Applying for rentention after the fact?

Xcellor

I've had an engineer do up plans for a planning exempt extension 40sq meter on the rear of my property.

All is within the guidelines with the exception of the flat roof which will have a parapet which will be higher than the rear wall. He has suggested the quickest way to progress is to continue and apply for retention after the fact. Lowering the ceiling height of the extension would be against building regs he advises.

I had wanted to avoid planning permission but there appears no alternative if I want to go for two story.

Is there a big risk to this approach?

Gumbo

Xcellor wrote: »

Is there a big risk to this approach?

Refusal and time line for removal.

Xcellor

kceire wrote: »

Refusal and time line for removal.

Removing a roof would be fairly drastic.

When is retention usually refused, this might give some indication on risk?

Gumbo

Xcellor wrote: »

Removing a roof would be fairly drastic.

When is retention usually refused, this might give some indication on risk?

Seen one refused this week on a dormer window that the roof went higher than the ridgeline.

That's the risk, nobody can say if it lends any weight to your situation without knowing what's on the ground.

How high is the parapet wall?

Xcellor

kceire wrote: »

Seen one refused this week on a dormer window that the roof went higher than the ridgeline.

That's the risk, nobody can say if it lends any weight to your situation without knowing what's on the ground.

How high is the parapet wall?

Im attaching the drawing and highlighted. It's very small if you take from the rear wall roof joists.

sydthebeat

Xcellor wrote: »

I've had an engineer do up plans for a planning exempt extension 40sq meter on the rear of my property.

All is within the guidelines with the exception of the flat roof which will have a parapet which will be higher than the rear wall. He has suggested the quickest way to progress is to continue and apply for retention after the fact. Lowering the ceiling height of the extension would be against building regs he advises.

I had wanted to avoid planning permission but there appears no alternative if I want to go for two story.

Is there a big risk to this approach?

why put a parapet on it then?

retention is always an option, but you run the risk of having to remove the parapet should that be deemed necessary ie is over shadowing an issue etc

Xcellor

sydthebeat wrote: »

why put a parapet on it then?

retention is always an option, but you run the risk of having to remove the parapet should that be deemed necessary ie is over shadowing an issue etc

The engineer added this parapet. In my drawings that I did up I had kept the roof flush with the existing roof joists. There doesn't appear to be any other way to proceed with the construction without a parapet...

sydthebeat

Xcellor wrote: »

The engineer added this parapet. In my drawings that I did up I had kept the roof flush with the existing roof joists. There doesn't appear to be any other way to proceed with the construction without a parapet...

there is always an alternative.

a flush eaves like page 25 of this document should be possible:
https://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/migrated-files/en/Publications/DevelopmentandHousing/BuildingStandards/FileDownLoad%2C18751%2Cen.pdf

your engineer wants to do whats on page 26

Xcellor

Xcellor wrote: »

The engineer added this parapet. In my drawings that I did up I had kept the roof flush with the existing roof joists. There doesn't appear to be any other way to proceed with the construction without a parapet...

To be honest, that sounds like a "you added this without my say so" kinda problem, which would make it a "it's up to you to fix it without my pay, so" kinda solution.


If you end up having to apply for retention, the costs can quickly stack up. If you're refused, its triple the price to appeal than it normally is. If the appeal fails, you may have to make the reparations yourself out of your own pocket. Bear in mind, you will be applying for permission for the whole extension, not just the parapet. If refused on appeal, you'll have to tear the whole thing down. All because someone added something else without your input?

Xcellor

I'm just wondering why the engineer didnt suggest the flush approach? If it's compliant with building regs

There's nothing odd about the house that it's being attached to standard concrete construction.

sydthebeat

Xcellor wrote: »

I'm just wondering why the engineer didnt suggest the flush approach? If it's compliant with building regs

There's nothing odd about the house that it's being attached to standard concrete construction.

probably the aesthetics.....

i honestly cant think of a roof covering that cannot be used with a flush eaves, but maybe he has specified a flat roof covering that requires a parapet to finish up against.

Xcellor

sydthebeat wrote: »

probably the aesthetics.....

i honestly cant think of a roof covering that cannot be used with a flush eaves, but maybe he has specified a flat roof covering that requires a parapet to finish up against.

See attached. The proposed seems to cut into a large portion of existing roof. Aesthetically I think the flush approach looks much better.. I thought maybe its because of where the roof windows are located, but these could be moved further to the rear..

elperello

Get a different engineer and build within the guidelines.

sydthebeat

Xcellor wrote: »

See attached. The proposed seems to cut into a large portion of existing roof. Aesthetically I think the flush approach looks much better.. I thought maybe its because of where the roof windows are located, but these could be moved further to the rear..

thats not really the issue... the cut in depends on the roof construction thickness... as the ceiling heights are the same internally.

once the ceiling heights are the same, which appears to be in the section.... then all you have to do is match the external existing eaves level with the proposed blockwork.

just ask the engineer why hes not considering a flush eaves , as that would make the wall heights exempt and none of this would be an issue.

sydthebeat

just on that roof plan drawing....

surely hes not proposing building the parapet so far into the existing roof?
theres hardly a block wall within the existing building at that point capable of supporting it...

Gumbo

OP,

Did you engage the Engineer to design the Structural works or to oversee Planning Compliance?

Xcellor

sydthebeat wrote: »

just on that roof plan drawing....

surely hes not proposing building the parapet so far into the existing roof?
theres hardly a block wall within the existing building at that point capable of supporting it...

Yeah.. that doesn't make much sense.. I'll query the reason why this is being proposed.

Essentially by saying it needs to have a parapet it means a two story extension is impossible without planning permission ...

Xcellor

kceire wrote: »

OP,

Did you engage the Engineer to design the Structural works or to oversee Planning Compliance?

The following services in the context that it needs to be planning exempt. I provided mock ups of the floor plans dimensions etc and 3d rendering of what it should look like to provide a basis of the drawings.

1. As-Built: As-Built survey of property.
2. Architectural: Produce accurate Architected drawings.
3. Construction Details: Design & issue of Construction, Structural Details for Tender & Construction.
4. Tendering: Issue tender pack to Building Contractors on vetted panel, review and select.
5. Contract: Administer contract of works.
6. Communication: Liaise with clients and Building Contractor throughout the build.
7. PSDP: Project Supervisor Design Process. Prepare Preliminary Health & Safety Plan, Design Risk Assessment and submit
completed AF1 & AF2 to HSA.
8. Monitoring During works: Five number periodic site visits during works.
9. Certification: will issue an Opinion of Compliance Planning Exemption & Building Regulations strictly upon successful
completion.

Xcellor

OK spoke with the engineer today.

It is a matter of aesthetics, the parapet finish looks better overall. Hidden gutters. In terms of how it will be supported etc those details would be provided.

This is meaning that any opinion of compliance that I get issued will state that it's not compliant on this point so really this would require retention to sell.

I hired a professional to give guidance on this matter so it would be stupid to not follow the advice.. right?!

sydthebeat

so he'll give you a cert of exemption to say its not exempt....

i think he should agree to prepare and administer an application for retention immediately on completion.

Xcellor

sydthebeat wrote: »

so he'll give you a cert of exemption to say its not exempt....

i think he should agree to prepare and administer an application for retention immediately on completion.

Yeah pointless cert I already know this..