Search results

I suspect it depends on your local authority. Incidentally, I think this is almost futile as an exercise; I just tried it myself with a Local Planning Authority with which I regulary work - the results are so diverse that I doubt you could form a meaningful picture, other than to say 'this...

I don't think you can search for projects on the government's planning portal. Do you mean the local authority planning pages?

Ah, but what would that constitute exactly? As best as I can recall, the White Book doesn't provide a spec for 30 minutes fireline (only soundbloc)

And anyway, negligence isn't governed by contract. It's why we have (and can have) PI.

Someone's doing me out of a job :eek:

That sounds like a bargain compared with what I'm usually quoted. But fireman damage sounds concerning.

Because it's the law (on the assumption that the works include the refurbishment and/or demolition of a part or whole of the property) See CAR2012 and CDM2015

I'll keep my mental clothes on, thanks

Well, same with AIs; just take a look at those T's & C's

That's weird, I have never (well, not since 2012) undertaken a domestic refurbishment without an asbestos (r&d) survey (except where the property was obviously asbestos free)

You mean like this? https://bit.ly/39Nlmey

FWIW, I can't see any constraints attached to previous applications within that postcode - although number 34's PD rights in respect of windows and doors have been curtailed (assuming the associated application was implemented)

To quote the doc... "In the Secretary of State’s view, Requirements M4(1) will be met when a new dwelling makes reasonable provision for most people, including wheelchair users, to approach and enter the dwelling and to gain access to habitable rooms and sanitary facilities on the entrance...

Well, good luck getting a wheelchair up the stairs

Take a look at the Planning Jungle's 'loopholes' pages. See if your proposal corresponds with one of those

I don't know what your LPA would allow, or what local policy might apply. But if it met with refusal, and there was precedent for similar things being done locally (presumably under PD), then an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate might still prove successful. As for risks, the only risk is that...

And I wish we had a word for things 'viewed from above'

You could do that. But it carries a risk. If a neighbour claims that the extended scheme means a loss of privacy, say, then you could end up back where you started (minus a 3-4m rear extension, which you would then want to re-build). Neighbours will often tell you to your face that your proposal...

1. Under PD? No. 2. Under PD? As long as it conforms to the rules set out under the relevant class. Yes.

Or up the price by £1500