📣Southwark Council are planning to BAN LOFT CONVERSIONS on Victorian properties📣

[Cesummers]

Southwark Council have released a draft Householder Development supplementary planning document, which sets out to make it impossible to build a loft conversion if you live in a Victorian house or flat.

The new draft guidance requires dormers to be stepped in from the party/external walls by 1m, this means you will not be able to put a staircase up to the new loft room. They also want this 1m step-in on both sides of the dormer over the outrigger of the property (ie if you were doing an 'L-shape' dormer conversion). This would result in a room that is less than 1m wide on most Victorian terraces.

These requirements constitute a desired ban on loft conversions by Southwark Council. This is not fair on homeowners, especially if all your neighbours have had a conversion done and you will not be allowed to if this gets approved.

Luckily, the consultation period is open until 27th November and we can stop this unfair legislation - see the document and complete the survey to object to it here: https://engage.southwark.gov.uk/en-GB/folders/supplementary-planning-documents Survey: https://engage.southwark.gov.uk/en-GB/projects/householder-development

There is a consultation event this evening (29/10) between 18.00-20.00, at 160 Tooley Street and another on Saturday (02/11) between 10.00-12.00 at the Peckham Library.

[Sue]

Why are they suddenly doing this now? Bit late, isn't it?

Since I moved in around 1990 my  light and view of the sky has been greatly reduced at the back of my house by loft conversions in my own road and the road whose gardens back onto mine 😭

Also, yes, very unfair on those people who don't yet have one and want one.

Edited October 29, 2024 by Sue

[alice]

They allowed a breaking of the original rules and it’s just caused a mess visually. Like electric scooters, they have left it too late.

[letfordj]

they're not trying to 'ban loft conversions'. they are trying to tighten the rules over what you can do when you do one, i.e. how much you can increase the size of the house.

[pigglemarex]

https://engage.southwark.gov.uk/uploads/28d767dc-0dda-42d8-92cb-a0fa51466ba3/project_file/file/63f233a1-13bc-4c0b-9edc-9964e8685eb2/Householder_Development_SPD.pdf

Propsal did above - see page 74 onwards.

They are effectively banning them for the majority of Victorian given a typical terrace is only 4.5-5m wide over the main house and around 3m in the outrigger - a 1m indent isn’t going to leave you a lot if room.

With the lack of ability to add space, I suspect a lot of families will need to leave the area as their kids get older which will lead to a drop in demand for school places (which is already in evidence anyway) as well as impacting local businesses.

[Cesummers]

Their proposals effectively constitute a ban, the screen shot below is from the draft guidance. The figure they provided is misleading, as if scaled, the outrigger would be circa 5m wide, whereas within the Borough all outriggers on Victorian properties are around 3m or less wide.

Complying with the 1m step in from the party wall/external walls would result in a room that is less than 1m wide on the outrigger dormer and nowhere for your stairs to land in the main box dormer. The usual/only possible location for the stairs is to run above the existing stairs, however in this arrangemnt the stairs would run up to the sloping roof. 

The proposals also want a 0.5m step down from the ridge line, for the majority of Victorian houses within the Borough this would result in a ceiling height under 2m and not meet building regs. 

I have marked up on the screen shot red lines, which represent where new steel beams would be required to support the proposed dormer arrangement. The majority of loft conversions are supported off the existing party and external walls. The requirement of these additional steels will have negative impacts on the environment, the constructibility and the cost of doing a loft extension. 

Someone who owns a one bedroom first floor flat, who had purchased it with the dream of one day extending into the loft to create a 3 bedroom flat with a roof terrace, will no longer be able to do so. It will force people out of the Borough, which is not fair given their neighbours will have been granted permission to do their extensions previously. 

If you are lucky enough to own a house in Southwark, you will still be able to do a loft extension where the new dormers are supported off the existing party/external walls with no requirement for the 0.5m step down from the ridge line under Permitted Development. Unless you own a house that has already had a kitchen extension, then you would be limited by these proposals as you can only increase your home by 40m3 under PD. 

People should be allowed to add space to their home and expand as their family does, I completely appreciate these loft extensions shouldn't dominate the existing building, and this could be achieved with the 1.5m step back from the rear of the property. 

[KalamityKel]

April fools?

Seems a bit late for it all 🤷‍♀️

[Earl Aelfheah]

Seems a bit late as others have said - although don't appear like unreasonable standards to have imposed had they done it at least a decade ago. Also a bit weird when they're still allowing other bits of laissez faire development - including developments of glorified shed conversions in back gardens (for example).

[alex_b]

It’s helpful they’ve given explicit guidance on ridge raises and mansard extensions. When we did our loft we were told by loft conversion companies that these were completely banned and it took me a long time to persuade them to apply for planning permission to do our conversion that way. The application sailed through planning permission so it’s nice that’s now going to be in official guidance. 

[first mate]

55 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Seems a bit late as others have said - although don't appear like unreasonable standards to have imposed had they done it at least a decade ago. Also a bit weird when they're still allowing other bits of laissez faire development - including developments of glorified shed conversions in back gardens (for example).

I agree with all this. This policy should have been made at the outset, when loft conversions became a 'thing' or not at all. 

[Bub807]

23 hours ago, Dulwichlass said:

Hey, how do we object? I just looked at the info on southwark website but cant see how to object? Do we just go along to the consultation on 2/11 and sign a petition or something....

Seems best to email them:

 Responses can also be submitted via email to the Planning Policy Team or by post to: Planning and Growth, Southwark Council, PO BOX 645529 London SE1P 5LX. ([email protected])

I have plans to do a loft conversion and this would really impact why I'd bought the property in the first place and if gone these guidelines go ahead, will seriously consider moving out elsewhere as the place I bought would no longer serve my future needs, such as having a family/kids. Even the extra room(s) would allow to take in a lodger if times got tougher.

Not to mention, these restrictions would make a terrace conversion in to 2 decent sized flats almost impossible and exacerbate the housing crisis further.  Adding usable rooms to existing housing makes sense under current guidelines for permitted development. As an earlier poster said, the 1m restrictions and the added requirements for additional the steel beams will make any rooms too small to be decent and costs too high for the slight additional space, which might barely fit a double bed and wardrobe.

It might even encourage illegal loft conversions to a 'room' and lower the overall quality of housing in the borough.

Edited October 30, 2024 by Bub807
spelling

[Sue]

42 minutes ago, Bub807 said:

Seems best to email them:

 Responses can also be submitted via email to the Planning Policy Team or by post to: Planning and Growth, Southwark Council, PO BOX 645529 London SE1P 5LX. ([email protected])

I have plans to do a loft conversion and this would really impact why I'd bought the property in the first place and if gone these guidelines go ahead, will seriously consider moving out elsewhere as the place I bought would no longer serve my future needs, such as having a family/kids. Even the extra room(s) would allow to take in a lodger if times got tougher.

Not to mention, these restrictions would make a terrace conversion in to 2 decent sized flats almost impossible and exacerbate the housing crisis further.  Adding usable rooms to existing housing makes sense under current guidelines for permitted development. As an earlier poster said, the 1m restrictions and the added requirements for additional the steel beams will make any rooms too small to be decent and costs too high for the slight additional space, which might barely fit a double bed and wardrobe.

It might even encourage illegal loft conversions to a 'room' and lower the overall quality of housing in the borough.

Many terraced houses round here have been converted into flats, or else used to be flats and have been converted back to houses.

[Cesummers]

6 hours ago, Sue said:

Many terraced houses round here have been converted into flats, or else used to be flats and have been converted back to houses.

Southwark council will no longer support flats to be converted back into houses due to the desperate need for additional homes 

[Friernlocal]

Cesummers, I think you may have misinterpreted the Southwark Council guidance document. I have downloaded and read it. Paragraph 3.6.1 refers to 'permitted development' and restates the statutory law which say planning permission is required if a loft extension is greater than 40 square meters in a terraced property and greater than 50 square meters in a semi-detached of detached property. Under permitted development the extension should be set back 20cm from the existing eaves (not 100cm).

Paragraph 3.6.2 applies to loft extension that fall outside the scope of permitted development. Under these circumstances the council require the set back from the eaves and boundary walls to be 100cm and the extension roof to be 50cm below the existing roof ridge.

I would imagine that most loft extension in our area fall within 'permitted development '.

Edited October 31, 2024 by Friernlocal

[Cesummers]

20 hours ago, Friernlocal said:

Cesummers, I think you may have misinterpreted the Southwark Council guidance document. I have downloaded and read it. Paragraph 3.6.1 refers to 'permitted development' and restates the statutory law which say planning permission is required if a loft extension is greater than 40 square meters in a terraced property and greater than 50 square meters in a semi-detached of detached property. Under permitted development the extension should be set back 20cm from the existing eaves (not 100cm).

Paragraph 3.6.2 applies to loft extension that fall outside the scope of permitted development. Under these circumstances the council require the set back from the eaves and boundary walls to be 100cm and the extension roof to be 50cm below the existing roof ridge.

I would imagine that most loft extension in our area fall within 'permitted development '.

Permitted development only applies to a house. If you wish to do a loft conversion on a flat (ie a house split into 2 flats like so many of the properties in Southwark) you require planning permission.

Effectively the SPD is bias to those who can afford a house. 

[alice]

I think that accusation of bias is flawed.   Doesn’t it simply prevent overdevelopment which is of benefit to everybody? Especially those living below.

[Dulwichlass]

Hey, anyone go to the briefing on Saturday morning at the library? Any update?

[SpringTime]

Sooner the better. Some of these cheap, tatty and ugly conversions should simply be removed. Ooh, I've got some more space at everyone else's expense.  Oink. Now buy my house with a shed on top   x

[dougiefreeman]

In a city where successive governments have allowed property prices to spiral out of control, this just seems like a really cynical move.

Given that every other mid-terrace already has a full size dormer, I can't see what benefit there is to anyone to prevent further such development from happening. For many it will be the only way to increase space without moving out of the area. As families grow up and kids get bigger, more space is needed. What is the reason for doing this? It can't be aesthetics because then presumably they'd go to all the other properties and force them to reverse their developments.

OK it seems like permitted development stands for houses. What on earth benefit is there to restrict the top floor in a house (i.e. a flat) from doing the same thing?

Also what'll it do to property prices? Surely it could put a big value divide between neighbours houses?

Really bizarre thinking

[jazzer]

It's about time that restrictions are applied for those who desire a roof "shed" extension. I have to say, some of them are down right ugly and out of character. If people/families require a larger property go and see what is on the market and put in an offer. The explosion of roof sheds needs curbing both in Southwark and Lewisham. Stand at the top of Langton Rise (SE23) side, look up skywards and see the array of ugly roof extensions houses have had added.  

[tiddles]

Since the cost of moving is astronomical- and moving to a larger house is well outside of most people’s budget- I heartily support someone who needs extra space and does not have the means to move. If you have children at school etc you no doubt would want to stay - I see nothing wrong with a loft extension and many of the ones in recent years are much better designed and attractive than earlier versions. 

[malumbu]

A lot of people have extended their properties as am investment rather because they need the space.  Obviously what is an appropriate space for a family is objective but I view some building projects as self indulgent and out of scale with the surroundings.

Some of the comments on this thread appear reactionary.

[Penguin68]

36 minutes ago, malumbu said:

but I view some building projects as self indulgent and out of scale with the surroundings.

As is your right, but just because it is your right doesn't mean that you are right.

I very much doubt, by the way, that people have spent money on extensions 'as an investment'. Read it up, but many building works do not lead to short term profits - or even long-term ones. In the main most people I know who have extended the size of their property have done so because moving to a larger property to meet growing family needs (which may include providing for elderly and infirm relatives) is not economically possible unless you also move (for those now in ED) far away - which level of disruption may be counter-productive. 

[Cyclemonkey]

I mean as someone who loves ina  purpose built flat I have no dog in this fight, but those dormer extensions are, by and large,  really ugly.  The back of streets in East Dulwich look like a well built shanty town 

[rapunzel]

On 31/10/2024 at 15:26, alice said:

I think that accusation of bias is flawed.   Doesn’t it simply prevent overdevelopment which is of benefit to everybody? Especially those living below.

I agree on this point. I live in a one bedroom ground floor flat with a 2/3 bed flat above, should they build into the loft the negative impact below would be huge. Plus there is already only space (within the garden which is covered by the ground floor lease) for one wheelie bin per flat so unless Southwark decide to allow bins out on the pavements I am not sure where the additional waste produced by more residents will go! There are many things to consider when it comes to deciding on whether to grant planning permission that Southwark have never taken into account, hence the situation I guess they are in now. 

19 hours ago, dougiefreeman said:

In a city where successive governments have allowed property prices to spiral out of control, this just seems like a really cynical move.

Given that every other mid-terrace already has a full size dormer, I can't see what benefit there is to anyone to prevent further such development from happening. For many it will be the only way to increase space without moving out of the area. As families grow up and kids get bigger, more space is needed. What is the reason for doing this? It can't be aesthetics because then presumably they'd go to all the other properties and force them to reverse their developments.

OK it seems like permitted development stands for houses. What on earth benefit is there to restrict the top floor in a house (i.e. a flat) from doing the same thing?

Also what'll it do to property prices? Surely it could put a big value divide between neighbours houses?

Really bizarre thinking

From my point of view when part of the property is shared or owned by the freeholder in the case of flats I think the impact of extending, impact on any communal areas, space for bins etc should be taken into account. Every property is different so each case should be looked at differently.

Look at some of the house being converted into 3 flats, they look very smart but now the tiny front gardens are full of bins, rubbish and bike sheds that must impact on the ground floor.

Personally the appeal of living in a converted Victorian terrace dwindles when they become so small and crammed into a tiny house, might as well live in a purpose built block!