) - "the 20 metre rule". The current "20 metre rule" prevents developments happening in front gardens facing the street, which might significantly undermine the street scene, without having to define to which side of the house the restrictions applied. However, it also prevents permitted development in other areas of the curtilage within 20 metres of a road, even though there may be no adverse impact on the street scene.
2.7 Our proposed approach proceeds on the basis that most houses have a "principal elevation". This is generally defined with reference to the door which forms the main or principal entrance to the house - this is not necessarily the door most often used, but the one designed as the main formal entrance to the house - usually the "front door". This principal elevation may not be the wall of the house fronting the street on which the house is located and may not necessarily be the wall of the house which is designed as the face of the house. In most cases the principal elevation is easily identified and from that the rear (the elevation opposite the principal elevation) and side elevations (those connecting the principal and rear elevations) are self evident.
2.8 The main ways in which these concepts come into play are where the principal elevation and/or a side elevation "front a road". In our proposals in Annex B (Class 1 of the Schedule to the dHPDO), there is a restriction preventing extensions where development would extend from a wall which was a side elevation fronting a road or a principal elevation fronting a road thus preserving the street scene.
2.9 In some instances, a house may, for example, have its principal elevation facing away from the road and it is the rear elevation which fronts the road. In that case an extension could be made under the proposed PDR to the rear of the house although this fronts the road, provided it complies with other restrictions.
2.10 In a number of instances throughout the dHPDO we have therefore replaced the "20 metre rule" with various restrictions on development forward of a wall forming the principal elevation and in some cases a side elevation. We have also introduced a replacement limit on the distance of development from roads (see next section on PDR near roads).
Q2. Do you agree with the new approach to principal, side and rear elevations?
Permitted Development Rights Near Roads
2.11 The current householder PDR in the GPDO contains specific restrictions in some of the classes regarding the distance of development from a road. In particular the "20 metre rule", mentioned in the previous section, has potentially severe limitations on householder PDR.
2.12 In order to promote full and appropriate use of the PDR, we have moved away from this restriction in relation to roads and sought to identify the "principal elevation" of the house. This is on the basis that any concerns about road safety arising from PDR exercised in the vicinity of a road will be addressed by the general requirements set out in Article 3 of the dHPDO, in particular those which prevent permitted development which would cause an obstruction to road users (See paragraph 2.15).
2.13 We have also included at various points in the dHPDO a restriction on development over 1 metre in height within 5 metres of a road where the development would be closer to the road than the part of the original dwellinghouse closest to the road. This last element simply means that where the original dwellinghouse is within 5 metres of the road you can still, for example, have an extension or a fence over 1 metre high at the side of the house within 5 metres of the road provided it is no nearer the road than the original dwellinghouse.
Q3. Do you believe that issues regarding road safety are sufficiently addressed by the restrictions on PDR set out in Article 3 of the draft householder permitted development order and the height limit of 1 metre within 5 metres of a road?
Article 2 - Boundary of a Dwellinghouse
2.14 Article 2 contains the interpretation of the phrase "boundary of a dwellinghouse" used in the dHPDO. This interpretation addresses situations where the curtilage of a dwellinghouse extends to the property boundary and those cases, usually isolated houses in rural areas with a large area of land around the house, where the property boundary extends beyond the curtilage. The vast majority of houses in streets have a discrete area of garden associated with the house and are bounded by roads or neighbouring properties; in such cases there is no distinction between the curtilage and the property boundary.
Article 3 - Grant of Permission and General Restrictions and Conditions on PDR
2.15 Article 3 of the dHPDO grants permission for the developments specified in the classes in Schedule 1, and places some restrictions and conditions on this permission. In particular:
i) Sub-paragraph (1) "European Sites", such as Special Protection Areas are protected;
ii) Sub-paragraph (4) PDR cannot override a condition attached to another grant of planning permission, e.g. a condition preserving visibility splays for access attached to the planning permission for the dwellinghouse itself;
iii) Sub-Paragraph (5) PDR cannot be used in relation to a development which is unlawful, e.g. if the dwellinghouse were erected without PP then PDR do not apply;
iv) Sub-paragraph (6)(a) PDR cannot authorise development in relation to a means of access to an existing classified or trunk road, or which creates an obstruction to the view of persons using any road used by vehicular traffic, so as to be likely to cause danger to such persons.
v) While partial demolition of a house to implement PDR is allowed, the whole demolition of a house could only be carried out in accordance with Class 70 of the GPDO.
vi) Article 3(6) (b) - (d) place restrictions on the area of the curtilage of a dwellinghouse which can be developed under PD. They consist of:
- a proportion of the area of the curtilage (excluding the area of the original dwellinghouse) which can be developed - 40% ;
- a new limit of the area of rear curtilage (excluding the area of the original dwellinghouse) which can be developed again of 40%; and
- an absolute total of the area of the curtilage (excluding the area of the original dwellinghouse) which can be developed of 60 square metres.
vii) PDR cannot be used for development which might require environmental impact assessment under the EIA Regulations. Although this is unlikely with the scale of development involved, we are required to legislate to ensure compliance with the EIA Directive.
viii) Article 3(7) defines the term "rear curtilage" in relation to the controls at vi) above.
2.16 The restrictions in vi) above in effect raise the proportional limit of the curtilage of a dwellinghouse which can be developed, but with a limit on the area of the rear curtilage which can be developed - to avoid the whole of a rear garden being developed under PDR. The absolute limit of 60 square metres is to avoid situations where, for example, developers with single dwellings with large areas of property associated with the house carry out very considerable householder developments on the basis that they contend the entire area of their property constitutes the curtilage of the dwellinghouse.
2.17 In such cases, once 60 square metres of the curtilage have been developed, even if that is less than 40% of the curtilage, no more of the curtilage can be developed under PDR. These limits exclude the area of the development footprint of the original dwellinghouse.
2.18 These limits apply to all development within the curtilage, whether or not carried out under PDR. For example, if a householder has applied for and received planning permission for a building covering 50% of the curtilage of a dwellinghouse, excluding the area of the original dwellinghouse, PDR cannot be exercised under the dHPDO to develop any more of the curtilage and a planning application would be required for such further development.
Q4. Do you agree with the overall limit on development of the curtilage (excluding the original dwelling) of 40%?
Q5. Do you agree with the additional limit on the development of rear curtilage of 40%?
Q6. Do you agree with an absolute limit of 60 square metres?
Designated Areas
Conservation Areas and the Curtilage of Listed buildings
2.19 Additional controls apply in the current GPDO for householder development within conservation areas and within the curtilage of listed buildings (as free-standing developments are not subject to requirements for listed building consent). Also, a significant number of conservation areas have directions (known as "Article 4 Directions") which restrict some or all of the classes of householder PDR available under the GPDO.
2.20 Our proposals in Annex B include additional restrictions and conditions on permitted development in these areas based on the current provisions in this regard in the GPDO, adjusted in line with the changes to PDR.
2.21 One argument has been that it would be simpler not to allow any permitted development in these areas. While that might reduce workload with Article 4 Directions restricting permitted development in conservation areas, such a blanket restriction might also prevent innocuous development from taking place without an application for planning permission.
Q7. Do you agree with the additional conditions and restrictions on householder PDR in conservation areas contained in the draft householder permitted development order?
Q8. Do you agree with the additional conditions and restrictions on householder PDR within the curtilage of listed buildings as set out in the draft householder permitted development order?
Q9. Should there simply be no permitted development in relation to conservation areas or the curtilage of listed buildings?
World Heritage Sites
2.22 There are increasing calls for further protection to be given to World Heritage Sites ( WHS) (as designated by UNESCO). This could presumably extend to restrictions on PDR within WHS.
2.23 WHS fall into 2 broad categories, namely cultural sites and natural heritage sites. With regard to the latter, PDR in relation to existing dwellinghouses would seem unlikely to compromise these designations. With those WHS designated on cultural grounds, which could include built heritage, there would seem to be an argument for restrictions on a par with conservation areas. However, again there may be issues where PDR for existing housing within the designated area would have no effect on the basis for designating the area a WHS.
2.24 This raises the issue whether WHS require additional statutory controls or whether we should rely on existing restrictions on conservation areas and the use of Article 4 directions to protect such areas or areas within WHS which might be vulnerable to development carried out under householder PDR.
Q10. Should additional statutory restrictions be placed on householder PDR within World Heritage Sites?
Q11. If so, what level of control should be applied (e.g. similar to that for conservation areas or a total restriction)?
Other Designated Sites
2.25 We do not intend to apply these restrictions on householder PDR to other designated areas. On that basis, it would be for the planning authority for the area to promote an Article 4 direction and to make the case for restricting PDR within other designated areas.
Q12. Do you have any comments on the extent of designated areas where restrictions will apply?
Ramps and Handrails
2.26 There are no specific PDR for ramps to doorways or handrails for such ramps or steps up to doorways to assist the elderly and disabled people. We would be interested to know how such works are currently treated by planning authorities - whether, for example, they are regarded as covered by householder PDR generally or are regarded as relatively minor developments to which planning controls are not applied.
Q13. In your experience, do planning authorities treat the addition of ramps and handrails to the exterior of houses to assist the elderly or disabled people as requiring an application for planning permission?
Flats
2.27 There are currently no PDR for flats or buildings containing flats (other than in relation to satellite and other antennas) where the more intensive levels of occupation and different property ownership arrangements could lead to particularly problematic outcomes. While we have no specific proposals in the dHPDO for additional PDR for flats, we would appreciate views on a possible minor change which might avoid the need for planning applications in relation to flats without creating amenity problems.
Q14. Do respondents believe that replacement and alteration of existing windows in flats, without altering the overall size of the window opening should be permitted development?
Flagpoles
2.28 There are currently no explicit PDR for flagpoles within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse. We would be interested in views on having specific PDR in this regard and what conditions and restrictions might apply to such PDR.
Q15. Do respondents believe there should be specific PDR to allow flagpoles to be erected within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse?
Q16. If so, what controls should there be on the height of flagpoles and on their location, with particular regard to designated areas?
« Previous | Contents | Next »