jeli

So, jumped through the planning application and now falling foul of building regulations. In the plans was for a 6.6m x 3.3m garden room, within 1 m of the boundary. This would be using Kingspan quadcore and Coldstore panels. I.e. one of their kits. Kingspan data sheets mention the panels are tested on the internal face and meet b-s1-d0 classification. Kingspan sneakily don't declare the external face rating, so I've reached out on email to ask as per the datasheet recommendation. Unfortunately, over the phone the question could not be answered. Has anyone else been down this rabbit hole before with Kingspan and building regs. Building regs are advising the materials need to be inherently non combustible which these panels apear are not. Thanks!!

Just to update on this. I lost confidence in the one man band I used for the original drawings. I couldn't find a planning consultant that wasn't inundated with work although one did recommend another architectural drawing company and gave some impartial advice that was useful. I went with the recommended company having held calls with other businesses too. It was the best decision I could have made. This business explained the original drawings were over ambitious and no LPA would give their support. We started the process again, having withdrawn the 1st application. So, the fencing wasn't moved out and retained the openness. Instead of 2.5m out that the LPA suggested 1st time around, we went for 3m. This was a compromise on the 4m. We also went for an additional single bedroom and ensuite, rather that the original design with two additional bedrooms. The bedroom would now have a dormer window like @DevilDamo had suggested. No garage to the side but instead a 6.6m x 3.3m summer house relocated to the garden. This was always going to be used for a home gym, so no issue for me to go with this. The LPA came back and insisted the trees were surveyed by a specialist. The arboriculturist did his report and one lime tree was in the RPA zone, so that was then put in to be removed. With that obstacle out of the way, it received an approval. Thanks for all the advice, it was greatly appreciated.

Thanks all for the advice, extremely invaluable! Who knew? I'm contacting local planning consultants and they're turning down work!! Too busy. I'll keep trying.

Thank you. The LPA has given me until the 7th August to put an amended plan in or they will assume I'm going with the original plan. Should I withdraw the application or can I request a delay?

I think the planners are playing hardball after the alterations to the house before you enter the estate. It's now pretty big and had significant changes.

Party poopers are welcome here and you haven't even been one! My property is around 2m out than the properties behind it. I did expect the neighbour at the back of me to object but they said it didn't bother them. There is restrictive covenants about building to the front elevation in the title deeds for each property on the estate.

This one was approved back in 2001. Good spot with the porch. Absolutely, it not needed to be that big and we are now thinking to either not bother or change to 1m. The builder didn't like the porch design when showing him the plans and suggested it didn't flow. Also created some issues with drainage since the drainpipes currently come into the small garaged area (flat roof) Scrapped the idea of making the existing family bathroom an ensuite for existing bedroom. The other issue that came via the builder is the access to the new bedrooms in the proposed design. The access between existing bedrooms to the new ones means a corridor width of 775mm.

Thanks for your suggestion, definitely gives me something to consider that I hadn't done before. This is another corner plot house on the estate that the architect based his design on. I thought I'd be able to do similar but it appears not so.

Thank you, I will have another look. From what I could find, they suggested a generous amount of land. Looking at the applications on the estate the council rejected they are using - NPPF and PPG2 do not formerly define "openness" and it's down to interpretation. Rather than being law it's planning and judgment. There is a difference between impacts on visual amenity, which normally considered within the process of Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) and the visual aspects of openness which are considered part of the greenbelt assessment. The former, an assessment is made on the effects of the development on the views available to people and their visual amenity and how this may affect character and scenic quality. NPPF - Paragraph 131 of the NPPF recognises the importance of good design in positively contributing to making places better for people. Local plan policies - Solihull Local Plan - P10 Recognises the importance of a healthy natural environment in its own right. Solihull Local Plan - P15 Seeks to ensure that development proposals achieve good quality, inclusive and sustainable design that conserves and enhances the local character, distinctiveness, and streetscape quality. Solihull Local Plan - P14 The Council will seek to protect and enhance the amenity of existing and potential occupiers of houses, businesses, and other uses in considering proposals for new development and will, inter alia, permit development only if it respects the amenity of existing and proposed occupiers and would be good neighbour.

Thanks Alan, good point! I've attached everything I think will be useful. Aerial Image - Front Corner Image - Note conifer tree was removed prior to planning application Side View Image Plot - Existing Planning - Proposed Planning -

I should also say that the house is set far enough back that the highway safety does not seem of concern. Prior to planning I did remove a huge conifer tree from the corner of the plot because it reduced visibility from the highway.

Hi all, I'm hoping some of you can offer some guidance and thanking you in anticipation. I live on a 1976/77 housing estate. I purchased a corner plot 3 bed property 2 years ago which had open land included in the same single title deed. My house is linked detached and on the open side 7.6mb of land from the foot path and then highway to a cul de sac. On the open side I've put in planning to have a 4m wide double storey extension length of house (2 bedrooms, toilet & sink between the rooms), 2.6m wide garage to the side just short of full length, 6ft fence to garage side and leaving 1m open land to the pavement. The local planning officer has said with some minor changes they could support the application. These are far from minor! Remove the garage from the plans. Reduce the double storey from 4m to 2.5m wide. Leave 4m+ of open land. They say this will reduce harm to the corner plot. On the estate the council (Solihull MBC) are hellbent with all recent applications to refuse anything on the corner plots and wish to keep openness mostly quoting local policies (leave a generous amount of land open etc). 2 recent applications have been refused (retrospective) where 6ft fencing went to within 1m of boundary line. 1 owner compromised and has come in 4m. Note none of us have amenity land, I maintain mine and its included in my title deeds. There is one property on the estate that already has similar changes to what I want. A further three have moved their fence out whilst retaining 1 to 2m open land. Just before entering the estate on the corner (different road) there has been a massive extension build going on similar to what I want but mine is to a lesser degree. On this one it is retaining 1m of open land. So I'm at a loss and don't know where to go with this. My architect isn't confident and did a redesign but it sacrifices too much and not worth doing. I had two objections from neighbours and one vote of support. Do I withdraw and engage with another architect / planninf consultant or let this be refused and try to appeal which doesn't sound ideal in these circumstances. Thanks for hanging in there and reading this far