Building a rather large wall by side of the road

[^woody^]

Permitted Development height measurements are taken from the higher adjacent ground level

I guess I'm not quite following the definition of "highest ground level". Are we talking about the highest ground level immediately next to any portion of the wall, and not the upper ground level (at the top of the retaining wall), in comparison to the lower ground level (at the bottom)?

 

[KayCee14]

This is all sound advice and other then it being an eye sore on the main road, my concern is whether it is structurally stable and like you all said built in accordance to regs, planning permission, etc. I will try the council again tomorrow. I’m not being a jobs worth here at all, I think we should all do things correctly and follow due process.

 

[^woody^]

It's a retaining wall within 3.66m of a highway (that has been altered) - why wouldn't it?

Because the retaining wall is already there and the wall on top is not a retaining wall.

 

[RonnyRaygun]

Because the retaining wall is already there and the wall on top is not a retaining wall.

Yes, but it's an existing highways structure and the works to it may have affected its stability.

Highways departments don't take chances on stuff like that (in my experience).

It's similar to obtaining planning approval - the alterations won't necessarily be dangerous or negatively affect anyone, but the planning department still likes to be involved, just because them's the rules (unless they aren't)

 

[conny]

I'm not a brickie but, to me anyway, it looks as though every other row is a cross-bond row. i.e. they tie the outer face with the inner face.
I would have thought this had the effect of making the whole wall quite strong and resistant to external forces such as wind. As I said, I'm not a brickie, so could be totally wrong in my assessment.
Does look ugly and very daunting though and I wouldn't like to be walking past/standing at the bus stop in inclement weather.

 

[^woody^]

I don't think the technical guides apply as that appears to be new work (its a design guide) and the one document even specifies what it applies to

"for highway structures on motorways and other trunk roads or designated roads."

The HWA s167 may apply if the wall is one to which it applies

(5) If a length of retaining wall to which this section applies is in such condition (whether for want of repair or some other reason)

Well the OP will now have to call the planners and the highways people then and report back.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Does look ugly and very daunting though and I wouldn't like to be walking past/standing at the bus stop in inclement weather.

All it lacks is a few archers with longbows

 

[^woody^]

I'm not a brickie but, to me anyway, it looks as though every other row is a cross-bond row. i.e. they tie the outer face with the inner face.
I would have thought this had the effect of making the whole wall quite strong and resistant to external forces such as wind. As I said, I'm not a brickie, so could be totally wrong in my assessment.
Does look ugly and very daunting though and I wouldn't like to be walking past/standing at the bus stop in inclement weather.

It's English Bond, which is the strongest bond. It's actually looks nicely bonded, evenly curved, the BOE looks level and in line and apart from a little messy staining does look like its been built very well.

If it was not scaffolded but built overhand, the brickies have done really well.

 

[Poe]

If no scaffold was used and it was built overhand then the though of the risk to people passing underneath from falling items/materials makes me shudder!

Poe

 

[RonnyRaygun]

I don't think the technical guides apply as that appears to be new work (its a design guide) and the one document even specifies what it applies to

"for highway structures on motorways and other trunk roads or designated roads."

The HWA s167 may apply if the wall is one to which it applies

(5) If a length of retaining wall to which this section applies is in such condition (whether for want of repair or some other reason)

Well the OP will now have to call the planners and the highways people then and report back.

Probably the most pertinent page I can find.

Section 77 and 78 say that if a structure appears to be overloaded or in another way dangerous they can force immediate action to rectify the situation. https://www.devon.gov.uk/roadsandtr...ging-the-network/retaining-walls-and-bridges/

Retaining walls and bridges


Property retaining walls
The responsibility for the maintenance of retaining walls which support property adjacent to the highway (‘property retaining walls’) generally lies with the owner of the property who derives benefit from the support. Under certain circumstances where a wall has been built as part of the highway it is maintained by us unless built as accommodation works for the adjoining landowner.

If you wish to report a property retaining wall that is a threat to public safety use the GOV.UK postcode search which will direct you to the appropriate local authority. However, if there is an immediate risk to the public please contact us as well.

You can find out more about the primary legislation relating to dangerous defects in these walls in Section 77 and Section 78 of the Building Act 1984. The Act gives powers to the local authority, normally the district council, to deal with buildings, structures or parts of buildings or structures that are considered to be dangerous.

 

[^woody^]

Probably the most pertinent page I can find.

Section 77 and 78 say that if a structure appears to be overloaded or in another way dangerous they can force immediate action to rectify the situation. https://www.devon.gov.uk/roadsandtr...ging-the-network/retaining-walls-and-bridges/

Retaining walls and bridges


Property retaining walls
The responsibility for the maintenance of retaining walls which support property adjacent to the highway (‘property retaining walls’) generally lies with the owner of the property who derives benefit from the support. Under certain circumstances where a wall has been built as part of the highway it is maintained by us unless built as accommodation works for the adjoining landowner.

If you wish to report a property retaining wall that is a threat to public safety use the GOV.UK postcode search which will direct you to the appropriate local authority. However, if there is an immediate risk to the public please contact us as well.

You can find out more about the primary legislation relating to dangerous defects in these walls in Section 77 and Section 78 of the Building Act 1984. The Act gives powers to the local authority, normally the district council, to deal with buildings, structures or parts of buildings or structures that are considered to be dangerous.

Nah that wrong about the "generally lies with the owner of the property". It's fact and degree.

As for the Building Act, there needs to be a definite defect, not a hypothesised assumption. Check this wall out Is the lean on this wall dangerous? | DIYnot Forums - not "imediately dangerous" apparently. The OP would have no chance with this wall if that inspector went out

 

[catlad]

More wildlife habitat depletion! when will we stop? when will we learn?

 

[RonnyRaygun]

Nah that wrong about the "generally lies with the owner of the property". It's fact and degree.

As for the Building Act, there needs to be a definite defect, not a hypothesised assumption. Check this wall out Is the lean on this wall dangerous? | DIYnot Forums - not "imediately dangerous" apparently. The OP would have no chance with this wall if that inspector went out

Oh, I’m in no way saying the wall is dangerous, I just shared in the respect that responsibility for the wall lies with the owner and actually the highways department won’t have any further interest if it wouldn’t be considered to be in a dangerous condition (which I agree would be difficult to argue).

I’m happy to have a difinitive answer, even if it proves my initial assumption to be wrong

 

[^woody^]

I can't see any way than anyone can just look a that wall and say its dangerous, or even that it might be dangerous. There are just too many assumptions to make to be able to make such an assertion without any actual evidence or signs, and too costly for a council or highways authority to make wrong assertions.

Of course any randomer walking past who know nothing about these things can exclaim "it looks dangerous", but that's Facebook and Twitter territory when anyone can say "My opinion is .... " and get 5million likes and instant fame.

 

[mattylad]

Is it not finished yet or did they run out of bricks when doing the top row?