Urgent Advice Needed

[DSR1]

I checked the building height again last night. As I didn't have a ladder and it was quite dark I was unable to use a tape measure.

I did however do a brick count, it is 59 bricks high + the mortar inbetween. I know its not a totally accurate way of measuring but does that give some sort of indication as to the height of it to any experienced people here?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

4.425m

 

[DSR1]

thanks freddy.

it looks much higher than that though. will try and post a pic. looks likes its easily 3 times my height and I am 6ft.

(how do I post an image?)[/img]

 

[Nakajo]

Looks can be deceiving. If it's 59 bricks, then it cannot be more than 4.5m high - unless the contractor has some special arrangment with a mortar supplier, by which it benefits him to provide 28mm mortar joints! BTW, in general, and for buildings built in modern times, counting bricks is an amazingly accurate way of guaging the height of buildings.

 

[DSR1]

is being 0.5m higher than allowed still under and tolerance that is given?

Sounds like the official term for this is 'shafted'.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

I doubt the LA will get legal for 400mm but no one on here can say for sure so if you want to, pursue it as per jeds advice.

 

[DSR1]

Guess who's just received a VM from the planning dept at Ealing saying they are putting in an application to reduce the height of the building???!!!

However he did say the person building it can put in an application to make it lawfull as it is currently illegal. Surely this is grossly unfair as they haven't adhered to the initial permission that was granted?!

Any advice on this matter?

I was also told by the planning officer that I will be receiving letters informing me of the new planning request - I will not be missing it this time!

 

[cjard]

However he did say the person building it can put in an application to make it lawfull as it is currently illegal. Surely this is grossly unfair as they haven't adhered to the initial permission that was granted?!

I will not be missing it this time!

If everyone was bound to the initial permission then most schemes wouldn't go ahead. A developer can at any time go back to the planning department and request a modification to a previously approved scheme, or indeed (if changes are too extensive) apply for a whole new permission to validate something that has been built contra to spec. It's an expensive way to develop if you get turned down, of course..

Search the planning area of your council website every day, make it a favourite on your desktop or your browser home page

 

[DSR1]

but this developer hasn't applied to modify the original approved scheme as if he had the planning guy I spoke to would know wouldn't he?

He's on my speed dial and im going to be up is a r s e with a flash light searching for this new application that might potentially be put in, not going to let it go this time.

 

[noseall]

He's on my speed dial and im going to be up is a r s e with a flash light.

Pity you weren't so hot with your tape measure.

The developer has built a building directly behind mine and my neighbours property which is 6m high (I have measured it).

says from experience looks like the building is 4m - 4.3m .

Typical NIMBY.

 

[DSR1]

Thanks for your kind words noseall.

Typical LUN.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

What's a LUN?

 

[Nakajo]

I think it's Hindi

 

[jeds]

Is 400mm really causing you an issue? You originally said it was 2m over height, which would be fair enough. But 400mm?

 

[Nige F]

Maybe it's because he's a LUN Donor