Details on planning applications and approval.

[Lillykins]

2 years ago my neighbours applied for planning for a loft room.

A detached bungalow with the ridge line running from front to back.

The plans were appalling, in accurate, not detailed, incorrect and not a complete application - such things as site plan omitted. However, these plans were accepted by the planning department.

We complained about the plans and they were redacted and some corrections made.

The plans included 4 velux windows; 2 on the side elevation facing us and two on the other side facing the neighbour. ( The 4 windows are at the same height and mirror each other in location). We commented that we thought the velux windows should be annotated fixed and obscured. This was duly done, however only the velux windows to the neighbours side received the annotation. After consultation with both architect and planners we were also informed of the following
1) In any event the velux windows didn't need annotation because they were covered under other rules.

We assumed the annotation 'velux windows to be obscured and fixed' applied to all 4 windows.

Planning was approved.

2 years on we have contacted the enforcement office and been told that the windows to our side elevation do not need to be fixed and obscured because the plans do not state that our side should be fixed and obscured. Please bear in mind the plans without the annotation were accepted by the planners)
Also told:
Neither is a Planning Condition attached that requires them to be fixed and obscured.

Now I have found the rules regarding attaching Conditions and basically what we have been told is a load of rubbish since the 'windows' would not pass one of the 6 tests that have to be applied if a Condition is attached.

Also know about the 1.7 meter rule and fixed obscured if it falls under permitted development but what i can't find is the regulations/rules for velux windows which fall under an approved planning application. So can anybody provide a link to the building regs or rules because i can't believe they differ for permitted and controlled development.

Any help or ideas appreciated, I mean the response is rubbish and where does one head to get a rubbish answer withdrawn and amended.

 

[tony1851]

Frankly, you are wasting your time.

After this period, it's highly unlikely the planning dept. will want to take action over it, and you can't force them to do anything.

The windows may or may not comply with Building Regulations, but that's not your concern and any contravention will now be well out of time for enforcement.

 

[Lillykins]

The velux windows and the loft have not yet been built.

My query was to the agency who would police a possible breach. But seem intnet to not apply the rules in the future.

The neighbours have 3 years to build, thus my query that has been on going for over a year.

The planning officers comments are I believe to be incorrect if the rules etc i have tried to research are correct. All I want is peace of mind that these windows should if they appear be fixed and obscured.

So any comments about this since we are clearly not out of time and making every effort to make sure windows get the right application of the rules.

Please can somebody answer the original questions in particular if the building regs are the same for permitted development and controlled development (that with planning approval) Since none of you have the plans it is for me to interpret the height/position of these windows and judge what building regs may apply.

It is interesting your comment about it being out of time, I understand I have a year to complain about possible breaches and enforcement once the windows are in situe.

 

[tony1851]

Not quite sure what's going on here. Are you confusing 'Planning' with 'Building Regulations'? A loft conversion is normally permitted development and does not need a specific planning permission.

If the work has not yet been done - and is permitted development - you have no say in how the plans may be amended. Unlike Planning, Building Regs is not in the public domain - it is a private matter between the council and developer.

You can only make a complaint to the Planning dept once the windows are in, and if they don't comply with the conditions stated in the p.d. rules. Even then, it's up to the council's enforcement team to decide whether or not to take action.

There is no time limit for making a complaint, except that the council cannot take action after 4 years has elapsed.

 

[Lillykins]

Thanks for the reply, and to answer some of your points raised and a bit more clarification; I may have confused you.

The loft conversion includes raising the ridge so they needed planning permission.

Drawings were submitted. The ridge runs from front to back and the roof will have 4 velux windows. a mirror image in location and height.

Unfortunately only the windows on the other neighbours side elevation were annotated, as fixed and obscured. Annotation reading Velux windows to be fixed and obscured.
We interpreted this as all the velux windows, since why would the same positioned windows receive a different treatment.
Similarly only one drawing states that the roof materials will be red tile, but they are reroofing the garage from flat felt, to red tile but this is not stated on the detached garage plan, but similarly we interpreted this to mean all the roofs would be red tile.
The architect who did the drawings came to see us because we had a few problems with the drawings and told us that the velux windows didn't need to be annotated as fixed and obscured, because they were covered under other building provisions. But the one annotation was included because we wanted the windows noted as fixed etc.

At this point i would like to mention that the planning department accepted the original plans without any annotations and evidently thought them fine, but the plans were altered somewhat and resubmitted.

The development has not yet started and I contacted the planners only as an after thought to confirm that all the velux windows would be fix and obscured
and they came back and said that because they weren't annotated to our side they wouldn't do anything.
But how stupid is this if they have not yet been put in but should be fixed and obscured, it is getting more ridiculous, every time I contact the planners, and the answers are getting more fanciful.

So this is why I asked the question about how detailed plans should be and what regulations cover velux windows in developments with planning permission. I have got the rules for PD, and can't believe that the regulations would be different.

The planners also said that if they should be fixed and obscured a Condition would have been added to the planning report. But no Condition was added for any of the windows. I have found the rules regarding adding Conditions and one states that a Condition cannot be added if it is covered by some other body/legislation/regime etc. So I am assuming that the question regarding the fixing and obscurity of velux windows on side elevations is covered elsewhere, but as yet can't find the 'rules' only those for PD.
And if this is correct the planning dept is talking rubbish.

I hope this clears up a few issues I may have created unaware.

 

[tony1851]

A little clearer, now.

The rule regarding side-facing windows is a condition for a development to be classed as 'permitted development'.

If a full planning application has been made (in this case, on account of the ridge being raised), then these conditions do not apply, and the planning department is free to either ignore them, or apply them, as it sees fit.

In your case, if some of the windows have been annotated, and others not, then it's down to a question of interpretation of the drawings. In a case like this, it's highly unlikely that the council will then press the applicant to apply this note to all the rooflights. (The council would have to serve notice that the applicant has not built according to the plan, and on appeal, that might be difficult for them to prove).

 

[Lillykins]

Thanks for the reply. Not what I wanted, however the question of interpretation still lingers.

3 times in letters we questioned these plans, unfortunately because in a verbal assurance that these windows would be fixed and obscured that point failed to make hard copy as in our letters of complaint.

If these plans contain other irregularities, surely their interpretation can be questioned as ridiculous. As mentioned the missing annotation on the garage roof plans. I can also add that on the application form the architect has put the roof down as slate so yet another anomaly. Whats the roof coverings then going to be felt, slate or red tile!!

Why can't this be re thought and the neighbours informed of the proper intention of the architect, before the windows are put in - this is just a question of the planners being pig headed.

Certainly a word to the wise in not interpreting plans with a rational head on, but query every little nit picking point and get it in writing. The planners moan about being understaffed but if this is how they want to carry on, well they only have themselves to blame.

The MP is involved, the councillor is involved, I have written numerous letters and funnily enough this wasn't the original question I asked, but something thrown up by the planners while trying to avoid the first and original question that remains unanswered 14 months later.
Sorry, there is something not quite right.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

What's not right is the council, a councillor and an MP devoting time and resources on a couple of poxy windows. Jeez get a bloody life, your nitpicking complaint is not gonna go anywhere anyway.

 

[Lillykins]

I think the nit picking has got somewhere. At least it alerts others into not interpreting plans in a rational and sensible fashion only to find that what appears to be rational/sensible and straight forward is not the case. We were lied to at the outset, and there appears no comeback.

If the planners had answered the the original question instead of reading all manner of things into it, I would not be here and nor would the MP etc.

Simple question :-
Does the recent planning application for a loft room which is bigger and higher than the existing loft room, give the original un-approved loft room legitimacy in any way under the heading of 'retrospective planning'
No comment from the planning department, only about the windows.

In other words without doing the planned development could they now market the bungalow as having a loft room with planning, with out committing fraud.

Some of us just have enquiring minds, and its not my fault that the planning department has turned a mole hill into a mountain. All I wanted was a simple yes or no.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Blah blah blah ....

 

[Lillykins]

I think people spend 'resources' in a way that helps/suits them.

In terms of UK resources or money I'm a pretty low user.
I have one child so accessed pregnancy care/NHS etc once. I have used the schooling system once. I married once. I myself was privately educated. I do not smoke drink to excess nor fat, so don't hope to be a drain on healthcare resources.

So if I uses a few resources accessing my MP, thats a bit of my resources used up.

Get the picture - so unless you screen users here about their private lives, keep those comments to yourself.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

There are plenty of people more frugal than yourself, they must be more deserving than yourself.

 

[cjard]

In terms of UK resources or money I'm a pretty low user.

Would you say you live and let live, then?

 

[Lillykins]

50/50

Like everybody I know, peoples buttons are pushed for various reasons.
People campaign for various things.
What annoys one may not annoy another.
Everybody has a hobby-horse they want to ride occasionally.
Mine at present are the local planning officers. 14 months I have been trying to get a simple answer to a simple question, and every time they think they have responded to it they actually throw more fuel on the fire, and leave us with more questions, which in return they fail to answer and round and round we go.

 

[jeds]

where does one head to get a rubbish answer withdrawn and amended.

I've left a comment on the other thread. Once planning is approved there's nothing anybody can do about it. In some cases planning can be challenged but that has to be lodged within 6 weeks of the decision. So this is a dead duck.