Garage too high

[26hoggy]

Like this?

[26hoggy]

That's all I've got

[big-all]

yes that sort off thing but was hoping for an easy to transfer datum point
as in the ground level was at that level on that fence post thats still there so thats your datum point

[Notch1]

I would say the ground level on the garden side can be proven by raking off the loose soil and getting back to the original lawn.

On the sides, if you can establish the tide mark on the some fence posts, that would prove the sides.

My guess the planners will conclude you need to lower it, because that will sort out the complaint and get the issue to go away (for them). If you think you have a good argument write to them with reasonable evidence and make them give it more attention.

[26hoggy]

Do you mean this metal post?

[davyp1]

I would say the ground level on the garden side can be proven by raking off the loose soil and getting back to the original lawn.

On the sides, if you can establish the tide mark on the some fence posts, that would prove the sides.

My guess the planners will conclude you need to lower it, because that will sort out the complaint and get the issue to go away (for them). If you think you have a good argument write to them with reasonable evidence and make them give it more attention.

Notch is right, you need to get a letter in with print offs of proof of existing levels etc. (all as mentioned above)
Stop rolling over and take the fight back to them!
Very quick action is needed! It has to be in writing.

davyp1

[26hoggy]

Cool I'll write up a letter tomorrow, thanks for the advice guys.
What are your thoughts regards the plans we submitted, accidentally showing two different heights for the same building?

[Notch1]

Cool I'll write up a letter tomorrow, thanks for the advice guys.
What are your thoughts regards the plans we submitted, accidentally showing two different heights for the same building?

I guess you can either ignore it and just state height of building is 4.00m (or whatever it is), from ground level as shown on xyz elevation (the elevation being the one where it is shown correctly) -just ignire the issue and concentrate on the argument to prove ground level.

Strictly speaking the planning consent has been issued on a false premise because the drawings available for public access are wrong and therefore this process should be redone (IE either the 4 weeks public consultation or complete new application). However if it can be argued that the dimension is wrong and would not have been taken into account for determining the decision, it could be ignored.

Of course the planning permission would have gone initially to a validation team whose job it is to check elevations have information that matches, so it is also their error.

[26hoggy]

OK as I haven't heard anything for almost a month now I thought I'd give planning control a call, the guy dealing with my case hasn't spoken to the head guy that deals with planning breaches yet and he will be on holiday for the next 2 weeks.

Due to the fact the partially built garage has been built 1.2 meters in the wrong place we are going to apply for retrospective planning permission.

My new question now is if I apply for a retrospective application and it's rejected, will that null and void the original application that was granted?

[Notch1]

OK as I haven't heard anything for almost a month now I thought I'd give planning control a call, the guy dealing with my case hasn't spoken to the head guy that deals with planning breaches yet and he will be on holiday for the next 2 weeks.

Due to the fact the partially built garage has been built 1.2 meters in the wrong place we are going to apply for retrospective planning permission.

My new question now is if I apply for a retrospective application and it's rejected, will that null and void the original application that was granted?

I presume you are meaning the garage is built in the correct place but the planning application was incorrect? -or are you wanting to move the garage?

I dont know about your new question, Id be interested to know the answer!

I think your original consent remains in place. Of course if you get a new consent, the original will have to be removed.

If you apply for a new planning application, you do realise that your neighbours will be writing to complain!

[26hoggy]

Yes sadly I'm going to have to take their complaints on the chin as the garage has been built 1.2 meters from the road and the original planning application shows it to be 2.4 meters from the road, so if I'm to correct this mistake then I either move the whole garage (which will cost thousands) or get retrospective for its new position. The planning inspector that came round said they will probably just tell me to build it to exactly what was on the plans,
I can't afford to move it so that leaves me with one option.

It takes 3 complaints to make a planning application go to a committee.

I know one neighbour hasn't got an issue with it and the other definitely has.

if I drop the level down 90mm so it's the same height as what the original application said then I'm hoping they won't refuse me my retrospective application as all the complaints were about the height and not it's position, and permission was granted for that height previously so I would be asking why it's been turned down on my second application.

[Notch1]

Oh dear, you havent had a lot of luck with this.

If you are building in a different position from the consent, thats a non material amendment, so you will have no choice but to start a new application and declare work has started.

Unfortunately the new application will be judged on its own merit. However as the first application went through, it must have satisfied all the planning policy framework, so provided the new application is not creating any issues, like neighbour amenity then in theory you should get approval. Of course if now the neighbours submit objections, then the application will be subjected to greater scrutiny. It doesnt mean objections unduly influence planning decisions, they are still based on the planning policy.

Good luck!