Raising build height and planning permission

[PSC88]

Hi I have a query on tolerances when it comes to build height of the property.

 

we are demolishing a bungalow and rebuilding a 2 storey property. We want to use the existing drainage connection.

 

we have connected foundation and the Finished floor level will need to be approx 200mm above where we previously set out our FFL to get the drainage falls to work.

 

Ive looked through my planning and there nothing in terms of ridge height or finished height of the property apart from the submitted elevation drawings.

 

my question is would 200mm increase in height cause a problem for planning?

 Or should we look at other methods to make the drainage work like a new connection 

 

many thanks

 

[markc]

Highly unlikely you will have any problems unless there are adjacent buildings where the height would be noticed. If just using FFL, you will (could) be bringing landscaping up at the end of the build so height will still be relative

[Gus Potter]

6 hours ago, PSC88 said:

my question is would 200mm increase in height cause a problem for planning?

Just ask the planner, drop them an email and get it in writing. 

 

5 hours ago, markc said:

Highly unlikely you will have any problems

Disagree as we have no other information. 

[saveasteading]

9 hours ago, Gus Potter said:

Just ask the planner

I probably wouldn't.

 

You are proposing to lift it 200mm above what you previously thought.

But is there anything on the drawings that could be used as a height reference?  It sounds as if you can only use a scale rule.

 

Is the height going to be referenced to adjacent buildings, the original (gone)  or ground level?

You will probably raise ground level to match the higher building.

 

If height was considered sensitive then there would be a condition.

 

Can you flatten the drains by using bigger pipes, or finding a shorter route?

 

 

 

[Conor]

200mm is a bit out of what you could call a margin of error. we did similar, ended up 250mm too high by the time we got up to the ridge. I made the call to drop the wall plate by 100mm and the ridge by 150mm. So we edend up about 100mm too tall. Could not got away with any more as we set the ridge height to be mid way between the houses either side of us.

 

It depends on your design and construction method, but trimming 100mm off your ridge and wall plate might help you sleep at night. we were building ICF and a panel roof system, sownqs dead easy to make the change.

Edited July 11 by Conor

[FarmerN]

Our planning permission specified a ridge height, relative to ground level, but no datum for ground level. So we raised the ground level by 500 mm, no questions asked.

The bungalow we knocked down was in a hole, always flooded near front and back door, and no nearby houses as reference points in our case.

[PSC88]

We have no restrictions or conditions on our ridge height in the planning approval.

 

we have no adjacent houses as it’s a detached property on a fairly large plot the neighbouring property is about 20 metres away and the road slopes down.

 

no street elevation was requested or provided for the planning application.

 

we are still going to be lower then the nearest adjacent neighbours house due to the road being on a slight slope.

 

We had a topography survey done of the exiting bungalow which shows the FFL of the bungalow. We are going to be just under 0.2m higher on the new FFL if we decide to go down the route of raising to make the drainage work (we are looking at alternatives with the drainage also).

 

the property size/dimensions/height relative to ground level will remain unchanged and in accordance with plans.

the FFL is being increased potentially for technical reasons for the drainage falls to be with in tolerance.

I will look in to the drainage speak to designer to see if shorter routes can help 

 

 

[Gus Potter]

On 11/07/2026 at 07:51, saveasteading said:

probably wouldn't.

 

You are proposing to lift it 200mm above what you previously thought.

But is there anything on the drawings that could be used as a height reference?  It sounds as if you can only use a scale rule.

 

Is the height going to be referenced to adjacent buildings, the original (gone)  or ground level?

You will probably raise ground level to match the higher building.

 

If height was considered sensitive then there would be a condition.

 

Can you flatten the drains by using bigger pipes, or finding a shorter route?

 

On 11/07/2026 at 10:33, PSC88 said:

We have no restrictions or conditions on our ridge height in the planning approval.

Ok good points. But as a designer.. if you came back to me and asked.. is it ok Gus to bump up the ridge height? Given that it is not going to say cause an over shadowing problem, it is well away from other development as above and so on. 

 

I would say to you, ok fair point but this is not the end of the consideration.

 

Raising the ridge can introduce a what we call "massing" in Architectural terms. The wall / roof relationship changes for example, the mass (size) of the individual elements (be that render cf the roof tiles for example)  can suddenly become unacceptable as their proportion relative to each other changes. 

 

Then if we make the ridge higher we can invite what we call a "scale" problem. The house is just bigger in elevation for example. This could be relative to the skyline or the ground levels. 

 

If you want to ignore this then you are taking a risk.. Sometimes the risk is low, but the consequences can be catastrophic.. but the Daily Mail may pay you for your story!

 

If any Client asks me if it's ok to just pop the ridge up a bit.. I would try my best to discuss with them the risk they are taking, make contact with the planners for clarification.

 

If it's obvious to me that it's daft and the Client persists,  I'll probably withdraw from the project as I don't want my name in the Daily Mail either. 

 

@ETC may be able to add detail to this or be better able to comment?