Attic conversion as exempted development during construction of original house ?

joebre

As the title says, can the attic be converted under exempted development during the construction of the original house ?
The front and gable elevations will be unchanged. Velux windows to the rear. Roof pitch unchanged.
The attic will consist of habitable rooms that will comply with the Building Regulations.

sydthebeat

That would be an ecumenical matter....

Gumbo

My opinions is yes it can.
You are still allowed to enjoy the exemptions and to do so during the build would make the most sense.

Mellor

kceire wrote: »

My opinions is yes it can.
You are still allowed to enjoy the exemptions and to do so during the build would make the most sense.

It might make financial and construction sense, but it wouldn't be in line with the exemptions, nor the planning permission.

A similar example would be if somebody increased the approved floor area of their house by 40sqm and claimed it was an exempt extension. Which of course is not intended by the exemptions.

joebre wrote: »

As the title says, can the attic be converted under exempted development during the construction of the original house

That wouldn't be a conversion. It's changing the design from the approved plans, in a number of areas. The elevations aren't the issue.


There is no time limit from completion to when you can avail of exemptions. So to do so legal, you just have to ensure the planning permission is satisfied before you "convert" the ceiling. If any certificates of compliance are required get them at this stage. Take photos now too . There's also no planning reason preventing you from putting in structural work now, with a view to converting later. If you are clever with your sequencing, you can "convert" the attic with no extra work beyond if you built it all as one.

If no certs are needed. And nobody will ever know what order it was do in, then it's up to you.

sydthebeat

kceire wrote: »

My opinions is yes it can.
You are still allowed to enjoy the exemptions and to do so during the build would make the most sense.

Technically.....

There are no attic conversion exemptions, so it's down to the individual certifier / local authority to decide if it fails under 4 1 h....

I can't believe that there hasn't been an amended SI on this yet, when we consider the most ludicrous situations we already legislate for.

Angry bird

Court cases have said no. Local authorities often say yes

Penn

kceire wrote: »

My opinions is yes it can.
You are still allowed to enjoy the exemptions and to do so during the build would make the most sense.

Actually no. You're not supposed to change anything substantial, even if it constitutes exempted development, during the build. An attic conversion with habitable rooms suggest the rooms will be bedrooms which therefore affects the wastewater treatment system design and specification.

A colleague of mine dealt with a case previously where the clients added a small rear extension during the build, which complied with all exempted development requirements. The architect wouldn't sign off on the build and the council issued an enforcement notice, because the first condition of every grant of planning is that you build in accordance with the submitted application. By adding to it, even if it constitutes an exempted development, you're not in compliance with that planning condition, and it's determined that it should have been part of the original design if it was going to be done as part of the original build.

Best course of action is to contact the planner, issue them drawings of the change you wish to make and check with them. Even an email from them saying it's okay to proceed should cover you for the changes you wish to make.

Gumbo

Penn wrote: »

Actually no. You're not supposed to change anything substantial, even if it constitutes exempted development, during the build. An attic conversion with habitable rooms suggest the rooms will be bedrooms which therefore affects the wastewater treatment system design and specification.

A colleague of mine dealt with a case previously where the clients added a small rear extension during the build, which complied with all exempted development requirements. The architect wouldn't sign off on the build and the council issued an enforcement notice, because the first condition of every grant of planning is that you build in accordance with the submitted application. By adding to it, even if it constitutes an exempted development, you're not in compliance with that planning condition, and it's determined that it should have been part of the original design if it was going to be done as part of the original build.

Best course of action is to contact the planner, issue them drawings of the change you wish to make and check with them. Even an email from them saying it's okay to proceed should cover you for the changes you wish to make.

But a planner cannot issue a cert of compliance either.

I’ve had cases that the local authority won’t go to court on as they know the judge will rule in favour of the Developer.

It is senseless and unreasonable to expect a home owner to completely build a house and then rip out works to facilitate an exempted development (Assuming no condition that de-exempts the exemptions).

I’ve had many of These cases over the last few years and every one of them end the same way, no action to be taken.

I completely agree that condition 1 specified the works to be as lodged, but in reality it won’t lead to enforcement action (dublin).

To go to court the first thing the judge asks us is that a reasonable approach and reasonable conditions were attached to any enforcement notice. If the judge seems that we were unreasonable he will side with the home owner every time.

Mellor

Penn wrote: »

the first condition of every grant of planning is that you build in accordance with the submitted application.

This is what it comes down to, it's really simple

kceire wrote: »

But a planner cannot issue a cert of compliance either.

Nobody suggested they could. The planner can however amends the approved plans.

It is senseless and unreasonable to expect a home owner to completely build a house and then rip out works to facilitate an exempted development (Assuming no condition that de-exempts the exemptions).

I'd argue the opposite. It's completely senseless to let people increase the approved floor area of their approved house and claim exempt development.

If somebody was to invoke multiple exemption,s they could significantly alter an approval

I’ve had many of These cases over the last few years and every one of them end the same way, no action to be taken.

I agree that it's unlikely that council would make you rip it down. They could however sting you for retention permission. Even if they wouldn't bother. why would any one go the illegal route, when a perfectly legal and simple option is there.

antiskeptic

If taking the view that building the full exempted development along with the build isn't in order, would digging foundations and laying a floor slab for same contravene?

Mellor

antiskeptic wrote: »

If taking the view that building the full exempted development along with the build isn't in order, would digging foundations and laying a floor slab for same contravene?

I'd say no, it wouldn't contravene.
As it wouldn't be classed as floor area. Nor does it alter the approved plans.

antiskeptic

Mellor wrote: »

I'd say no, it wouldn't contravene.
As it wouldn't be classed as floor area. Nor does it alter the approved plans.

Just a very well designed and built patio area

Thanks

Gumbo

Mellor wrote: »

I'd say no, it wouldn't contravene.
As it wouldn't be classed as floor area. Nor does it alter the approved plans.

antiskeptic wrote: »

If taking the view that building the full exempted development along with the build isn't in order, would digging foundations and laying a floor slab for same contravene?

Are you tight for private open space?
Does the final Grant mention anything about de-exempting the exemptions or that planning is required for any structures that otherwise would be exempt?