Hip to Gable PD on side elevation?

[Pheo]

Does anyone know if a hip to Gable on a side elevation with a 5 metre set back from the public highway counts as PD?

Planner is not happy with our dormer conversion so trying to ascertain if we can do it under PD instead, but I’m not sure how to interpret the technical guidance specifically for hip to Gable (our dormer would be rear elevation but the hip to Gable is on the side and we are a corner plot)

I do wonder if I should just have PM’d Equus but that seems a little unfair!

[Equus]

Pheo said:

...a side elevation with a 5 metre set back from the public highway...we are a corner plot

If I'm understanding you correctly, the side elevation faces a public highway, set back 5 metres from it?

In which case, regardless of any other factors, it is considered to be a 'principal elevation' (see diagram on page 16 of the Technical Guide) so no, it wouldn't be Permitted Development.

Hip-to-gable conversions can really bugger up the balance of visual mass on a building, so I would share the Planner's concerns, depending on the precise arrangement.

[Pheo]

This is what we were hoping to do. I agree about the hip to Gable concern, we were trying to go for something architecturally interesting to reduce impact and add to the streetscape - but we’ve had I think an out and out no, so we’ve pulled the dormer from the plans for now while we consider options - a barn hip being one of them.

Thanks for your input Equus will get onto the architects.

[Equus]

I've seen worse, to be fair, but while you're talking to your Architect, you might want to ask him how you're expected to tile that narrow strip of roof between the zinc dormer and the gable. In practice, you'd have to flash it, which would look a dreadful bodge.

You appear to have a very thin deck on that flat roof, too.

And tell him there's a button somewhere on his CAD that will change the view to three-point perspective, instead of parallel projection... the latter gives me a migraine if I have to look at it too long!

[Busa mav]

"Principal elevation"

I think a hip to gable may be allowed here Equus.

Its very clear in the document that there can only be one principal elevation, even on a corner plot. I think the planners would have a difficult task proving that the side elevation should be "the" principal elevation.

I think the proposal as shown must be getting close to the allowed 50m3 , so losing or reducing the dormer size may be a requirement to beat the allowances.

For the sake of £103 and some basic drawings, I would test this one, given the OP is running out of options,

[dmsims]

That dormer looks "interesting" has he found the ELC button in the cad program ?

[Pheo]

Busa mav said:

"Principal elevation"

I think a hip to gable may be allowed here Equus.

Its very clear in the document that there can only be one principal elevation, even on a corner plot. I think the planners would have a difficult task proving that the side elevation should be "the" principal elevation.

I think the proposal as shown must be getting close to the allowed 50m3 , so losing or reducing the dormer size may be a requirement to beat the allowances.

For the sake of £103 and some basic drawings, I would test this one, given the OP is running out of options,

Yeah I see what you mean:



Then further down it specifically refers to principle elevation in the document regarding any increase in roof size... but it does have a vague get out about other roof planes; but refers to bay windows.

Take it the £103 is certificate of lawful development cost?

[Busa mav]

Turn to page 7 for the definition of "principal elevation".

Yes, £103 is the cost to apply for a certificate.

[Pheo]

Busa mav said:

Turn to page 7 for the definition of "principal elevation".

Yes, £103 is the cost to apply for a certificate.

Very interesting! Quite fun this maybe I should go work for Equus

[Equus]

Busa mav said:

"Principal elevation"

I think a hip to gable may be allowed here Equus.

Its very clear in the document that there can only be one principal elevation, even on a corner plot. I think the planners would have a difficult task proving that the side elevation should be "the" principal elevation.

I think the proposal as shown must be getting close to the allowed 50m3 , so losing or reducing the dormer size may be a requirement to beat the allowances.

For the sake of £103 and some basic drawings, I would test this one, given the OP is running out of options,

You may well be right; I must admit that I didn't check back on the definition on page 7 of the Technical Guide.

I would observe that the current GDPO (which is the actual statutory instrument, and hence takes precedence over the Technical Guide) contains no such definition of 'Principal Elevation' that I can find, though... I've just done a search on the document itself.

Also, from experience, if you want to isolate one element of the work as being 'permitted development' and wish to seek a LDC on it, the Local Authority will want a set of drawings that show that work and nothing else. I've been down the path many times of trying to just highlight one element of work on a set of drawings with annotation to say that the rest of the stuff isn't under consideration, and they never wear it.

But that aside, as you say, for the sake of £103 and some basic, doctored drawings, give it a go?

Let us know how you get on?

[Pheo]

Will do guys - has gone back to the architect - I think they’ve given their consultant a bell to get their view as they don’t feel comfortable in this area (hence you guys exist!) - need to obviously give them some space.

Great spot on the row of tiles next to the dormer. We did actually have one other design which was a Gable ended dormer which I really liked and would be less of the 50m3, but definitely something to keep an eye on (trying to work out the m3 used by the hip to Gable at the moment!)

[Ranger 6]

We wanted to do the same about 10 years ago and the planning office didn't allow a hip to gable. I did a photoshop bodge of what it could look like with a reduced hip and they were happy. There weren't any dimensions on the mock up and when the builder came to actually put it together it was so small as to be almost non-existent. It didn't impact on the size of our dormer.

You may find a similar approach could win them round.

You can see the comparison here.


You may find a similar approach could win them round.

[Pheo]

Barn hip you mean?