kandgmitchell

We didn't ask, just put the static on site. I'm going to use Part 4 Class A permitted development rights if challenged: 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. My wife and I are supervising the works (as well as doing some jobs as well) and providing security to the site. We have registered for council tax over the phone and the Council has supplied refuse bins. The actual banding has yet to be assessed by the District Valuer (4-5 months) but we've elected to pay Class A council tax just so there's no lump sum due when it's no doubt backdated.

Well I've got an appeal against the refusal of a lawful development certificate that had a start date of 14th November 2022. All the various written reps were back by the deadline in February 2023. We are now waiting for an Inspector's visit some 7 months on. Requests for an update are met with a standard "we will be in touch" response. A tad more than 27 weeks then........

Well I've just been through the Openreach developers portal application system. It's not exactly the easiest application I've done. However, it's just churned out a quote for £9710.00 so I think that's a thanks but no thanks. The static now has a 4G router with a £24/month unlimited no contract sim card in it. All our stuff including the smart TV seems to work fine so I may transfer that when the house is finished.

Well I can update now as we are in the static with all services connected. The British Gas guy turned up exactly on time as agreed with a brand new 3 phase meter and was done and dusted in half an hour. Our electrician returned later that day and heh ho we were up and running!

That'll be all we need! Just have to hope. Octopus quoted 8 weeks for a meter.........

Just to be clear, up to 30m2 internal floor area and more than 1.0m from the boundary then the building is exempt building reg control so you choose how to insulate it. Two separate 30m2 buildings placed close but not touching could therefore save you a lot. Over 30m2 and under 50m2 the building regulations apply (foundations, damp proofing etc) but not the "energy efficiency requirements" so you choose the insulation. Beyond that you need to comply with everything and the regulations set the standards even if you are not sleeping in it.

Hurrah! British Gas finally did get back to us. Apart from needing our full bank details there and then whilst we were out away from home, they were actually helpful. New meter goes in a week after Northern Power Networks installs the supply so bearable. Lot's of games of scrabble by gas light!

Why on earth don't DNO's just fit the meter and let you choose the supplier? Spent ages on the phone to British Gas (who Northern suggested as speediest) last week. They tell you the new connections team will call back within 48 hours. They don't of course so spent more time this morning going round in circles " you don't have a customer number...." how do we get a customer number? "you need a meter to get a customer number... our new connections team will ring you in 48 hours" - well they haven't so far. "Ah if they don't a second time you can lodge a complaint..." Can we speak direct to them? "No I have to forward an online form, they do not take calls..." Give me strength!

Have some of these as fall back. Has anyone had experience of the best supplier for getting a meter installed....

Hi, Moving into the static in a weeks time. The electricity supply to the site has been delayed due to various reasons but have now just finally got a date for Northern Power Networks to put the cable and head in (on the day before we arrive).We now need a meter PDQ, still waiting for British Gas new connections team to phone us back, Eon says 4 to six weeks and Octopus can't understand why we don't have a customer number........ Any thoughts out there - it's going to be hard times with no leccy!!

If you want a UK based engineer and especially if you may need some on-site help, try Structural Engineers Cambridge Ltd. That's Charles Tallack's company. He's a very practical guy capable of sketching you out a sensible solution to a problem whilst standing in pouring rain whilst knee deep in mud with concrete waiting to be poured..... Based on the outskirts of Cambridge he knows the Eastern counties well and is easy to talk to and always very helpful.

Right, what is enforceable is the Requirements of Part C - Site Preparation and Resistance to Contaminants and Moisture. In particular C2 Resistance to Moisture. C2 states: The walls floors and roof of the building shall adequately protect the building and people who use the building from harmful effects caused by; a) ground moisture, b) precipitation including wind driven spray, c) interstitial and surface condensation; and d) spillage of water from or associated with sanitary fittings or fixed appliances. OK so it is only paragraph b) that is an issue here. Section 6 of the Approved Document applies to roofs. It gives three concerns : precipitation from the outside, interstitial condensation, risk of condensation on the underside of the roof covering. Here we are considering slates so interstitial condesation is not an issue and if the roof is a traditional cold one with adequate ventilation then there is little risk of condensation on the underside. What is left is keeping the rain and snow out. Paragraph 6.3 states: Roofing can be designed can be designed to protect a building from precipitation either by holding the precipitation at the face of the roof or by stopping it from penetrating beyond the back of the roofing system. Paragraph 6.4 states: Any roof will meet the requirement if: (b) it has overlapping dry joints, is impervious or weather resisting, and is backed by a material which will direct precipitation which enters the roof towards the outer face (as with roofing felt). Finally Paragraph 6.6 states: Roofing systems may be: (b) weather resisting including natural stone, or slate, cement based products, fired clay or wood. Sorry it's long winded but that is what the LABC should consider. So they cannot insist on BS 5534 being used but they are using it as a reference to base their judgement on whether you satisfy the above. However, the Approved Document right at the start states: "Approved Documents are intended to provide guidance on some of the more common building situations. However, there may well be alternative ways of achieving compliance with the requirements. Thus there is no obligation to adopt any particular solution contained within an Approved Document if you prefer to meet the relevant requirement in some other way." (Bold in document). Consequently you can refer to other guidance particularly specialist historic building documentation to support your arguement. Certainly a SPAB document is appropriate in the circumstances and they ought to listen to reason. I would also pay particular attention to the underlay or consider a product such as Isoline by Onduline which is used for slates/tiles below the recommended pitch. It's a polite but firm approach challenging their position, explaining the age and appearance of the building and how you have reached out for further advice. It's all about appearing to concede whilst not!

Blimey, what a palaver over a detached garage. The structural engineer should stick to structural engineering rather than worry about moisture prevention, loads of garages are built as single skin. As for the BCO they need to read Regulation 21 - Application of Energy Efficiency Requirements. Paragraph 1 applies them to buildings, paragraph 2 then exempts those buildings listed in paragraph 3 and Paragraph 3 says (d) standalone buildings other than dwellings with a total useful floor area of less than 50m2. Patently a garage is not a dwelling. This is the statutory legislation, the Approved Documents are simply guidance on how to comply. It's always useful to start at the top just to see if there is a legal basis is for some of the more extraordinary demands one hears. In this case Part L doesn't apply to your garage but should you wish to insulate it then that is entirely your own choice as to how much insulation you use and the Building Regulations have no opinion on that.

ETC is right, your window can be up to 1.0m2 and will obviously open inwards if the neighbour has erected a fence across it. However, also as pointed out if you can't use the window to escape out of then you have an issue as the room is an "inner room" i.e escape in case of fire is through another room - the dining, kitchen area. I would think you will need to extend the side wall of the bathroom labelled as 2550mm across the hall to meet the room in question. A door will be needed into the dining/kitchen off what is now a hallway. All rooms will then open onto a hallway with a direct exit and thus comply whether or not they have escape windows. You then only have to comply with the size limit and the ventilation as above.

With the planners setting the opening height of your windows at no less than 1.7m you can't satisfy Para 2.1 (b) above. I presume this is to stop occupants peering out, it usually is. Your alternative is to provide a protected stairway (2.1 (b) above. So basically a stairway down into a hallway with a direct final exit. The partitions forming the hall need to be 30 minutes fire resistant and all doors that open into that hall from habitable rooms and kitchens need to be FD20 standard (albeit they're hard to get as more FD30 doors are usually sold). The route must be direct and so the stair can't land in a room (i.e be open plan).

It's a pretty rare ground floor window where the floor level inside is 600mm + above the external ground level. So normally the requirements of part K apply which says you need guarding if a person can fall more than 600mm. So, if your floor level is say 200mm off the external ground level then the cill height of a window can be at any level as you cannot fall more than 600mm..... If you want to keep to 800mm high cill heights at first floor level, restrictors will only work if the openable area with them in place meets the requirements of the openable area needed. Otherwise guarding will be needed.

This bit of Part O is madness. Suddenly just because the weather is getting warmer we may be at greater risk of falling out a window that has been left open! It does say "falls from height" so I'd argue that wouldn't apply to ground floor windows. It's certainly challenging if you need to combine both means of escape with a window needed to reduce potential overheating in an upstairs bedroom...........

Have a look at section 56 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (it's on line). That section sets out the time when development has begun. You seem to be relying on paragraph 4(c) "the laying of an underground main or pipe to the foundations, or part of the foundations of a building". I would suggest that you would have to take the pipe from the soakaway right up to the location of the proposed foundations, not just stick in one length of drain. I'm slightly cautious because argueably there are no foundations are there? If you are concerned that the LA may be awkward (if perhaps it was a contentested site) the most secure way is to dig just a small section of foundation trench, then there is no possible dispute because paragraph 4(b) is clear. Get that inspected, photographed (and then backfilled) and write formally to the LA with the evidence advising that works have materially started on site in accordance with Section 56. The whole hog would be a LDC but it would take a really difficult LA to try and overcome that evidence. Is there a reason that they would take such an extreme approach?

6 months for a single house plan check! Are they serious? Let's ignore warranties and just deal with Building Control. Two systems - LABC and Approved Inspector (AI). The LABC system is the default - they can't refuse an application. All LA's publish their fee scale and these are meant to to be pitched at a level to cover the cost of providing the service. They are the enforcing authority and can prosecute for breaches of Building Regulations. If an AI cannot certify a project as complete or feels they have to withdraw, then the scheme reverts to LABC control. They tend to be cheaper than AI's but you only have a single choice within your Council area (although many LABCs have amalgamated across several local authority boundaries). Some LABC offices are good, some are poor and not always fairly so. My plot is in an area where I discovered on Tuesday, only has two full time staff left in post. It brings in three agency staff for three days a week to help out but will not up salaries to attract staff. How can that provide a service? AI's are private companies. They charge what they think is reasonable for their services. They are not limited to a geographical area but they may add to their fee estimate if the site lies a long way from their office. Again you can get good ones or bad. Depends whether you simply want that piece of paper at the end or someone actually checking what you are doing complies. I tend to use AI's in areas where the LA is poor, but are happy to use LABC where they work well (that's for my client's benefit). Going back to the 6 month plan check. Section 16 of the Building Act 1984 requires a LA to pass or refuse a deposited plan within the "relevant period" which is 5 weeks from the deposit of the plans (which can be extended by up to two months with agreement). If the plans are approved by the LA or not refused within the relevant period, then the LA may not institute enforcement proceedings in relation to the proposed work that is carried out in accordance with those plans. In effect, if the plans aren't refused within the statute set period then effectively the scheme can be built in accordance with those plans regardless. So a six month plan check time is worthless. If the plans aren't refused in five weeks then you can proceed with the scheme as presented to the Council. AI's aren't so constrained, they tend not to worry so much about the plans as they are required to certify completion. Since the work on site is more important anyway they tend to focus more on that. It's a lot more flexible although I have noticed that they get a bit edgy about projects taking a long time to progress on site (something to do with their registration organisation). LA's on the other hand are happy for jobs to take years....... So, if you don't have a good reference for an AI then don't ignore the LA option but try to ask around local builders if you can to get feedback on their performance.

The latest Part R - i.e gigabit ready infrastructure does not apply to works started before 26th December 2022 or for works for which an application was made before that date with the proviso that works start on site within 12 months of that application.

Just a follow up to this with many thanks to @Omnibuswoman Sent a letter to HMRC in April with all the details their phone line suggested. Got a letter from them last month asking for all the information I had already given them. This week we found they had repayed the whole amount plus nearly 70 quid interest. For this alone, membership of this forum has been worth it let alone the other useful stuff I keep finding. Shame the refund just covered the archaeological survey so it's not spare as such but certainly very, very welcome.

Hoops? How long have you got??? First, your proposal can't: Be in a national park or conservation area, area of outstanding natural beauty etc. Extend a dwelling built before 1/7/1948 or after 28/10/2018 Extend a dwelling where you used this provision already No end up being over 18m high Extend more than 7m higher than the existing Extend more than 3.5m above the highest part of the rest of the row Have a floor to ceiling height of more than 3.5m or existing floor to ceiling height Be anywhere other than on the principal part of the dwelling Have any visible support structures Involve any engineering works other than works within the curtilage to strengthen walls or foundations (but what about shared party walls??) Then you have to meet the following conditions: Match the materials of existing house No windows in any side wall Have the same roof pitch Remain a single dwelling But before all that you need prior approval from the LPA on: Impact on neighbours of overlooking, privacy and loss of light Impact on external appearance (principal elevation only) on design and architectural features Air traffic (??) Any protected view Then after all this you need a report on how you intend to manage construction e'g hours, noise, dust etc. And finally do it within 3 years of getting all this. This is paraphrasing, you'll need to see the exact details but good luck!

But £449 for set up and £75/month ?

I think you'll struggle to argue that the principal elevation doesn't front a highway and thus any alteration under Class B would not be permitted facing the road. You could try arguing the distance, the garages, the levels but that'll have to be done via an appication for a certificate of lawfulness which odds on the LPA will refuse. That'll have to be appealed and you'll spend a year probably to fail. You could try Class AA but there's a lot of hoops to get it to be PD and then you need prior approval from the LPA. If you want to try be prepared to be in it for the long haul but good luck.

Agreed. See diagram D5 on page 144 of the Approved Document to Part B Volume 1 - Dwellings (it's on line) You count the number of storeys at the point where it has the greatest number but exclude any basement storeys.