Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Architect not willing to sign off house

  • 28-07-2015 1:56pm
    #1
    derferjam
    Registered Users Posts: 197 ✭✭


    What can you do if an architect is unwilling to sigh of a build because the house was build bigger than plans that went into the council for planning permission.:confused::confused::confused::confused:


Comments

  • #2
    micosoft
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,367 ✭✭✭micosoft


    derferjam wrote: »
    What can you do if an architect is unwilling to sigh of a build because the house was build bigger than plans that went into the council for planning permission.:confused::confused::confused::confused:

    Call the council planning dept and complain he won't sign off? What are you expecting here? Perhaps you could do this?


  • #3
    Will23
    Registered Users Posts: 265 ✭✭Will23


    derferjam wrote: »
    What can you do if an architect is unwilling to sigh of a build because the house was build bigger than plans that went into the council for planning permission.:confused::confused::confused::confused:

    apply for retention permission, this should regularise/legalise the area of non-compliance and allow certification to proceed.

    the architect is correct, as a professional he/she cannot certify compliance with planning, when this is not the case.


  • #4
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,860 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    derferjam wrote: »
    What can you do if an architect is unwilling to sigh of a build because the house was build bigger than plans that went into the council for planning permission.:confused::confused::confused::confused:

    you built it bigger, your problem, not his.


  • #5
    hexosan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,740 ✭✭✭hexosan


    How much bigger than the original plans. Can he not certify it's in substantial compliance


  • #6
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,860 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    hexosan wrote: »
    How much bigger than the original plans. Can he not certify it's in substantial compliance

    without being curt, but the architect has obviously already made that decision if hes unwilling to sign it off as is.

    why should he take the risk on it? he didnt build it bigger.

    you need to apply for full retention for the dwelling as built, plus any other changes that may have been made to entrance, effluent treatment etc.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    derferjam
    Registered Users Posts: 197 ✭✭derferjam


    The build was just four feet longer than the plans that went into the council and its only a bungalow in the countryside. Neighbors are an acre away as the crow fly's and have no issues.

    However Mocosoft I WILL NOT be doing a "Castle-style building that Robert Fidler concealed from council planners" ;-p
    although it is a nice castle he has... ;-p


  • #8
    kippy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,793 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    derferjam wrote: »
    The build was just four feet longer than the plans that went into the council and its only a bungalow in the countryside. Neighbors are an acre away as the crow fly's and have no issues.

    However Mocosoft I WILL NOT be doing a "Castle-style building that Robert Fidler concealed from council planners" ;-p
    although it is a nice castle he has... ;-p
    Was it an oversight that it was built bigger than the plans? Or intentional?


  • #9
    Glebee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,694 ✭✭✭Glebee


    It would have been a lot easier if the Architect had just said "look I cant sign of on the build because its not in accordance with the plans but the solution is we apply for retention and then I can sign of on that." Everyone happy


  • #10
    derferjam
    Registered Users Posts: 197 ✭✭derferjam


    kippy wrote: »
    Was it an oversight that it was built bigger than the plans? Or intentional?

    A bit of both the mistake was done at foundation and we decided to go ahead anyway.


  • #11
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,860 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    derferjam wrote: »
    The build was just four feet longer than the plans that went into the council

    architect is definitely correct
    kippy wrote: »
    Was it an oversight that it was built bigger than the plans? Or intentional?
    why would that matter to the architect?

    at what stage was the architect asked to provide certification?


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Larbre34
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,371 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Its nice to hear of a construction sector professional with integrity. Why would he compromise himself.

    Usual Irish attitude to bending the rules.


  • #13
    derferjam
    Registered Users Posts: 197 ✭✭derferjam


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    architect is definitely correct


    why would that matter to the architect?

    at what stage was the architect asked to provide certification?
    at the end of the buiuld


  • #14
    BryanF
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 10,143 Mod ✭✭✭✭BryanF


    Was the arch involved all the way through? Was he aware this issue was coming? Did he suggest submitting revised plans to the coco explaining the issue?


  • #15
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,860 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    derferjam wrote: »
    at the end of the buiuld

    well then, hes absolutely correct.

    look at it this way, the money you "saved" by not having the architect involved during the build can be used to pay for the necessary retention.


  • #16
    Gumbo
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,801 Mod ✭✭✭✭Gumbo


    derferjam wrote: »
    What can you do if an architect is unwilling to sigh of a build because the house was build bigger than plans that went into the council for planning permission.:confused::confused::confused::confused:

    I thought you were still waiting on planning to come through????

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=96349486


  • #17
    DOCARCH
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,165 Mod ✭✭✭✭DOCARCH


    kceire wrote: »
    I thought you were still waiting on planning to come through????

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=96349486

    Hmmmm....interesting! :P


  • #18
    Dudda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,541 ✭✭✭Dudda


    kceire wrote: »
    I thought you were still waiting on planning to come through????

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=96349486

    Nice find.



    Forget the size of the house do you even have planning permission for a house? How can anyone sign off on a house without planning?


  • #19
    RORY O CONNOR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 270 ✭✭RORY O CONNOR


    Apply for retention-the fees are only for the extra floor space and you can use the original drawings. If you can't get it certified as in compliance with the planning permission then you will not be able to sell it further down the line without the cert in place. Bit the bullet and get retention.


  • #20
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,860 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    RORY O CONNOR wrote: »
    Apply for retention-the fees are only for the extra floor space and you can use the original drawings. If you can't get it certified as in compliance with the planning permission then you will not be able to sell it further down the line without the cert in place. Bit the bullet and get retention.

    ??

    1. Nope, the fees well have to cover the whole house build, Not the extra bit. It's not an extension being retained.

    2. How can you use the original drawings of the house Is bigger?


  • #21
    RORY O CONNOR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 270 ✭✭RORY O CONNOR


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    ??

    1. Nope, the fees well have to cover the whole house build, Not the extra bit. It's not an extension being retained.

    2. How can you use the original drawings of the house Is bigger?

    You can get the original drawings modified to reflect the extra bits-its about 30 mins work for the CAD guy-is what I meant.

    Retention is for the unauthorized part of the development.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,860 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    RORY O CONNOR wrote: »
    You can get the original drawings modified to reflect the extra bits-its about 30 mins work for the CAD guy-is what I meant.

    Retention is for the unauthorized part of the development.

    my local authority would see it as the building that is constructed is not the building granted permission, therefore the whole building is unauthorised and would need to be retained. you cannot extend what doesnt exist so you cannot argue its an extension of floor area.

    just preparing the OP for the worst.


  • #23
    Strolling Bones
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 615 ✭✭✭Strolling Bones


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    my local authority would see it as the building that is constructed is not the building granted permission, therefore the whole building is unauthorised and would need to be retained. you cannot extend what doesnt exist so you cannot argue its an extension of floor area.

    just preparing the OP for the worst.

    Absolutely correct.
    30 mins of CAD....how stupid a comment.


  • #24
    RORY O CONNOR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 270 ✭✭RORY O CONNOR


    Strolling Bones wrote: »
    Absolutely correct.
    30 mins of CAD....how stupid a comment.

    If you have an original house drawing on CAD a good Cad technician can modify the original drawing to add in the extra bit of the house that's been built on. How is this a stupid remark.


  • #25
    Strolling Bones
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 615 ✭✭✭Strolling Bones


    and what needs to happen after the edits....


  • #26
    BryanF
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 10,143 Mod ✭✭✭✭BryanF


    this thread is going nowhere.thread closed.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement