Leaderboard

Yeah, I think this 'we refuse to talk to our customers' thing is just making everything much slower and more resource intensive - for the LPA as well as the applicant. In my case, I've now put in one pre-app (the seller had also put in one), two applications, two appeals, I've just filed my costs with the LPA and I'll submit the original application again on Friday. I'm pretty sure now I'll get to build what I asked for on the pre-app several years ago. If the case officer had read it properly and discusssed it with me for an hour, we could all have saved a couple of years and a lot of resource. This is like doctors refusing to talk to their patients; polititians refusing to talk to their constituents; businesses refusing to talk to their customers (all online businesses?). It's all going to go downhill fast and then someone will discover that a 10 minute chat could avoid work for everyone lasting several years.

Well, it is true as it has, does and continue to happen. The LPA’s I referred to state their positive and pro-active engagement is by way of offering pre-application advice.

Just a cautionary tale from an oldie .....our first time round in the 90's we bought a plot with outline planning, when we went to full design it turned out that highways had not responded first time round, when they got the opportunity again they tried to stop the development, similarly this time round the consultation period was rerun and a couple of consultees who did't reply first time finally got their responses in, in the second window, all was ok in both cases but......it maybe worth checking that all the consultees did actually respond and what those responses were.

That’s the other thing that’s teeing me off with LPAs atm. They’re ignoring the ***** rules. Mine ignores the 8 weeks or negotiate-the-timing rule. They also ignored the absolute basics in the Procedural Guide for appeals and the inspector let them. When your state institutions themselves lie, I mean ‘mislead’ with their stats and ignore the rules, then everything is falling apart rapidly. A friend who’s an architect and has worked in France tells me that if their equivalent of the LPA don’t meet the specified timing, then the application is automatically allowed.

Northumberland refuse to engage, they won’t even engage over discharge of conditions. Yet the sign all decision notices saying In dealing with the application we have worked with the applicant in a positive and pro active manner and have implemented the requirement in paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework They continually reject discharge of conditions applications when a simple ‘can you submit document X’ would solve the problem. When I complained they said ‘you are welcome to submit applications as many time as you require to clear a condition but we no longer engage in the process as we don’t have the resources’. So each time they request additional documents to clear a condition it costs me more money.

Not strictly true... NPPF Paragraph 38 "**38.** Local planning authorities should approach decisions on proposed development in a positive and creative way. They should use the full range of planning tools available, including brownfield registers and permission in principle, and work proactively with applicants to secure developments that will improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. Decision-makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible."

LPA’s don’t “have to” engage with applicants or agents during the formal determination process. I know one or two who do not.

Our local LPA say they are protecting their Planning Officers who have been subject to abuse. They no longer publish which PO is assigned a case and will not respond to any calls/messages regarding a live application. If/When they come out for a site visit you'll be told there's no officer assigned, they now share duties. If you want to discuss an application you have to do a pre-app. They're gaming the system, increasing the cost of an application and reducing the time from validation to decision.

Has someone put two layers of plasterboard up for fire protection due to the property being converted to flats?

The topo people normally do something sensible, but add anything you think might impact planning or building. It's annoying to go 'I wish they had measured xxx while they were there', but you will undoubtably forget something, so don't sweat it. (for planning) + Ridge, eves, position of neighbouring buildings + Location, heights of existing building, driveway, access, gates, paths, outbuildings (for building) + Positions of services, drainage runs, manholes, inspection hatches, invert levels, ditches, culverts, meters, position & height of poles and track of overhead lines + Size, position, spread of trees + Geo features - ponds, fences, boreholes, wells, hedges, ridges etc

They tend to be fairly standard but sometimes you may want to include neighbouring buildings for context elevations etc.

If was doing it again I would do water UFH at 100mm centres in bathrooms AND electric. Water supplies the bulk of the heating in winter, the electric makes the floor feel warm if you want

Looks like it

yes will be fine, you need to order ballast.

I agree. Perhaps allow it to be informal. It is surprising that the architect (Architect?) chose a beam specification. Unless he has seen the same span before and is repeating it. Or maybe there is a ready reckoner for them. But the slates are an issue and so there will be other issues too. Maybe it can be propped and the packing replaced half at a time.

In that case, why not send him these pictures and ask if he's happy it's constructed as designed? Never hurts to get that sort of thing in writing. If the ridge beam is working as designed, you should be able to remove those collar ties and get some of that vaulted ceiling height back. See how happy your builder is about that

Pedestal system e.g. Wallbarn. You can install them on well compacted stone + membrane and adjust as things move.

If the new application was substantially different I'd agree. As it's basically just changing the appearance of it i can't imagine any credible concerns from consultees

of course any of them can, highways,sewer etc etc

Yes but already has an approval for similar dwelling. Cant see any consultee being able to stop it

waste of time upstairs really, shouldn't be a need for heat in bedrooms with a well built insulated and air tight house.

be aware a pre-app doesn't necessarily goto all the statutory consultees any of which can kill the application even if planner approves.

Said this a few times before, but if you can, install UFH in every room, including upstairs. It's the simplest and most cost effective solution (assuming run as a single zone.) if you don't need it, it's not taking up space and only cost a small amount of money. We did the for every room except one... And turns out to be too cold in winter and we need to use an electric oil heater.

Wiltshire, where I used to submit applications, stopped pre-apps about a year or so ago. Dorset, where we have a planning app in charges about a grand for a per-app! I don't get the posts above where people are saying some authorities will not discuss applications, how is this possible?

The current varies with sunlight levels hence the difference in rated current for STC and NOCT

Both my pre-apps were a complete and misleading waste of money - both exactly wrong. Suggest consultant, do your own research on the planning portal and/or full app and option agreement. Bear in mind - unless your site is very straight-forward you may be going round the planning loop more than one time.

Another significant parameter is the current under STC and NOCT conditions. As the new and old panels will be wired in series for each string, the same current value will pass through all the panels in a string. The best match will be if the new and old panels would naturally produce the same current at the various insolation levels say 200W/m2 to 1000W/m2. Some manufacturers show an insolation/current/voltage graph on the data sheet, but not Longi. Have you got the full data sheet for the existing panels? Current of the new panels, Imp = 13.17 A (STC) and 10.78 A (NOCT). The string voltage is then the summation of all the panels in that string which must not exceed the capabilities of the inverter, even under open circuit conditions at low temperature (Voc - (Voctempco * (25 - - 20 degC)). For the new panels this equates to:- 39.33 - ((-0.23% * 39.33) * (45)) = 39.33 + 4.07 = 43.40 V per panel.

Euro pricing: https://netzero.jaga.com/docs/Briza_Net_Zero_Listing_EX.pdf I have a feeling I contacted them in 2021 but can't find any email - maybe I filled in one of those web forms and they didn't get back to me? I don't remember exactly.

- Full application (£578) - VoC application (£293) But note a Full application may need to be accompanied by various assessments, reports and surveys. You don’t need those for a Pre-app enquiry or an Appraisal by a PC.

We're in a similar position. I used a local planning consultant who was recommend by our EA - the one selling our house, not the one selling the plot were are buying. The planning consultant looked at the current PP, looked our our brief , and met with us for an hour to discuss our chances of getting what we want (which he rated as good). He did this for £250+VAT. Of course we cannot hold him to his opinion if we subsequently struggle to get the revised plans we want through, but it was enough to give us the confidence to proceed. We also to a good look at as many recent nearby planning applications as we could find, both granted and refused.

Two points here. The 2 houses feeding this with septic tanks should not do that any more. But sadly SEPA don't seem to care about old non compliant systems. So on the face of it you have a soakaway and rubble drain acting as a partial soakaway and ending up in a burn. So in theory this should never back up to the point of flooding the treatment plant. So something is wrong with the levels when it was installed that is causing the plant to flood, or something is blocked. THAT is what you need to concentrate on finding, what is the weak link in this that is making it possible to back up. Probably an unpleasant job of paddling about in wellies next time it does back up to work out where the problem is. It surely should not be hard to sort out when you have found it. With an eventual destination of the burn, it should not normally back up.

The quarry dig stuff out the ground, they wash it and sell it to builders merchants as sand, gravel, ballast the chances are they have a bagging plant which bags it to sell to wickes and places like that, a good chance they will have a concrete plant either at the quarry or set up a short distance away. they are making double the money if they don’t actually buy in the raw materials, but it comes from their own hole in the ground. if you do a list of 30m ready mix for footings 20m of ready mix for floor slab 40 tonne of type one under floor 20 tonne of screed 10 tonne of bricklaying sand blah blah blah you will get a better price than just being some Joe who just wants some concrete. have a drive about and do some networking. .

Yes indeed. It appears that nobody cares about the running cost of a house. Yet they will only buy an A+++ rated fridge. The fact that the FIT payments for our old house just about paid for the annual electricity bill (and probably would pay it 100% if we took more trouble to save usage a bit) was irellevant to most people. The running costs of that house are about £1200 per year in heating oil, and the council tax (which is the dominant bill with nothing you can do about it * ) I still suspect that our new low energy house, might actually cost more per year to run than the old house, because there will be no FIT subsidy. I know of one case where a house sale fell through because of solar PV. A friend of SWMBO was looking for a house, and they found a detached house, with ownwer owned solar PV on the original high rate FIT. I advised them to buy it. But the sale fell through because the surveyor mentioned that the roof might not be adequate to support the extra load of the PV panels, and might have damaged the tiles and they might need replacing. They pulled out, and ended up buying a semi detached house without PV. I felt sorry for the vendors, and for them missing out and ending up with a less good house. * I might have mentioned "council tax poverty" IT has often been stated if you spend 10% of your income on fuel, then you are in "fuel poverty" Well for some time we have been in the situation, where we spend more on council tax, than we do on fuel, with no way to reduce the council tax bill. Since the council tax is 10% of our income, I declare that we are in "council tax poverty" And before you ask, we don't qualify for any of the low income council tax reliefs, because our assets are way too high.

Yes- this was the guy our daughter employed to tile her kitchen - complete rubbish. Had to strip them all off and do it ourselves.

You are all (expletive deleted)

Steady on, he's not Savile/Glitter/Edwards!

Or just wait until it next floods and it will be obvious which bit is sticking out of the flood water = that bit is too high.

Okay, I lied, Cex will give you a quid for the cpu: https://uk.webuy.com/product-detail?id=SCPUINTI54460A