- Joined
- 5 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 194
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
Sorry for the long post...
My next door neighbour has submitted planning permission to remove an existing ramshackle extension that is built upon a party wall shared with my extension, and build a new structure separate from the party wall.
I get on well with my neighbours, have no objection to the basic design of the proposed extension but do have concerns about the detail.
The proposal has new wall parallel to and 150mm from the boundary line. The existing party wall is at least 450mm thick; it is not possible to build 150mm in from the boundary. The plans show this wall rendered, a task that is impossible due to the party wall. In short, his 'architect'* has drawn something that does not acknowledge the constraints of the site and cannot be built. When challenged by my neighbour, the architect said it's up to the builder how he achieves it!
* in quotes so as not to confuse him with a professional
I raised an objection with the council because the design cannot be built as drawn and because of the effect on my extension (i.e. a wall that has been internal for 50 year will now be external with no weather proofing or insulation). The Town Council also objected to the design for the same reasons.
My neighbours agree with my concerns; they would prefer the design to use the party wall as it is aesthetically better and it gives them more usable floorspace, so much so that they have had plans redrawn to utilise the party wall in anticipation of the original proposal being rejected by the council.
However, the council have now approved the design as submitted, acknowledging my objection but including a comment "officers must assume that there are methods in which this elevation can be finished in the proposed material given the submitted plans". Basically, because someone has drawn it, it the council assume it must be achievable! Regarding my concerns about weatherproofing, they state that this is covered by the party wall act.
The council have their money, now the responsibility passes back to my neighbour to achieve the impossible. If my neighbour deviates from the plans, they will be in breach of the planning permission granted, but what has been granted cannot be built. Is this usual / acceptable practice for Planning Departments?
I am not going to fall out with my neighbour over this (he has been shafted by his architect and the council have IMO not done their job properly) but any thoughts, including next steps and suggestions how to proceed?
Merry Xmas,
Mike
My next door neighbour has submitted planning permission to remove an existing ramshackle extension that is built upon a party wall shared with my extension, and build a new structure separate from the party wall.
I get on well with my neighbours, have no objection to the basic design of the proposed extension but do have concerns about the detail.
The proposal has new wall parallel to and 150mm from the boundary line. The existing party wall is at least 450mm thick; it is not possible to build 150mm in from the boundary. The plans show this wall rendered, a task that is impossible due to the party wall. In short, his 'architect'* has drawn something that does not acknowledge the constraints of the site and cannot be built. When challenged by my neighbour, the architect said it's up to the builder how he achieves it!
* in quotes so as not to confuse him with a professional
I raised an objection with the council because the design cannot be built as drawn and because of the effect on my extension (i.e. a wall that has been internal for 50 year will now be external with no weather proofing or insulation). The Town Council also objected to the design for the same reasons.
My neighbours agree with my concerns; they would prefer the design to use the party wall as it is aesthetically better and it gives them more usable floorspace, so much so that they have had plans redrawn to utilise the party wall in anticipation of the original proposal being rejected by the council.
However, the council have now approved the design as submitted, acknowledging my objection but including a comment "officers must assume that there are methods in which this elevation can be finished in the proposed material given the submitted plans". Basically, because someone has drawn it, it the council assume it must be achievable! Regarding my concerns about weatherproofing, they state that this is covered by the party wall act.
The council have their money, now the responsibility passes back to my neighbour to achieve the impossible. If my neighbour deviates from the plans, they will be in breach of the planning permission granted, but what has been granted cannot be built. Is this usual / acceptable practice for Planning Departments?
I am not going to fall out with my neighbour over this (he has been shafted by his architect and the council have IMO not done their job properly) but any thoughts, including next steps and suggestions how to proceed?
Merry Xmas,
Mike