Somersetcider

Thank you that’s perfect! Exactly what I meant. I hadn’t thought about a change of material/switch of cladding direction on the end parts would help to break up better. I was already thinking to have a difference in roof height if I went over to a pitch roof. The thinking is it would make it look less of an afterthought and modernise the building a bit?

This is unfortunately part of me and how I work 🫣. My architect that we have is more of a technical building control drawings rather than a designer as such. We were initially planning for a new build but council has said they would never approve in this location so it’s been back to the drawing board! thank you it was one of the first things Our architect suggested we get done and has been very useful.

hi all so i am at the point of finalizing drawings ready to engage my architect to do final drawings for planning. We have already had pre planning with the council and they are happy with the scheme ive come up with with the new build element. The planning will be under paragraph 80 conversion of redundant and disused buildings in the countryside, its quite a rural location the majority of local buildings are built from blue lias stone with a mix of styles of agricultural barns so i have tried to reflect this within the design. The existing main barn is 13x5mtrs built of 150mm dense blockwork the rest of the buildings on the site are planned to be demolished and i have drawn a new single story extension to the main barn in the same style as existing almost as a mirror. there are neighbors both sides of it one of which is a new development overlooks the plot quite badly so i have left the west elevation without windows with the exception of two top light portholes. The one element i am not 100% happy with the form of is the end lean to pieces, the existing barn has a small leanto that I plan to house a plant room/utility room this would have been built at the same time as the main barn and is well tied into the main structure so i am not keen to demolish and replace in a different form, i was planning to mirror this on a new build element it wouldn't be able to go across to meet the existing due to the heights and the valley so I have planned for a lower height external store to infill which would be a very useful space. My dad has suggested to switch to a pitched roof on the lean to elements but i cant quite visualize if this will look correct or will add too much bulk to the form? I plan for the main barn to be insulated internally with a timber frame, the new build element will be timber frame post and beam with exposed trusses all with a focus on airtightness and good insulation values i have already found the spreadsheet on this forum and some other resources to plan this through i was also contemplating to get the phpp even though this wouldn't be a certified project however ive heard this is complex to use so im unsure if this would be wise? Budget is tight, i will be doing the majority of the work so trying to keep everything as simple and easy as possible! i am a welder & fabricator by trade and run a manufacturing business but im also pretty good with timber and finish carpentry and ive got plenty of trade contacts from previous customers etc i just didn't know if anyone else had any other design ideas? or if ive missed/ not thought about something? unfortunately with my trade etc im one of those that has to have everything perfect and planned in minute detail!! Hopefully attached are some pics of the main barn, survey of exisitng buildings and also my drawings they are to scale as best as i could drawn on a4 paper. floorplan and elevations with new build element.pdf survey of existing building.pdf

To add as well I believe there still is scope for another large home as the other 2 my neighbours owns were smaller sized the cumulative floor space has been merged and this has been developed into a large new build. Much larger than the agreed planning so I think they are trying to get it through retrospectively! I’ve added a photo gives a bit of a better overview of the site some of the garden in the picture is parents and is yet to be separated properly.

Thanks a lot for your reply. The original class q had the barn and workshop as a separate dwelling! Believe it or not the planners accepted a 1 bedroom conversion of the workshop! Within that it was agreed that the lean to element was to be demolished interesting about the driveway I can confirm it’s an unclassified road we had thought about doing it separately before but was told it’ll need full planning and so another ecology report etc. the big benefit of going class q route I can see is that we won’t be subject to the phosphate issues as from my understanding permitted development is excluded from this? the lpa seemed perfectly happy with the proposed works to the main barn falling inside the scope of a conversion so that could be a route to explore to give a legitimate fall back position and then we can develop further it seems to me that establishing the fall back position is the stumbling block in this case and once established as long as the design and scale is in keeping the lpa are perfectly accepting of a new build.

Thank you for the reply hadn’t considered that we could resolve access and then do a class q application we can’t use the neighbouring access we’ve tried to negotiate and they won’t budge at all. so the first class q application was this https://publicaccess.southsomerset.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?previousCaseType=Property&keyVal=PKR2Y9OW07W00&previousCaseNumber=HHG1NEOW9A000&previousCaseUprn=000030084211&activeTab=summary&previousKeyVal=QW6LVSOW0NP03 submitted prior to us buying the buildings we own barns 1&2 our neighbour owns the access and barns 3&4 and has now developed this (although this isn’t completed in planning even though it’s finished as they’ve built entirely different to their planning!) this was the refused class q a very much diy submission and we made a number of silly errors on this https://publicaccess.southsomerset.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?previousCaseType=Property&keyVal=QBGEJMOW0JY00&previousCaseNumber=HHG1NEOW9A000&previousCaseUprn=000030084211&activeTab=summary&previousKeyVal=QW6LVSOW0NP03 I missed that really we are classed as open countryside not within any settlement. from what I understood of para 80 it was one or more of the 4 mentioned the last is too much for us so is definitely not an option. thanks again for your help I’ve been in contact with a local planning consultant to see what they have to say as well and what the fees involved are

thanks everyone for their replies this is the reply i got back following a pre app site visit for the new build, i have since gone back to him with the above designs just awaiting their reply. Firstly apologies for the delay in responding to your enquiry. I have been looking back over the previous applications and subsequently discussed with senior officers given the complexity of the landownership etc. It is noted that there is no ‘fall-back’ position following the refusal of the previous Class Q application, the approved Class Q has also now expired. I also note that the neighbouring property currently under construction which was permitted under the approved Class Q application has ‘landlocked’ the application site. Therefore, without access over agricultural land the proposal represents a new dwelling in the open countryside which unfortunately would not be supported by local planning policies. However, you may wish to explore a full planning application under Para 80 of the NPPF, although this would only allow the ‘conversion of redundant and disused buildings’ in the countryside. This would also be subject to the Phospahte issue and would need to be resolved prior to having a legible fall-back which would allow the demolition and erection of a new dwelling as proposed here. A new class Q application could be submitted utilising the neighbours access, as this would still be recognised as an agricultural access given that it was used this way in 2013. If you could secure access over the site and therefore a subsequent Class Q approval, you would have a solid ‘fall-back’ position and therefore the LPA would have no objection then to the demolition of the building and erection of a new dwelling and associated access through residential land. You may wish to revisit your ownership documents following the purchase of the land as this might show a right of access through the site? As we discussed on site, the design of the proposed property in terms of design is attractive and considered acceptable, it would have little bearing on the enjoyment of neighbouring properties and the proposed access through the residential curtilage would raise no concerns on highways safety grounds; however, in terms of local and national planning policy if the application was to be submitted in its current form due to the rural nature of the site without an established fall-back I do not believe that this is something we would be able to support. You may wish to explore the possibility of converting the existing structure in to additional ancillary accommodation rather than a separate residential unit. Alternatively, you may wish to proceed with an application regardless of this advice. Planning is a democratic process and any eventual application could be overturned by a planning committee should there be local support for the proposal, including from the local elected councillor. I appreciate this is disappointing news. Should you have any further queries or wish to discuss other means of access to the site, such as via the neighbouring site please do contact me and I will endeavour to help. RE class Q Thats quite interesting with access originally we were thinking to be able to do something similar. potentially splitting up the application so my parents would put in for permission to put an access across their land as a householder application then maybe use that in conjunction with a class q. the buildings were last used in 2018 for agriculture and have stood empty since then theyve been in agricultural use from at least the 60s within the local plan (south somerset) they have this about rural housing POLICY SS2: DEVELOPMENT IN RURAL SETTLEMENTS Development in Rural Settlements (not Market Towns or Rural Centres) will be strictly controlled and limited to that which:  Provides employment opportunities appropriate to the scale of the settlement; and/or  Creates or enhances community facilities and services to serve the settlement; and/or  Meets identified housing need, particularly for affordable housing. Development will be permitted where it is commensurate with the scale and character of the settlement, provides for one or more of the types of development above, and increases the sustainability of a settlement in general. Proposals should be consistent with relevant community led plans, and should generally have the support of the local community following robust engagement and consultation. Proposals for housing development should only be permitted in Rural Settlements that have access to two or more key services listed at Paragraph 5.41.

these are the plans for the new build that was being planned shows the access as well 2139-06B Prelim .pdf 2139-07A Prelim.pdf

hi all just wondered if anyone had any experiences of planning under section 80 "the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and enhance its immediate setting" we have barns 1&2 with a lean to that joins them together (pics and drawings attached). we would like to convert to a 2 bedroom house unfortunately we cant use class q as there isn't an existing agricultural access anymore as the neighboring site has been developed. so a new access needs to be formed and this will be over residential land (part of my parents garden goes over the front). Originally we wanted to demolish and put a new build there during pre planning even though the design was well received and the access isn't an issue the officer has said this wouldn't be supported by local and national planning policy as its classed as open countryside and we haven't got a fall back position. i think now i potentially wouldnt be able to get enough funds together to go the new build route so im looking to do a smaller single story build. ive come up with 2 designs 1 which uses the buildings in entirety ideally i dont want to do this as the leanto and workshop are poorly built and would need significant works to bring up to required standard. the second is my preferred option and puts an new build element in place of the leanto that wouldnt be seen from the roadside and would be a more compact site with a smaller footprint but is a paragraph 80 application allowed to have a new build element? i would still be reusing the main barn which is a significant portion of the site. elevations and floor plan.pdf floorplan and elevations with new build element.pdf survey of existing site plan.pdf survey of existing building.pdf