Planning Permission
Discussion
Arrrgh! (long rambling post warning - leave now!)
I hate this sort of negotiation. We've sold our house to buy a delapidated building on a small plot of land. The plan is to knock down the existing house, and build a home for ourselves. On the site is a very small barn that's listed, and listing - it needs complete rennovation to save, but internally it's a lovely space with centuries old timbers. It's on the edge of the fens, so though the view is a bit.. um.. flat, it is beautiful. At the moment it's cheaper to go through the madness of building your own house than to try to afford something 'nice' in the area.
So, we've talked at length with a great architect and got a design of a house that meets our needs - nothing extravagant, but an original and interesting plan. Now we're presenting it to the planning department and the frustration is immense.
All of the planners are helpful and before our main application we've had a couple of meetings to discuss what we plan to do. They love the house and are fine with the plans to rennovate the barn. However, we've moved the new house away from the location of the original building, which was cramped into the south-west corner of the plot and shaded by a yew hedge. As a consequence, they have said they will not accept our plans.
In terms of making the most of the plot, the new location couldn't be bettered and the design we've worked towards makes the most of the south-west exposure it gets. Using the old location would not only leave the house in the shade with no view, but so far from the barn (20 metres or so) that we could not make serious use of it as part of the 'living space'.
Yet this seems like a stalemate. They don't want a house in the new location (the barn, though very small, should be the main focus of the plot), and aesthetic arguments are secondary to planning guidelines. We really can't see how to make the old layout work (we've tried a few variations) or how to make the new building have any less impact (we've used every trick in the book, from low rooflines to different cladding). Though the plot is big, they would much rather we put up a small two bedroomed square box to replace the existing building. I understand their position that new buildings have to blend in to the environment, and conservative designs are far easier to pass, but that position makes it extremely difficult to rise to the challenge of an excellent site. It's frustrating that developers of large housing estates can put up acres of ugly red brick blobs, yet individual designs have to be fought for.
Unless we can come up with some strong arguments for the new site layout, it looks like it's going to be back to the drawing board for us.
..and we haven't even talked about the siting of the garage yet..!
>>> Edited by Tuna on Wednesday 16th February 15:35
I hate this sort of negotiation. We've sold our house to buy a delapidated building on a small plot of land. The plan is to knock down the existing house, and build a home for ourselves. On the site is a very small barn that's listed, and listing - it needs complete rennovation to save, but internally it's a lovely space with centuries old timbers. It's on the edge of the fens, so though the view is a bit.. um.. flat, it is beautiful. At the moment it's cheaper to go through the madness of building your own house than to try to afford something 'nice' in the area.
So, we've talked at length with a great architect and got a design of a house that meets our needs - nothing extravagant, but an original and interesting plan. Now we're presenting it to the planning department and the frustration is immense.
All of the planners are helpful and before our main application we've had a couple of meetings to discuss what we plan to do. They love the house and are fine with the plans to rennovate the barn. However, we've moved the new house away from the location of the original building, which was cramped into the south-west corner of the plot and shaded by a yew hedge. As a consequence, they have said they will not accept our plans.
In terms of making the most of the plot, the new location couldn't be bettered and the design we've worked towards makes the most of the south-west exposure it gets. Using the old location would not only leave the house in the shade with no view, but so far from the barn (20 metres or so) that we could not make serious use of it as part of the 'living space'.
Yet this seems like a stalemate. They don't want a house in the new location (the barn, though very small, should be the main focus of the plot), and aesthetic arguments are secondary to planning guidelines. We really can't see how to make the old layout work (we've tried a few variations) or how to make the new building have any less impact (we've used every trick in the book, from low rooflines to different cladding). Though the plot is big, they would much rather we put up a small two bedroomed square box to replace the existing building. I understand their position that new buildings have to blend in to the environment, and conservative designs are far easier to pass, but that position makes it extremely difficult to rise to the challenge of an excellent site. It's frustrating that developers of large housing estates can put up acres of ugly red brick blobs, yet individual designs have to be fought for.
Unless we can come up with some strong arguments for the new site layout, it looks like it's going to be back to the drawing board for us.
..and we haven't even talked about the siting of the garage yet..!
>>> Edited by Tuna on Wednesday 16th February 15:35
Firstly, you can appeal all the way up to the Secretary of State if you don't like their decision.
Secondly, if the barn is indeed listed then you fall into listed building consent which is more onerous than normal planning. It requires listed building consent for everything within the curtilage of the site.
Generally on a planning decision there are a list of conditions or points and a reason why they are raised. Can you give any more detail?
As for removing the existing foundations of the old house, a day or two with a JCB should suffice. There are many reasons the existing building subsided. If the ground is poor then you just need to dig deeper foundations (obviously more expensive)
Secondly, if the barn is indeed listed then you fall into listed building consent which is more onerous than normal planning. It requires listed building consent for everything within the curtilage of the site.
Generally on a planning decision there are a list of conditions or points and a reason why they are raised. Can you give any more detail?
As for removing the existing foundations of the old house, a day or two with a JCB should suffice. There are many reasons the existing building subsided. If the ground is poor then you just need to dig deeper foundations (obviously more expensive)
Have a look at www.periodproperty.co.uk
Its my 2nd fave site and if you put your question on there you will find a wealth of knowledge come to your aid. Having said that don't expect sympathy just straight answers.
As has been said tho, listed building consents and permissions are sometimes fraught, just try and stay with the planners for they are the Gods so far as this issue is concerned.
Its my 2nd fave site and if you put your question on there you will find a wealth of knowledge come to your aid. Having said that don't expect sympathy just straight answers.
As has been said tho, listed building consents and permissions are sometimes fraught, just try and stay with the planners for they are the Gods so far as this issue is concerned.
i don't know very much about this but its all to do with planning laws i think.
As i understand it, you are not allowed to build houses just anywhere, they have to be on the site of former buildings and they also have to use the old walls, i think it's all to do with "green field" sites and is legislation introduced by the goverment (I'm not sure which one)
You can't knock down the old building and start again and I think there are issues about how much building you can have in addition to what is already there. As in, if there are 4 walls you can't turn that into the utility room and build the rest of the house around it.
I think this is where your problem is, you are not building on an existing site you are just using the plot of land which is frowned upon.
As i understand it, you are not allowed to build houses just anywhere, they have to be on the site of former buildings and they also have to use the old walls, i think it's all to do with "green field" sites and is legislation introduced by the goverment (I'm not sure which one)
You can't knock down the old building and start again and I think there are issues about how much building you can have in addition to what is already there. As in, if there are 4 walls you can't turn that into the utility room and build the rest of the house around it.
I think this is where your problem is, you are not building on an existing site you are just using the plot of land which is frowned upon.
AC79xxx said:It is very well known. I looked after a site in London and we had to pay over £30K for 'school places' for a development for the infirm and elderly. Hardly likely to add to the local schools' burden.
wedg1e said:
Tried a backhander?
Developers of large housing estates often do this but in an above board fashion.
Westbury have built a housing estate in our town. They have also built a new sports centre (gratis of course)
Yep, it's known as planning gain.
Caradon are epic for this. Get yo' ass in the local lodge, down the golf course and then before you know it, you will be building what you want where you want and a lots more besides.
Fancy a 10 bedroomed bungalow in the middle of a SSI and AONB? Might not only be Caradon.
I recently worked on a build and had a chat to the site agent, one night a listed old peoples home was accidentally reversed over by a runaway JCB, they built a massive block of flats in its place (2 storey) of course, only there were 2 basements which happened to be above ground as well. Thus eclipsing the people behinds view of the sea. Of course the man with the most ££££'s wins. The site agent said it was a cash job!
The best one is our village which has a line of No Build outside the line (since everything is owned within the line no building is happening). One guy has submitted plans for 8 starter homes on a patch of land which his architect has redrawn the village boundary to include his bit of land. Will be very interesting to see what happens. They are as corrupt as you can get, (and it's spoiling the area something chronic)
>> Edited by love machine on Tuesday 15th February 16:10
Fancy a 10 bedroomed bungalow in the middle of a SSI and AONB? Might not only be Caradon.
I recently worked on a build and had a chat to the site agent, one night a listed old peoples home was accidentally reversed over by a runaway JCB, they built a massive block of flats in its place (2 storey) of course, only there were 2 basements which happened to be above ground as well. Thus eclipsing the people behinds view of the sea. Of course the man with the most ££££'s wins. The site agent said it was a cash job!
The best one is our village which has a line of No Build outside the line (since everything is owned within the line no building is happening). One guy has submitted plans for 8 starter homes on a patch of land which his architect has redrawn the village boundary to include his bit of land. Will be very interesting to see what happens. They are as corrupt as you can get, (and it's spoiling the area something chronic)
>> Edited by love machine on Tuesday 15th February 16:10
To answer your various responses: 
Ha! Firstly I'm sure they're honest and decent people - they have been very helpful. Secondly, knowing my negotiating skills, that would end very badly.
Nope, they've got that covered. Until we have planning permission, they won't even allow us to put a caravan on the site.
The barn is much too small to be a house, and as a listed property we're basically limited to making it weather proof. It'd make a great living room, but that's about it. As it is listed, they're against anything touching it, obscuring it, or looking bigger than it. Which is a problem, as it's a small barn in the middle of the site.
So far, we've only been to pre-planning meetings to try to smooth the way before a full application, so no formal response yet. Their issue is largely that the new position of the house would 'dominate' the site as it would be closer to the side of the site that backs on to open fields. Distant footpaths and a local dead-end road get a clear view of the back of the site, and therefore the new house.
The ground is more than poor - it's atrocious. Edge of fenland peat marshes, so piled foundations are going to be the order of the day. We've factored the added expense into the costs - indeed the plot was cheaper than usual due to the difficulty of building there.
We've had offers But as has been pointed out, it can end in a swift trip to the local jail, and we would have to rebuild at our own expense. Anyway, we really like the barn, the problem is combining it with useful living accomodation.
We'll let anyone in the village swim in our bathtub if that helps?
I'm not really expecting a magic solution here - we knew when we took this on that the whole process would be long and stressful. We want to have a nice home, and genuinely want to do something that suits the site. Presenting a good case to planning and conservation is part of the process, but it's very difficult as both sides have wildly different priorities. The plot came with outline planning permission to replace the existing building, so this isn't a green field site (it's actually littered with garages, sheds and lean-to rubbish) and that give us an emergency backup plan. However, in trying to design a new house in the location of the existing one, we've hit so many issues (view, services, available light, relationship with the rest of the plot) that a new location made a LOT of sense.
>> Edited by Tuna on Tuesday 15th February 16:15
wedg1e said:
Tried a backhander?
Ha! Firstly I'm sure they're honest and decent people - they have been very helpful. Secondly, knowing my negotiating skills, that would end very badly.
pesty said:
Say your a gypsie then you can do what you want.
Nope, they've got that covered. Until we have planning permission, they won't even allow us to put a caravan on the site.
Incorrigible said:
If you're using the barn as part of the new house, you could try and get permision to convert the barn, then get an extension on it (matching the style obviously)
The barn is much too small to be a house, and as a listed property we're basically limited to making it weather proof. It'd make a great living room, but that's about it. As it is listed, they're against anything touching it, obscuring it, or looking bigger than it. Which is a problem, as it's a small barn in the middle of the site.
rsvmilly said:
Generally on a planning decision there are a list of conditions or points and a reason why they are raised. Can you give any more detail?
As for removing the existing foundations of the old house, a day or two with a JCB should suffice. There are many reasons the existing building subsided. If the ground is poor then you just need to dig deeper foundations (obviously more expensive)
So far, we've only been to pre-planning meetings to try to smooth the way before a full application, so no formal response yet. Their issue is largely that the new position of the house would 'dominate' the site as it would be closer to the side of the site that backs on to open fields. Distant footpaths and a local dead-end road get a clear view of the back of the site, and therefore the new house.
The ground is more than poor - it's atrocious. Edge of fenland peat marshes, so piled foundations are going to be the order of the day. We've factored the added expense into the costs - indeed the plot was cheaper than usual due to the difficulty of building there.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
We've had offers
But as has been pointed out, it can end in a swift trip to the local jail, and we would have to rebuild at our own expense. Anyway, we really like the barn, the problem is combining it with useful living accomodation. b17nns said:
Westbury have built a housing estate in our town. They have also built a new sports centre (gratis of course)
We'll let anyone in the village swim in our bathtub if that helps?
I'm not really expecting a magic solution here - we knew when we took this on that the whole process would be long and stressful. We want to have a nice home, and genuinely want to do something that suits the site. Presenting a good case to planning and conservation is part of the process, but it's very difficult as both sides have wildly different priorities. The plot came with outline planning permission to replace the existing building, so this isn't a green field site (it's actually littered with garages, sheds and lean-to rubbish) and that give us an emergency backup plan. However, in trying to design a new house in the location of the existing one, we've hit so many issues (view, services, available light, relationship with the rest of the plot) that a new location made a LOT of sense.
>> Edited by Tuna on Tuesday 15th February 16:15
mutt k said:
What is the problem with the yew hedge? Can it not be trimmed back/removed, or am I missing something?
it's twenty-something feet tall, and as this is the fens the practise is to try and keep any trees you've got! Without visual and wind breaks the place would be a desert. Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff