Ferdinand

Yes, but the wrong sort of planner would not like it :-). There was an episode of The Avengers which is perhaps a good but unwelcome analogy to whichever side is on the receiving end. They were put into a human version of one of those rat mazes with all the doors. A Planning battle can be about closing the correct doors first before the other person closes your doors. When we did our Planning App the PC had a resemblance to one of those Barristers who enjoys winning the process battle. I have seen similar motivations in organisations specialising in Obtaining grants. I don't know if anyone remembers the programme Garrow's Law about the Regency innovative Barrister. That caught the sense well. But then the client or the architect has to be the General. Ferdinand

Hmm. Can you argue that you will have a right to add EWI to an extra 200mm in all dimensions in future to demonstrate that the Council controlling the size to that extent now is ludicrous? ie you can build a Building Regs minimal house now with thinner walls and larger rooms and get to your better walls with large rooms by that other route, so to stop you doing it now is silly? Or have I spent too much time with Planning Consultants?

If there is genuinely no record of size in the Council files (go through the Plannjng File next time you are there) then I might well chance my arm on a site like that by a - creating a dimensioned version of the plan with sizes a little larger, for my files. If there is something buried somewhere that emerges if you have built the walls and plead ignorance enforcement us vanishingly unlikely. or b - treat the volume calculation as internal volume, unless there is some exact stipulation somewhere that says otherwise. Or talk to them about extra insulation as suggested. Ferdinand

AS an alternative to print/scan, you could do a screen grab / paste and print that to PDFs. Free tools are available for all of that. Ferdinand

Two further comments. 1 It was quite common for tracing paper to rip in two if taped onto a drawing board in too humid an atmosphere as the air dried. 2 The last paragraph of Sensus' post is what I call the HOG requirement. There is value in Hoary Old Gits who have been round the block. Ferdinand

ON your original example, I think that that could be made to go through, but if it was eg close to a boundary then pressure on the planners would make them enforce on it. eg if you were close enough to my boundary that the 'error' was going to make it impossible for scaffolding to be put up on your plot in future without encroaching, I would make a significant fuss. But I would need to act sharpish, because the probability of enforcement would reduce as the build progressed as the cost to remedy / consequences of error would change. One of the purposes of consultants is to provide the knowledge as to which liberties can be taken in each context. Ferdinand

I think there is error and there is error :-), and there are liberties and liberties, and not all are created equal. For example, there was someone posting some time ago whose house was not quite where the Council expected it to be as they were measuring iirc from a boundary and the boundary line was unclear. I think that could be argued out as a genuine error / tolerance due to the General Boundary Rule, and that trees and fences can move. But if your room suddenly turns out to be 1ft larger than expected inside because one wall has moved to the limit of tolerance one way the other has moved to the limit of tolerance the other way, I think that you will struggle to convince the Council that this is "error". It would not be credible because there would - should - be a dimension on your plan, and a credible mistake would be to move all of the walls in the same direction and keep it the same size. I am sure there are always errors and mistakes you can 'not notice', but verisimilitude is important - it has to be a credible and consistent set of mistakes. In this case you would have been expected to have the overall size of your house being what it says on the plan. OTOH I have seen plans go through Councils with no dimensions on plans, or drawn to be possibly misleading in a way which will encourage the Council to say yes. I know a house which is extended to the boundaries on both sides, and I were I the Council would have been questioning. To me the application plan looks ambiguous as to where the boundaries are, so a rushed Planner may well have made an incorrect assumption in their haste. The corrugated roofed cottage Sensus quoted was a good example ... The Council missed that the material had not been specified, and seem at that time not to have insisted on samples which would have been a check. Even now I am sure that people get away without actually submitting samples, and just build it, then when considering enforcement the difference is such that they let it go. And it may be that your mistake could be one of those that causes a real problem, and you may be made to put it expensively right. Alternatively you can just go over the line and hope that no one notices, and that happens all the time. But if caught out, it is a fair cop. Ferdinand

It can be finessed in some ways. Eg you can do what you want on it for I think 28 days a year without needing change of use. Your best bet may be an informal chat to your PLanner or another LPA without identifying the place, or the Planning Aid people at RICS? There are many threads on this over at the gardenlaw forum. Ferdinand

It is actually more interesting than that. There are other factors at work, eg: 1 - urbanisation is now 85-90% my estimate. In 1930-1950 it may have been more like 60% So in many places the rural population will be much less than before, which is why graves often more haven't had to be reused That is despite an increase of maybe 40% in the pop since the mid century. I Cannot prove it but the rural population of eg Norfolk may still be less than it was in say 1400. An extreme case but an interesting subject. 2 - now only fewer people are buried. THink about all those crems built in the baby boom era, and most churchyards now have an ashes' area. ALso of course we have all those green funerals etc. 3 - much of the population growth is in non Christian religions, where arrangements may be different - though Planning may be affected on occasion. 4 - and of course the CofE has itself declined in percentage of population as adherents, though there is still a lot of folk loyalty. 5 - and there is a statutory right to close graveyards and hand them over to the Local Authority. Always tempting at Health and Safety review time for small congregations. A REALLY interesting story I ran across the other day was when the Channel Tunnel people dug up medieval graves with JCBs in St Pancras. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2516907.stm Interesting diversion: http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/20160906-plague-pits-the-london-underground-and-crossrail Ferdinand.

I think Persimmon will cave in that issue, because reuse and deepening of graves of that age is entirely routine, and the CofE has its own planning system for ecclesiastical matters. The alternative to their proposal is essentially cost free, so they only have goodwill to bargain with plus the loss of any development value to the extra bit of land which will be in the viability spreadsheet and vulnerable to having its value reduced by the church implementing Plan B if they drag their feet. In fact you cannot in law lease a grave for more than iirc 100 years. That is certainly the case for ashes in a columbarium as the chap with the Long Barrow in Wiltshire found out. http://www.thelongbarrow.com/about-the-long-barrow Persimmon are really leveraging on modern squeamishness about dealing with death. F

Yes. Something built with modern, and perhaps local, materials in sympathy with the locality (which might be pink render in Lakeland) IS the local vernacular. The issue is that Planners interpolate the local venacular from the past. On S106 etc, you can never overestimate the cynicism of large developers or disbelieve their financial arguments sufficiently. The larger they are, the worse they are. I have alluded occasionally to the housing estate plot we have just sold on the old family small holding. We put in a Unilateral Declaration which is like an S106 but you don't have to negotiate as painfully, in line with local requirements to get PP. The developer that bought it has just applied for a new PP with zero S106, densification increased significantly, and a lower affordable housing burden, on grounds of 'viability'. Bearing in mind that the sale price of the land with outline was well under 10% of the GDV, and it is a relatively easy project, I think someone is trying it on a little. I reckon they may get 1 out of 3 of those. Ferdinand

15" is a waterproof newt barrier. But I guess they could swim in in a 16" flood.

MOre seriously I wonder what the potential is here? I would estimate that there may be in the low 10s of thousands of residential moorings in the UK, if that many and including marinas. I would guesstimate 2k moorings in London, which may suggest 15-20k nationally. I wonder how many opportunities there are? Ferdinand

THat is presumably one of those where it was better to be a supplier , if I recall the episode and the budget. Though I suspect that London prices would mitigate the unamphibious machinery being flooded through climate change appearing a bit early etc. Amphibious may be the ones for that 25% contingency. But yes ... Fascinating project. Ferdinand

I would also phone the author of the school's report. He would be the second person to know after the school when it was found. Ferdinand

This is the first in a series of postings I will be making whilst on holiday in Sydney and Melbourne, mainly about architectural details which may be of interest to Buildub readers. My favourite way to meet a new city is to do what I call a random walk, followed by a random journey back to my starting point on public transport. I will be posting photos and descriptions of anything I find of interest, whether internal or external. Cycle Locking Point This first is ... If I am right ... a place to lock your bicycle. Zebra Crossings are as clear as in the UK. Cars stop, pedestrians keep going. But the Sydney version of a Belisha Beacon is joyous in its bluntness. You can also see that the Fun Police have reached Australia. I will have a bit more to say about the Sydney police force, and priorities of pedestrians and motor vehicles later. Textured Paving. In the UK we have moulded concrete pavers with grids of bumps to place next to, for example, pedestrian crossings, such that visually impaired people can tell by touch where to cross the road with the help of signals, or where they are approaching the edge of a kerb. This is the strangest item of street furniture I have met here. The Sydney version is grids of metal studs, which could almost have been designed as a slip risk in humidity or rain, especially for visually impaired or blind people in places there are even signs warning that the studs are a slip hazard. Quite how these are supposed to keep blind people safe is an explanation I would love to hear. Or perhaps I have misunderstood? Comments are, as ever, welcome below.

If you were not informed about a development affecting you, then there looks to be some shortcoming in the process somewhere, which may be challengeable. Or you may be able to claim compensation for costs which they are imposing on you. THis is very unusual and I believe there to be a general principle about claims not being possible in response to a grant of planning permission, but this is in response to an action required by PP and NAtural England. That PP date in 2011 looks to be dodgily old. ANd a compensation pond itself should require PP, supreme? Do they have it? Or create facts on the ground with a newt barrier and a rapid start to development. AN appropriate notice of intention to object, or perhaps a Letter Before Action, may stop them in a red tape trap while you create facts on the ground. This could potentially knock a large 5 figure sum off the value of your plot, a little like knotweed next door, so it needs careful thought. I would go for a newt barrier as part of the landscaping on the boundary. Ferdinand

Yes ... Familiar with that. PP required if the paving is not permeable. Peter Piper Premeditatively Picked a Protruding Private Portico Particularly Presenting Peculiar Permeable Paving Purposely to Preclude Planning Permission. Innit. Ferdinand

SOrry. That is vispa.net. Typo.

Talk to vispa.net. They do wireless broadband in Cheshire. They may help or know someone who could. http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2016/04/vispa-extend-60mbps-wireless-broadband-homes-cheshire-uk.html Ferdinand

Does anyone have a good knowledge as to what can be done without involving Planning Permission on an existing plot/garden, or a Landscaping Plan document for a new project etc? That would be useful information to know. I am aware that if I choose to develop a deck in my garden above I think 30cm then the Local Authority will want Planning involved if they notice or someone says something. But I think there is considerable scope to just do things provided neighbours are onside or if out of sight of roads etc, and in the past I am of people who just done and got away with considerably more than 30cm of height, and I have personally done rather more than that in adjusting ground profiles etc where I have been keeping materials on site rather than removing them. That can then get involved with the definitions of whether material being removed is 'waste' for disposal or 'material' for use elsewhere, which can get complex in regulatory terms. Does anyone have more knowledge? Ferdinand

We used to have one of those, simply laid in a well where we did not lay tiles near the door. But it was always problematic finding mats big enough and keeping the dust off the rest of the floor etc. At the new place we have several of those £5 rubber mats from ALDI cut to the right size, and outside, covering the whole floor of the traditional open porch. FItted together they do not move. FAr less complicated. Ferdinand

If you really want an alternative then one company doing Microwave are w3z.co.uk from my area, which is faster and less limited from satellite. But the long term costs are likely to be more than the one off and you are into rural solutions of a vintage before ADSL was available in even slightly remote areas. Ferdinand

As it happens I have just moved to a hotel at the corner of Wentworth Ave and Liverpool Street, and I was down on Crown Street today to register with Medicare, as one of Etihad's Brazil Nuts removed a filling from my front tooth. I have done my usual thing in a new city and started with random architectural walks (loving the clapboard houses with corrugated roofs - reminds me of the feel of London mews in semi-industrial areas such as Fitzrovia), And loving the sushi on the underground as a grab and run hand snack. But I baulked at the sea anenomes complete with tentacles to be eaten raw and alive from the Fish Market. Will start a thread in the off topic area as there are plenty of relevant ideas for the forum. Ferdinand

This is just for internet or phone as well? Suspect you are going to have to evaluate your alternative bullets then bite the least nasty, as high speed internet is going to be a basic requirement for a modern house. Any obvious alternative method (eg WiFi repeater outside your plot with a dish, or a microwave link) is going to be painful to maintain over the years. The only glimmer of hope I can see is if there is going to be some "right to internet" which may put the onus on Openreach or some govt funding package. That might argue for "wait and see". Or can you piggyback on next door? Ferdinand