Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Legal or planning definition of what "Single Storey" means
1,083 views
Skip to first unread message
Peter_A...@standardlife.com
May 7, 2015, 9:17:52 AM5/7/15
to
My local planning department has granted conditional planning approval for a single storey house in my neighbourhood - with the condition that additional information on the actual house is provided.
The new owner has submitted this additional information and on his application and plans describes the house as a 1 & 1/2 storey house. The planners appear to have indicated that for legal reasons this must be described as a single storey house with attic accommodation.
So to the question - is there a legal or planning definition of what single storey actually means?
The new owner has submitted this additional information and on his application and plans describes the house as a 1 & 1/2 storey house. The planners appear to have indicated that for legal reasons this must be described as a single storey house with attic accommodation.
So to the question - is there a legal or planning definition of what single storey actually means?
steve robinson
May 7, 2015, 10:33:53 AM5/7/15
to
definition they use, not all departments use the same definitions, Some
may call it single storey with attic room, others will call it 2
storey and as you point out 1 &1/2 storey.Much depends on how they were
refered to historically
>From builders POV a storey means each floor surrounded substantially
by vertical walls, locally we wouldnt call any rooms built entirely
within the roof cavity a storey it would be refered to as an attic,
unless of course it was self contained, the trendy would call it a
pentouse or loft apartment then
Mark Goodge
May 7, 2015, 2:45:19 PM5/7/15
to
On Thu, 7 May 2015 14:46:09 +0100, steve robinson put finger to keyboard
and typed:
>Peter_A...@standardlife.com wrote:
>
>> My local planning department has granted conditional planning
>> approval for a single storey house in my neighbourhood - with the
>> condition that additional information on the actual house is provided.
>>
>> The new owner has submitted this additional information and on his
>> application and plans describes the house as a 1 & 1/2 storey house.
>> The planners appear to have indicated that for legal reasons this
>> must be described as a single storey house with attic accommodation.
>>
>> So to the question - is there a legal or planning definition of what
>> single storey actually means?
>
>Contact your local planning department,they will supply you with the
>definition they use, not all departments use the same definitions, Some
>may call it single storey with attic room, others will call it 2
>storey and as you point out 1 &1/2 storey.Much depends on how they were
>refered to historically
Nearly any house with a sufficiently steeply pitched roof can have
habitable accomondation in the loft or attic, either by design or
subsequent conversion. Which means that even a bungalow can easily have two
levels.
Planners are well aware of this, and therefore a stipulation that a
building must be "single storey" does not mean that it cannot use the loft
or attic space. It simply means that the perpendicular-sided section, below
the roof, must be no more than a single storey.
The usual reason for this kind of restriction is where a new building is
intended to be located among or next to existing bungalows. The intention
is primarily to maintain the uniformity of the roofline along the street,
and minimise problems caused by overlooking or obstruction of light caused
by a larger than typical (for the area) building. But many of the existing
bungalows are likely to have habitable spaces in their lofts, so, provided
the overall dimensions are not significantly different as a result, there's
no reason why a newbuild should not do so as well.
Mark
--
Please take a short survey on security and privacy on the Internet: http://meyu.eu/ao
My blog: http://www.markgoodge.uk
and typed:
>Peter_A...@standardlife.com wrote:
>
>> My local planning department has granted conditional planning
>> approval for a single storey house in my neighbourhood - with the
>> condition that additional information on the actual house is provided.
>>
>> The new owner has submitted this additional information and on his
>> application and plans describes the house as a 1 & 1/2 storey house.
>> The planners appear to have indicated that for legal reasons this
>> must be described as a single storey house with attic accommodation.
>>
>> So to the question - is there a legal or planning definition of what
>> single storey actually means?
>
>Contact your local planning department,they will supply you with the
>definition they use, not all departments use the same definitions, Some
>may call it single storey with attic room, others will call it 2
>storey and as you point out 1 &1/2 storey.Much depends on how they were
>refered to historically
habitable accomondation in the loft or attic, either by design or
subsequent conversion. Which means that even a bungalow can easily have two
levels.
Planners are well aware of this, and therefore a stipulation that a
building must be "single storey" does not mean that it cannot use the loft
or attic space. It simply means that the perpendicular-sided section, below
the roof, must be no more than a single storey.
The usual reason for this kind of restriction is where a new building is
intended to be located among or next to existing bungalows. The intention
is primarily to maintain the uniformity of the roofline along the street,
and minimise problems caused by overlooking or obstruction of light caused
by a larger than typical (for the area) building. But many of the existing
bungalows are likely to have habitable spaces in their lofts, so, provided
the overall dimensions are not significantly different as a result, there's
no reason why a newbuild should not do so as well.
Mark
--
Please take a short survey on security and privacy on the Internet: http://meyu.eu/ao
My blog: http://www.markgoodge.uk
Roland Perry
May 10, 2015, 6:58:13 AM5/10/15
to
In message <dobnka9ilrve7d71m...@news.markshouse.net>, at
19:36:48 on Thu, 7 May 2015, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-
stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>Planners are well aware of this, and therefore a stipulation that a
>building must be "single storey" does not mean that it cannot use the loft
>or attic space. It simply means that the perpendicular-sided section, below
>the roof, must be no more than a single storey.
That can't be quite right, because this Victorian end-of-terrace is
definitely two-storey (not three) despite having a three-storey
perpendicular side wall, and indeed also a loft conversion:
<http://photos2.spareroom.co.uk/images/flatshare/listings/large/27/96/27
96445.jpg>
It's tempting to try a definition based on where the majority of the
guttering is, and whether there are original-build habitable rooms
above. This is an interesting design to test rules against:
<http://www.allplans.com/media/designers/3/33/plans/8/8624/3arw-house-
plan-front_jpg_900x675q85.jpg>
It has gable walls again (to near the top of the roofline) and based on
my experience of this sort of USA-ian design the lefthand end will be a
lounge with a high (vaulted) ceiling and the righthand end will have a
box-room (called a "bonus room") above the garage. While the bonus room
can be habitable, it's not really intended to be, and in particular
there's unlikely to be any insulation (sound, heat or fire) between it
and the garage. The three small dormer windows will be bed/bath rooms.
Combining many of these ideas, the guttering criterion looks doubtful
for the following house (which I'm assuming and for the sake of argument
was built from new like this), and I suspect most people would class as
two-storey:
<http://www.heathwoodcarpentry.co.uk/images/photos/dormersheathwoodcarpe
ntry.jpg>
Although this fairly similar bulk of house has its main guttering above
the upstairs floorline:
http://www.self-build.co.uk/sites/default/files/styles/homes_image/publi
c/hurd-self-build-dormer-bungalow.png
Finally, these are both marketed as bungalows, and the RH certainly is.
The LH one is called a 'Dormer bungalow', and has an original-build
third bedroom on the "second" floor" (as well as high solid
perpendicular walls side and front).
http://damsonhomes.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Cam_30003.jpg
--
Roland Perry
19:36:48 on Thu, 7 May 2015, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-
stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>Planners are well aware of this, and therefore a stipulation that a
>building must be "single storey" does not mean that it cannot use the loft
>or attic space. It simply means that the perpendicular-sided section, below
>the roof, must be no more than a single storey.
definitely two-storey (not three) despite having a three-storey
perpendicular side wall, and indeed also a loft conversion:
<http://photos2.spareroom.co.uk/images/flatshare/listings/large/27/96/27
96445.jpg>
It's tempting to try a definition based on where the majority of the
guttering is, and whether there are original-build habitable rooms
above. This is an interesting design to test rules against:
<http://www.allplans.com/media/designers/3/33/plans/8/8624/3arw-house-
plan-front_jpg_900x675q85.jpg>
It has gable walls again (to near the top of the roofline) and based on
my experience of this sort of USA-ian design the lefthand end will be a
lounge with a high (vaulted) ceiling and the righthand end will have a
box-room (called a "bonus room") above the garage. While the bonus room
can be habitable, it's not really intended to be, and in particular
there's unlikely to be any insulation (sound, heat or fire) between it
and the garage. The three small dormer windows will be bed/bath rooms.
Combining many of these ideas, the guttering criterion looks doubtful
for the following house (which I'm assuming and for the sake of argument
was built from new like this), and I suspect most people would class as
two-storey:
<http://www.heathwoodcarpentry.co.uk/images/photos/dormersheathwoodcarpe
ntry.jpg>
Although this fairly similar bulk of house has its main guttering above
the upstairs floorline:
http://www.self-build.co.uk/sites/default/files/styles/homes_image/publi
c/hurd-self-build-dormer-bungalow.png
Finally, these are both marketed as bungalows, and the RH certainly is.
The LH one is called a 'Dormer bungalow', and has an original-build
third bedroom on the "second" floor" (as well as high solid
perpendicular walls side and front).
http://damsonhomes.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Cam_30003.jpg
--
Roland Perry
steve robinson
May 10, 2015, 8:17:58 AM5/10/15
to
be if windows re actually within the vertical walls of the building
below eaves height above that its an attic room
Roland Perry
May 10, 2015, 8:50:48 AM5/10/15
to
In message <xn0jluwtv...@reader80.eternal-september.org>, at
12:21:39 on Sun, 10 May 2015, steve robinson <steve@colevalleyinteriors.
co.uk> remarked:
So that means that the lefthand "bungalow" here, isn't a bungalow:
http://damsonhomes.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Cam_30003.jpg
Nor is this (although I doubt anyone expected it was):
<http://www.self-build.co.uk/sites/default/files/styles/homes_image/publ
ic/hurd-self-build-dormer-bungalow.png>
But this one does qualify:
<http://www.heathwoodcarpentry.co.uk/images/photos/dormersheathwoodcarpe
ntry.jpg>
And my American house is in between - the bonus room window is within
the vertical wall, but the dormers aren't.
--
Roland Perry
12:21:39 on Sun, 10 May 2015, steve robinson <steve@colevalleyinteriors.
co.uk> remarked:
>Dug out one of my old construction books one of the key deciders will
>be if windows re actually within the vertical walls of the building
>below eaves height above that its an attic room
That's very helpful, and makes quite a bit of sense.
>be if windows re actually within the vertical walls of the building
>below eaves height above that its an attic room
So that means that the lefthand "bungalow" here, isn't a bungalow:
http://damsonhomes.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Cam_30003.jpg
Nor is this (although I doubt anyone expected it was):
<http://www.self-build.co.uk/sites/default/files/styles/homes_image/publ
ic/hurd-self-build-dormer-bungalow.png>
But this one does qualify:
<http://www.heathwoodcarpentry.co.uk/images/photos/dormersheathwoodcarpe
ntry.jpg>
And my American house is in between - the bonus room window is within
the vertical wall, but the dormers aren't.
--
Roland Perry
0 new messages