DevilDamo

Oh right. The increased price may take into account using somebody else’s Planning drawings to interpret and produce the BR drawings from. Tbh, I do the same where clients have secured Planning via a third party. Too many ‘Planning architects’ for my liking.

Compared to what? What are the other quotes you’ve had?

In my opinion, it doesn’t look great but each to their own. As you mentioned, why not just put in the compliant step and then ‘add’ onto it to create what you want post sign off?

Pre-application advice is informal. If you show willing to take on board and incorporate some of the recommendations made, then you can look to ‘argue’ the rest with the examples you have provided above.

Planning Officer’s do not “have to” engage with applicants or agents pre, during or post the Planning process. The NPPF does advise on positive and proactive engagement during the determination process, which you may be able to use as a trump card. I can understand why they may have suspended pre-application enquiries for the more minor developments. One LPA near’ish to me suspended it’s pre-app service back in 2015/2016. Just out of interest, any reason why you cannot design and submit something that complies with policy?

Sounds like the exact same wording of the application type I mentioned ?

The conditions do not appear to be exhaustive and it’s information that could be provided and submitted on one application. Saves you having to deal with it later, potentially delaying the build.

The 25 degree rule is a ‘thing’… https://www.firstinarchitecture.co.uk/designing-for-daylight-45-and-25-degree-test/

Any plans to see/review?

BN and FP applications are usually only those submitted to LABC’s, not AI’s ?

Architects are RIBA/ARB and is a protected title. Chartered Architectural Technologists are FCIAT/MCIAT and is also a protected title. You then have Architectural Technicians, etc…

Ahem, don’t forget Chartered Architectural Technologists ?

From a submission point of view, what ‘type’ of person along with their experience and/or qualifications is irrelevant. The only time it would be of some importance is the difference between knowing and not knowing the LPA’s policies with any forthcoming design proposal.

Oh ok. I was actually referring to the first option/scenario of your post.

Would the proposed EWI have a different finish to the existing house? If so, that would require Planning as the proposed materials would not be of a similar appearance.

It would be treated as a material alteration and therefore a revised Full application. You should be able to use your “free go” too providing you haven’t used a free go on the site in the past before and the re-submission is within 12mths. As you are ‘only’ looking to re-position the dwelling, you could speak to the previous Planning Officer advising them of the change and whether it can be pushed through any quicker.

You have to “Start a new application” and when faced with the drop down list for the type of application, you need to select “Approval of details reserved by condition”.

For those who use the PP website day in, day out… it is very simple but can understand for your normal person to feel quite daunted by it. If you need assistance, message me.

Why did you initially submit a PA application for a 3m deep extension? So have you now resubmitted a PA application for the 3.5m deep extension?

If this is in relation to a new build, the LPA will in the majority of cases include a pre-commencement condition relating to the submission and approval of external materials. If this is in relation to an extension/refurbishment, you should look to include details of the proposed materials with the application. On the assumption of Planning being approved, the LPA would include a condition relating to the already stated external materials.

As above. All habitable rooms on the first floor would require a window or door that is suitable for means of escape. A connecting door between two adjacent rooms is also deemed acceptable subject to one of those rooms being provided with an escape window/door. If you are unable to provide escape windows/doors to the habitable rooms that require it, you will need to provide a protected staircase with a door leading to a final exit. You do also have the option of providing a secondary means of escape but this is very rare for dwellings. Bathrooms and En-suites are not habitable so do not require an escape window/door. Ask your BCO where in the BR’s it states this as a requirement?

Two different things. It’s either PD or would require Planning However, I do think you now understand but just to be clear... - Attached to the house would be deemed as an extension and would require Planning (as you’re a corner plot). - Detached from the house would be deemed as an outbuilding and would constitute PD.

Smells may be more aimed towards non-residential developments.

This list is not exhaustive but it gives an idea of the sort of things that would be classed as a material planning consideration. Car parking provision. Design, including appearance, layout, scale, density and materials. Highway safety issues and/or traffic generation. Impact on important trees. Impact on the character or appearance of a Conservation Area or a Listed Building. Local drainage or flooding issues. Planning policies and guidance. Loss of important open spaces or community facilities. Noise disturbance, smells, obtrusive lighting or other impacts on amenity. Overdominance, overshadowing and loss of light. Proposed landscaping. The planning history of a site.

If it’s to be attached to the dwelling, it would need to meet the PD criteria for extensions. If it’s to be detached to the dwelling, it would need to meet the PD criteria for outbuildings.