Green belt extension- impossible?

[Fretfulmum]

We have a chalet bungalow in the green belt (but substantially built up frontage). The house has already been extended to approx 60% increase in size of the original house in the 1940s and is just more than the average volume of the adjacent houses.

2 bedrooms upstairs have a very low ceiling on one side and we want to extend the hipped roof to a gable end to make these ceilings higher (DC will have to crouch out of bed before they can stand up). It’s ok as they are small currently so the ceiling height is fine but as they get older, they will need it to be higher.

Pre planning at the council stated we can’t do this as although we are only extending the ceiling height of 1 wall, it adds to the volume of the house which has already been exceeded. They said we can remove Volume elsewhere in the house to do this but the house is not huge and we need all the space we currently have. Do we need to sell up or has anyone managed to get round this somehow?

There's legislation that says you can't extend a house more than a certain percentage of what it originally was, so yes, you'll have to do as they say, cope or sell.

Nothings impossible, but how much time and money do you have?

I would wait to see what happens this year. Huge planning reform is underway including street votes in suburban areas. Green belt protections were supposed to be increasing but they haven’t added those in yet so I suppose it depends whether suburban in green belt is under street votes or not. If so then the street decide. And if anyone wants a house of x size then they would have to approve yours too.

I would just wait the year atleast and see what happens.

This is not true. My neighbour (after consultation) was allowed to lift the main ridge one whole storey higher and we're in a conservation area. I must admit I was when they got permission on the 2nd attempt. To be fair though, they did a beautiful job in keeping. The house I am speaking of is now more than 100% bigger than the original 2 up-2 down.

@LemonSwan we have loads of time yet as the rooms are ok for DC for another 5 or 6 years yet, but we want to renovate and we only want to spend on luxury fittings if we are going to stay here long term, so I’m looking at the feasibility TPD the council allowing planning permission. But I guess there is no certainty with this. I hope the planning reforms take into account built up green belt areas.

@JamBiscuitBun where are you in the country please?

@Fretfulmum
Some of what is written here is rubbish I’m afraid. A conservation area and the planning policies devised for that have nothing to do with the Green Belt planning policies decided by a planning authority. They are different.

We live in the green belt and AONB. We have planning policies, which are upheld by inspectors, that are pretty draconian. Volume or footprint of house in 1948 onwards are taken into account. It’s very unfortunate yours is volume. Ours is footprint and volume but people have added dormer windows and extended but it stays within volume permitted. Would dormers work? Might planners agree to that?

We also, now, cannot get any more for further extension at our house. We are up to max so there it is! If your planners say your proposals don’t meet the policy requirement, you won’t get pp. You could appeal but the inspectors usually go with the policy. Well around here anyway!

The people who get the most pull down the first house and start again. Automatic volume/footprint increase by the allotted amount. 40% here. Same for you? They also dig out basements and lower floors. Keeps roof height the same. They then extend the new house again. So another 40%. They build a garage or outbuilding (usually gets permission as not habitable space) and then quietly convert it. However getting around the policies is usually impossible if you are honest.

We’ve been here 35 years and the policies get more and more draconian. So I would not be holding my breath for relaxation of GB policies. It’s either start again or move. If you are in a highly sought after area, starting again can work financially! Especially if you have a big garden as you get 40% immediately and then a further 40% when you extend. You just need the money.

@TizerorFizz thank you that’s so helpful. We are in Bucks and the council won’t let us even put a small dormer in due to the volume issue.

The only saving Grace that I can think of is if one of our neighbours get planning to extend (one hasn’t extended yet), which will push up the average volume of adjacent dwellings and we may get a bit more volume to play with. But it doesn’t negate that we are already over the 50% increase in size of the original dwelling, so planning may still be difficult.

We are on the side of a hill so we can put in a basement (one of the homes on our road has done it decades ago before the volume issues came in)- this won’t affect the bulk of the house, open views and will be invisible to any neighbour. It will increase the volume, but it doesn’t affect any criteria in the Local Plan so it will be interesting if the council allow it.

it’s very frustrating as there are homes on our road which are bigger than ours, some much bigger, but we are tied to the original size of our dwelling in 1948.

@Fretfulmum
Im Bucks too. What neighbours do is irrelevant. It’s the volume/footprint of your house that’s central. It could be others are not at their maximum. That’s completely separate to you.

We did get slightly over our limit but it’s because we pulled down 2 sections of the house, which were an odd shape, and built an “extension” to replace them. It’s a much better building overall now it’s been tidied up. However we wanted to go higher and add volume. We were not allowed to. So we had to stick at ground floor only but it’s still an improvement.

Yes. People have extended and built at different times. I have tiny cottages and a few big ones near me. One is having a whole new second floor added. It was new in 1992. Not extended since and now it’s grieving by 40%. The other new rebuilds around me are massive because they go for the extra 40% after they are built with the first 40% added. If you are south Bucks and desirable, it’s worth it.

My neighbour got a basement but planning refused to let it open out to the garden! It had to be internal. It did open out! He kept it on appeal. So you might try that.

@TizerorFizz yes South bucks and desirable location. Although the low ceiling height upstairs in 2 rooms may be off putting. It’s a brilliant house in all other aspects.
Well the local plan says up to 50% increase in volume from the original house (we are actually at 60%) but it also says you can extend up to the average volume of your adjacent neighbours, which what permitted us to get to 60% increase. Next door is not extended and already bigger than ours, and going up for sale soon so I’m hoping any new neighbours may want to use their extension allowance and we may have a chance to extend a bit more. It’s just a massive dependancy.

We wouldn’t pull down and start again, would move instead. Was your neighbours basement over their permitted volume or within it? A basement is definitely on the cards if we are allowed, but won’t solve the bedroom issue for DC upstairs unless they want to move down there!

And yet they allow developers to put 500 ghastly houses in a field! People need to fight harder for sensible reforms.

Having had part of our planning refused, we had the planning officer round to have a look and he agreed we could slightly exceed the allowable because it didn't impact on anyone's views and to not have done would have made the upstairs extension not very usable. Greenbelt, but heavily obscured by trees at the rear, where the extension was.

@Greentree1 that’s good to know thanks. There are no houses in front or behind us so doing a hip to gable (or even a less hipped roof) extension won’t affect anyone’s views. We are on a very quiet no-through lane though. I am willing to plant some very tall trees to fully obscure the house from the lane! I think getting a planning officer to talk through potential options may be a good next step. There’s one nearby who is also a freelance contractor at the council that neighbours have used, so may get some advice on feasibility.

We are not even in a village. That’s also part of the issue. Open aspect must be maintained! South Bucks is now CDC and actually Bucks CC. If you are at 60% I can see that being an issue. Basements were amendments to new builds. However it’s a grey area! It’s more space without altering outside look. Roofline is interesting as we are not a street scape. The new build that’s getting an additional upper floor is clearly not constrained by roofline. They have been concerned where properties are a bit closer together. If house replaces a bungalow it’s been more difficult. The second extensions have been easier. 30 years ago the new houses were more generous. A couple of bungalows were replaced with quite big houses and they have been extended again. Added around £1 m to selling price. Or more!

To be honest, you could get a planning consultant. One that knows the area. Bucks planning are very understaffed and decisions take ages.

If you have time just wait it out and see what comes about this year.

@TizerorFizz

So you are saying if you knocked down a house built in 1940 that was 1000ft2, but extended by 40% to 1400ft2 before being demolished. You could then build a new 1960ft2 house, and then extend it to around 2800ft2?
If so that could defo be worth it in a desirable area
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, which is entirely possible 🤔 😅

I’m trying to think if any of the 1940s bungalows here that have been knocked down were ever extended. One was! By an addition of a room which would have been about 20%. Definitely wasn’t 40%. The replacement property now has 3 levels. Basement, ground and first floor. I’ve attached it’s sale details. Formerly it was a wood clad bungalow. I’m not sure of sq ft size and I cannot find a plan. However I would guess at around 1500 sq ft. So it’s more than double now.

Others here started as 4 square bungalows. 2 rooms at the front and 2 at the back. These have all been rebuilt and then extended again. All of them. I suggest you talk to a planning consultant. I also know an architectural practice knows how this works. PM me and I can tell you. You need an appraisal to see if it’s a possibility or not - I’m just saying what has happened here.

To update, if this is useful for anybody, we have discovered that our council have recently allowed a few basement excavations in the green belt which do not have to count towards the volume of the house as they are fully subterranean. Therefore, we are going to crack on with getting a planning company to start an application for us to excavate under our house. Our only difference would be that as we want a bedroom in the basement, we need a window, which means there may be issues with it counting towards volume. The planners are going to come up with some options for us. Our back garden is lower than the front of our house so ours is semi subterranean as the basement could open out directly into the garden without having to lower the garden or create a light well, but it means the council could argue it’s not fully hidden (although nobody would see these windows as we aren’t overlooked and it wouldn’t affect the openness of the area). But it’s made me more hopeful after finding what has been recently approved

@Fretfulmum Glad you did some research. “Basement” is the way to go.

An update for those interested. After commissioning a planning agency and architect, we have been successful with further increasing our volume by another 20%. The loophole is that any extension using permitted development does not count towards green belt volume. We managed to put in 2 x planning applications for permitted development of different types to get the space we needed (roof extension, rear extension). Volume calculations were totally omitted from this.

So you applied for Certificates of Lawfulness? These are decided purely on whether the development proposed meets the requirements of 'permitted development' so are not applications for planning permission. Planning policy is not a consideration.
However, all extensions post 1948 will count, whether permitted development or not, when future planning applications are considered.

Yes we obtained the certificates of lawfulness. Yes we were only able to extend certain parts of the house which hadn’t been previously extended eg we couldn’t do a full rear extension across the full width of the house as parts of the rear had already been extended. We could only extend to the rear from where no extensions had been previously.
With the roof extensions we are able to do a hip to gable extension allowing use to create a full height ceiling.
It has allowed us to create the space we wanted after the council initially told us we couldn’t extend the house any further under planning policy. So this is advice to anybody that if you live in the green belt and want to extend your house larger than the council allow you to, there are other potential ways to achieve what you need. Get a good planning agent and architect

Well done. Extending is not really building in the green belt and spoiling fields and nature. These rules are draconian. We all know it. Look at HS2. They have blown apart the green belt and AONB but my neighbour was refused a slightly bigger garden room that no one can see. It’s just ludicrous.

Great news OP 🥳

Really pleased for you!

Do you mind pming me the name of your architect and planning agent? Thanks

Well done. We had a similar experience with a pre planning enquiry saying we couldn't build a garden room because we were already well over the 40% extension allowed in our area.

We are green belt and conservation area.

After doing my own research I realised that we were able to build a very substantial garden room if we wanted as it's permitted development. In any event the 40% rule relates to extensions to the property not unattached outbuildings. Permitted development is still in place in the green belt.

If I'd not done my own research and just relied on the planning department we'd have shelved our plans.

We can't extend the house without planning permission because of the conservation area, and as soon as we need planning permission we won't get it because of the 40% rule. If you're not in a conservation area you can use permitted development rights to extend without needing planning permission.

The moral of this is do your own research and don't take what the planning department says at face value.

There's a good website called Planning Geek that covers the rules in a thorough but accessibly way.

@100Bees thank you for that and that is exactly what we have done too. It’s been so unnecessary really; the time, effort and costs to get here have been eye watering. The draconian rules didn’t serve any purpose in this case. What we have been approved to build has absolutely no negative effect on green spaces, nature, openness.