PP for BP replacement drive and creation of NEW hardstanding?

[mrelliott]

Hi all,

Not sure but the OP may be mixing up two requirements.

1. Unless the road is privately owned, it will be owned and maintained by the Highway authority. This applies to most non-main roads (i.e. unclassified roads). Any works to the pavement or road (e.g. a vehicular crossover) need to be carried out under license from the Highway Authority. You apply for a license, the Highway Authority may or may not grant this, if they do they will specify the requirement which need to be complied with.


2. Planning permission- which is a separate matter. Many driveway alterations can be carried out without planning permission, provided they do not involve significant level changes, and either use a porous solution or provide a run off within the site. See p48 of this document.


In this case resolving the Planning Permission issue could require, for example, adding a drainage gulley at the front of the driveway, if the driveway is not a porous one.

The licensing issue- you may be able to apply to the Highway Authority to resolve retrospectively- if the crossover is acceptable and has been constructed correctly presumably it stands a good chance of approval.

As has been said above, you could just do nothing, the driveway would gain immunity from Planning enforcement after 4 years. I'm not sure if a similar principle applies to the vehicular crossover / the need for a license to carry out the works.

1.I think I confused folks by saying it wasn't an A, B or C road. Property is on an estate, the road is a bus route and there are footpaths and street lights.
That is how I understand it, ie 2 separate issues, although initially I think I did say planning permission for a drop kerb, when in fact, as you say, it's a license from the Highways department, so 2 separate departments. Obviously the council have new hardstanding areas on their radar as Highways want to see evidence that planning have been consulted if the drop kerb license application is being requested because changes are being made to hardstanding at the front of a property.

2. re planning- One of the first things I looked at when we viewed the property was the height of the BP bricks. Mentioned to solicitor that they didn't meet reg's and was told that there are no reg's for Block paving driveways. Then, when looking into it further, I discovered the planning requirements and (at our request) the solicitor raised a query re the nature/construction of the BP. The answer from the seller was to say that they had no plans, no invoices/receipts and no guarantee, although they did provide the name of the contractor who did the work and stated "Fully checked on Checked and Vetted and Check a Trade"!

On their website they say they"...... excavate to 250 millimetre. The blocks will be laid on coarse sand with good aggregates to prevent sinking, this will be laid on a 40 millimetre spread....... 150mm of stone base. We use a vibrating base plate to compact, stones, sand and blocks. We use 60 millimetre blocks.
Is my driveway protected? Answer: Yes, we use a membrane & taram to protect your driveway
Q13. Do I need planning permission for my new driveway?
Planning permission not necessary if an ACO drain is installed to remove any surface water back in to the house drains or a soak away. The alternative is permeable paving.
Q14.What is permeable paving?
Answer: Permeable paving is a wider form of block paving that creates wider spaces between blocks to allow surface water to soak through.

So essentially we don't know if it's permeable, but looking at the gaps between the blocks and info above, our best assessment would be that it's not.

Apart from dropping the kerb, what else would be involved in a crossover? There is no dropped kerb for the newly created area, only the original one across the section which was the original drive. The photo shows where the BP meets the footpath.

Regarding drainage, there are no visible drains.
It doesn't slope towards the path/highway, it appears to slope to the left and slightly towards the front of the property. As you can see in the photo, there's a semicircular area of plum shale to the right,but this must be purely decorative as essentially uphill. No other porous areas anywhere for surface water to run to.
There's a drain on the front corner of the house with a downpipe from the guttering and it could perhaps be assumed that the slope of the front part may direct runoff to this, however, this drain presumably is going into the mains drains.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if this is the case then it's precisely when you do need planning permission ?

@op; you are under no obligation to apply for planning permission for extending or altering the driveway within your property boundary; neither do you have to inform the council of your intention. Planning permission is only required if the proposed hard surfacing is non-porous, or does not drain to a porous area (eg a soakaway) within the curtilage. This is explained in F.2 of the Permitted Development rules, which clearly your council is unaware of.
Instead of applying for PP for an extension to the dropped kerb (and opening a can of worms) why not do what many people do and just get a piece of treated timber, such as a 9"x3", cut a chamfer along it, and put that against the kerb.?

Re the condition for the drop kerb application, I think they just want to know that, if you're also creating or ammending hardstanding, you've consulted with planning. The council have a "pre-planning application enquiry" form (think I mentioned it before), but all it asks for is the size and position in relation to the property. Nothing about the nature of blocks, drainage or sub bases etc.

The "pavement or verge" is defined by where the "highway" is.

From what I can tell there is no legal definition of a highway but common law has established a "highway" to be where the public have the right to pass, so ownership of the road is not what defines this, but whether there is a right of way say down the private road.

If it is a cul-de-sac it is probably not classed as a highway and therefore your drive does not meet a highway and the council rules are not relevant. As where you "drive over the pavement or verge to park on your property" will be where the private road meets the highway (not your drive entrance).

If the road connects at each end to an adopted road, and the road has been built for some time, and there is no signage up saying private, and there are no barriers etc. then even if in private ownership it may still be deemed to be a highway.

If it is not a highway then consider then a lot more work is also deemed PD, the exact allowances would depend on orientation and proximity to an actual highway, however usually private roads/estates do have covenants in place that restrict people doing things that might annoy others who live down the road.

From looking at the photos why do you need to ask drop the kerb? There doesn't appear to be a raised kerb in existence. If its already done and you have an indemnity you don't need to ever ask for permission. You just deal with the matter through the indemnity if it is ever raised by the council later.

The front edge of the BP in the photo is where it joins the footpath, not the highway.

Really appreciate everyone's input. I think now we're pretty clear that it's not permeable and if anything (probably not the back of the drive up the side of the house) run off is probably being directed to the house drain so it probably required PP. Also that the answer isn't an indemnity policy as we need to apply to the council for a dropped kerb which will essentially be bringing the issue to the councils attention.

I wish there was a way around getting the dropped kerb ie not needed immediately and they could manage to just use the section that's already there, but even with the shortest car as far forward as possible on the drive (whilst still being able to get out and leave room to walk down to the front door with 2 sticks ) it doesn't leave enough room to easily drive a car diagonally onto the front hardstanding and reversing off would be even more of an issue.
Aaaagh!

 

[mrelliott]

shows blocks and gaps (also DPC which is only 1 brick

But where would that gulley discharge? Unless it discharged to some soakaway within the curtilage, it would presumably have to be connected to an existing surface water drain, and that would almost certainly be refused planning permission.

But it does say that in some circumstances where it's not practical or possible to do anything but drain surface water run off into the mains drains , planning permission may be granted to allow this? Bearing in mind that bungalows are supposed to be for older people (who are getting older!) and that more people have cars nowadays and those cars are bigger and don't fit on the narrow driveways that were created with "front" doors off them, plus the fact that this drive doesn't slope away from the house and the work has already been done?........

I don't really understand the drainage terminology. Is an ACO something that surface water runs into and then is allowed (because of what's in the ACO) to permeate into the ground? Is it possible to have one or several gullys/swales with pea gravel in which would hold water in the air pockets and then this would evaporate? Guess in this country with the amount of rain we get and the humidity it might never evaporate!
Seems like BP wasn't the best choice here or it should have been permeable!

Re "the do nothing until 4 years is up" and then apply for the dropped kerb license, only thing I can think of is that one of them parks their car most of the time on the road and a bit of car shunting around has to go on when access on/off the front is required. Not ideal because it would mean they're either parking on the wrong side of the road or getting out into the middle of the road and there's bus stops (not a full size bus I don't think) on both sides of the road. Road isn't that busy and they're not out and about that much, plus in the not too distant future there may only be one car.

 

[mrelliott]

Just saw this thread. https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4980944
Interesting that the council where perhaps more concerned about/interested in water running off the BP drive onto the pavement/road and freezing than they were about it running into the mains drain.

 

[napoleondynamite]

The Planning requirement for a porous solution / run off within the site, is to avoid rain running off on to the pavement and road, as this can contribute to flooding in extreme conditions. Where you run it to within the site, e.g. into the house drain, is of no concern. Sounds like you might be ok re Planning.

If the dropped kerb / crossover on the pavement has not been changed, then no works to the pavement would have taken place, and no license would be required.

 

[mrelliott]

The Planning requirement for a porous solution / run off within the site, is to avoid rain running off on to the pavement and road, as this can contribute to flooding in extreme conditions. Where you run it to within the site, e.g. into the house drain, is of no concern. Sounds like you might be ok re Planning.

If the dropped kerb / crossover on the pavement has not been changed, then no works to the pavement would have taken place, and no license would be required.

I don't think so. They don't want run off going into the house drain either. If not a permeable driveway, then runoff has to be directed to a permeable area within the site ie garden or lawn.
From here
https://www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200130/common_projects/45/paving_your_front_garden
You will not need planning permission if a new or replacement driveway of any size uses permeable (or porous) surfacing which allows water to drain through, such as gravel, permeable concrete block paving or porous asphalt, or if the rainwater is directed to a lawn or border to drain naturally.


If the surface to be covered is more than five square metres planning permission will be needed for laying traditional, impermeable driveways that do not provide for the water to run to a permeable area.

 

[lt8480]

1.I think I confused folks by saying it wasn't an A, B or C road. Property is on an estate, the road is a bus route and there are footpaths and street lights.
...
The front edge of the BP in the photo is where it joins the footpath, not the highway.

Yes I thought you were suggesting it wasn't a public highway, but it is. And thought you were talking about the kerbs in the photo and the tarmac was the road, but assume now that is the path and there are kerbs out of sight.

A footpath is counted as part of the highway.

 

[mrelliott]

Yes I thought you were suggesting it wasn't a public highway, but it is. And thought you were talking about the kerbs in the photo and the tarmac was the road, but assume now that is the path and there are kerbs out of sight.

A footpath is counted as part of the highway.

Yes to all!

 

[Seafarer1966]

Just do the job bud. I've got a neighbour building a wall at his property frontage which is well higher than the Permitted Development Regs allow and he definitely needs planning permission. I'm not going to dob him in though because it looks a lot nicer than what was there before.
As has already been said if after 4 years the local planning dept don't realise you've done the job (and I'm still not convinced you need ppm anyway) then your project becomes Lawful Development. This doesn't mean it gets planning permission but it becomes immune from planning prosecution (IF you needed ppm in the first place).
The piece of bevelled wood acting as a temporary ramp up the kerb is a good idea. You could always drop the kerb sometime in the future. Local Councils do not have the resources to keep a beady eye on small fry such as this. Only if one of your neighbours dobbed you in would questions be asked. Also if you were planning on selling the house in the near future i.e. before 4 years were up, then the buyers surveyor might notice the recent works and flag it up.
Just one last thing on the four year rule on Lawful Development the onus is on the owner of the property/ developer to prove to the council that the works were undertaken beyond fours years ago. As an example I had a relative who had a concrete sectional garage built. The local planning dept queried it after a while and he had the receipts to prove he'd erected the garage 8 years before. Job done. Nowt the council could do.

 

[Tigercubrider]

If you have the website of the paving installer, why not contact them and ask if it was done with permeable bricks?

 

[mrelliott]

Just do the job bud. I've got a neighbour building a wall at his property frontage which is well higher than the Permitted Development Regs allow and he definitely needs planning permission. I'm not going to dob him in though because it looks a lot nicer than what was there before.
As has already been said if after 4 years the local planning dept don't realise you've done the job (and I'm still not convinced you need ppm anyway) then your project becomes Lawful Development. This doesn't mean it gets planning permission but it becomes immune from planning prosecution (IF you needed ppm in the first place).
The piece of bevelled wood acting as a temporary ramp up the kerb is a good idea. You could always drop the kerb sometime in the future. Local Councils do not have the resources to keep a beady eye on small fry such as this. Only if one of your neighbours dobbed you in would questions be asked. Also if you were planning on selling the house in the near future i.e. before 4 years were up, then the buyers surveyor might notice the recent works and flag it up.
Just one last thing on the four year rule on Lawful Development the onus is on the owner of the property/ developer to prove to the council that the works were undertaken beyond fours years ago. As an example I had a relative who had a concrete sectional garage built. The local planning dept queried it after a while and he had the receipts to prove he'd erected the garage 8 years before. Job done. Nowt the council could do.

We found out this week that it was done last year. Seller is obviously getting his proverbials in a bunch. He replied to last solicitors enquiries by email and his solicitor just forwarded the email to our solicitor. Additionally, he says "the block paving is permeable and it's sloped so that run off goes into the house drains" I don't understand how he doesn't have any paperwork, especially when the contractor says they provide a 10yr guarantee
Thanks for the tip regarding proving when it was done.
I'm sure you're right that the council are unlikely to enforce it, but because of the lack of documentation and the fact that we can't seem to get a straight answer from the seller we're a bit suspicious about what's underneath it! If it's only been down a year then any prob's may not have shown themselves yet!
Our solicitor says that because I've looked into it all and we've asked the seller lots of questions we can't get an indemnity policy anyway. I can find loads of info about people taking them out but none about anyone who's ever claimed on one , so probably not worth the paper they're written on.

If you have the website of the paving installer, why not contact them and ask if it was done with permeable bricks?

I emailed them and also sent a message via the "contact us" form on their website a few weeks ago but didn't get a reply. Our solicitor is trying to speak to them. She thinks it probably did need planning permission. On their website it says "15 years experience", but according to companies house the company was only set up in 2014.
She's also going to contact the sellers solicitor and tell them they need to "advise" their client regarding what the planning portal says regarding block paving and to provide a reasonable answer to our enquiries. He could also contact the contractor and ask them to provide the information.

 

[mrelliott]

But where would that gulley discharge? Unless it discharged to some soakaway within the curtilage, it would presumably have to be connected to an existing surface water drain, and that would almost certainly be refused planning permission.

No sensible answers from the seller yet. Stated that the driveway was permeable and provison had been made for water to flow into the house drains.
The contractor (via the seller) has said
To whom it may concern.


I fitted a blocked paved driveway at ADDRESS OF PROPERTY back in March 2017 we used Beamish Cobbles we also installed aco drains to the house etc to remove any surface water it was all done by myself COMPANY NAME.

As far as I can see regular Beamish cobbles aren't designed for a permeable drive.
I understood that Aco drains were visible linear drains with a slatted cover over them. None of these visible. Is there another sort, ie buried in the sub layers?
It's somewhat irrelevant anyway as he seems to be suggesting that water's draining to the house drains.

I think we're just going to have to bite the bullet and move forward.
Seller seems to think the queries are questioning his moral integrity and suggesting that the work they've done is substandard and had little concept that information provided formed part of a legal contract.
Of course now he's (?cleverly) diverted to the contractor to answer questions.

 

[Notch7]

I fitted a blocked paved driveway at ADDRESS OF PROPERTY back in March 2017 we used Beamish Cobbles we also installed aco drains to the house etc to remove any surface water it was all done by myself COMPANY NAME.

Yeah...bulls hit

He cant say it wasnt done properly to his customer can he?

If there is no paperwork it mightve been a cash jobbie, otherwise the client would just ask the contractor for a copy invoice or quotation or contract..

driveway pavers....its sort of the new tarmacadam. It can be done quickly and looks great.

 

[mrelliott]

Yeah...bulls hit

He cant say it wasnt done properly to his customer can he?

If there is no paperwork it mightve been a cash jobbie, otherwise the client would just ask the contractor for a copy invoice or quotation or contract..

driveway pavers....its sort of the new tarmacadam. It can be done quickly and looks great.

Yes a cash jobbie I think. Seller is a policeman. Contractor website says he provides a 10 yr warranty against sinking, but no mention of that either. If this was a house for us I would just walk away, but because it's for parents in their 80's and bungalows in decent areas are like hens teeth it's a different story. P....d off to say the least.

 

[Nakajo]

You're basing a purchasing decision on a bit of driveway. Is it really such a big deal?

 

[mrelliott]

You're basing a purchasing decision on a bit of driveway. Is it really such a big deal?

don't know- you tell me?