DevilDamo

Has this been designed by a professional or is it literally your brief and requirements put on paper? The Living area does appear to be an awkward shape to furnish. Where would you have the sofa, TV, etc...? Have you not considered having more and larger openings to the Living/South elevation or is that the main approach to the dwelling?

Although BR rejections do happen, they are very rare. Tbh, I don’t think I’ve ever had one. I’ve issued one before but that was only because of the lack of BR information in order to carry out a plan check, i.e rejection under Regulation 14. Assuming the rejection is therefore based on a combustible material being located within 1m of a boundary? If so, then either the combustible wall needs to be made non-combustible or you pull the way away to at least 1m from the boundary. It’s common design/detail practice and concerning if it’s something your architect/designer has missed or unable to satisfy. As mentioned above, the resubmission of a BR application would not normally attract an additional fee. You would however have to pay additional fees should you choose to use private Building Control/Approved Inspector. They too wouldn’t be relaxed on the BR’s so you’d still need to comply in one way or another.

As above, commencing work on the foundations would be enough to warrant a start on site. You wouldn’t have to excavate for all but may be a portion of, say 25%. Once excavated, request a BR inspection and then job done. Btw, make sure you formally discharge any pre-commencement Planning conditions before you start digging.

Firstly, if you decided to proceed with the BR drawings without having first obtained Planning approval, then that is a risk you took. If Planning requests changes to the scheme, then those changes would need to be reflected on the BR drawings, potentially resulting in additional architectural costs. Secondly, have you (or your architect) considered having a cantilevered first floor so the left hand wall comes away by up to 1m above the wall below? This could prove helpful if you end up having to pull the right hand wall away from the boundary in order to avoid any angled walls. You could also look to reduce the depth from 4m to 3.5m that will also help in maximising the width.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4404237/world-war-one-nissen-hut-converted-luxury-home-for-sale?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebaramp Crack on?

Similarly to HH applications, LDC applications can also take up to 8 weeks to be determined. Again and similarly to HH applications, LDC applications would be uploaded to your Council’s website and not the (Planning) Portal. Your LPA may be experiencing a backlog with the formal registration and validation of applications. As your architect submitted the application, ask them for an update. If the application was submitted (and deemed valid) on the date of submission, then the 8 weeks starts from then and ‘not’ once the application has been uploaded.

Also added is a JPG format of the file.

In the majority of situations, a pair of semi-detached houses with hipped roofs have their ridges running from side to side. In taking their hip ends, converting them to gables with a rear (flat roof) dormer is the "norm". However, when you have a house with a ridge running front to back, what can you do via a hip to gable via PD? I have been involved in a few and have always secured CoL approval by carrying out the hip to gable to the rear and dormer windows on each side. This therefore maintains the ridge line. However, can you convert hips to gables but those new gable ends are formed with flat roofs, which would therefore enable a dormer to be positioned to the rear? Attached will help explain. PD.pdf

https://www.doineedplanningpermission.co.uk/forums/planning/front-porch/

Bottom of Page 7... https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/830643/190910_Tech_Guide_for_publishing.pdf ?

Even though it is a corner plot in which two elevations front a highway, the main/principal elevation would be that to the front as per... “in most cases the principal elevation will be that part of the house which fronts (directly or at an angle) the main highway serving the house (the main highway will be the one that sets the postcode for the house concerned). It will usually contain the main architectural features such as main bay windows or a porch serving the main entrance to the house. Usually, but not exclusively, the principal elevation will be what is understood to be the front of the house. There will only be one principal elevation on a house. Where there are two elevations which may have the character of a principal elevation, for example on a corner plot, a view will need to be taken as to which of these forms the principal elevation.”

Your Local Planning Authority would have that information, either online or by contacting them direct.

Can you upload or link to your submitted drawings?

In securing Planning approval for a replacement dwelling should always be a little less stringent and straight forward than that for an additional dwelling. Even a replacement dwelling would still need to meet Local Plan policies.

SWMBO? 500m? Are the changes you’re talking about internal or external?

By the way, you are talking about rooflights from a first floor as opposed to a second floor?

The height is measured to the actual opening so the 1.1m would have to include the frame. The regulation is there for a reason so there isn’t usually any tolerance. If you wanted, you could have a small 40mm step up at the velux to meet the BR’s. Whether you then remove this step post BR sign off is up to you.

Although I 100% agree with you, some LPA's I deal with do include a rather odd bit of text within their formal acknowledgment/validation letters... I never understood why that included that part as the letter receives confirms the application is valid ?

I have never heard of that happening. If anything, the LPA request an extension of time. They can’t invalidate something after something hasn’t been formally validated. Not sure why it took them 5wks to send out the consultation letters either ? Your only option is to get in contact with the PO to ascertain the reasons why the application has been retrospectively invalidated. Probably no harm in copying in their Line/Area Manager at the same time.

How can you have a target determination date if the application hasn’t been validated? Do you have any email or letter from the LPA since the application was submitted? Why has nobody chased the LPA within the last 8 weeks?

In my opinion, you should be able to deal with the additional 600mm via a NMA application. But as you say, each LPA has different views on what is and is not considered Non-material, which isn’t helpful. Your other options are a Variation of Condition or a revised Householder application. The latter may be free of charge providing you haven’t used up a free go on the site in the past. A NMA will take up to 4 weeks while the VoC and revised HH applications will take up to 8 weeks.

LPA’s offer applicants or agents to submit a Lawful Development Certificate/Certificate of Lawfulness application for proposals that would perhaps be considered PD. Any application would require scaled drawings. How you do that is up to you.

https://lmgtfy.app/?q=building+regulation+drawings Then look for ‘images’.

On that basis, the extension you are proposing would normally be considered PD as it would come under the 4m deep rear extension guidelines.

Where was the ‘original’ rear wall prior to “Room-1” being extended? Was the rear wall to the Utility area the original wall?