kandgmitchell

Temporary refers to a limited amount of time not to the construction of a building. Merely using a concrete base to impart stability and a degree of weather resistance and convenience doesn't make anything permanent. It is up to the OP to decide how much they want to invest in their building which is on site for a limited time, more effort might be required to ensure security for instance. It will still be lawful. It will only cease to be lawful when the works it is being used in conjunction with cease and it is not removed. At that point the LA may well have an issue but that is not the case as it stands is it? Reading the planning permission documents will tell the OP nothing about what rights they have under the legislation, merely what they have permission to do. If there is a condition imposing a restriction on permitted development rights (and that in itself has to be justifiable) it will refer almost certainly to Part 1 rights and define the Classes within that Part that may not be relied on. Part 4 rights stand entirely separate and once again, a building may be provided for the period of time it is required in connection with other works being carried out which have been granted planning approval

No, as I mentioned above we are not talking about Part 1 Class E rights here, land has other permitted development rights that has nothing whatsoever to do with dwellings. As a landowner I can use my land as a caravan site subject to criteria because I would have Part 5 PD rights, as a farmer I have different PD rights contained within Part 6, I could extend my warehouse using Part 7 Class H PD rights. Don't get hung up on one part of the Schedule of Permitted Development Rights. You are right that there are no Part 1 rights because there is no dwelling but Part 4 rights apply to temporary uses of any land and the provision of a building in connection with authorised works is allowed because builders need buildings whilst they are building other things, be that bridges, roads, offices or dwellings and the OP needs their building whilst they build their house, it is therefore covered by that provision and has nothing whatsoever to do with "normal" Part 1 domestic permitted development rights. Here it is again... PART 4Temporary buildings and uses Class A – temporary buildings and structures Permitted development A. The provision on land of buildings, moveable structures, works, plant or machinery required temporarily in connection with and for the duration of operations being or to be carried out on, in, under or over that land or on land adjoining that land. Development not permitted A.1 Development is not permitted by Class A if— (a)the operations referred to are mining operations, or (b)planning permission is required for those operations but is not granted or deemed to be granted. Conditions A.2 Development is permitted by Class A subject to the conditions that, when the operations have been carried out— (a)any building, structure, works, plant or machinery permitted by Class A is removed, and (b)any adjoining land on which development permitted by Class A has been carried out is, as soon as reasonably practicable, reinstated to its condition before that development was carried out.

Write back, drawing their attention to the legislation {Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015} and ask politely why they do not think you do not have Part 4 Class A PD rights for the duration of the house build. It does not matter what it is built of, it is a "temporary" building being used in conjunction with authorised works that are being carried out on site. Tell them that it is the intention to remove said building at completion of the works. Then look again at the situation when you are complete. If it meets the domestic PD rights then apply for a certificate of lawfullness at that stage if you want certainty. First things first, get them off your back.... We had containers, a static caravan and a shed during the build and not a peep from the LA. The shed was repositioned so as to be definately PD (and has been added to with a second), the static and contaners removed and everyone is happy.

You aren't going to get as far as building out the house only to be refused a completion certificate. The problem with the access will be identified by building control as part of your full plans application, if you ignore a private BC then they will withdraw and the project will revert to the local authority, if you still keep building they then will eventually serve a compliance notice or a stop notice. In short you will not get ten years of occupation with or without insurance, I can't see a mortgage company wanting to get involved either. Your planning application will be speculative, fine, to an extent every planning application is speculative so you are committed to spending some money. No doubt most of the design/layout for the dwelling will be done for that application. As soon as you get planning then develop the scheme further, enough to be able to make a building regulation submission, it doesn't have to be fully done because you are testing the access issue. Choose your building control supplier and get an application submitted, it doesn't matter if it's ultimately rejected for say lack of structural details, you can always come back with those later, it's that access you want to get engaged with. If a solution can be agreed then finish the detailed work and press on. If no agreement can be found and the access is deemed not to comply then at least you know.

Protection against sound within a dwelling-house etc. E2. Dwelling-houses, flats and rooms for residential purposes shall be designed and constructed in such a way that: (a) internal walls between a bedroom or a room containing a water closet, and other rooms; and (b) internal floors provide reasonable resistance to sound. Requirement E2 does not apply to: (a) an internal wall which contains a door; (b) an internal wall which separates an en suite toilet from the associated bedroom; (c) existing walls and floors in a building which is subject to a material change of use.

Sliding doors or hinged doors aren't mentioned specifically but you have to consider what the door has to do as well as just close off the opening. Is it required to have fire resistance for instance, or provide access for disabled persons. If it has additional functions then a door can be sliding or hinged as long as it still performs those functions. The door you illustrate would obviously not work as a fire door for instance. Difficult to judge without more information but if it's between two rooms in a conversion, then odds on it's not doing any specific task and can be any sort of door that you like.

You will find that the planners will be ambivalent. They will consult highways who will say that this is a private track and as long as the vehicle movements from it do not impact their highway network they will have no comment to make. Environmental health may flag up the refuse situation but will basically say the occupants will have to store their bins within so many metres of the highway for collection otherwise it will not be picked up. Apart from that they are unlikely to be interested. They aren't the problem. It will be Part B of the Building Regulations which sets out access for firefighting that is. Fire appliances only carry so much hose so need to get close to the building in the first instance. They want to get hose access to all parts of the building within 45m of their appliance. It is Building Control therefore that you will need to convince that your fire mitigation proposals will still meet the requirement which is: 1) The building shall be designed and constructed so as to provide reasonable facilities to assist firefighters in the protection of life. 2) Reasonable provision shall be made within the site of the building to enable fire appliances to gain access to the building. The problem these days is that competition between local authorities and the private sector means finding someone to consult with prior to making an application is not easy. Why would a private BC contractor spend time with you going through proposals only for you to engage the local authority and visa versa. I fear you will not get a definitive answer with respect to building control until you are a way down this route (excuse the pun). Have a good look at requirement B5 and see how close you can get to the guidance as you may have to take a calculated risk on gaining BC approval. Finally, remember that post Grenfell and now with the new Building Safety Act there is not much appetite out there for regulators to take risks on interpretation of these sort of life critical matters on your behalf.....

Remember that permitted development rights exist across a wide range of developments not just dwelling houses. A right may exist under another part of Schedule 2 not just Part 1 which covers development within the curtilage of a dwelling house. Part 2 covers minor development, so that's where you find the right to erect a fence on any land not just dwellings. Part 3 is for various changes of use of land and buildings and Part 4 is what the OP needs - temporary uses. You have a right to erect buildings used in connection with other approved works no matter how attractive that building may be. There may be an issue if the outbuilding is erected and then the main works do not start for years but it is not unreasonable to be sorting enabling works such as erecting welfare facilities in advance of building on the site. One of the first things most sites start with are storage, welfare and office buildings. OP just engage with the planners (probably an enforcement officer rather than a planner) point out that this building is a temporary structure for use with the house build and this should go away for at least the length of the build. By the time you have finished the house, if the building still meets what will be then the Part 1 requirements for outbuildings I cannot imagine that you will hear anymore about it.

We don't know what materials this outbuilding is built from but if it is being used for storage and welfare during the house build it would fall under Part 4 Class A during the build. Note the PD only refers to "buildings", which from the limited information we have appears to describe the OP's structure. It is at the end of the build when works are complete that the PD under that Part would cease. At that stage ( again assuming the normal domestic PD rights are not removed) then one would argue that if it now satisfied the criteria for residential outbuildings there would be little liklehood of the planners going down the enforcement route. But in the short term the OP should explain to the planners that in response to the complaint made by the third party, that the outbuilding is needed in connection with building operations on the site for a scheme that has planning approval and thus is PD under Part 4 Class A. That should be sufficient to put the matter to bed for the length of the build. By the end of the project the complainant may have moved, died, joined the army or just got used to the building being there. Deal with it then.

Assuming you have planning permission for your new build then refer the planners to this part of the Town and Country Planning ( General Permitted Development)(England) Order 2015 to be found in Schedule 2 which lists permitted development rights.... PART 4Temporary buildings and uses Class A – temporary buildings and structures Permitted development A. The provision on land of buildings, moveable structures, works, plant or machinery required temporarily in connection with and for the duration of operations being or to be carried out on, in, under or over that land or on land adjoining that land. Development not permitted A.1 Development is not permitted by Class A if— (a)the operations referred to are mining operations, or (b)planning permission is required for those operations but is not granted or deemed to be granted.

But the point is to get approval for a completely new building before taking down the original, that way you have a fall back position of proceeding with the approved refurbishment should for some reason a new dwelling is refused. It's when works go too far and walls "accidently fall down" when it becomes a problem if the LPA decide what you doing now is a new build without the required approval. A BCO may well suggest that from a technical point of view a new wall would be a better constructional prospect, but planners don't see it in the same way........

I would echo those comments. You'll need planning consent and you are going to have to carefully consider the impact on the neighbour's windows. In this case it'll be not just the 45 degree splay but don't be surprised if the planners ask for a formal assessment of the daylighting impact on the neighbours rooms as well.

You can notch out a small triangular piece of the joist where it lays across the back wall plate (the trade call it a "birdsmouth"). From your previous figures the slope will be a lot less than your sketch! That layout means you will have a fascia board along the top of the back wall fixed to and covering up the ends of the joists where they pass the wall thickness.

For a "flat" roof like that with EPDM use a minimum of 125mm x 50mm at 400mm cntrs for a span of up to 2.67m. The ply will come in 2440 x 1220 sheets and 400 fits with that better than 500 so that as many of the edges are supported on joists and you aren't cutting sheets down. The wall plate, if it's being bolted to the face of the wall can be 100 x 50 as it's the bolts really doing the work as long as the spacing of the bolts is sensible at say 600mm.

Tiling at 5 degrees? I can't think of any that go that low, 12.5 degrees perhaps for one or two types on the market. If the minimum span requirement is ignored and tiles used then 100 x 50 over a 2.6m span is not enough. At a 0.5kN/m2 dead load (assuming interlocking tiles at say 50kg/m2) you would be looking at at least 150 x 50 at 400mm cntrs.

Our supplier gave us this specification - we had 3ph so laid the 125mm dia duct from the cabinet to the plot boundary. They went from the boundary to their supply cable in the road bringing their own ductwork. I positioned the kiosk as close as I could to the boundary to reduce my work and used the pre-formed slow bend to pass through the base and into the cabinet. Ducting specifications (002).pdf

Knowing some self builds take a while, when did you start work? Before 15/6/2023?

The other evening I was reading about the 12th century Bishop of Hereford having gallons of wine made from his vineyards around Hereford during the "warm" decades, then we have the ice fairs on the Thames as late as 1814. There is obviously some natural fluctuation in climate even without the impact we are having. Trouble these days is finding balanced, impartial views when the mainstream media is forecasting disaster for the planet at every turn.

I'd echo Temp's comments. Volume 1 applies to new dwellings and this is not a new dwelling but is ancillary to an existing one. With no paying guests BC shouldn't try to apply Part M Volume 2, so you should not have a problem.

Presumably the actual condition is more detailed and refers to Classes A, B and E of Part 1 of the order which basically covers extending the dwelling, altering the roof and adding outbuildings. You could still do a porch (Class D), hardstanding (Class F), roof light (Class C) and a couple of minor things such as chimneys, soil pipes etc. Fences come under Part 2: Minor operations so shouldn't be affected. You would need to apply to have the condition varied, the council are unlikely to lift everything for everyone so perhaps give specific reasons why your particular plot should not be restricted; size orientation, lack of neighbours etc. If the portal is gibberish you're better off getting someone who knows the system to make the application for you.

Well this is what s55 sub para (2)of the Town and Country Planning Act says with respect to what constitutes development: 2)The following operations or uses of land shall not be taken for the purposes of this Act to involve development of the land— (a)the carrying out for the maintenance, improvement or other alteration of any building of works which— (i)affect only the interior of the building, or (ii)do not materially affect the external appearance of the building, and are not works for making good war damage or works begun after 5th December 1968 for the alteration of a building by providing additional space in it underground; It would seem bizarre that you could be made to build the house exactly as per the approved plans and then having done so, entirely change the internal layout without needing permission. Now that would be one approach perhaps - build the house and then use the £100K saved to change it all again! I would suggest that internal layout is therefore not on the planners' highest list of priorities and I can't see how such changes during construction would constitute a material alteration. However, materially change the external appearance of what has been approved is another matter and you don't seem to make it clear whether you need to do this to achieve your internal changes.....

Not sure about 0.5m, Anglian Water specify 3.0m as do Thames Water and most if not all other WC's. If you measure that as a radius then you should include works within 3.0m of where the lateral drain becomes public , i.e at the boundary crossing point. However, as I say, your neighbour is potentially impacting only their own services and I can't see a problem developing to such a point where you may be impacted without things already becoming extremely unpleasant for them.........

I'm not sure this will be the case. Drains normally block at junctions, bends or manholes unless there is a pipe dislodgement which is rare. A blockage anywhere from your common manhole up the lateral drain and into their property would result in them suffering the result. Hopefully they would have an outside gully which overflows. Worst case is there is no gully and the first they are aware of a problem is when the kitchen sink backs up. If that sink is connected to a soil pipe then they really have a problem because that's quite a head of effluent sitting above a very full manhole...... All that effluent is shut inside their part of the drainage system and it will not impact you. If the blockage is within the common manhole or below, then that is a joint problem and yes being lower you will detect the issue first. The WC are responsible for dealing with that and you should call them asap. In that scenario both you and your neighbour are contributing to the contents of the drain and this could have happened whether or not they built an extension.

Just to clarify it's Part H of the Approved Documents which cover drainage in England and Wales - G covers hot and cold water, sanitary facilities etc. Internal manholes are not uncommon - most large commercial buildings will have them. Building over a private inspection chamber is also not uncommon and this is covered by Para 2.54 which requires internal manholes to have screwed down airtight covers. Presumably this is what your neighbour will have below the trap door access. Building control will no doubt check this. I'm not saying it's a nice thing to have but that's their problem. All this is being done on a private drain for which the Water Company have no responsibility. When that drain crosses onto your property then they do have a responsibility to maintain it as a lateral drain until it reaches your manhole where it become public from there. Where this enters a grey area is "building over" includes "building within 3.0m of". Now if that extension is more than 3.0m from where the pipe crosses the boundary then clearly they are not affecting the lateral drain at all and what they do under the extension is purely between them and building control. However, if the extension is within the 3.0m then technically it may need a build over agreement. It will depend very much on which WC it is - some are more relaxed than others. In any case though it is probably unlikely that they will object to an enclosed manhole on the private part particularly if the only affected party is the one that's done the work and it doesn't directly impact the structure of the pipe they maintain. The best place to check is your WC website and look under "developers". Their policy towards build overs is to be found there.

So from what tree does "Decwood" come from? The most elaborate at a sensible price, that's easy to get is going to be the tall ovolo type stuff held by most builder's merchants. At least you can easily get extra when you're two feet short of it in the last room.