Materials to match condition - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)

Dear David

Further to Steves' comment, I have asked similar questions for my Council.

I am amazed that the best I can get out of them is......................."I am afraid I cannot confirm that grey synthetic slate is similar in appearance to red concrete tile."

I put the question to them because they have issued PD Certs where the existing was red concrete tile and they have permitted grey slate.

I am therefore amazed because their action seems to me to clearly state "...............grey synthetic slate is similar in appearance to red concrete tile."  otherwise how could they possibly have certified it? Unless of course by oversight, but they are not admitting to that. And now I have raised it with them I am not aware that they are taking enforcement action.

To confound the issue in my view, they have recently issued nother PD Cert on the basis that "The roof extension will be built in slate roof tiles that match the original slate tiled roof slope (rather than the existing concrete roof tiles)" ie they have waived the GPDO terms, which I didn't think they are entiltled to do.

My "first principle" approach to this is that a dormer window should be clad in metal and set within a main roof of slate/tile. It seems to me that is the convention which Mr Mansard established.

But jobbing builders and loft conversion companies seem to clad everything in slate now it can be successfully hung vertically.

My neighbour had PD to finsh the roof in slate, and from what I can see from photos, has used lead/zinc for the dormer, felt for the "flat" roof and slate for the remnant 35 degree roof.

 I note Steve refers to a number of appeal decisions........................

 Inspectors have found that the following materials would NOT accord with the above conditions: - black slate where the existing house has red clay tiles.

This reinforces my surprise at my Council's statements above.

Following  http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/ViewCase.asp?caseid=2163035&coid=65610, I propose to clad the cheeks of my rear dormer in metal (as my neighbour) and change the roof of the existing house from red concrete pan-tiles to grey slate.

Noting this Inspector's comments, there is a 200mmx2000mm flashing between myself and neighbour, plush numerous others of smaller dims.

But when I appealed against a refusal for dormers clad entirely in metal, my Inspector refused to acknowledge this (though bulk, form, scale etc was my undoing).

Steve Speed The Planning Jungle website:

Hi David, Although there have been a number of appeal decisions relating to the requirement for materials to be "... of a similar appearance ..." (i.e. conditions A.3(a) and B.2(a)), I'm not aware of any that would answer your exact question. Most of the appeal decisions have dealt with more obvious situations. For example, Inspectors have found that the following materials WOULD accord with the above conditions: - smooth render where the existing house has pebbledash render. - clay pan-tiles where the existing house has clay plain tiles. (etc) For example, Inspectors have found that the following materials would NOT accord with the above conditions: - natural cedar slats where the existing house has smooth render. - black slate where the existing house has red clay tiles. (etc) Perhaps one of the most relevant appeal decisions to your exact question is the following: http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/ViewCase.asp?caseid=2163035&coid=65610 For the above application, the cheeks of the proposed rear dormer would be finished in zinc cladding, whilst the roof of the existing house is finished in concrete pan-tiles. The Inspector found that the zinc cladding on the proposed rear dormer WOULD accord with condition B.2(a) on the basis that there are zinc or lead flashings on the existing house, particularly noting a 300mm strip of the latter on the parapet walls of the existing house. Unfortunately, this still leaves open the question of whether zinc or lead cladding would be acceptable on a house without such apparent existing flashings. For some more examples of appeal decisions relating to "materials", please view the following document: http://planningjungle.com/householder-permitted-development/part-1-of-the-gpdo-appeal-decision-summaries-free-version/ Thanks, Steve

I know this is an old post but do you mind if I ask which appeal case is linked in this post? as the url link seems to be dead.

We are looking at zinc or lead dormer cheeks on a proposal, do you feel this case would be similar to substantial lead flashing to a chimney stack on a slate roof?