flanagaj

You were 100% correct. Not one question. All the previous applications each took 15-20 minutes with long drawn out speeches from the applicants. Ours was done and dusted under 5 mins. Even the Chairman commented how my wife’s statement was the shortest of the night. The personable ‘self-build’ aspect to the speech and not mentioning anything to do with consultee objections was great advice! So thanks again.

Thanks. I wasn't aware of the acoustic transparency of the PIR. The one positive I do like of the SIP is around the fact that the cladding can then be flush in the vertical plane of the wall when it adjoins the lower floor brick exterior skin. Having the lower in brick / cavity / block and the upper block / cavity / block, means that the counter batten + cladding (~ 75mm thickness) will sit proud of the lower floor brick face. Aesthetically it doesn't quite look as nice. I don't think there is anyway to avoid that?

I suspect this has been talked about a huge amount, but given I am going to be managing our project and doing the first and second fix carpentry myself I am unsure how I go about costing up the difference between having the upper storey and roof constructed with SIP Vs having it constructed with traditional block / cavity / block and me cutting the roof myself. Exterior of the upper will be vertical timber cladding and the roof is standing seam. Footprint of the dwelling is ~ 110m2 If anyone has recently looked into this and can give me some guidance as to what their findings were it would be most appreciated

Thanks for all your help. We were last in the list of applications, but our worry was short lived. My wife read a short and personal speech regarding this being our dream for a long time. No questions from the committee to my wife or I and none either from the committee to the planning officers. Approved unanimously. Really chuffed and a bit dumbfounded it's finally over. The not knowing what the outcome is stressful. You put your life on hold.

One last question on this. I will find out whether any of the objectors are planning on speaking at the committee meeting tomorrow. If they are not and given the planning officer is recommending the application for approval, would people still suggest we pay for the planning consultant from the architect practice to attend, or are we simply wasting money and we are better off just addressing the committee and asking for their support in approving our application?

Does it basically switch to using an immersion heater to heat the water to 70c? I always thought an ASHP was only efficient at heating water to low temperatures, eg underfloor heating?

Can anyone advise as to the best option for hot water when we are having an ASHP for underfloor heating. I like a good flow rate shower, so was thinking that we should have an oil boiler for hot water. What have others done when you have to have an ASHP?

Our electricity supply requirements are not straight forward. We need to have the pole moved and have agreed a £3k contribution to have it moved to the boundary, but have been advised it can take 12 months. We obviously do not want to wait 12 months before we commence development and therefore require a TBS, so that we can get started and have a mobile home on site. I am not sure how many KVa we need for the house (we are having to spec ASHP, EV chargers). There is no mains gas. But obviously, the TBS can be much less. What do people recommend here. Generator for the mobile home or have a TBS put in, but will need to be eventually moved when they move the pole?

Thanks for that. I was just reading about the audibility related issue.

Incredibly frustrating and local councils should face higher compensation costs for going against the planning officer and then losing at appeal. It might then remove the politics that should not feature.

So our application has been spec'd with a Graf One2Clean. On reflection, I would like to potentially switch this to a Tricel Novo, for the simple reason that the required excavation depth is considerably less than the Graf. The Tricel does look like a quality offering as well, and I like the fact that you can house the compressor inside the lid of the tank. I suppose that I would potentially have to have the calculations redone and the nitrate offset credits might need to be recalculated? Has anyone change their tank from the one spec'd in their planning application?

Given the NIMBY neighbours seem quite determined, I suspect they will turn up on the night to voice their objections. As we are the applicant, I assume we don't have to register to speak beforehand and just turn up?

You have made an excellent point. I was just discussing this with my wife. The planning officer is recommending our application for approval and none of the consultees made any objections either. Yes, the NIMBY neighbours raised objections to the two storey aspect and for some strange reason, the AONB woodland that sits a field away behind the house. The planning officer listed these in her report, but given she has done that, we still felt we had to try and justify our application to the committee. It's bonkers that we are even having to attend, but we are simply going to use your statement. Will the committee ask questions to my wife and I why we have gone a bungalow to a two-storey ... I am hoping that they too will be thinking "why have we got an application in front of us, that has been approved by the planning officer" and it will be a very quick "approved" decision.

So you think that we should simply state that given the planning officer has approved the application without objection then I trust the committee will too?

Thanks. I have removed that a reworded "some concerns" sounds more subtle and less alarmist.

That would be music to my ears if that happens.

Ok, maybe that is why he is not too interested in coming along. Frustratingly, we are the last one on the list for the night. I suppose that could be a good thing. Most definitely!

Thanks. Yes. That will be our conclusion as well.

I switched to buying Festool some years back and I wish I had done it sooner. Yes, they are expensive, but they are quality tools.

I was proposing something along the lines of the below. Chair, Councillors, Thank you for allowing me to speak. We are here today to ask for your support for our planning application to build the home we’ve dreamed of for over 20 years. This application is a revision to an already approved scheme. The planning officer has reviewed it thoroughly and recommends approval, confirming that it complies fully with relevant policies including EM1, EM4, and EM10 of the Local Plan. Much of the opposition to our application centres on the fact that it is a two-storey dwelling, and that the site is within the North Wessex Downs AONB. However, it's important to emphasize—this is not a new principle of development. A home has already been approved here. The only significant change is in design. While this revised proposal is two-storey, the ridge height is identical to the previously approved single-storey home, as the design has been set into the ground. The overall visual impact is actually reduced, due to a smaller footprint and a garage now relocated away from the road frontage. As the planning officer’s report confirms, the site sits in a linear row of mixed one- and two-storey properties. There is no prevailing single-storey character along White Lane. To suggest that a two-storey form is inherently out of character is not consistent with what is already built and clearly visible in the street scene. The objections also refer to the AONB and nearby woodland. But again, as the officer concludes, this proposal does not cause harm to the landscape character. Conditions are in place to ensure landscaping, biodiversity protection, and tree preservation. And it’s important to note: this is a replacement for already developed land—formerly occupied by cattery buildings—which have now been removed. We also appreciate the concerns about future development. That’s why we welcome the officer’s recommendation to restrict permitted development rights—ensuring the scale of development remains exactly what’s approved here today. In summary, this is a modest, well-considered home that respects its surroundings, complies with policy, and builds on an already granted permission. We ask the committee to support the professional recommendation and allow us to finally realise our long-held dream to build our own home. Thank you.

To summarise. The planning officer's report is available and she approves the application and has not raised any objections to the scheme. We are going to take the planning consultant who works for the architectural practice with us to the planning committee meeting, just in case we are thrown any curve balls.. We are going to focus on the personal side regarding this being a dream self-build of for us and that we have waited over 2 decades for such an opportunity. And that our aim is to create an energy efficient and high standard home that we don't intend leaving. Our redesign has been mindful of the neighbours and the location and we have shrunk the footprint of the previous proposal by 60m2, moved the gable end 9m away from the neighbours boundary. All of which creates an atheistically pleasing dwelling of a high standard that will benefit the lane and is also much less imposing than the previously granted permission,

Yes. We are definitely attending and we will speak. We are going to draft some key points with regards to the locals objections. It's difficult though, when one of those who objected to the house not being hidden by the hedging, resides in a bloody huge house that overlooks the area 200 metres down the lane.

This is very promising given the planning officer has approved the application and hasn't requested any amendments. I could be worrying over nothing, but it's the fact that the committee can still refuse based on the look of the property or that it's now a two storey property and not a bungalow, or that you can see upstairs windows from the lane as you walk along it and it's not hidden by the hedging .... All of the above would have been taken into account by the planning officer, but the committee still have the annoying power to say now. 94% leaves me feeling much more optimistic about things though.

I'm becoming really paranoid now about the committee meeting a week tomorrow. Given the ***** neighbour used to run a local cattery business and another of the neighbours is a magistrate, we have concluded it's one big stitch up. The committee can refuse it on such vague terms that it's far too easy for them to do it on the basis of appeasing someone they know.

Neither the revised planning application or the previously granted application specified any FFL measurement. All very strange, as don't the planners want to know that?