Jump to content

Building our forever home

Alfie

By Alfie
in Introduce Yourself

 Share

Recommended Posts

Alfie Member

Alfie

Posted
Posted

Hey all,

 

We've just submitted our pre-app for our potential forever home in Northamptonshire.

 

Outside the village boundaries and currently on my OH's family farm so having to go down the paragraph 79/80 route.

 

Ideally ~300msq, 5 bed, 3/4 bath, open plan.

 

I've found this forum super useful so far and fingers crossed we get approval!

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kxi Regular Member

kxi

Posted
Posted

Hello, no old agricultural buildings that can be converted under class Q?

Or do you think you've got a good chance under 80? If so would be interesting to see the proposal. I don't believe the forum has ever had such a build on it before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alfie Member

Alfie

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 minutes ago, kxi said:

Hello, no old agricultural buildings that can be converted under class Q?

 

Unfortunately not as several have already been converted and the remainder are still in use.

 

6 minutes ago, kxi said:

Or do you think you've got a good chance under 80? If so would be interesting to see the proposal. I don't believe the forum has ever had such a build on it before.

 

We're working with an architect who has a solid track record with these types of schemes (paragraph 79/55/PPS7) who feels a unique design specific to the area alongside the narrative of why we would want to be there (closer to family, eventually raising kids in this type of environment) should see us have a chance.

 

From some of the comments I'd assume several posters have been through this process prior. Should the pre-app come back positive I'll update with some more details.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
shuff27 Regular Member

shuff27

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, Vijay said:

Good luck Alfie :)

 

What part of Northampton are you building? I'm in Roade

Welcome @Alfie

 

I'm about to start in Hartwell ?...just waiting for the council to pull its finger out & approve my CIL exemption ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IanR Advanced Member

IanR

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Alfie said:

Outside the village boundaries and currently on my OH's family farm so having to go down the paragraph 79/80 route.

 

Hi & Welcome... and good luck, Para 80 has got to be the hardest way of getting planning. Fingers-crossed and you get positive feedback so that we hear more about your "truly outstanding and/or innovative" plans.

Edited by IanR
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kxi Regular Member

kxi

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, IanR said:

 

 more about your "truly outstanding and/or innovative" plans.

 

I had not realised that para 80 removed 'or innovative' 

 

(e) the design is of exceptional quality, in that it:

is truly outstanding, reflecting the highest standards in architecture, and would help to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas; and

would significantly enhance its immediate setting, and be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-planning-policy-framework/5-delivering-a-sufficient-supply-of-homes

 

One might take this removal as a sad statement about British ambition, but perhaps the planners were fed up of applications trying it on with UFH and a wireless doorbell.

 

 

Also interesting that while part e) gets a lot of play (esp. on architect's websites), part c) which has been around since para 55 would seem to offer a vastly simpler way of rural development than e) or even class Q:

 

(c) the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and enhance its immediate setting;

 

c) merely has to 'enhance' rather than e)'s 'significantly enhance' AND 'be sensitive to'. There must be something I'm missing here. Perhaps it's harder to show redundance or disuse than I imagine.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IanR Advanced Member

IanR

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, kxi said:

 

I had not realised that para 80 removed 'or innovative' 

 

 

So it does...should be a doddle then!

 

2 hours ago, kxi said:

c) merely has to 'enhance' rather than e)'s 'significantly enhance' AND 'be sensitive to'. There must be something I'm missing here. Perhaps it's harder to show redundance or disuse than I imagine.


But (c) is for the Change of Use of existing structures, (e) is for (isolated) green-field sites.

Edited by IanR
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
Alfie Member

Alfie

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Update: The pre-app has come back with no major roadblocks (although it contained very little detail on it) which is a start.

 

We're pushing ahead with a Design Review Panel towards the end of September. Fingers crossed they are supportive!

 

Note: the pre-app took less than two weeks for a fairly detailed reply.

Edited by Alfie
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...
Alfie Member

Alfie

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Update: We've had our Design Review Panel this week and things are still progressing. It was a very useful experience and it was great to have several pairs of completely objective eyes looking at what we have from an ecological, town planning, landscaping and architectural perspective.

 

There were a lot of praise about the site and the characteristics that we can work with and a fair bit of work for us to do in terms of the potential concept. When we have something a bit more concrete down I will share some of the plans.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Alfie Member

Alfie

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

I've had several conversations with folks at various stages of planning applications that are geared towards para 79/80 houses and decided to document our journey so far:

 

Firstly we consulted a local architect who has worked on several Class Q developments. They walked the site with us and mentioned that it's highly unlikely we could gain approval due to being classed as "open countryside", however we could pursue a specific "country house" clause that they didn't feel best equipped to pursue.

March 2020: Grand Designs: we watched most episodes, making a list of houses that we liked the look off and the architects that were responsible for the designs. This gave us a long list to begin researching. It was here that terms such as the "country house clause", PPS7, Paragraph 55 and Paragraph 79 were mentioned.

 

We started researching para 79e (as it was at the time) housing requirements. There didn't seem to be a ton of information around the process however Studiobark conducted an incredible study focused on previous applications, including creating an interactive map  - I highly recommend reading this should you be looking to go down this route.

 

Richard Hawkes has a Youtube channel which was also very helpful in providing additional information and context around the criteria; I'd highly recommend the two video's focused on the Braintree case to provide context on the "isolation" principle that needs to be met.

 

A few more hand links below:

- https://www.architecture.com/knowledge-and-resources/knowledge-landing-page/using-paragraph-79-to-design-innovative-country-houses

- https://www.countrylife.co.uk/property/the-exceptional-houses-being-built-in-idyllic-countryside-spots-thanks-to-the-foresight-of-paragraph-79-215618

- https://urbanistarchitecture.co.uk/paragraph-79-house/

- https://www.hawkesarchitecture.co.uk/para-79/

- https://www.hughesplanning.co.uk/para-55-houses-explained

 

 

After reviewing a large number of both successful and unsuccessful applications the Pareto principle certainly seems to be present - a large number of approvals come from a small number of architects/firms (I'm unsure on the rules with regards to promotion (I have no stake in any of the firms), however I'd be happy to share a list of the firms should admin be happy with this).

 

June: 2020 An initial site visit is the first stage each firm recommended where they would be identifying various strategic opportunities & constraints being presented by the site and its context. This would be followed by a detailed research exercise which would involve a comprehensive analysis of local and national policy as well as looking into planning history within the local area. This stage is crucial as without enough elements to play with any future planning application would likely be unsuccessful. The fee's for this stage varied a lot (several hundred to several thousand)!

 

I'll add another couple of posts later today/tomorrow focusing on:

 

- Site visit to pre-app

- Pre-app to Design Review Panel

- Design Review Panel feedback and next steps

 

Hopefully this will be useful to some.

 

 

Edited by Alfie
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...
Alfie Member

Alfie

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Updating on this, we've been pressing on and the design has changed somewhat since the first design review panel.

 

Please feel free to add feedback on the layout.

Notes:

  • Total size ~350sqm, single story with outside building for either additional bedroom + bathroom, double office and/or garage
  • South facing windows (Dining room and Master Bedroom)
  • We're going to get rid of the family bathroom in one of the bedrooms and either
    • ensuite in each bedroom OR
    • Blow out the area currently labelled ensuite/walk-in wardrobe near the Master Bedroom to a similar size to the Kitchen/TV room area, this would enable a larger master, a larger walk in wardrobe coupled with a large family bathroom + additional storage/room for something

We're meeting the architects and landscape architect this week so should have some more updates and images to upload.

 

Alfie

Edited by Alfie
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alfie Member

Alfie

Posted
  • Author
Posted
9 minutes ago, Russell griffiths said:

With those curves, are you going icf. 

I had a 350m house, it’s a big chunk on one level. 

 

ICF = It's likely this will be one of the topics discussed tomorrow.

 

Big chunk = One of the concerns is it being exactly that. We both work from home, visiting the office once per week max, and therefore have moved away from London to gain the additional space. Family and friends will also be visiting so it's the balance of living in a house that feels "cosy" when it's us whilst having enough space for several friends + family to stay. Was there anything that bugged you or you wish you could have changed? 

 

Any thoughts on the layout would also be appreciated - the good and the bad!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Russell griffiths Advanced Member

Russell griffiths

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, Alfie said:

 

ICF = It's likely this will be one of the topics discussed tomorrow.

 

Big chunk = One of the concerns is it being exactly that. We both work from home, visiting the office once per week max, and therefore have moved away from London to gain the additional space. Family and friends will also be visiting so it's the balance of living in a house that feels "cosy" when it's us whilst having enough space for several friends + family to stay. Was there anything that bugged you or you wish you could have changed? 

 

Any thoughts on the layout would also be appreciated - the good and the bad!

We had a big family bit, kitchen, diner, lounge, office. Then a hall leading off to the bedrooms 

two of the bedrooms probably only got looked in once a month for a hoover. 

So cosy at one end, leading off to a small hotel down the other. 

350m isn’t that huge over two floors, but on one level it does tend to look a bit big and sprawling. 

I bet you a tenner you build that in icf. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...