ToughButterCup

Thanks everyone for your contributions. Quite apart from the legal and technical aspects of the issue, it's very reassuring to have access to so many people with whom I can share a problem. None of you had to respond. Ian

People construct their own online Learning Networks, @Ferdinand. And what people learn from any resource is not always what the producer intends. I always bless @Construction Channel : he has no idea how much his vidoes have taught me about building. I have watched almost all of them 3 times - and each time I learn something new. Poor Faye for one thing

Yes, they can. But they are better than nowt.

and boys This is what Our Local King of Planning says is happening (in an email copied to me) - the applicant made an application to add a house to the site , and because he did that a blind eye was turned to the caravan. But that application failed. Magically, the caravan is needed to support the build of the stable. And absolutely no progress in building is being made

Thanks @Temp, I was hoping for a dose of clarity from you. I read a hint into Not so difficult if photographic evidence of inaction , complete with EXIF data (meta tags) were to be obtained. Perhaps? Ian

Thanks everyone for your interest and input. I feel a bit of local networking coming on.

To quote the head of planning; '.... Unfortunately [... name...] is currently using Part 4 of the General permitted Development Order to justify the caravan remaining on site. This allows for 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....' and '... If the works are either permitted development, or have the benefit of planning permission then even if [s/he]is carrying out those works at a slow pace, that would be sufficient to allow [...] to remain with [his/her] caravan on the site. ...' I can't see the logic either - the works are in progress in relation to a stable. I could see the logic if the issue were to be in relation to a house.

Thanks. I got cross a few hours ago but it's gone now. It's the fair-play issue which gets to me most. And you are (all) right diplomatic nudges are the way forward. Now, where were those Thunderflashes a mate acquired for me a few years ago?

You are right. I should just get on with it. I sense a slight shift in my thinking - just keep gentle, polite, consistent pressure on the Council to draw things to a close. A carefully worded letter every few months will do. Ian

Take care. One or two over the eight, a bit of a happy-dragon doze; it doesn't need to catch fire, just smoulder and smoke until the almost inevitable Forgot to add: Stihl do some 'twisting' wedges: get four, that'll see you through the largest tree. Split in half and half again; a cheap saw will cope with the results

Is that stipulation a locally applied bit of legislation? I'm not fighting with my neighbour, I'm cross with the behaviour. Curiously, I also have a grudging admiration for his doggedness. @jamiehamy, you sound like a close relative of mine @MrsRA. That's exactly what she'd say I suspect.

Host it somewhere (YooChube) and link to it is one way that will always work... Ian

Yes, there is and they are here: called the General Binding Rules Just a bit of me suspects you might need the Scottish rules, though? In which case, here 'yar Jimmie! Ian

If driving past Lancaster on the M6, you see the tell-tale mushroom cloud of a nuclear explosion, that'll be me. And here's why. Advice please. The land next door to me has planning permission for stables. The owner applied for and was refused planning permission for a separate house on the same land. The subsequent appeal was rejected. The owner continues to live there in a caravan. I asked for advice from my Councillor. This is the response she got from the Head of Planning (verbatim) We are investigating it and will take any necessary enforcement action if and when a breach of planning control is clearly identified. Unfortunately [... name...] is currently using Part 4 of the General permitted Development Order to justify the caravan remaining on site. This allows for 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. Any building, structure, works, plant or machinery permitted by Class A must be removed when the works are complete. We will check to see what works [s/he] is carrying out and whether they have or need permission. If not we will take appropriate action. If the works are either permitted development, or have the benefit of planning permission then even if [s/he]is carrying out those works at a slow pace, that would be sufficient to allow [...] to remain with [his/her] caravan on the site. We did try to enforce a similar case a few years ago where we felt that the works being carried out were of such a small scale and being carried out at such a slow pace but an appeal was submitted and the council lost. We therefore have to be careful that our case is robust this time. One interpretation of the Head of Planning's response is that it seems to be OK to take 10 years to 'finish' the job because at the end of that time, the person has a right to build. What does temporary (above) mean? I am in dire need of advice on a strategy to deal with this issue. A good outcome for me would be for the applicant to build the stables, and then move out. Or apply successfully for planning permission, and remain.

Eye bolts in the rafters, and some strapping on the top ladder rung - attached to a carabiner. Same method as when I cleaned windows to keep the wolf from the door when I was a student. The Winter Garden was Sam's idea (architect) and @MrsRA fell hook line and sinker in love with it. I like it too, perhaps more from the point of view that the light from the garden will filter into every room in the house except the loos and the utility room. It certainly gets people talking. It's such a small house, and to devote so much space to a garden inside the building means that we will have to be really super careful about its maintenance.

Snot fair! Too smart! Ubersmart in fact.

Interesting @joe90. My 'neighbour' has applied for planning permission, was refused, and the subsequent appeal was rejected. There is an Enforcement Notice on the site still under consideration by the Council's Legal Team. On the face of it, he has no legal right to be there. He continues to live on site in a caravan, discharging raw sewage to ground. The discharge is so big, you can see it on Google earth. His claim to a 'right' to live in the caravan is at best questionable. He has built a wall just high enough to hide his caravan from casual view from the road. Ian

Hmmmm, Yes, the wind will circulate. No need for 2 or 3g Why the top to bottom overlap, Pete? I cleaned windows for seven years to pay my way round my first degree. Should be fun doing the insides at that height. Ian

Thanks folks. Now over to the Clerk of Works @MrsRA

We plan to have about 5 square meters of roof light. It's above our Winter Garden. (1720 by 3200) On a partially protected South West face The darkish area below the roof is an open, barn-style set of baffles. ... I'm thinking about our equinoxial gales, and the occasional hoolie. The area to the right of the glazing is meant to represent solar PV I'm wondering whether polycarbonate is the best choice? Or maybe 4 toughened glass sheets? I have no experience of polycarbonate at all. I've looked at too many videos. I'm all over the place and wonder what your experience is? Ian

Is it worth the cost?

Almost always, smile - chat if the person pauses. One who cycles by most days now works for me : a great young lad with lots of fizz, does a few hours cleaning up and light work each week. To those (often local worthies) who openly opposed the development, I reserve an especial smile. I may be wrong, but I sense a slow thaw in relations. Intruders: hmmmm, it works well when your lad's the local copper, and his partner's the one of the local CSIs. I just wish they'd park their Police van outside more often

Here's chapter and verse Ian

OK @swisscheese, at this stage the only thing that's important is the piling mat level isn't it? Because you can tinker with other levels afterwards. Right so far? Answer these questions, and you have your answer: At what level does the piling company require the piling mat? Do the piles need to be trimmed after insertion? (mine need to 'lose' the top 600 mmof the stone column - the ToP level [Top of Pile Level] is 600mm lower than the raw stone column) Ask for a copy of the piling mat calculation: that will tell you the difference between Geotextile added to the mat and raw stone only (mine appended as an example) Piling Mat Calcs.pdf (look for the 'Required Working Platform Thickness' section) Do a simple table with all your levels on it from Ridge level all the way down through FFL and top of pile cap down to top of pile: makes the whole thing much clearer. PM me or ring me to talk it through if needed Ian

Hold on, where's that supply of pull-through I managed to appropriate while in the army? I knew it would come in useful.