Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We're getting a loft extension and are end of terrace, so are only allowed 40 cubic metres leaving us with a pretty small room up there. Has anyone gone through full planning with Southwark to get an outrigger built? I get the impression it could be difficult but live in hope. Anyone got any experiences (positive or negative)?
I had an outrigger built in addition to the main loft room and ensuite under permitted development. 40 cubic meters will gave us an outrigger bedroom that was 110sft (so a decent double). We limited the height to 2.2 meters in both the main loft and the outrigger and that made it work. If you want really high ceilings in the dormer loft extension or have a really wide main house then it might be more difficult but its worth playing around with the parameters. Do you have an architect?

Oh, that's too bad. One trick might be to put in two applications. From what my architect said, Southwark don't always approve / like outrigger extensions and so it's easier to get it via permitted development. Therefore, you could apply for the outrigger via permitted and the dormer / hip to gable via full planning. It would be hard for them to reject the hip to gable as it's got lots of precedent. Just don't take the piss with the size of everything and make sure you aren't harming your neighbours amenity. I've found Southwark to be reasonable.


We submitted 2 applications: pd for the loft, full planning for ground and first floor extension. All went through smoothly.

Similar experience to LM. We are nearing the end of a loft and outrigger extension under pd - I'm afraid we were a straightforward dormer for the main room (not hip to gable). Worth getting a few local architects in to take a look around and advise you on the options. I think Southwark are slowly having to come to terms with outriggers as that's a pretty much obvious use of the 40 sqm for terraces.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • A friend has asked me to recommend Juliene for regular cleaning as she has some slots available. Her phone number is 07751426567
    • I'd put short odds on that but who would be his likely successor?
    • Hi, I went to the council's planning portal to look at the application, and I encourage others to look at it. It looks like a pleasant building, with thoughtful landscaping. as Pugwash said, the big oak would be retained, only two smaller trees are supposed to be cut, one of which is already dead according to the Tree Survey. It sounds like 38 people in great need of it will gain supported housing thanks to this development, a very positive change. Of course a solution has to be found for the 3 who will need to find other accommodation during the works, but that doesn't seem enough of a reason to oppose the development. The current building is 4 stories, so I would be surprised if one extra storey was considered objectionable, especially considering the big oak stands between the building and the neighbours' back gardens and the fact that the neighbours it's backing onto are all 5 stories houses themselves or only have blank walls facing the building. In the context where affordable housing is sorely missing, a 100% supported housing development is great news. Personally I've never seen a less objectionable planning request
    • I also wonder if all this, recently events and so many u turns is going to also be the end of Kier Starmer.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...