Jane W

That's great, I'll get looking to see if our council has anything similar. Thanks very much for taking the time to reply, very useful!

Ahh OK, thank you. I will have a look at the Outline Approval when I get home to see if it is mentioned in that. It was mentioned in the Pre-app.

So the archaeological expert can't just say we propose an archaeological study brief in lieu of a desktop report? Which is what they're suggesting

Yes we do, it runs out In October though!

The pre application advice report says ' you should also include a desktop study of the archaeological impacts of the site'. I'm not sure what we're proposing, I asked the planning consultant what a study brief involved and he said it depends on the site, what the planners stipulate, and what they find, if anything, when it's taking place. We're just getting everything together to make a reserved matters application at the moment.

@Mr Punter The outline plan is as vague as is possible and shows a dormer bungalow with a footprint of about 6m x 6m to replace a much larger double garage and single garage that are on the plot at the moment. The porch has been replaced by a much, much smaller oak framed porch on the newly drawn plans, more in keeping with the character of the conservation area. I'll have a good read of that link, thank you!

Our pre-app says we will need a heritage report which includes an archaeological desktop study. We have been quoted by a company who have suggested we put in planning to include an archaeological study brief at the time of construction, as an alternative to the desktop report. The planning consultant says this may be a good idea as the planners may ask for a study brief or something similar in the conditions anyway. Has anyone got experience in this area, or have any thoughts....I don't want to fall at the first hurdle by not giving the planners the desktop study if they want one, and what if they didn't go on to ask for a study brief after all?

Yes, thank you @TempTemp, I think these are the block plans they had used. Much appreciated 🙏

@Great_scot_selfbuild thank you for taking the time to post such a detailed reply. That information is so helpful and explaining the process you went through is also very useful. Was yours done for an appeal or as supporting evidence in addition to your architects Design and Access Statement, just wondering as the planning consultant is doing ours, but also that you mentioned it didn't have to go to committee. I have also heard that some professionally written D&ASs are appalling and so I want to have a handle on what I think should be included and have one written for the planning consultant and architect to possibly refer to or use. Thanks again Jane

In 2022 a planner posted a design and access statement he wrote for his own plot. It was a fantastic resource for the build hub community and I would like to use the approach he suggests for getting together some evidence for my own plot after a pretty damning pre-app. The upside is that I'm aware of the many issues the planner had at the time of her report, so I can try to address them, with evidence. There was alot of data presented in photos, diagrams and tables and I wondered if anyone knows how this information can be obtained or researched by a lay person. There were street/neighbourhood plans like the one below which enabled drawing over, and information presented in tables; that information relevant to my plot would be very useful. Does anyone know where I can find plot size, footprint, floorspace, garden size, even better if they are all in one place? Thanks

@Tony K Thank you for a great framework and contents from your D&AS. I am a bit of a rookie and wondered if the map you used for Fig 11 & fig 16, plus the information you presented in Fig 12 & Fig 13, was open access/ easily available to research and use?

If I was able to get planning permission for the smaller house and then put in a section 73 to put in new drawings for the bigger house, would I have the opportunity to put in a revised design and access statement so that I could argue all of the reasons that the conservation officer was not correct, or very pedantic about? So the rationale for allowing the bigger house was clearly laid out? Some points wouldn't be needed in the DAS for the smaller house.

Thanks Mike, you've made a lot of sense and very good points in your reply however I'm thinking that if I can get approval for the smaller, easier to pass application (if there is such a thing🤔) then I'm at least secure knowing I have a plot with permission to build. Then if that passes, apply for the slightly bigger house and go to appeal if necessary. If that all fails then I can at least sell the plot with full planning. @Pocster and @ProDave I agree that it could muddy the waters and I'm sure if it came to a planners and neighbours' choice the smaller house would be the one to get the approval. As it's a conservation area there's no permitted development so I'm thinking they'd probably refuse an immediate extension. @Alan Ambrose My pre-app was signed by one of the most senior planners but the majority of the criticism was from the conservation officer. I'm not sure I'd do a pre app again, it was delayed, and a reserved matters application would have likely been just as helpful, If not more so, given your reasoning above.

Sorry for the long post. I put in a pre planning application. In discussions with the architect we decided to make the application for what we really wanted to build knowing that some elements would be contentious given that we were in a conservation area. The thinking was that they might single out the elements they were unhappy with, particularly the large full height oak glazed porch specifically. The report was received a couple of weeks ago and I was a bit surprised at how many aspects they felt were unacceptable. It is a tight site. They said our proposal was basically too tall, too deep, too wide, too close to the boundary on both sides, too close to the front boundary. I can take their analysis on board to a degree, we pushed those things a little. The height was the same as the neighbours even though there is a slight slope in the land and road. On one side is a parish carpark and the proposed drawing was less than a metre from that boundary. The house continued the building line from the house next door which makes it slope towards the front boundary on the carpark side. The porch is a definite no. They did like the dormers and segmental arches on the front elevation though, I think that was the total of the positive aspects! The architect suggested bringing a planning consultant on board and we all met this week. My outline planning runs out at the beginning of October. The original drawings submitted were for a 1600 sq ft house. The plan now is to apply for reserved matters for a 1200 sq ft house, not as tall, deep, or wide. 1.5m away from both side boundaries, in the hope it will gain permission. This is very removed from the house I want but the need for planning approval overrides that. They feel that many of the statements that were made in the report could be countered and some were just incorrect, but I need approval. The thought is that we can then apply for section 73 variation. A builder acquaintance suggested to put in 2 alternative applications, 1 for the 1200 sq ft house and another which scales everything down a bit but not as drastically...something that I would still be happy to build and live in, instead of waiting for the approval/refusal and then either having to apply for variation under section 73 or reapply for full planning anyway. Would having 2 alternative schemes in at the same time be viewed negatively? Is it more likely to get closer to what I want doing it one at a time?

375 cavity Yes meant to say 375 cavity wall!