large garden shed roof problem

[^woody^]

LOL, 14hd I like your style.

I've removed this until I get it clarified

 

[14hd]

Hi Woody,
Thanks for your reply, Does that mean my roof is a dual pitched roof?
The same planner has also sent us an appeal form even though he hasn't yet issued the enforcement notice.
He has also written stating if we apply for planning he would refuse it, Which to me sounds very bias and can he actually do this. I'm asking this as i haven't got a clue about what is acceptable and what is not.
I fear this person is bloody minded enough to drag it through the courts, when all i want to do is finish it in order to carry on whith the rest of the project.
So what do you suggest we do now, only my solicitor seems to be in no hurry to resolve this matter ,which is why i have sought outside advise.

 

[^woody^]

and this

 

[spongobongo]

Read my post. There is no requirement for a dual pitch roof. The requirement mentions a "ridged roof"

The planner is interpreting the GPDO incorrectly

Woody, are you really sure about this? In my version of the GPDO 2008 (Class E, Condition E.1(d) states that development is not permitted if:

the height of the building, enclosure or container would exceed:

(i) 4 metres in the case of a dual-pitched roof.
(ii) 2.5 metres in the case of a building, enclosure or container within 2 metres of the boundary of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse, or
(iii) 3 metres in any other case.

While building regs and common sense may dictate what constitutes a flat roof, pitched roof, barrell roof etc., the only valid definition in this case is the planning definition of a dual-pitched roof. And no one (me included) seems to know precisely what that is.

As a development control planner of some experience (but by no means infallible, I can tell you) I'm not sure who here is in the right.

I suspect the planning officer considers a dual pitched roof to have two slopes ('dual' meaning two). That would be a front pitch and a rear pitch.

What the enforcement officer is perhaps arguing to have been built is a multi-pitched roof. Under (iii), this would be classed as being 'any other case' which should be no higher than 3m.

I don't necessarily agree with this interpretation, but it's one possible explanation.

The point to all this is that the 2008 amendments to the permitted development rights are a complete mess and are open to wide interpretation. My advice would be to press the planning department for a definition of a dual-pitched roof. If they're preparing an enforcement notice, they'll have to be absolutely spot on with their definition or risk the enforcement notice being quashed by a Planning Inspector.

 

[^woody^]

Hmmm, I suppose I better check which copy we have

 

[14hd]

Thanks for all the info, but could anyone tell me what i need to do to resolve this quickly, without too much more cost.
I have been informed by my shed designer that the cost to change the roof shape & bowing down to the council's ludicrous request will be about the same price as starting again, of which i will never accept.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Thanks for all the info, but could anyone tell me what i need to do to resolve this quickly, without too much more cost.

There is only one solution that will that will resolve this issue quickly and without too much cost but you won't like it . . . . . . . . . .

bowing down to the council's ludicrous request

You mean playing by the rules!

Q. When is a pitched roof not a pitched roof?

A. When its flat!

Personally I'd find a cheap good planning consultant (they do exist, you'll need to do some research eg phone Architects in your area & see who they recommend) who knows the rules inside out and consult him. At this stage you need only to get him to spend an hour or two reading up on planning policies (and more importantly how to interpret it correctly) and offering you his professional opinion as your only hope is how the policies are interpreted. Forget about solicitors, what the hell do they know about planning! Having said all that, you never know, as mentioned it may all be hot air although personally speaking if my neighbour erected that at the end of my garden I'd be livid.

 

[14hd]

Sorry Freddy but when do you get your eyes tested! You can quite clearly see in the photo that the roof shape is not flat & never has been.

I'd be grateful if you can't say anything constructive to not say anything!

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Sorry Freddy but when do you get your eyes tested! You can quite clearly see in the photo that the roof shape is not flat & never has been.

I'd be grateful if you can't say anything constructive to not say anything!

Actually the comments I largely made at the end of my last post were constructive were they not? In any case you have still not got your head round the definition of a flat roof ie one that is 10 degrees or less! Its no good only liking the comments that support you and dismissing the ones that aren't. This is a forum afterall definition of which is a meeting or medium for an exchange of view. If you'd come on the forum with your proposals before you started the build you'd have had little support for your weak argument beforehand. When you spoke to the planners before you built it, did you mention that the 'pitched roof' as you put would actually be a flat roof?

There's always the ignore function if you feel that strongly about it though.

 

[hotrod]

When I wrote,

Do you want to elaborate on the issue?

I didn't expect to open Pandora's box.

Sounds a right confuddle this one 14hd. I'll leave you in the capable hands of Woody&freddy et al. If you get really desperate you could always just burn it down - insurance cover permitting of course .