Neighbours extension

farrerg

Is there any way I can check if a neighbours extension (being built at the moment) complies with planning regulations. I know it's less than 40sqm but it is very high and pretty much right up against against our boundary.

When they said they were building, we thought it would slope down same as the existing sunroom, but across the full width of the back of the house, but they have knocked this and gone out a good distance along our boundary at the level of the highest point in the old sunroom if that makes sense . It looks like it will block a lot of light into our kitchen and garden. Is there any way to get this looked at or clear guidelines as to what they're allowed to do without planning?

ahappychappy

Once it is within the 40ft rule then they can build away. There is no right to light that was an old law that existed.

thinkydink

As far as I'd be aware your neighbours are allowed, without planing permission to build up to 40sqm, as long as they are leaving a percentage of their garden in tact.

To build without planning, it must be single story but that can still be fairly large up to around the first floor level plus parapet could be 3m.

as to the boundary as long as they stay inside their boundary yet again this would comply, just try to be aware of their foundations and that they don't move over to your side (including under your side of any boundary wall) or impact any boundary walls without consent (as you would be part owner of that wall if shared) The act that covers that is Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2009

farrerg

Yeah it looks like its going to be up to just under their first floor windows. Seems mad that with such small gardens in most houses these days that you just stick something like this up.
We had been considering buying our house from our landlord, think we'll hold fire until we see the end result

Gumbo

farrerg wrote: »

Yeah it looks like its going to be up to just under their first floor windows. Seems mad that with such small gardens in most houses these days that you just stick something like this up.
We had been considering buying our house from our landlord, think we'll hold fire until we see the end result

They must have 25 Sq. M of rear garden left after the extension to comply.
The height cannot exceed 3m for a flat roof or 4m for a pitched roof.

Can you throw up a pic?

farrerg

Hopefully this works

Gumbo

farrerg wrote: »

Hopefully this works

Looks quite high. What's the finish being used?
Could do with a few more pics looking back at it though.

If you are concerned you could email planning enforcement of your local council and they will come out and measure it and ensure it complies with planning regulations.

farrerg

Don't want to put up anything too identifiable, is it possible to PM pics? Couldn't work out how to do it.

thinkydink

just from the first image you posted that looks about legal on the height to first floor level and an extra bit to form the parapet, the only concern that I'd say you (or the property owner would have) is that if that is built on a standard floating foundation then the foundation needs to be three times the width of the wall to allow for load (the wall sitting centre on it) so that looks like they may have dug under your boundary.

Other than that I don't think you would have any case against it.

PucaMama

kceire wrote: »

They must have 25 Sq. M of rear garden left after the extension to comply.
The height cannot exceed 3m for a flat roof or 4m for a pitched roof.

Can you throw up a pic?

Why the rule on the amount of garden left?

Gumbo

PucaMama wrote: »

Why the rule on the amount of garden left?

Planning and development Act.

I presume it's so you can't simply cover the entire site with a solid structure.

Gumbo

farrerg wrote: »

Don't want to put up anything too identifiable, is it possible to PM pics? Couldn't work out how to do it.

Yeah you should be able to PM them too.

Gumbo

thinkydink wrote: »

just from the first image you posted that looks about legal on the height to first floor level and an extra bit to form the parapet, the only concern that I'd say you (or the property owner would have) is that if that is built on a standard floating foundation then the foundation needs to be three times the width of the wall to allow for load (the wall sitting centre on it) so that looks like they may have dug under your boundary.

Other than that I don't think you would have any case against it.

It depends, what most builders will do is expose the boundary wall foundation on their side and pour new foundations and underpin the boundary wall foundation.

They will then build the rising wall from the new foundation.
I wouldn't be worried about it structurally as long as it was done correctly. The 3T rule should never replace the advice from an engineer after inspecting the ground conditions.

Murt10

Your very lucky you are only renting.

That monstrosity will knock many thousands off the value of your house.

At least you can move and you are better off not having neighbors that would erect anything as inconsiderate as that.

ted1

kceire wrote: »

They must have 25 Sq. M of rear garden left after the extension to comply.
The height cannot exceed 3m for a flat roof or 4m for a pitched roof.

Can you throw up a pic?

The front garden can make up the 25m

Edit: I'm wrong it's just the back garden

ted1

farrerg wrote: »

Hopefully this works

That's a very odd finish, call your landlord and get him to have a look at it. I'd expect a a courtesy call from my tenant if a neighbour was extending

farrerg

ted1 wrote: »

That's a very odd finish, call your landlord and get him to have a look at it. I'd expect a a courtesy call from my tenant if a neighbour was extending

We told him as soon as they mentioned it, but he didn't seem too concerned, he might be when he sees what they're putting up though

Skatedude

ted1 wrote: »

The front garden can make up the 25m

My planing application stated that the front garden didnt count, we were refused for it

farrerg

Murt10 wrote: »

Your very lucky you are only renting.

That monstrosity will knock many thousands off the value of your house.

At least you can move and you are better off not having neighbors that would erect anything as inconsiderate as that.

I know, they made it sound like they were just going across the back as a lot of houses have done, but this is much higher and longer.
It'll essentially block what little sunlight there was as its a north west facing garden

farrerg

Might be a better pic

MarkAnthony

I'd be very surprised if that's in compliance. I'm also dubious of the 25M2 including the front garden but to be fair to Ted I haven't looked it up so I stand to be corrected. Looks like there's very little room at the back of it.

Get on to the local planning office ASAP.

Gumbo

ted1 wrote: »

The front garden can make up the 25m

The front garden CANNOT make up the 25 Sq. M.
No argument, the 25 Sq. M has to be private open space to the rear of the building line, and it has to be useable ie. your side passage way doesn't count.

cerastes

christ, it looks like a pillbox
Unless there is a large amount of garden to the side not seen, then there hardly looks to be 25sq m left.
This doesnt make me feel too bad, a neighbour put up a monstrosity of a structure which effectively covers a lot of their garden.
I also thought planning permissions included noise, hours to finish work by as we had non stop noise and some instances of vibration to the point dashing would fall off our opposite external walls, I was concerned if the work was done to any standard and how it affected our structure, but if anything ever comes of it, it'll be them thats hung out if they're not by the book, it went on for ages as work was done, more than a year.

Gumbo

farrerg wrote: »

Might be a better pic

That looks way over the limits with regards to exempted development but to be fair, I cannot see the other side to try judge the open space left.

Also I'd be curious to to see a u-value calculation through the walls to see if the meet Part L of the Building Regulations.

cerastes

kceire wrote: »

That looks way over the limits with regards to exempted development but to be fair, I cannot see the other side to try judge the open space left.

Also I'd be curious to to see a u-value calculation through the walls to see if the meet Part L of the Building Regulations.

Does that include a barna shed? looks like theres one in the corner which indicates where the other side of the property is, even if there is 25m sq left over which it doesnt look like, can something like that be allowed stand?

farrerg

It's not quite as long on the far side, but if they do have 25sqm, it'll be by the skin of their teeth. It's the height more than anything that seems mad. I wouldn't be happy if I was in the house backing onto them either.

Gumbo

cerastes wrote: »

Does that include a barna shed? looks like theres one in the corner which indicates where the other side of the property is, even if there is 25m sq left over which it doesnt look like, can something like that be allowed stand?

It depends. If it was a brick built shed, no you can't count the garden area under it.
If it's a timber garden shed, then technically it's removable and you can discount the shed in the area calculation as if it wasn't there, the home owner could erect one the day after getting his exemption certificate.

It really depends on the Planning Enforcement Officers view when they visit the site in question. I know a couple that allow the timber garden sheds and I know one or two that don't allow them as they cover useable space.

I think if it came down to it the owner could remove the shed, the file be closed and then the owner could bring it back in the next day in theory.

cerastes

kceire wrote: »

It depends. If it was a brick built shed, no you can't count the garden area under it.
If it's a timber garden shed, then technically it's removable and you can discount the shed in the area calculation as if it wasn't there, the home owner could erect one the day after getting his exemption certificate.

It really depends on the Planning Enforcement Officers view when they visit the site in question. I know a couple that allow the timber garden sheds and I know one or two that don't allow them as they cover useable space.

I think if it came down to it the owner could remove the shed, the file be closed and then the owner could bring it back in the next day in theory.

Just curious really, but it suggests where the garden goes to, I really didnt think you could build in that manner though, it looks out of place, the cladding material? edit, its blocks is dark and its very imposing on the garden beside it, where the OP lives.
Could they be asked to take it down? If I lived there, I know its difficult to broach, but I think Id have to have a word when the extension structure is so permanent looking, its not like its an almost completely transparent sun room? cant think of what they call them.

farrerg wrote: »

It's not quite as long on the far side, but if they do have 25sqm, it'll be by the skin of their teeth. It's the height more than anything that seems mad. I wouldn't be happy if I was in the house backing onto them either.

Thats what I think is so imposing about it, but it does seem to cover a lot of area in the garden too.
Even if I was letting that out as a landlord, Id have a lot to say, maybe even more, its got to reduce the desireability for any potential purchaser.
As for the OP, lucky they dont own, like living beside a prison wall.

ted1

It's some height , if there 9 inch blocks that's About 40 inches above the window. Are they self building?

Gumbo

cerastes wrote: »

Just curious really, but it suggests where the garden goes to, I really didnt think you could build in that manner though, it looks out of place, the cladding material? is dark and its very imposing on the garden beside it, where the OP lives.
Could they be asked to take it down? If I lived there, I know its difficult to broach, but I think Id have to have a word when the extension structure is so permanent looking, its not like its an almost completely transparent sun room? cant think of what they call them.



Thats what I think is so imposing about it, but it does seem to cover a lot of area in the garden too.
Even if I was letting that out as a landlord, Id have a lot to say, maybe even more, its got to reduce the desireability for any potential purchaser.
As for the OP, lucky they dont own, like living beside a prison wall.

I don't think it's removal could be justified as long as it's a valid building material that's fit for purpose. It's on the neighbours property so the OP can't really say anything just because they don't like the look of it (I don't like it either btw).

I certainly would be talking to the neighbour or at least make a complaint to planning enforcement. Your details remain confidential throughout.

ted1 wrote: »

Are they self building?

Don't see the relevance?

farrerg

ted1 wrote: »

It's some height , if there 9 inch blocks that's About 40 inches above the window. Are they self building?

Nope builders here, had stopped yesterday at what seemed a reasonable height, got some shock today when they started adding more blocks

cerastes

I dont see how anyone would chance doing something like that with a neighbour beside them, they'd have good reason to dislike due to imposing or shadowing them, whether its allowed or not, potentially oppose it and have it either demanded to be removed or reduced, even if its allowed they must have no consideration or clue about how it appears from other peoples perspective.
Im sure it could easily lead to disputes.
If there isnt 25sq m left can they just be told to cut it back so there is 25 sq m left or would they be told to take the lot down?

You'd think someone would be floating the plans to neighbours to ensure they arent opposed to it, or is it just a case of lash it up and hope they dont complain as its too late??

ted1

kceire wrote: »

Don't see the relevance?

Inexperienced owners going that little bit higher.
You'd expect a seasoned pro to do a better job

Gumbo

cerastes wrote: »

I dont see how anyone would chance doing something like that with a neighbour beside them, they'd have good reason to dislike due to imposing or shadowing them, whether its allowed or not, potentially oppose it and have it either demanded to be removed or reduced, even if its allowed they must have no consideration or clue about how it appears from other peoples perspective.
Im sure it could easily lead to disputes.
If there isnt 25sq m left can they just be told to cut it back so there is 25 sq m left or would they be told to take the lot down?

They would get 3 options from the council :

1. Remove the structure.
2. Reduce the size of the structure so that 25 Sq. M of garden remains.
3. Apply for Retention Permission for the structure.

CollyFlower

farrerg wrote: »

Hopefully this works

I can't believe they don't need PP to erect that eyesore! Are they going to pebble-dash the wall on your side to blend in?.... If I was you I'd send off that photo to the planning department.

farrerg

cerastes wrote: »

I dont see how anyone would chance doing something like that with a neighbour beside them, they'd have good reason to dislike due to imposing or shadowing them, whether its allowed or not, potentially oppose it and have it either demanded to be removed or reduced, even if its allowed they must have no consideration or clue about how it appears from other peoples perspective.
Im sure it could easily lead to disputes.
If there isnt 25sq m left can they just be told to cut it back so there is 25 sq m left or would they be told to take the lot down?

You'd think someone would be floating the plans to neighbours to ensure they arent opposed to it, or is it just a case of lash it up and hope they dont complain as its too late??

I'm assuming they know we're renting so don't really care but I agree, knowing it will block all the light and going ahead anyway takes some neck

Gumbo

ted1 wrote: »

Inexperienced owners going that little bit higher.
You'd expect a seasoned pro to do a better job

Yeah possible. I've seen it before. Home owners and the builders having no clue about planning restrictions.

ted1

cerastes wrote: »

I dont see how anyone would chance doing something like that with a neighbour beside them, they'd have good reason to dislike due to imposing or shadowing them, whether its allowed or not, potentially oppose it and have it either demanded to be removed or reduced, even if its allowed they must have no consideration or clue about how it appears from other peoples perspective.
Im sure it could easily lead to disputes.
If there isnt 25sq m left can they just be told to cut it back so there is 25 sq m left or would they be told to take the lot down?

You'd think someone would be floating the plans to neighbours to ensure they arent opposed to it, or is it just a case of lash it up and hope they dont complain as its too late??

The house next to them is rented, they probably guess that the tenants can't say anything / don't care

farrerg

CollyFlower wrote: »

I can't believe they don't need PP to erect that eyesore! Are they going to pebble-dash the wall on your side to blend in?.... If I was you I'd send off that photo to the planning department.

I presume they will, it's only just gone up in the last day or two and we haven't seen them around at all. I think I'll send them off to the landlord first and see what he wants to do

CollyFlower

You're landlord won't be happy if possible buyers will be put off buying , it's going to knock off thousands of € off the value, unless he/she's in NE and doesn't care.

cerastes

farrerg wrote: »

I presume they will, it's only just gone up in the last day or two and we haven't seen them around at all. I think I'll send them off to the landlord first and see what he wants to do

Its decent enough for you to send the landlord the pictures and inform otherwise they'd never know, or might only see the completed project.
Id be astonished if the landlord couldnt see how this affects their property, personally I think you're right to notice but you're lucky in a way also being tenants as you dont have to put up with it. Although you did mention buying off the landlord, if there was some discussion of that with the landlord, you might be able to get the landlord to oppose it now in your interest if you want that, if there was a plan/discussion around possibly purchasing, that way you're off the hook for complainign if you do purchase.

Hard to see how the owner of this monstrosity would voluntarily row back and reduce it now.
Some recent advice regarding pictures might be good.
Unless you arent buying in which case Id pass on the info and not pay too much heed, least it shouldnt be a worry as you lose no value now, lucky you hadnt already purchased.

Teyla Emmagan

Thank god you're renting OP. That is absolutely hideous

Is your landlord going to come over and have a look? I'd have conniptions if that went up beside me.

seamusk84

farrerg wrote: »

I presume they will, it's only just gone up in the last day or two and we haven't seen them around at all. I think I'll send them off to the landlord first and see what he wants to do

Keep us updated OP. That structure is a complete eyesore and I think the planning department would be on your side.
People can be so ignorant and self involved sometimes. Raise hell with the planning office if you have to, worst case senario is you find some place else to rent.

tommer

Would getting a local councillor to bring attention to the planning department help you, i think it's disgusting that people can try get away with such arrogance

ted1

Might they wrap it in external insulation ? At least it's eliminate the ugly red brick

farrerg

seamusk84 wrote: »

Keep us updated OP. That structure is a complete eyesore and I think the planning department would be on your side.
People can be so ignorant and self involved sometimes. Raise hell with the planning office if you have to, worst case senario is you find some place else to rent.

I'll definitely keep you posted.

loyatemu

ted1 wrote: »

Might they wrap it in external insulation ? At least it's eliminate the ugly red brick

Why would you use external insulation on a new-build? It seems from the picture that there's a cavity for insulation. As others have said, that's a seriously ugly and out-of-place finish and it's very bad form not to have informed you (or the landlord) of their plans.

Zadkiel

CollyFlower wrote: »

I can't believe they don't need PP to erect that eyesore! Are they going to pebble-dash the wall on your side to blend in?.... If I was you I'd send off that photo to the planning department.

For it to be exempt from PP under the 40sqm rule it needs to be 2m from the boundaries, this butts up to one so would no longe be exempt? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Gumbo

Zadkiel wrote: »

For it to be exempt from PP under the 40sqm rule it needs to be 2m from the boundaries, this butts up to one so would no longe be exempt? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Sorry, you are wrong
At ground floor level, you can go right to the boundary aslong as the new works, including any facia, gutters etc are kept on your property.

If the neighbour had approached the adjoining home owner, you can even knowck the boundary wall and build up on the centre line with both parties in agreement.

The boundary location is a civil matter and the council will not get involved.

ted1 wrote: »

Might they wrap it in external insulation ? At least it's eliminate the ugly red brick

The outer leaf is not suitable for external insulation, and there would not be enough space to adequately place it between the wall and the boundary. Also, as noted above, the cavity in there for it to be filled with insulation. I guess that terracotta finish is there to stay.

tommer wrote: »

Would getting a local councillor to bring attention to the planning department help you, i think it's disgusting that people can try get away with such arrogance

No need, a complaint in writing or by email from the OP or the landlord to the Planning Enforcement Section carries the same weight.

Zadkiel

kceire wrote: »

Sorry, you are wrong
At ground floor level, you can go right to the boundary aslong as the new works, including any facia, gutters etc are kept on your property.

If the neighbour had approached the adjoining home owner, you can even knowck the boundary wall and build up on the centre line with both parties in agreement.

The boundary location is a civil matter and the council will not get involved.



The outer leaf is not suitable for external insulation, and there would not be enough space to adequately place it between the wall and the boundary. Also, as noted above, the cavity in there for it to be filled with insulation. I guess that terracotta finish is there to stay.



No need, a complaint in writing or by email from the OP or the landlord to the Planning Enforcement Section carries the same weight.

Thanks KC, that's much clearer

pwurple

I wouldn't be bothered about the finish or anything else, but those gardens look microscopic. That extension is way out of proportion with what remains of the site. I doubt they even had 25m2 to begin with.