Common misconception re Local Authority Planning and Building Control Departments

designermatt_2

Sorry to disappoit you, but your friends Building Control officer was wrong. With these Regularisation applications (Unauthorised work) the extension would only have had to comply with the Regulations of THE TIME IT WAS BUILT. Noot the modern day ones when the work had been discovered. The officer could ask for things to be exposed in order to ascertain what was in place and require certain works be carried out in order for a certificate to be issued, but those works would only be according o the requirements of the Regulations of the time of construction of the extension.

designermatt_2

Sorry to disappoint you, but your friends Building Control officer was wrong. With these Regularisation applications (Unauthorised work) the extension would only have had to comply with the Regulations of THE TIME IT WAS BUILT. Noot the modern day ones when the work had been discovered. The officer could ask for things to be exposed in order to ascertain what was in place and require certain works be carried out in order for a certificate to be issued, but those works would only be according o the requirements of the Regulations of the time of construction of the extension.

designermatt_2

Planning department wont contact the water authority, Building Control will and then only if a Build Over agrement is necessary. This will usually involve a fee of around £3 or 4 hundred, and only be required when it is a main sewer with in 3 m of the foundations. Any foundation adjacent to or over or above a drain will need to be dug to at least the same invert level as that drain regardless of ground conditions and the proximity or lack there of of trees. As the previous poster has indicated it is a fairly simple job to bridge over the drain with lintels and to separate out the pipe from the foundation completely.

designermatt_2

HugoSP wrote: »

As I understand it, removing the doors do bring the conservatory into the realms of Building Regs.

However leaving the doors on do not.

I think you are basically right in what you suggest, but check this out with the BCO first. Everything else he says seems to fit, so he won't tell you wrong I don't think.

The only thing you should be aware is that if you change the external doors, or the BCO thinks you have then the 'new' doors will have to comply with current building regs, whereas the old ones probably do not.

In other words, you decide to chuck out the aluminium sliding patio doors as they are unfasionable and don't work properly. You erect your conservatory and then voila, you're finished.

You come to sell the house and install new external UPVC doors. These then MUST comply with the regs as they are at the time of installation, so buying some cheap ones now then fitting them later may not be enough. Regulations with respect to insulation requirements are getting tighter all the time.

Right dealing with this one bit at a time. a conservatory doesnt need Building Regs approval as it is an exempt building, so long as it is under 30msq it has a min of 75 % of the roof and a min of 50% of the walls constrcuted of transparent material and the doors between the conservatory and the house are retained. If they arent you will need an application. If you wish to go ahead on this basis anyway, you cld still get approval by way of a SAP report. This would need to demonstrate that your building was no worse with the addition of the conservatory than it was without it. This is unlikely, but certain other works to the house to improve its thermal performance can be taken into consideration. Part of those works maybe to install more loft insulation, upgrade your boiler to a more efficient one or, install cavity insulation or replace your windows to better ones.
On a different note the poster who was asking about replacing windows, DOESN'T need an application, as long as those windows are fitted by a FENSA registered installer. If they are not registered, yo utoo will need to make an application.

molerat

To edit your post ......
a conservatory IN ENGLAND & WALES doesnt need Building Regs approval as it is an exempt building
........ Scotland is different. Although the only thing the BCO was interested in was the size of the step which, now I have got a cert, will be reducing to something less monstrous !!

designermatt_2

molerat wrote: »

To edit your post ......
a conservatory IN ENGLAND & WALES doesnt need Building Regs approval as it is an exempt building
........ Scotland is different. Although the only thing the BCO was interested in was the size of the step which, now I have got a cert, will be reducing to something less monstrous !!

Surprisingly enough I would have thought that was a given seeing as this was already covered earlier in the thread. Should I perhaps also mention it isn't the case in the USA? or Ireland?

HugoSP

designermatt wrote: »

Sorry to disappoit you, but your friends Building Control officer was wrong. With these Regularisation applications (Unauthorised work) the extension would only have had to comply with the Regulations of THE TIME IT WAS BUILT. Noot the modern day ones when the work had been discovered. The officer could ask for things to be exposed in order to ascertain what was in place and require certain works be carried out in order for a certificate to be issued, but those works would only be according o the requirements of the Regulations of the time of construction of the extension.

I beg to differ.

The BCO had no handle on when the construction was built. Hence all he could do is apply the current regs.

Planning permission was granted several years before but the construction could have been started any time up to 5 years after (now 3 years).

designermatt_2

HugoSP wrote: »

I beg to differ.

The BCO had no handle on when the construction was built. Hence all he could do is apply the current regs.

Planning permission was granted several years before but the construction could have been started any time up to 5 years after (now 3 years).

Then that isnt differing is it? Sheesh!! and the BCO COULD have aplied the regs to when he/she reasonably thought the structure was built. It is usually possible to have a pretty good idea how old a structure is by looking t it. ANy other little gems of information you wish to come up with?
All I am trying to do is give you information and yet you seem intent on trying to disprove what is FACT. If your particular case (or friends') the BCO chose to apply the latest requirements it sounds like they were being a bit bloody minded. If proof could have been found by way of receipts for materials then they would have been on a very sticky wicket if the BCO insisted on it complying with the latest requirements. If your friend had so wish they could have sought a ruling and would most likely have won.

One way of proving that it was built before a particular date would be to use the GIS mapping system which generally has airial photos taken at various dates. Seeing as the latest changes to Part L came in on April 6th 2006 all that would be necessary to show would be that it had been constructed prior to this. Google earth may even show this.

harryhound

I am sort of aware of three changes on the stocks at the moment.

1. Permitted increase in the size of a dwelling house, as detailed above.
This is changing. I think it boils down to expanding into the roof will no longer count against the cubic meters allowed, except for the dorma windows. So rooms in the roof plus an extension into the garden will count as permitted development?.

2. Concreting over the front garden to make a parking space, will need permission , especially if the rainwater run off is going to flow into the gutter of the highway?

3. Listed buildings are going to be reclassified as "heritage". Is this just change-the- name-and-do-the-same or are there real changes hidden in the proposals?

My main interest is building a modest conservatory, BUT "houndhovel" is a bungalow that has more than used up its permitted development. As it is embedded in green belt, I would need to spend a lot trying to get planning permission, which might well get turned down. Should I settle for a "glazed porch"?;)
I don't really want to expand into my loft (shush I've got a room up there already), but perhaps, were I to sell, the huge loft might add value to the property under the new regulations?

Can anyone link to "an idiots guide" to what is changing?

Harry

kingsand

Am trying to replace windows in a cottage. The ones there are "Crittal"? Conservation officer wants wooden sash replacements as these may or may not have been there originally. No-one knows how old the cottage is or when it was converted. It has been animal accommodation, shops & dwellings. He is trying to liken it to other run-down farm buildings in the area but the existing windows must have been in 40 years. Area is section 4 although property not listed. I have read that even in this case, if we replace with exact copies they cannot object. We were trying for Aluminium in existing wooden frames, this looks unlikely now. Will put new "Crittal" windows in if need be. Quote for wooden windows was £3000 not fitted!!!! Can anyone help? Sorry if this is not the right thread but something similar was discussed earlier.