Listed Building Consent & Pre-Application

[montyjohn]

I'm in the process of writing a pre-application document to get input from the CO prior to writing my own listed building consent.
I don't want to involve an architect as funds are limited and I want to do the works myself slowly over time.

Key items we want consent for are:
- Turning a bedroom into a bathroom (because the house doesn't have a communal bathroom). I feel this is a fair request.
- Add a new heating system. It only has a Rayburn with no radiators downstairs. Rayburn is undersized for the house.
- Possibly fibreboard internal wall insulation but understand I may get push back from the CO on this. We'll see. I like the idea of it as it allows a lot of other works to go ahead like wiring and plumbing without needing to chase the walls.

Some works I think will be straight forward to get LBC are things like:
- Loft insulation
- Replace all skirting boards (every room has a different style, all modern, rotten and horrible). Kitchen might be original, so will seek advice on this.
- Rewire (wiring is falling apart)

Other items I would argue are like for like replacement
- Guttering. Mostly cracked.
- Brocken roof tiles
- Rotten joists
- etc list goes on.

My plan is to detail all this up, the issues, the damage, and my proposals and materials in a pre-application document including photos of everything.
What I'm hoping I get in return is a list of items from the CO of what in that list needs LBC, and any variations to my proposals they would need to accept.
Also, anything that is flat out going to be refused.

I'm getting mixed advice on how to approach this however.
Neighbours have said to keep it all vague and share the bare minimum you need with the CO otherwise you'll open up a can of worms. They've also said do whatever you can without involving the CO. Bring them in at the last minute when we move on to more serious works (i.e. after the like for like replacement stuff is done).
We know there are some unconsented works by pervious occupants and again been advised by neighbours to keep quiet about all of it otherwise the council will make our life hell.

This is the opposite of my plan. I wanted the pre application process to be my opportunity to demonstrate that I care about the property, my ideas take the needs of the property seriously and it's in safe hands.

I'm looking for opinions and feedback on what approach they have taken and what has worked for them.
Any experience writing your own pre applications and LBC?
I'm a civil engineer so write condition reports and proposals for a living, so the paperwork and drawings etc doesn't worry me. Heritage report might, but nearby barns have all gone through LBC by a developer recently so there's a lot of information there I can pinch. Shhh.

 

[Cubist]

Our COs, there have been several over the years, have been willing to come out for an informal meeting on site to discuss the projects we were considering. Those visits helped to clarify the specific needs for what had to be included in formal documentation and in particular to agree which items could be handled without or merely needed confirmation of the materials to be used.

 

[Flyfisher]

I've written four LBC applications and all were approved first time. I've not written any pre-apps because that part of the process was always done in person with our CO visiting the house, so we could discuss things until we had reached an agreed solution to each bit of work. After that, the formal application was more of a 'rubber stamping' exercise (although being G2* it did have to go to English Heritage (as was then) for their input as well.

Your point about wanting to show that you care about the property is, I believe, an important one. Because our CO was readily available and willing to visit, I was able to do that in person and it basically gets the CO 'on side' and helps to build a relationship of trust. Many of the things that ended up in my LBC applications could have been argued as like-for-like repairs that didn't require LBC, but it does no harm to include them with other works that definitely require LBC, but it helps to build a record of works and demonstrates you're taking things seriously.

For things such as the bathroom and the fibreboard IWI, consider and then explain how you propose to do this with minimal impact to the exsiting structure of the property. Your point about the IWI meaning that it would avoid the need to chase walls, which is an invasive/destruction process, is a very good one. Thus, not only would the IWI make the property more energy efficient (clearly a good thing) but it would also avoid the need to disrupt the existing fabric (also clearly a good thing). In general, alterations that are additions are likely to be more favourably received than alterations that are destructive in some way. I think of it in terms of reversibility - if the work is fully reversible then there's no significant impact on the historic fabric of the property, ie the very thing that listing is supposed to protect.

Of course, there will always be some works that are destructive so it's good to explain how you propose to minimise them. The bathroom conversion, for example, will likely require holes through walls for pipework, ventilation ducting etc, so explain how you will minimise this.

As for unconsented works, if you don't propose to reverse them then I'd probably keep quiet about them.

 

[montyjohn]

Our COs, there have been several over the years, have been willing to come out for an informal meeting on site to discuss the projects we were considering.

This would be ideal. Although looking at Shropshire website this is a service they provide for a smidge over £500. I'm hoping that service is more aimed at architects and developers, and they will do it informally for home owner.

 

[montyjohn]

I've not written any pre-apps because that part of the process was always done in person with our CO visiting the house, so we could discuss things until we had reached an agreed solution to each bit of work.

Is this fairly recently by any chance?
I know it used to be easy to call them up and discuss things, but in more recent years they've introduced the paid for pre-app service (it's not super expensive at £160) but it suggest they don't want to spend too much time engaging if you've not paid.

Maybe my experience will be the opposite, and they are willing to pop over and throw ideas around which is what I'm hoping for.

But the two responses I've had are very much inline with what I'm hoping will happen which is good.

I do wonder why the neighbours have such a negative view.

Thanks for your response.

 

[Flyfisher]

Is this fairly recently by any chance?
I know it used to be easy to call them up and discuss things, but in more recent years they've introduced the paid for pre-app service (it's not super expensive at £160) but it suggest they don't want to spend too much time engaging if you've not paid.

Maybe my experience will be the opposite, and they are willing to pop over and throw ideas around which is what I'm hoping for.

But the two responses I've had are very much inline with what I'm hoping will happen which is good.

I do wonder why the neighbours have such a negative view.

Thanks for your response.

I've only had experience of one listed property and one CO but from what I've read on here over the past couple of decades (well, nearly) the situation seems to vary a lot across the country. I've also concluded that I've been very fortunate with our CO. He did once tell me that his view was that since listed property owners had to live with various additional rules and constraints then the least COs should do is to help them as much as possible, which I found very refreshing and most definitely not al all 'jobsworthy'. I did, however, detect that he wasn't entirely enamoured with the way 'the system' worked and sensed that it was changing for the worse, so perhaps he was rebelling slightly. Whatever the background, I cannot fault the help and support he gave me over the 15 years or so of our project and even when he wasn't happy with a proposal he would suggest an alternative that was usually even better!

My last formal LBC application was about five years ago, so I can't vouch for the current state of affairs. However, he came to visit a couple of years ago when I asked him about solar PV options and was as helpful as ever. Being fortunate to have a fair bit of ground and knowing that roof-mounting would be unacceptable (and not really appropriate anyway) I proposed a ground mounted array some distance from the house and almost invisible. Not only did he readily agree, he said I wouldn't need LBC and it would just be a waste of tie and paperwork! OK, I haven't got that in writing, but I feel pretty safe that in these days of heightened environmental awareness, the council is not going to chase me about ground-mounted solar panels that are not visible from the house or from any neighbouring houses.

All I can really say is pursue things as best you can, keep the well-being of the property at the forefront and go for it.

I can't answer for your neighbours negativity - are they also listed? There does seem to be a body of (largely uninformed) opinion that if a property is listed then you can't do anything to it, which is patently untrue but it requires a bit of effort and self-education to dispel. What does seem to be the case though, is that the type of person likely to buy a listed property is also likely to be interested in its history in general so that, in most instances, there's a good match and the owners actively want to do the right thing, which is where the CO should be able actively help and advise rather than simply 'police' things.

Of course, there'll always be a few new owners who just want to rip out all the 'old stuff' but hopefully they are a tiny minority. They certainly don't seem to frequent these here parts!

 

[Kearn]

Councils now look to make money from the free LBC process via charging for pre-apps. The cost and level of detail / value you get seems to vary massively by council.

Personally, I’ve done two - one on a pre-purchase that we pulled out of, but the inept responses from the CO compounded what was already a liability of a building.

The other was for our current home, and for us in our location the best option was to treat the pre-app as a full application, you may as well get the biggest return for your fee - there was no differing level of info between our pre-app and LBC app, except a few tweaks discussed on site. Our full application sailed through.

Our pre app was only £100 and something, there are though, LAs asking north of £500 for just a phone call, which would make me just submit the whole thing instead for free.

Sadly, the folks on here referencing the ability to just call up a CO to pop round for a chat and coffee to talk things through is long a thing of the past in the current climate. It’s a shame as on balance it would save a lot of admin, but they need to try to make some money.

Some LAs will try to strongarm you into a preapp, insinuating that it is mandatory before submitting the free LBC app. Which is incorrect.

 

[LadyArowana]

I didn’t do our pre-app meeting because the CO was female and for various reasons I thought we might have a falling out which would not have been productive, so the architects did it with the builder. I believe they couched the proposals in terms of how the changes were either “neutral” or resulted overall in a “heritage gain”. I would say it’s worth going into the meeting having looked critically at your own proposals viewed from their perspective. So replacing a rotten and inappropriate skirting not only protects the fabric of the building but takes it in a more stylistically appropriate direction. Of course with some changes the heritage ethos is often that new things need to be clearly distinguished from original, but that seems to apply more to wholesale additions like extensions, rather than the things on your list, which look quite reasonable. Our two LBC’s were both approved without trouble, and I’m not saying that I did one naughty thing which was mysteriously not mentioned to anyone but the builders, because that would be very bad, but if it would only cost a de minimis amount to fix should there be enforcement action well…