DevilDamo

@twice round the block Apart from the OP is asking about Planning, not Building Regulations.

You’ll find this of some use… https://www.adpltd.co.uk/our-knowledge/what-counts-as-commencement-of-development#Legal Requirements for Commencement of Development In order to confirm commencement, you can look to submit a Lawful Development Certificate to the LPA. The definition of a Planning commencement is different to a Building Regulation commencement.

They’ll be outlined in the Planning approval.

If anything, including your property within the original application has not made the situation very easy… not just in terms of CIL but also any other Planning obligations and conditions.

Neither. You should speak to the CIL department at the Council as you may have to go through a Transfer of Liability process first.

@Susie That’s generic information which doesn’t solely relate to what the OP is asking. “Organisations or individuals can carry out the role of more than one dutyholder, provided they have the skills, knowledge, experience and (if an organisation) the organisational capability to carry out those roles in a way that secures health and safety.” https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l153.pdf (Page 7) You may also find this of some use… https://www.haspod.com/blog/cdm/can-principal-contractor-be-principal-designer#:~:text=The simple answer is yes,a breach of the regulations.

Has your Architect calculated the additional roof volume created as a result of the proposals as it looks to be more than 50cu.m?

Sorry, I’m confused. Who is building this house… you or the developer?

It doesn’t initially sound feasible. Council’s are not that favourable on being able to squeeze in an additional residential unit. Especially if it disrupts the general pattern and style of the area. In terms of the size, a 2-storey dwelling would need to provide an internal area of at least 58sq.m. Is that even achievable?

Are there any terraces in the locality? How wide is the plot? Would it meet the technical spacing standards?

I wouldn’t even waste your time and money.

Spoke to one of the BCO’s colleagues and he will accept a paddle/alternating tread stair. So that part is sorted (for now).

Do you have the relevant insurances to work in or on the highway?

@ProDave I think that may have to be it. Deem the mezzanine as a storage area/platform and the client can then decide how to use it. I’m still quite surprised for what I’m seeing as a bonus floor. I could see the reasoning where the upper area is a complete separate space but not when it’s one large room. The BCO is trying to enforce a complaint staircase as opposed to a paddle stair as there appears to be space to do so. I am not convinced. @SteamyTea Ok it isn’t completely like that 😄 It’s more like the attached, so a bonus bed space above a Study area. @TerryE I do see and get that. Going back on a comment made by another poster, looks like it may have to be deemed as a storage area. @Andehh So what have you got at the upper level, a storage area?

Is it right that a BCO is asking for a fully compliant staircase in a situation like this?

I think I know what you’re asking. So if you had Full Planning approval that removed PD works but you hadn’t yet started those Full Planning works, then you can crack on with the PD works. Once the PD works are complete, you can then start the Full Planning works. However, the LPA could then turn round and say your Full Planning approval is invalid as you have now changed the “existing” house. It’s always advisable to implement and complete any PD works prior to applying for any Full Planning works. One of those reasons being that a Full Planning approval can withdraw your PD rights. But in the OP’s case, should they apply for Full Planning once the PD works have been completed, then the LPA would see how much of an impact those PD works have in relation to the 30% uplift figure within the Green Belt.

That is a work around, providing the Phase 2 parts do meet the PD requirements. As you mention, they could withdraw your PD rights especially if they consider you have reached the maximum allowable uplift. They may discuss the withdrawal of PD rights prior to making the formal determination. It may be a case that if you don’t agree, you’ll be refused Planning. So it depends what’s more crucial and important… the works that require formal approval or the PD works. Also remember that the conditions of that approval only kick in once you implement those works. So if you receive approval with PD rights removed and never start those works… you do still have PD rights.

You would require Prior Approval and neighbours that share a boundary with you would be notified. If nobody objects, then fine. If however the most impacted neighbour objects on loss of daylight, then the LPA may well look into the 45 degree lines. That being said, some LPA’s adopt a 45 degree line for two storey extensions and a 60 degree line for single storey extensions. The impact would also depend on what room(s) the windows or doors serve as it mostly applies to habitable rooms.

@Russell griffiths Paragraph 1.17c states the basin should not impede the space. Diagram 1.4 on the following page however does show a slight basin encroachment.

Although it’s actually a rectangle, 900mm wide x 750mm deep 😄

@Temp Not an option if the Phase 1 survey/assessment has picked up bat potential.

Like with anything, always obtain more than one quote. Also check lead in’s and timescales.

Did your BR approval include a number of conditions that listed the various reports/tests/certification required either before you completed that particular element or pre-completion? Where have you got the response within 8 weeks from? Is that the “rule” for your particular LABC? LABC’s can request additional information. But to keep asking for things that were never mentioned previously is not that fair. The LABC should be approached and asked to sign off the project. Take it to their senior should they not be pro-active or forthcoming with it.

You had stated a minimum size of 1.5 x 2.2m which is therefore larger than the 3sq.m allowance. If you’re sticking with the 2.2m length, then the width would need to reduce down to 1.35m which will give you a little more than 1m width internally. If you factor in an inward opening door on the side (like you have at present), it doesn’t leave you much circulation space. The only way for you to know if your proposals constitute PD, you will need to submit a Lawful Development Certificate application to the LPA. They will check the plot and site history along with the proposals meeting said requirements.

@Ryan Turner Didn’t put two and two together and didn’t realise you’re the same person who created the other post. The conversion doesn’t sound like it needs Planning. But your porch will (on the assumption you’re sticking with the dimensions as noted on the other post). Because of that, why not include them both under one Householder application?