Search results

  1. F

    Permitted Development and 200mm setting back from eaves

    No, we haven't reached this stage yet. I've only been told that enforcement could be a possible outcome with a view of having the whole extension removed if it is established that we have exceeded the volume. We involved our ward councillor early on in the case but in his response he cannot...
  2. F

    Permitted Development and 200mm setting back from eaves

    Hi there, I just wanted to provide an update and hopefully get some further helpful advice? As it turned out Steve was right and the appeal the Council was making their decision on as regards to 20cm setback was indeed based on the appeal in the neighbouring council of Hounslow. Thank you...
  3. F

    Permitted Development and 200mm setting back from eaves

    Richmond Upon Thames Steve, To some extent you have summed up my thoughts. It is indeed madness to state eaves in the guidance when back wall is reality. This seems far too flexible for interpretation to go wrong. Both ways. I note that the appeal was rejected on the 19th January...
  4. F

    Permitted Development and 200mm setting back from eaves

    Well, by the look of things it's turning into a shut case for us and we may have to concede that the rear of the build has to come off again, best case. This was the reply from the officer:- I can confirm that the set up is measured 200mm up from the rear wall and not from the eaves...
  5. F

    Permitted Development and 200mm setting back from eaves

    Sorry, pictures tell a thousand words ..... Basically if I take a ruler, put it against the back wall, measure 20cm and put a baton as a 'plumb line' I get something resulting like this .... So there is still some margin left to the outer edge of the tiles. OK, not much but still a margin :wink:
  6. Untitled

    Untitled

  7. Untitled

    Untitled

  8. Untitled

    Untitled

  9. Untitled

    Untitled

  10. Untitled

    Untitled

  11. Untitled

    Untitled

  12. Back wall

    Back wall

  13. F

    Permitted Development and 200mm setting back from eaves

    Thank you for the reply and supplied links. I had already browsed through some of the info and found to my horror that various applications had been turned down on the basis that it would be up to the householder to show that the build couldn't have been set back further. However for now I...
  14. F

    Permitted Development and 200mm setting back from eaves

    Thanks guys, The horse has already bolted and whether it looks c**p or not is no longer up for debate as the build now stands :lol: Ours has been measured from the front of the fascia. The planning officer wants to see pictures that the new stud wall is set up 200mm from the rear wall...
  15. F

    Permitted Development and 200mm setting back from eaves

    Hi there, We are still wrangling with the Planning Department. Full background is in a thread further down about Permitted Development and calculating volumes. This incidentally has been put aside for the moment. It was agreed that we were over permitted allowance but it seems not enough to...
  16. F

    Volume calculation roof - advice required

    Correct I believe she may have done this. The calculation/ length used for the width from hip to gable stops at the flank wall, so does not include a non existent box. I'm struggling to get my head round this one. Just about able to make sense of that. Thanks guys, makes complete sense...
  17. F

    Volume calculation roof - advice required

    Thanks for all your help guys and I agree with everything you say/ suggest. This is really difficult to explain as it hinges on a very fine detail and interpretation. I need to find answers as to what figures to use for the planning officers hip to gable formula. My surveyor is also not...
  18. Untitled

    Untitled

  19. house

    house

  20. F

    Volume calculation roof - advice required

    Thanks DevilDamo, that background info is very useful. I don't think an additional £75 will break the bank at this stage :lol: Considering what's at stake and fees have been paid and no one has complained so far. We have already been told that a retrospective application would most likely...
Back
Top