 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
So here's the story....
We've built a dormer extension into our house and clad the outside with black gladding rather than vertical hung slate (architect said it was fine)
Received a letter last week saying we've breached planning by using black cladding, just got off the phone with the council and here's the verdict.
The former is unauthorised, as cladding is not allowed by the councils policy. However they aren't going to take action against us because after inspection the cladding looks better than our neighbours dormers done with slate.
But as its against policy to have cladding we can't sell the house for four years because its unauthorised. After that we are exempt. Unless we change it to sell.
Really struggling to understand how something which has been admitted to look better than the stated policy is still going to be rejected should we apply to have it legalised.......red tape and all that I suppose  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
did the architect not submit plan to council for building regulations etc ? - sure this has to be done for extensions - if so they would have picked up the cladding - |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Yes we got planning permission no problem, but with Marley tiles - which would look awful.
Before we decided to use the cladding we consulted the architect who said it would be fine as long as it's black.
The point I'm making is that, how can they say yes it looks better in cladding than slate but if you apply to have it authorised we'll decline it.
It's basically saying your way is better but we will still refuse to accept it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Yes we got planning permission no problem, but with Marley tiles - which would look awful.
Before we decided to use the cladding we consulted the architect who said it would be fine as long as it's black.
The point I'm making is that, how can they say yes it looks better in cladding than slate but if you apply to have it authorised we'll decline it.
It's basically saying your way is better but we will still refuse to accept it "
Because beurocracy!
It is its own reason, don't sweat it just carry on. I take it since you just had the extension built that you won't be moving in four years so let it go |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
in one way its passed and another its failed
but you did change the planning by using different stuff instead of what was illustrated within your original submitted plans
I would say think yourself lucky that you dont have to rip it off and replace with the other tiles instead
if you intend to move before then you may have an issue
there is differences between bradford planning kirklees planning and calderdale planning as had to deal with all 3 of them and many more |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"in one way its passed and another its failed
but you did change the planning by using different stuff instead of what was illustrated within your original submitted plans
I would say think yourself lucky that you dont have to rip it off and replace with the other tiles instead
if you intend to move before then you may have an issue
there is differences between bradford planning kirklees planning and calderdale planning as had to deal with all 3 of them and many more "
You're correct basically I have gotten away with it, in their letter to me they state their powers are discretionary, If I'd of used white cladding i would of had an enforcement notice issued.
Of course i wouldn't have done this of they architect didn't say it would be fine. It's all worked out in the end though  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
