Lawful development/Planning permission

[J4CKO]

We are building a 10 m by 4 metre extension which should fall under the lawful development laws, just applied for the certificate to be told that it will take 8 weeks to get it, and its not guaranteed, the height of the extension is 19cm higher than the 3m allowed, however this is apparently to the eaves and doesn't include the parapet wall so should be ok, but now in a situation where we have to wait 8 weeks where we may have to do another 8 weeks for planning if they reject it !

Why does it take 8 weeks to look at some drawings ? I asked and the guy who took payment says it will be 8 weeks to the day ffs. I was thinking 8 weeks was a worst case, not an arbitrary we are going to hold you up for 8 weeks !

As far as I am aware we don't even need the LDC and there wouldn't be any problem with planning, should we put it all on hold or just carry on regardless ?

Edited by J4CKO on Wednesday 20th September 11:30

[Vocal Minority]

You can carry on and take the risk. If you get consent you get it, if you don;t your options are

1). Get an enforcement notice slapped on you and have to take it down

or....and more likely

2). Apply for retrospective planning permission.

or kick heel for 8 weeks.

[SantaBarbara]

It may have to go to a committee?

[TA14]

Post up your drawings - either it falls within lawful development or not. If it does that the cert makes it easier at house sale time. If not you need PP. Where I live PP is £200 (fee + discharge fee and they're keen on conditions) and given that you're usually spending tens of thousands it's just easier to get PP and have it over and done with

[J4CKO]

May just stick in a Planning Application, or do I have to wait for the in progress LDC to be sorted first ?

The plans the architect have given us dont actually have the wall height on the elevations, I asked whether it was to the eaves but the only answer was its 319 cm high, the limit is 3m.


Part of the reason we were avoiding PP was the chap next door has just lost his wife and we haven't mentioned the extension, so we dont want him getting council letters about it until we have given him the courtesy of speaking in person about it but its really not the right time at the moment.

I cant see it being rejected for any reason, next door have recently had a very similar extension built, so really I think we could crack on in terms of getting the building control, structural calcs done and contacting builders, chances are the builders wont be starting for months anyway, and even if they did start earlier there would be a lot of groundwork to do.

I just despair that something so simple, i.e. a yes/no decision takes eight weeks in this day and age, all the applications are online but then it slows to the 1950s.

[Lotobear]

Are you confusing lawful development with permitted development?

[Pinkie15]

Reason it takes 8 weeks is most planning departments do not have a "Certificate of Lawful Development" process to process applications that are exploiting your permitted development rights. Thus they chug through on the timelines for a planning application.

If you've submitted for your lawful dev cert then they won't process any other applications until the clock's run it's course for that submission.

Oh, and you neighbour still gets a letter about your proposal with the right to object to it. Assuming your application is within the PDR requirements a neighbour objection is the only thing that can stop your application for the certificate.

Your height thing confuses me as well. Your architect should specify the height to the eaves to enable the planning folk to determine if you're within PDR, or not. If this isn't specified then (to me at least) strikes me your application could get refused on a technicality (and no they won't inform you of this until the end of the 8 weeks).

Edited by Pinkie15 on Wednesday 20th September 13:25

Edited by Pinkie15 on Wednesday 20th September 13:47

[andy43]

For the sake of eight inches I'd redraw it and crack on. If it means (temporarily) raising ground level around the extension by nine inches, so be it.

[Busa mav]

J4CKO said:

We are building a 10 m by 4 metre extension which should fall under the lawful development laws, just applied for the certificate to be told that it will take 8 weeks to get it, and its not guaranteed, the height of the extension is 19cm higher than the 3m allowed, however this is apparently to the eaves and doesn't include the parapet wall so should be ok, but now in a situation where we have to wait 8 weeks where we may have to do another 8 weeks for planning if they reject it !

Why does it take 8 weeks to look at some drawings ? I asked and the guy who took payment says it will be 8 weeks to the day ffs. I was thinking 8 weeks was a worst case, not an arbitrary we are going to hold you up for 8 weeks !

As far as I am aware we don't even need the LDC and there wouldn't be any problem with planning, should we put it all on hold or just carry on regardless ?

Edited by J4CKO on Wednesday 20th September 11:30

Your architect should / can tell you if it is permitted development, if its higher than allowed it WILL be refused.
They will not re consult or ask for amended drawings.

PD is black or white.

I note somebody mentioned it may go to committee, it will definitely not , there will be no consultation.

[Busa mav]

Pinkie15 said:

Oh, and you neighbour still gets a letter about your proposal with the right to object to it. Assuming your application is within the PDR requirements a neighbour objection is the only thing that can stop your application for the certificate.



]

A neighbour will not be consulted, and if it is allowable as PD there is no right or route to objection.

You may be thinking of the neighbour consultation scheme where an extension greater than the normal PD is allowable.

[V8RX7]

Your first mistake was putting measurements on the drawing.

As mentioned - temporarily raise the ground level.

[Equus]

Busa mav said:

Your architect should / can tell you if it is permitted development, if its higher than allowed it WILL be refused.

This.

The LPA does not have any flexibility to interpret Permitted Development. There's no such thing as 'near enough, so we'll approve it': if it is not in compliance with the rules, it's not Permitted Development, end of.

Having said which, the guidance is perfectly clear, and NOT as most people would expect: 'eaves height' is measured to where the vertical plane of the wall intersects the plane of the roof surface, and should ignore any parapets.

But no good asking strangers on an internet forum to guarantee that for you: your Architect should carry Professional Indemnity insurance. Ask him to put his cock on the block, not us.

Edited by Equus on Thursday 21st September 15:14

[J4CKO]

Equus said:

Busa mav said:

Your architect should / can tell you if it is permitted development, if its higher than allowed it WILL be refused.

This.

The LPA does not have any flexibility to interpret Permitted Development. There's no such thing as 'near enough, so we'll approve it': if it is not in compliance with the rules, it's not Permitted Development, end of.

Having said which, the guidance is perfectly clear, and NOT as most people would expect: 'eaves height' is measured to where the vertical plane of the wall intersects the plane of the plane of the roof surface, and should ignore any parapets.

But no good asking strangers on an internet forum to guarantee that for you: your Architect should carry Professional Indemnity insurance. Ask him to put his cock on the block, not us.

Edited by Equus on Wednesday 20th September 23:05

The architect cant get a straight answer, their rules are a bit open to interpretation.

So, the flat roof bit, i.e. the actual roof is the height they measure, not the parapet, the small wall round the top ?

The drawing has a scale but not any actual height on the outside, so they will need to work it out from that, I cant seem to get a straight answer as to whether it is 19 cm over at the top of the parapet or the roof level.

Think will just carry on regardless, if it gets knocked back then apply for planning, by the time we get a builder who is available and ready to start the sixteen weeks will have gone past anyway.

Should have just gone for planning I guess, still cant work out why it has to be so drawn out, almost fells like they want an opportunity to delay matters for the sake of it.

[skilly1]

I had an issue with wall height on a parapet wall. They measure to the top of the wall inc coping stones. We were 140mm too heigh and had to get minor amendment. Very stressful and I would not do it again. Neighbour was kicking off about height of extension (with full planning) so enforcement office was sent out. What an unhelpful person he was.

[Equus]

J4CKO said:

The architect cant get a straight answer, their rules are a bit open to interpretation.

Tell the Architect to read this, paragraph C, page 8, and supporting diagrams on page 9.

It doesn't get much clearer?

[Equus]

skilly1 said:

They measure to the top of the wall inc coping stones

Not for the purposes of measuring eaves height for Permitted Development, they don't. The document I've just linked above is the Technical Guide, published by the Government itself, for use by Planning Authorities and others when interpreting the rules.

If it's for the purposes of measuring overall height, that's a different matter, of course: that's simply measured to the highest point of any part of the structure (including parapets, if relevant).

[J4CKO]

Cant seem to get an answer as to whether it is the total height including the parapet or has been said here, the actual roof level, looking at the design and measuring it at 2cm per metre (as per the scale on the drawing) it is somewhere inbetween, i.e the parapet is marginally higher than 3m, and the roof level is lower than 3m.

It also depends on where you take ground level from, one is a cross section cutaway showing the foundations, height of the roof and parapet but no ground level so you have to guess and the other is just an elevation showing the brickwork, parpapet and ground level.

So its 1/10 scale and on the drawing it is showing 6.2 ish cm, so it is, like he said 19 or so cm over, so probably going to get knocked back.

Edited by J4CKO on Thursday 21st September 13:27

[Equus]

J4CKO said:

Cant seem to get an answer as to whether it is the total height including the parapet or has been said here, the actual roof level,

Read the fking technical guide. It's all in there, for anyone with a basic grasp of the English language.

Also sack your Architect: he (or she) should know this stuff themselves. Or be able to read: either would be acceptable.

[J4CKO]

Equus said:

J4CKO said:

Cant seem to get an answer as to whether it is the total height including the parapet or has been said here, the actual roof level,

Read the fking technical guide. It's all in there, for anyone with a basic grasp of the English language.

Also sack your Architect: he (or she) should know this stuff themselves. Or be able to read: either would be acceptable.

You didnt actually link to the doc you referenced, he sent me a copy of,

Town and Country Planning, England

The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(England) Order 2015

he said its on page 17, first para

"the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would be within 2 metres of the boundary of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse, and the height of the eaves of the enlarged part would exceed 3 metres;"

sniggers at "Enlarged Part"

So, the confusion he has seen is been the interpretation of "Eaves", if its the roof itself, we are good, even a layman like me can see its under the 3m, if its the parapet, then it will get knocked back, there doesnt seem to be any consistency as to how they interpret their own rules and very little in a right of appeal.

[J4CKO]

Took a photo of the plans with a ruler on to show the situation,


Untitled by Mark Jackson, on Flickr


Untitled by Mark Jackson, on Flickr