harry_angel

Members
  • Content Count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About harry_angel

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. harry_angel

    Original Footprint / Loft Connection

    Unfortunately as above, the previous owner signed away certain development rights, so everything has to go via the council now.
  2. harry_angel

    Original Footprint / Loft Connection

    Like where your head's at...is Wayne Manor trademarked? 😉 Re hoovers...waiting for robots to get better...
  3. harry_angel

    Original Footprint / Loft Connection

    Cheers guys. I should have been clearer that we would be expanding the loft space in doing this - you can see the change from the 2 images below. The 2nd image shows the proposed new 2nd floor. Currently the kitchen is single storey as you can see, but by making it 2 storey we also increase the potential size of the loft (because the existing loft will then have a new ceiling to link up to). I mean: it's a big job, we would be totally scrapping the existing pitch roof in favour of a new straight wall line + false pitch roof, semi-concealing a flat roof. So it's almost like we're saying to: "we want to convert what's already there....and add to it...considerably". I think I should probably tread softly softly and just apply as you guys say to add the bedroom above the kitchen and "re-sculpt" the roofline...which genuinely does look like a hodgpodge of random extensions currently. Note: the 2 images obviously show different sides of the house, which I know isn't clear or helpful. But the architect hasn't sent over the corresponding image yet.
  4. harry_angel

    Original Footprint / Loft Connection

    Thanks Ragg, the previous owner signed away certain (not all) PD rights, in order to get his triumvirate of planning points through (we have actioned 2/3). The final one is the one we're looking to "swap". Like your thinking though, but no idea whether it is credible or not. Interesting that your council didn't care about the basement - because we're not near neighbouring properties I'm assuming the blocking light etc wouldn't be an issue for us, either. I suppose it's always trickier to go up rather than down, however. I just want to know whether it would even be judicious to refer to the loft in the pre app...part of me thinks just apply for the bedroom above the kitchen and the remodelled roof, which at just a 9.33m sq increase isn't much of a big deal... Very keen to hear other views.
  5. Hi all, our property is set back in 3 acres in greenbelt and is almost 100m from any neighbouring properties. We are looking to fully convert and expand the loft area, by increasing the size of the 1st floor, which in turn will then "unlock" the loft (at present the loft isn't worth converting, due to lack of useable head height). Our predecessors secured planning for a front extension which we have never liked the idea of and do not wish to activate - this planning went through as part of other planning, which has been actioned, so is secured in perpetuity. So before you factor in the loft there is a +9.333m discrepancy between the planning the previous owners' secured, and building above the kitchen (the part which would then unlock the loft space properly). To my questions: first we'd need to get the council to agree to the +9.33m increase in "exchange" for the old planning secured second....how do we play it with the loft? Do we simply apply for the planning for the space above the kitchen, say the loft is going to be for storage (show windows on the drawings, or not?), then quietly convert it/stick a bathroom etc up there after it's all been signed off? Or just apply straight with the space shown, the windows shown, etc etc The council will struggle with objections about "openness of the green belt" and "disproportionate increases in size" because we are not increasing the dimensions of the footprint, nor the height of the structure. Throw in the 100m gap between us and other properties and that isn't the concern. We can probably even make a solid case that the structure looks bizarre currently, and we are improving it aesthetically. To our layman's eye the main refusal point would be on straight floor area increase: the house has already up to a c. 65% increase. The house currently is 258.55sqm + First floor extension above the kitchen = 35.55sqm + Proposed 2nd floor/loft area = 85.00sqm 258.55 + 35.55 + 85.00 = 379.1sqm (4080 sqft) However the loft has never been included in any floor plans, or footprints, or anything else. It's essentially new, unused, original 1913 space. Any advice on how best to play this very much appreciated!! Planning on putting in a pre app asap.
  6. harry_angel

    Ideas for Monetizing 3 acre Plot

    Many thanks for the input, this forum is an outstanding resource and I am irritated it took me so long to find it. Apologies for the long delay in responding, too. I will indeed do my due diligence on whether the land is high sensitivity greenbelt. House number 96 used to be part of this plot until the 1950s I believe, when reportedly the MI5 (!) employee who owned it at the time exerted influence over the council and managed to sell it off. By the owner's own admission his is an incredibly ugly structure, so I guess there's some vague precedent there - it would obviously totally change the access to revert it to the pre 50s layout. Clearly the outlook for any constructive development on this looks bleak, but I'd nonetheless continue to welcome any ideas/chinks of light BH members might wish to contribute. Thanks
  7. harry_angel

    Ideas for Monetizing 3 acre Plot

    @Ferdinand yup started on the Leylandii soon as we moved in, south side should be heavily screened within a few years. East side have yet to do... Anything residential be it affordable or otherwise is looking very tough at least at this stage. The economics of 4 soundproofed indoor 3G pitches with dense row of trees at south side and mini car park to north ie. as far away from houses as poss is interesting. https://urbanistarchitecture.co.uk/how-to-get-planning-permission-for-building-on-greenbelt-land-in-the-uk/ This is a pretty comprehensive article on green belt for anyone interested.
  8. harry_angel

    Ideas for Monetizing 3 acre Plot

    @MikeSharp01 right, got it. Yes we've partially done this already. For those interested I just received this from the council: "The Council continually monitors development that takes place and where we believe it to be suitable we would undertake reviews of the boundaries of settlements as part of updates to our Local Plan evidence base. This would take into account factors such as the presence of shops, services and community facilities and access to public transport and local employment facilities. You might like to have a look at our Settlement Hierarchy document for further information on this. The Council reviewed its Green Belt boundaries for the Local Plan in 2013 when it considered land that we could suitably propose to inset and has looked at them again during the Local Plan examination to identify suitable sites for additional housing. Our Green Belt and Countryside Study classified this particular area of land....as ‘high sensitivity’ Green Belt, which means that it serves a particularly important purpose in preserving the setting of existing towns and safeguarding the countryside from further urbanisation..." The problem as I understand it is that the council has not one but two "get outs" here: Green belt Lack of identified settlement area The only chink of light appears to be the Affordable housing rural exemption scheme...so I guess the bullseye is a planning consultant with great specific knowledge of getting them over the line.
  9. harry_angel

    Ideas for Monetizing 3 acre Plot

    Ah but @Mr Punter we're in green belt here... The wider access is the easy part (my neighbour is of a similar mindset), it's the green belt constraints that are the obstacle... The previous owner would have sold his mother's dentures to make a buck so my spidey senses tell me he definitely looked in to it! That said I did just speak to someone from planning policy who said that a "rural exception site" for affordable housing of c. 10 - 15 units might be acceptable, but I have no idea if the economics of that would play out that well...
  10. harry_angel

    Ideas for Monetizing 3 acre Plot

    Thanks all. I probably should have been more accurate in terms of PCs: we have had multiple meetings / at length conversations with a few local ones now. But no full engagement. And I've spent a lot with them historically, hence the reluctance to fork out just yet until we have a stronger idea of what direction to take... One, in no uncertain terms, said that it is borderline mission: impossible to build residential properties on the paddocks or fully develop the whole plot. Which is fine and to my original point: what else is possible? Obviously one avenue is putting in planning for as big a house on a new build basis as possible, then selling with PP secured. But in reality due to a) the access and b) the lack of high-performing state secondary schools close by, this is going to put a firm ceiling on the upside. In reality, we might not be able to climb the value too far beyond what it is now going down that road. I guess the alternative (within that school of thought) would be to try to develop the brownfield section of the plot only, with say 3-4 detached 4-beds. Although the economics would likely play out along similar lines, even if permission could be secured. Out of interest how much ££ is there in riding schools? Always struck me as an overhead-heavy business model but I suppose that might be easier than some other possibilities... Does anyone know how I can found out for sure what the paddocks are? (ie. brownfield, greenfield) Would it require a pre app? @MikeSharp01 sorry Mike I didn't quite follow what you meant about doubling the width...? @Ferdinand thanks for the insight will DM you re that high level PC thanks Thanks chaps this forum is seriously good, wish I'd found it sooner.
  11. harry_angel

    Ideas for Monetizing 3 acre Plot

    Thanks guys. Yes we've spoken to a few planners, who aren't particularly optimistic about the possibility of building residential units on it. And that's understandable. However their ideas seem to run dry at residential...the 3G pitches is slightly interesting to me because they are relatively inexpensive to install (£30 - £40k if sources are to be believed)...yet are rented out round year at c. £100 per hour, or higher. The intention is to build a property elsewhere in around 7-10 yrs time, and either sell this one or do let to buy and release most of the equity in this one but keep ultimate ownership of it in case green belt relaxes. But I'm not closed to any possibility currently. I'm just after ideas really... Appreciate the help!
  12. harry_angel

    Ideas for Monetizing 3 acre Plot

    Hi all, I own a slightly unusual 3 acre plot on the outskirts of a city in the south east My property is set back from the road, and indeed set way back in the plot itself, and you have to drive between other houses (on the road) to get to it. Bizarrely, the property is both in Green Belt but not within either the city or the local village's recognised boundary. That said, it's as logical an infill site as you're likely to see: essentially 2 paddocks of around 1 acre each, with an acre of land (the curtilage) containing our house and 2 outbuildings, sandwiched between other properties. As the crow flies, it's obvious. Without dropping £3k (and the rest) on a planning consultant, I am trying to figure out a long term plan for the plot. The paddocks..I'm not sure whether they're brownfield or greenfield but I suspect the latter. Ultimately the land hasn't been farmed in years, and I want to do something productive (and monetizable) with it. If that isn't residential properties - ok, fine. Let's do something else - 3G pitches...a swimming centre...I don't know...! I did speak to someone from the council today who said very recently that planning law on infill not involving residential builds has been relaxed even in the last month, but the whole process is labyrinthine and as you all know many planning consultants a) lack creativity and b) are on auto-pilot looking to pick up their pay cheque with minimum effort. Not all, but some... All help very much appreciated!