DevilDamo

As others have mentioned, neighbours are free to do and say what they want. Whether their comments or objections are material considerations that would influence the final outcome is another thing. As and when the Planning Officer comes to produce their report, they will list the number of representations along with a summary of those comments. So if a number of people have commented on similar issues, the PO will see that. If a number of people have objected, this could cause you a few issues as it may then trigger the application to be heard and determined at Committee. Some Council’s adopt similar rules so you’d need to check with your LPA. Or failing the above... one, two or a few neighbours may be friendly with a Local Councillor and would ask that it does go to Committee. However and irrespective of the above, try and think positive. It’s Christmas, nearly ?

Reading between the lines, this does appear to something you need to seek further and detailed (legal) advice about before trying to make any formal representation. With the target date only around the corner, it doesn’t leave much room for discussion. Unless you, somebody else or a group of people were to speak to a Local Councillor and see if it can be taken to Committee.

One of the submitted/uploaded documents will be the Application Form. Open that and scroll to the end where you will see what ownership certificate has been completed.

And sorry, a SPA is a Special Protection Area. This would only become a ‘thing’ should you be going down the formal Planning route. I’m pretty sure it applies to any self-contained unit although there may be arguments that would exempt annexes from this and Planning would condition it as such.

I always take information written by and uploaded to unofficial websites with a pinch of salt. Information provided across the internet is usually their own views as opposed to the actual regulations, unless of course the information can be backed up. Take another example where only this week, I came across two loft conversion ‘specialists’ websites that stated converting a loft to form a 3-storey property requires escape windows, which is incorrect. It used to be a rule but was taken out of the BR’s a long time ago. Unless I’m interpreting it incorrectly, It appears the link you provided does have some conflicting information... “See there’s a quirk in planning law where building an annex requires planning permission, but the conversion of an existing outbuilding into an annex does not.” and then... “You might find your property doesn’t qualify for permitted development rights, and there’s even a chance that your change of use might not be given the go ahead.” As they state the conversion to an annexe does not require PP, then why would the change of use not go ahead, i.e. be refused? It’s either one or the other. I still do not see how the creation of or a conversion to an annexe would be considered PD as the use class is not one as being accepted. When we’re talking about an annexe, I assume you are referring to a self contained unit as opposed to an open plan living/bedroom area with a W.C. and worktop area for a sink and microwave? Also note bathing facilities are not actually considered to be allowed via PD, which is why I mentioned a W.C. and not a shower room or bathroom. Post Planning, be sure to check the BR’s as outbuildings are generally seen to be exempt. But if you’re going down the route of adding in drainage and providing sleeping accommodation, this would normally trigger requirements under the BR’s.

It means the application does not solely relate to one property but a number of properties either in the same or different ownership. If any of the properties are not in the name of the applicant, then Certificate B would have needed to have been submitted.

The provision of a self-contained unit is not allowed under PD even if it’s a change of use. The only way I see it working would be to claim lawful use (as a self contained unit) for a min. period of 4 years. This would need to be supported by substantial evidence and usually in the way of tenants’ agreements. Assume you’re not within 400m of a SPA?

The loading there is minimal. However, B9 could be designed to allow for a bottom plate of which that would pick up the cavity wall construction over.

Assuming you are referring to extending at ground floor level only, then there isn’t generally any design/Planning rules that stipulate a min. 1m gap. Is this current gap your only front to rear access? Are you only wanting to carry out these works to make your garage more usable and/or to park a vehicle?

I have just had a look on the Council website and am not sure what "measure" feature you're referring to. Similarly to other LPA's websites, the uploaded documents open in Adobe so unless it's your particular PDF software that used to have some kind of measure function of which it now does not? Just out of interest, what are you trying to measure as the majority of drawings will include scaled dimensions along with scale bars so it shouldn't be too difficult to obtain that information?

Assume you’re referring to specific Council Planning websites as opposed to the Planning Portal, which is only used to submit applications?

Have you considered applying for or extending under PD and using the 30% on top of that as that would really help with your proposed new build floor area?

Outward opening also saves on some internal floor space.

You would need to check those requirements with the relative Highways department. Having looked at one particular source and for a 40mph road, you’d be looking at having to provide splays 2.4m back and 65m in each direction.

How do you know what approval process your neighbours went through? The self-certificate option is handy providing you can answer and meet all the requirements on the form. If there are any unknowns, you may find you’d have to formally apply for a Build Over Agreement... on the assumption the sewer is public.

As others have said, the height is measured from the highest natural ground level adjacent to the proposal(s). If you really want to go down the route of making sure the height is acceptable in PD terms, then look to get in touch with your LPA. A Planning or Enforcement Officer would carry out a site visit to check the necessary regulations.

Although LDC applications do not have such conditions tied to them. Only Full applications have ‘start within 3 years’ conditions. LDC applications are like MOT’s, i.e. acceptable on that date.

Plumbers pipes as in the underfloor heating? If so, the pipework would normally be positioned within the screed and therefore above the insulation. DPM runs on top of the concrete/beam and block floor, under the block skin, lapped up the external face of the internal skin and coursed. DPC physically laps with the DPM along with cavity trays if required. The perimeter strip can go down to the floor or sit on an insulation board. Do you not have an architect/designer which explains and details these connections?

Although it’s 55.897 so 3.427m up ?

It really depends on his pricing structure. Although there is a lot of money in Planning, my Building Regulation/working drawings are normally the more expensive of the two.

Then you do the exact same thing again but look for the “Approval of details reserved by condition” option in the drop down box.

It is quite common for ‘Planning’ architects to get you over that first hurdle and then the Technical side is dealt with by a third party. I personally don’t like that arrangement as (from experience) it can be a bit of a ball ache to make Planning drawings work as you don’t know their way of thinking. I used to take on Planning approved schemes but the majority resulted in re-designs either internally or externally which resulted in re-submitted Planning applications. On that basis and if I was in your position, I’d seriously consider the original person/company to quote for the full package.

They are collars/ties spanning between the rafters, which provide lateral restraint. They prevent the structure from spreading outwards so to eliminate them would require a roof re-design.

Who dealt with the submission of your full application... you or an agent? How was the full application submitted... by post or via the Planning Portal?

If it’s a cavity wall and where space is tight, no harm in removing the external skin and taking the wall back to the external face of the internal skin.