Forum

Replies

• 

  Kieran Ray January 17, 2015 at 5:03pm

  Never heard of it before. Maybe it's best if the client contacts the local planning office to find out what the actual issue is. Then maybe something can be worked out.
• PRO

  Best Gardens January 17, 2015 at 5:05pm

  I think you or your client need to speak to the Planning Officer to find out exactly what the issue is?
  Does this link give you any clues or direction?
• PRO

  Gary RK January 17, 2015 at 5:15pm

  Another +1 for the Local Planning Officer apporach.

  Many are supportive and look to assess any issues formally rather than emotionally (which is what often happens between neighbours).

  I'm wondering if you've breached a Covenent ?

  I'm just going through planning on the homefront and local officer has been really helpful in suggesting solutions to potential issues & objections.

  Finally; the Planning Portal is the best place I know (and all local Councils defer to it)
  • 

    Thermo > Gary RK January 17, 2015 at 7:18pm

    there may well be an existing planning condition in force from when the property was built. I fell foul of this when I terraced my front garden. someone complained (never found out who) and I had to put in for planning. it sailed through with lots of letters of support from the neighbours. the condition had been put on 40 years ago when the property was first built.

    It is the clients responsibility to ensure or comply with the planning. Planning depts. are normally very helpful and there has to be a pretty good reason to decline it, even if it is retrospective
• This reply was deleted.
  • 

    Thermo January 18, 2015 at 9:21am

    I disagree, it is not a raised platform, that section refers to structures such as decks or balconys
    • PRO

      Gary RK > Thermo January 18, 2015 at 10:02am

      From discusssions I have had with planning over my own situation, a "Platform" relates to a "built" structure emenating from the building.

      Is this out front of the building (ie the front elevation) and has 'piqued' their interest?

      Only "substantial" cut & fill/terracing needs planning appoval. Quite accept that retaining walls over a certain height are subject to Building Control.

      For me, my house sits on a hill that slopes away from the rear of the house and I have planning approval for a large extension under current planning rules relaxation. There will also be a patio, giving rise to a series of retaining walls. The are no planning consent reqs for "patios/hard standing" at rear of house, only at front. The Planning Case Officier has visited, hence my comment - talk to them - they intepret the rules and give advice and guidance. They can be your biggest friend or your worst enemy.
    • This reply was deleted.
      • PRO

        Gary RK January 18, 2015 at 8:11pm

        You'd like think that Planning regs are a 'set in stone', but it's because there's so much room for intrepretation that you can not rely on them....
• 

  David Cox January 18, 2015 at 10:42am

  I've seen this before with a client for whom the "punishment" was to create a sloping lawn so the edge of the patio was 300mm above the lawn rather than 550mm - burying 2 steps in the process.
  
  The planners in Leeds argued that as the patio levels were artificially raised as part of the construction, that it consituted a raised platform.... customer appealed and lost - i got the job of barrowing 8 tons of topsoil in to re-grade the site....
  The planners were reasonable and did not push for removal or digging up and re-laying lower down, but instead were willing to give permission as long as the lawn was graded up by the lawn.....
  Customer was anoyed but happy they didnt have to pay for their new patio digging up.
  This came from a neighbours complaint, who had followed the rules and applied for permission for a raised deck and was refused.......... So council had to be consistent - and fair...
  
  Ultimately the best thing to do is ask what the planning officer would want the customer to do... going in all guns blazing against them could mean they order the structures removal...... and if they can prove the structure needed planning.... then they're bang to rights really.
• 

  Richard January 20, 2015 at 12:25pm

  Many thanks for all your feedback.  The clients are currently in discussion with the planning officer so I'll confirm the outcome as soon as I know.  The height of the lawn does not seem to be the issue, it's the fact that soil has been retained....
  • PRO

    Gary RK > Richard January 20, 2015 at 12:51pm

    Keep us posted, I think we could all learn at bit here as it's something that many have done.... :)