We provide a comprehensive design service to clients wishing to extend or alter their property. Services include plan drawings, planning permissions, Building Regulations approvals, fire risk assessments, structural calculations, energy assessments, entertainment licence applications, party wall agreements and on-site supervision. ... ...

Don t Need Planning Permission You Must be Joking!

I remember it well! Early 2008, the excitement that was circulating in the home improvement market was almost too much to take. Central Government had decided to change the rules on the type of work that could be carried out to domestic properties without the need for Planning Permission. Certainly not the type of news that would be reported on News at Ten, but to the small builder and homeowner it was a blessing that even the smallest amount of Local Authority red tape could be cut. There had been several studies that had found that by excluding certain small house extensions from the Planning Process, the amount of Applications could be cut by as much as 70%. I read the document in detail and thought this will be a major change that would help the home improvement economy move much quicker. After the excitement had died down the new General Development Order was published and it would come into effect in October 2008. I remember thinking it was a bit of a disappointment as it had been watered down and changed by the people who shout the loudest! Having said that, it appeared much simplier and thankfully, gone were the cubic content rules. One change that was most welcome was that only one elevation of the property would be excluded from the main benefits of permitted development. Previously the owner of a corner plot dwelling had virtually no permitted development rights, but now only the front or "principal elevation" is the protected elevation. The amount of permitted development a property can have is well documented and not really the purpose of this article. Probably the best overview can be found on the Planning Portal website www.planningportal.gov.uk/england/public/tools/house/ Where our problems lie is in the explaining of Permitted Development to a client, and the idea that Planning Permission is not necessary. The issue is, that the extension or development may not require Planning Permission due to its exclusion by virtue of the GDO, but when the property is sold how can this be confirmed? You have two choices; 1) Request a letter from the Local Planning Authority stating that the development does not require Planning Permission and 2) Apply for a Lawful Development Certificate. The first option, in my opinion, is not really worth the paper it's written on, and the Local Planning Authority will actually state that in the letter. An alternative, is that you apply for a Certificate of Lawful Development. This will, however, involve the same amount of work for the designer as submitting a Planning Application, and the LPA still have 8 weeks to process it! Talk about being caught between a rock and a hard stone! So the new GDO has reduced very little burden on the Architectural profession, the LPA and the householder. In fact it has hurt the LPA more as they have almost the same amount of work - ok, they don't have to go out to consultation - but for half of the fee! How can this be changed? I think it's simple - for it to be of any benefit, the period of time in which the LPA has to deal with LDC applications must be reduced. Personally I feel that if the Council are in possession of the relevant information, then there is no reason why they need any longer than 4 weeks in which to process it.

Fire Risk Assessments Is the System Working

Oh the irony! - a recently published news article stated that a Fire Station burnt down as it did not comply with current fire regulations! For the benefit of those who hadn't seen this article I'll briefly describe what was reported. One of the buildings at the Fire Safety College in Moreton on the Marsh burnt down destroying two fire tenders last May. The report said it took 60 fire fighters to bring the blaze under control. As it was a Fire Safety College mainly attended by Firemen, there wouldn't have been a shortage of help, but the press got hold of it and had a field day. A point to note was that no-one was killed or injured in the incident, so to be fair, no legislation was actually transcended. Apparently there was no up-to-date risk assessment, together with a couple of irregularities that would have been addressed had the assessment been carried out. A Fire Consultant was quoted as stating that the Fire Safety College's standard should be higher than anybody else's. I don't know in what basis in law or professionalism he is coming from, but I suppose he is entitled to his own opinion, however misguided. What this proves, without any doubt, is the "on-going" system that controls the use of buildings in relation to fire safety is simply is not working. Even when it does work and the risk assessments are carried out, due to the assessors not being impartial, and in some case not having adequate knowledge, it can still result in an unsafe building. A good friend of mine is an office manager in a building that before the recent fire safety reform would have needed a fire certificate. I thought, there may be some work here and made an approach to carry out their next risk assessment. To my horror, the office was in my opinion, bordering upon dangerous, at the very least, a cause for concern. The floor was a large open plan with no emergency lighting or automatic fire detection. To add to this there was a 20m dead end condition that had to pass an open file storage system that had no fire separation from the only route out of the building. As if that was not bad enough, right at the extreme of the dead end condition my friend is located in an inner office! The office does have a current risk assessment certification, but it must have been carried out by Stevie Wonder! Needless to say, this same chap will doing the risk assessment when it is due, purely because employing me would cost a considerable sum in upgrading the premises over and above my fee to make it a safe place in which to work. However, it does not surprise me that regulations that relate to the Fire Safety are either ignored or incorrectly applied. This method of enforcement relies upon the owner and their consultant having the inclination and the knowledge to carry out their responsibility. The government's decision to place this responsibility with the industry is irresponsible and short sighted. I know there are good consultants and employers out there, but these are the minority and in the meantime the remainder of the country is either not interested in complying with the law or badly advised when they attempt to do so.

Specialist Services

Structural Calculations Specialist for extensions, conversions, new build and listed buildings.

Trade Bodies / Associations

MEng

Trading Since

2005