How long for LBC?

[Adam F]

Our CO came over last week and highlighted the areas we needed to apply for LBC on - some were obvious, but opening up the original fireplace which had been bricked and plastered to reveal the old inglenook seemed logical to me, but nope - we still need to apply! :?

Anyway - we want to install a log burner, but I just wondered how long LBC can take? It would be a shame to shell out a fortune on a burner if the LBC takes months and months taking us into the spring.

I appreciate this is probaby a 'how long is a piece of string' but I thought I'd canvas opinion!

Thanks, Adam

 

[Flyfisher]

Mine took 8 weeks. However, this included nearly three wasted weeks because my original application couldn't be registered because of an admin misunderstanding (on the council's part). Unfortunately, I was on holiday when the letter arrived so couldn't clarify the questions until I got back, which was particularly annoying because during that time new rules came into force that meant a 'design & access statement' is now required for all LBC applications - so I then had to find out what that meant (not much in practice) and add that to the application.

I was originally advised that LBC can take up to 13 weeks, so I presume it can vary depending on the nature of the proposed works and if there are any objections. Your CO should be able to advise - mine was extremely helpful throughout, but ultimately you are dealing with a large organisation with a fairly rigid set of procedures.

Good luck with your 'design & access' statement for opening up your fireplace - more useless bureacracy :evil:

 

[Anita]

I don't know who your local authority is, and whether the timescale differs between them - but in the area in Cumbria where I live it is 8 weeks. It is certainly illogical and ludicrous that some glaringly obvious alterations need LBC - we had to apply to remove some 1930's tiled fireplaces from our 1700's georgian farmhouse and open up original inglenooks and hob-grates. We also needed consent to take down partitions that had been put up to divide rooms in about the 1960's. However I am aware that LBC is there to protect our buildings from less synmpathetic owners than use this forum!!!

I have to report however that we were exremely lucky and actually recently received the maximum £1000 conservation grant to help towards removing an old, leaking asbestos roof on our outbuilding and replace it with a slate one. I think we just got in at the right time - at the beginning of the financial year - and our old roof was a real eyesore!


Good luck with your applications.

 

[Pford75]

Can depend on how complex (and extensive) the application is. You mention that there are a number of areas requiring LBC....are you going to include them all in a single application?

This is the cheapest option (in terms of app'n fees) and probably also the 'cleanest' from yours and the councils perspective.....but if there are lots of contentious issues in the other items, you may wish to consider splitting out the 'simple' stuff into a separate app'n

Our app'n was rather ridiculously held-up by the fact that only one person (the CO) could make a decision on a particular item....and they were on holiday! I don't blame the CO himself on this....I blame the council. So with Xmas approaching, you might want to check if your CO has any holidays planned :wink:

 

[Nemesis]

Aye, clearly they should have a whole posse of 'em employed, just in case...

It is certainly illogical and ludicrous that some glaringly obvious alterations need LBC - we had to apply to remove some 1930's tiled fireplaces from our 1700's georgian farmhouse and open up original inglenooks and hob-grates.

Why illogical and ludicrous?

 

[Pford75]

Aye, clearly they should have a whole posse of 'em employed, just in case

Not a whole posse.....but 1 CO to deal with an area the size of a small county and with 00's of listed buildings is ridiculous.

If you are mid-job (having had LBC granted with conditions)...it's not particularly amusing to have a team of builders sit around on day rates...just because noone else at the council is prepared to make a decision.

And councils wonder why some people see LBC as too beauracratic

 

[Nemesis]

Well, LBC is the law so possibly yes it needs to be.

But you are lucky to have a CO at all - many local authorities don't. But I am sure you wouldn't expect an obstetrician to carry out brain surgery, so why think anyone else at a council can do conservation work?

 

[Pford75]

I appreciate the specialist skills of a CO and ours has been very helpful. My point is just that it is completely unrealistic to expect a single person to handle everything for a region as large as ours (and I am sure my CO would agree).

A CO wields tremendous power for anyone owning a listed building...but at the end of the day, it is a service provided by the council to us the taxpayers....in the same way they provide any other service.

Where councils don't have CO's, I am sure that much ill-advised work takes place - but the flipside is that councils who have a CO, but don't resource the department properly..simply put barriers in place which cost considerable amounts of time and money.

To use your analogy, it would be like turning up at the hospital about to give birth and being told..."I'm terribly sorry, but we only have 1 obstetrician and they are on holiday for 2 weeks...can you come back then?" :x

 

[Nemesis]

Oh I'm not defending the fact some councils don't have CO's, (something raised time and again at government level - they do have to have someone to give appropriate advice, but that can mean an external consultant, for example) or the fact those who are CO's have a great deal too much to do, but it's down to cash. I have no doubt many local authority departments and personnel are overstretched.

If anyone cares to make a fuss with their own local authority over slowness of service owing to shortage of staff, they have every right to do so. Start lobbying now for extra resources to be diverted to conservation.

 

[borischarlton]

Just from the few examples we have here is it any wonder that so much work goes on without LBC. Also I find it really frustraiting that a C.O. can verbally ok something and then say "but apply for consent"!!

Rob

 

[Nemesis]

It is illegal to carry out work without LBC. There are sound reasons in many cases for the delays, so no use railing against them. Checks, balances and consents are in place to protect historic buildings. There are other bodies which may have to be consulted, and also of course at times democratically elected members will have some involvement.

If a building has been altered without LBC it is an offence, and it can mean a fine (or even a prison sentence). Such works may make a building hard to sell in future also.

A CO can say that in his or her opinion works will be OK, but as with all planning issues, the appropriate applications have to be made to the local authority and approved. It's called the law.

 

[Flyfisher]

You mention that there are a number of areas requiring LBC....are you going to include them all in a single application?

This is the cheapest option (in terms of app'n fees)

Aren't all LBC applications free? Mine was.

 

[Flyfisher]

It's called the law.

That's no guide to it being effective or efficient though.

 

[Nemesis]

We either live with it or try to change it.

I presume you have made all manner of responses to the proposed new legislation?

 

[Flyfisher]

Your presumption is wrong.
I live with it because I've got better things to do.

 

[Lady_Mari]

Checks, balances and consents are in place to protect historic buildings.

I used to believe that LBC was to protect the building from unsympathetic materials etc & I fully supported that view until I had a run-in with the local officer who insisted on the style of window frames we had to put in. Some time later I found it was more down to his personal taste & a bit of red flag waving.
The following year his replacement said our windows were awful & not in keeping at all. Sometimes you just can't win.

Incidentally, when they came round to inspect I said we intended to remove the tiled hearth & expose the inglenook & would I need permission. He said "No - only if you find anything interesting."

It seems to me that the response you get depends on the area you live in.

 

[Nemesis]

Your presumption is wrong.
I live with it because I've got better things to do.

Right. Just a whinger then, who really contributes not much to this site except try to stir things?

Why I wonder?

 

[Nemesis]

I used to believe that LBC was to protect the building from unsympathetic materials etc & I fully supported that view until I had a run-in with the local officer who insisted on the style of window frames we had to put in. Some time later I found it was more down to his personal taste & a bit of red flag waving.
The following year his replacement said our windows were awful & not in keeping at all. Sometimes you just can't win.

Incidentally, when they came round to inspect I said we intended to remove the tiled hearth & expose the inglenook & would I need permission. He said "No - only if you find anything interesting."

It seems to me that the response you get depends on the area you live in.

The theory is that it is there to protect the buildings, and of course some of that is down to those at the sharp end, and of course the qualifications, skills and expertise they possess, along with opinion. There is of course a great deal of lobbying going on to ensure that all CO's have the sort of expertise necessary to evaluate applications. HM Gov, as with many HM Govs before, continues to ignore many of the problems.



The hearth may not have been considered important, it may not have been considered that its removal may have altered detrimentally the character of the building.

 

[Flyfisher]

Your presumption is wrong.
I live with it because I've got better things to do.

Right. Just a whinger then, who really contributes not much to this site except try to stir things?

It's hardly whinging or stirring to correct someone's wrong assumptions is it? I prefer to spend time repairing my GII* home rather than campaigning. Surely that's not an unreasonable choice? Last time I checked it was a free country after all.

(tea break over . . . now back to the roof!)

 

[Nemesis]

Thanks - just confirmed a great deal.

Wrong assumptions - yours I think.

xxx