I can see nothing that has been removed.Yeah, so everything apart from the square footage is worded the same? Its not one of these "give with one hand, take considerably more with the other" then?
There is no stipulation as to whether it has to be a new building or an extension so I'd say you were okDoes this apply to extensions or only new builds? Thinking a 530m2 extension to cubicle shed which was built in the 80's...
Does this apply to extensions or only new builds? Thinking a 530m2 extension to cubicle shed which was built in the 80's...
There is no stipulation as to whether it has to be a new building or an extension so I'd say you were ok
In simple terms; not for PD. If you still have PD allowance to use then an enlargement is just as acceptable as a new seperate build.Are there normally different rules to extensions vs. new building? I'd never considered this before, just assumed all new "development" (extra sq. footage) was considered the same.
In simple terms; not for PD. If you still have PD allowance to use then an enlargement is just as acceptable as a new seperate build.
For non-PD then full planning would be required and every case would be judged on its own merit. The advantage of PD is as long as you comply with the requirements set out in the GPDO then you can have your building. With full planning it is a judgement call by a case officer who will have to consult the local statutory bodies, probably a rural consultant and of course your neighbours.Thanks.
and non-PD/full planning?
There is no stipulation as to whether it has to be a new building or an extension so I'd say you were ok
For non-PD then full planning would be required and every case would be judged on its own merit. The advantage of PD is as long as you comply with the requirements set out in the GPDO then you can have your building. With full planning it is a judgement call by a case officer who will have to consult the local statutory bodies, probably a rural consultant and of course your neighbours.
Thanks. Getting planning approved wouldn't be an issue at all. Never had any trouble in the past and won't be visible or near to anyone else. Only reason to go PD would be to save the planning fee. Would we be able to extend this extension in many years to come?
You'll save a lot more than that....not to mention the reduced hassle and speed (28 days rather than potentially unltd time).
What more will we be saving?
So what sort of plans do you need to submit for a PD application?You won't need an architect to draw up plans or submit the application for you.
The more detailed the better but simple line drawings of the elevations - TO SCALE would be sufficient in most cases.So what sort of plans do you need to submit for a PD application?
I presume they would want to see some sort of drawing of what was proposed.
You won't need an architect to draw up plans or submit the application for you.
No chance of further consultants needed to draw up highway plans, environmental statements, landscaping plans etc.
Unlikely to have any conditions applied to the final decision.
Could easily add up to same amount as the planning fee or more.
So a reasonable effort with a pen and a ruler to draw a straight line should be sufficient.The more detailed the better but simple line drawings of the elevations - TO SCALE would be sufficient in most cases.
So what sort of plans do you need to submit for a PD application?
I presume they would want to see some sort of drawing of what was proposed.
Can't argue with that although I would have thought the planners would wanted more detail.The last PD application I did I just did a location plan and that was it. No elevation plans or anything - one standard ag. building looks like much like another.