Committee decision - attend or not?

[Mr Punter]

Agree with @SimonD regarding being antagonistic.

 

Make your case for approval, citing planning policies to support it.

 

Address each of the 4 proposed refusal grounds in order and how your scheme responds to them.

 

Ground 1 (design and form out of character, failing to enhance the landscape) is subjective and there are should be several planning policies to briefly cite that will support your approach.

 

Ground 2 (loss of non-designated heritage asset) is not dissimilar to 1 but references different policies.  Again there should be enough about your scheme to outweigh this.  Make the point that without viable redevelopment the existing building will be lost to decay.

 

Ground 3 (car use / sustainability) emphasise the sustainable features of the scheme, work from home, knit your own yoghurt etc.

 

Regarding ground 4 (ecology), don't use the phrase "patently false".  Instead state that the report was submitted on xxx and you can provide copies if required.  Have copies with you for inspection.  Don't try to 'prove' that the planners have made errors.  They are just doing a not particularly well paid job.

 

Perhaps redraft, maybe using ChatGPT.

 

 

 

 

[SteamyTea]

7 minutes ago, Mr Punter said:

car use

Point out that we are heading to an EV future, so a lot of the primary reasons for car use i.e. pollution and noise, will vanish.

[Gone West]

2 hours ago, Drellingore said:

what should I do when the planning officer's report contains inaccuracies?

When I gave my 3 minutes worth at committee, I pointed out all their errors, as politely as I could. I had, a few days before the Committee Meeting, hand delivered a package of supporting documents to each of the Committee Members. I won unanimously much to the intense annoyance of the Head of Planning.

[Drellingore]

Spoke to the planning consultant (who is an ex planning officer) and his advice was quite contrary to the stuff on here.

His take was to be as positive as possible, and spend no time refuting any objections. His reasoning was that the planning officer will likely be giving a dry talk for an unbounded amount of time; any objector will be deep-ranting about their one pet peeve for three minutes; therefore the only airtime 'selling' the scheme is going to be my speech. He suggested that the ward members are unlikely to have read the report, and will have only received 45 minutes' training on planning concerns. His take was "they're basically going to vote on it based on whether they like it or not," and also suggested that their political instincts would come into play at the suggestion of having something snazzy that might end up on Grand Designs in their area.

So, to work on version four of the speech...

[Drellingore]

Version four, being as salesy as possible:

 

Quote

Our proposal is an exciting high-end design, using high-quality materials that will preserve a heritage asset and deliver a carbon-negative, sustainable, family home with outstanding eco credentials. It will generate more energy than it uses, will harvest rainwater, and will allow us to grow a lot of our own food.

 

Our design centres around the use of straw bales that will be locally sourced and are carbon negative. These have thermal performance better than any conventional insulation, meaning that the building is sustainable in its construction and sustainable throughout its lifespan.

 

Our plans commit us to retaining that core, historic timber frame so that the heritage of the building will be legible - the building is designed around it! Our plans also commit us to retain, salvage and reuse historic fabric wherever we can, like the flint walls.

 

The annexe is to be an eco-tourism holiday let, showing off all cool eco stuff we’ve done on site. Guests will be able to see and touch the straw in a special exposed ‘honesty panel’! If the need arises, it will be annexe accommodation for our elderly parents, enabling multi-generational family living.

 

The outstanding natural beauty of the area won’t just be preserved, it will be enhanced - it’s one of the main reasons we want to move from our REDACTED suburban home! We’re going to deliver a biodiversity net gain well in excess of that required. We’ll plant 150m more hedgerow, we’ll reinstate an orchard with heritage varieties, there’ll be bat boxes, wildflowers, wildlife ponds, even reptile shelters!

 

The scheme has had universal support from commenters. Neighbours support the scheme. The farmer who was born on site, spent most of his working life there, and now lives down the road, supports the scheme. Strangers support the scheme, including county councillor Martin Scherer who has voiced his support not once, but twice. People to whom we have no connection have gone on record calling the scheme “unexpectedly sensitive,” “aesthetically pleasing,” and “wonderful design that will enhance its immediate area and the valley.”

 

My partner Jeanette is a part one architect, interior designer and furniture designer. When we first met 18 years ago, we used to watch Grand Designs together and didn’t dare to dream that we’d have a chance to self-build our own. 

 

We’ve been waiting a whole year for this meeting. All we want is to add to the site’s 300 year history of evolution, preserving it as family home that is supported by locals, is ethical and environmentally-friendly. My youngest, REDACTED over there [points], is eleven. My eldest is 14. We want to get this built before my kids are too old to live with us.

 

[kandgmitchell]

Mmmm, "eco-tourism holiday let". Is it wise to open up a potential can of worms for uninformed councillors to latch onto and take the discussion up a completely different path? Suddenly it becomes about extra traffic, noise from holiday parties, even fireworks etc etc. They are like sheep, when one starts the others follow and suddenly you find they've forgotten what they are supposed to be considering. If the holiday let is a clear part of the planning application then I'd mention the annexe in passing as simply an opportunity to exhibit the methods used in the build. If the holiday let hasn't been mentioned before then I wouldn't raise it at all. 

 

A wise old planner told me that there two things that should never be seen by the public - making sausages and committees making planning decisions......

[joe90]

1 hour ago, Drellingore said:

The annexe is to be an eco-tourism holiday let,

I would worry about that as said above. Unless a local policy of encouraging business at home/b@b etc.

1 hour ago, Drellingore said:

it will be annexe accommodation for our elderly parents, enabling multi-generational family living.

That sounds more”planner” friendly to me 🤷‍♂️.

[Drellingore]

Thanks for the thoughts. A holiday let was part of the application in 2018 by the previous owners that established the principle of residential conversion, and some of the commenters mentioned that they'd welcome the economic activity.

What I could do is add in a bit about "in line with the 2018 application..."

 

In other news, it turns out that the PEA wasn't invalid, it was that the 2018 one suggested evidence of bats and the 2021 and 2022 ones didn't. They want further evidence that there are no bats. Presumably the 2023 emergence survey that shows no bats will suffice, but I do wonder if they're trying to get me to disprove Russell's Teapot.

 

On the up side, the planning officer has been lovely. She's happy to call me and talk through the issue, rather than keeping cards close to her chest and being adversarial. It's nice just being able to focus on the issue, and not having a planning officer who is 'out to get us'.

[joe90]

3 minutes ago, Drellingore said:

A holiday let was part of the application in 2018 by the previous owners that established the principle of residential conversion, and some of the commenters mentioned that they'd welcome the economic activity.

👍

4 minutes ago, Drellingore said:

They want further evidence that there are no bats

During my appeal the council were told, in no small way, that they were not qualified to argue with the ecology report on bats at mine.

 

6 minutes ago, Drellingore said:

On the up side, the planning officer has been lovely. She's happy to call me and talk through the issue,

Lucky you. 👍

[SimonD]

4 hours ago, Drellingore said:

Spoke to the planning consultant (who is an ex planning officer) and his advice was quite contrary to the stuff on here.

 Not really, I did say.... 😉

 

Quote

You need a compelling argument to get the committee on your side.

 

Build upon your initial paragraph to develop a story about how you've considered in your design the aspects of heritage, natural landscape, sustainability and support from the local community.

Now it seems your re-draft does that 🙂

 

and + 1 to @kandgmitchell's comment about the annexe.

 

It obviously depends on your context and local development plan, but when I sat on a development committee in a rural location, planning applications for 'annexes' for rent used to get viewed with suspicion. So be careful how you phrase it and how much you make of it. Even better if you can find a part of your local development plan for rural economic development, for example. There was one here recently where the farmer specifically noted an economic development clause in the development plan to be granted planning for commercial  purposes. All local objections were overridden due to the clause.

 

 

[Drellingore]

I'll send a highlight email out to all the committee members. Here's a first draft:

Hi,

 

My name is Daniel Jones and I'm the applicant for planning proposal 22/01353. It's an eco self-build barn conversion in Drellingore, near Alkham, that's due to be discussed at this week's planning committee.

I wanted to take the opportunity to present some highlights of the scheme ahead of the hearing. I can imagine that wading through all those reports must be quite time-consuming!

 

 

• High-end design eco self-build family home by Kent residents, converting a dis-used and dilapidated pair of barns
• Residential conversion and holiday let principle already established in 2018
• Annexe for eco-tourism holiday let/accommodation for elderly grandparents

• Built using carbon-negative, super-insulating, fire-resistant, locally-sourced straw bales
• Generates more energy than it will use
• Biodiversity net gain triple that required even of larger sites - wildflower areas, replanted heritage orchard, wildlife ponds, bat and bird boxes, reptile shelters

• All public commenters support the scheme, including county councillor Martin Scherer, and the farmer who was born and lived on the site
• Described in public comments as "unexpectedly sensitive," "aesthetically pleasing," and "wonderful design [...] that will enhance its immediate area and the valley"

• Plans commit to retain the core, historic timber frame
• Historic fabric will be retained, salvaged and re-used wherever possible
• Previous building outlines will be preserved through design features

We're pretty excited by the scheme, and have been waiting a full year for this hearing. If approved, we intend to reach out to the folks at Grand Designs to see if they'll cover it. I gather that having a great local pub is key factor in their decision-making, so it's lucky that we have the Marquis Of Granby up the road!

[Alan Ambrose]

Wow, love the design

[SimonD]

Can you provide that drawing in colour? That would would make more impact. At our committee meeting our architect hand sketched a colour drawing that went down a storm with the committee members.

[Drellingore]

20 minutes ago, SimonD said:

Can you provide that drawing in colour? That would would make more impact. At our committee meeting our architect hand sketched a colour drawing that went down a storm with the committee members.

 

Sadly I've already sent that email out. We've only got one 3D render that was a bit cheap, and looks it. I did try using various AI doobreys to try taking the 3D render and make it appear more intentionally lo-fi, but the AI took too many artistic liberties 

I do agree with your point though!

[Mr Punter]

The email was really good.

[Drellingore]

It was rejected, but on the criterion that I wanted to test (whether they valued heritage over eco-goodness). We had one chap on our side, and I managed to not make a total dog's dinner of the speech, so that was something. On the whole the committee were pretty reasonable, and whilst I think the "emotional sell" definitely helped, there were fundamental issues that our proposal had which they couldn't ignore.

 

It was a good experience, and we also got a bit more insight into the thinking of the planning officers, ready for the next scheme. It'll go up on YouTube for a limited time, so I'll post the link here in case you want to watch me fluff my lines.

[joe90]

32 minutes ago, Drellingore said:

It was rejected,

Sorry to hear that, can you be more specific on what was rejected, what do you need to modify?

[Mr Punter]

Bad luck.  Are you going to appeal or fresh application?  Sometimes the appeal can be useful to pin down which refusal grounds are relevant, so any subsequent application can focus on addressing those.  It all takes time though!

[Drellingore]

28 minutes ago, joe90 said:

Sorry to hear that, can you be more specific on what was rejected, what do you need to modify?

 

The threshing barn is a non-designated heritage asset. We proposed changing the external appearance, basically wrapping the core timber frame (the 'goal posts' that are characteristic of threshing barns) in curved crucks so we can use straw bales in the walls and roof, kinda like the stone arch in a bridge.

 

We pledged to retain those core, historic members of the timber frame, but we weren't specific enough on what exactly would be kept. If we had been more specific, they probably would have still rejected it.

 

We didn't provide an engineer's report, for a few reasons. First, we actually forgot to submit the one we'd paid for! It was however quite vague, and not terribly optimistic. The second reason is that the prior structural survey from the previously-approved scheme was tediously detailed, and we kinda thought it might not be necessary to supersede it (it did however accuse the rafters and purlins of being worthy of retention, when they're all modern softwood). Finally, our preferred oak framer basically said "you can say that you'll retain this, that and the other, but until we actually get in there we just won't know." I know it sounds a bit daft not supplying it, but we did provide around 40 documents, and I triple-checked my document submissions. Only problem is that I didn't double-check that the checklist was correct 🙄

 

We'd need to modify the entire scheme, not changing the roof or shape, which in turn precludes the Huff Puff straw bale construction method. Hence the next application will be radically different.

We've received pre-app advice on the next scheme, and it's not been great - the Ministry Of No were on full power that day. The danged AONB seemed insistent on getting us to put Kent Peg clay tiles on, despite the building not having had them for decades. Meanwhile, we're not allowed to reinstate the hipped wagon porch because it's been absent for decades 🤷‍♂️

 

TBH, it's all getting a bit awkward with the fact that if we ever get to build anything, the kids will soon be too old to live with us. We've not discussed what we want our lives to be once the kids move out. We've been putting off spending on holidays and stuff to save for the build, so the kids have been missing out for the sake of a building that they might never get to live in ☹️

Edited December 15, 2023 by Drellingore

[Drellingore]

Beginning of our item on the agenda: 

 

 

Beginning of a fool with a moustache stumbling over his words: 

 

[joe90]

Wow, at least they recognised your passion for developing this building but as you say it’s an uphill battle. One thing I think I heard was you are not retaining the cat slide roof but building a curved one? Is this correct? I can see that as not retaining local vernacular. I nearly bought a listed building once and certainly glad now I didn’t because of all this red tape and personally I think we retain too many listed buildings. Best of luck, best foot forward,

[Ferdinand]

Sorry to hear of your result.

 

I haven't seen this thread previously, but "North Downs AONB" rings a few bells from general news cover. They have been very intransigent in preventing developments of facilities related to the English Wine Industry (see the Kent papers passim.), and seem to me to have quite a chocolate box view of history.

 

Reading their 6 page submission, I note that the first 4 pages are chest-beating to the local council wallahs like King Kong in New York - this is how important we are and all these citations from planning and legal documents you have never heard of shows who writes the law around here.

 

Your scheme does not get a look-in until nearly page 5 out of 6, and the argument is mainly applying general principles to your microscape, rather than detailed consideration of the merits. They do, however, have good points on things like roofing profiles, and perhaps in their implication of your not having addressed specific features of the local vernacular sufficiently.

 

I also note that the AONB staff member / consultant is an MRTPI, who are the Big Daddies of the Planning Arena.

 

My suggestions:

 

1 - Can you engage with the AONB at design stage?

 

2 - There may be value in getting a Planning Consultant who knows their procedures / material better than they do, and can win a game of citation-chequers on their home ground; there are always authorities both sides of a question. Look for someone who has got similar circumstances schemes to yours through.

 

It may be less expensive than you expect - I would engage someone to advise from early on as needed on hourly rate (use sparingly and carefully), and then to take a designed scheme through planning on a fixed price with a bonus for success (we paid 3% of scheme value increase), with an option to handle an appeal. You want an MRTPI (ideally FRTPI) with local AONB experience; look at other applications, the local paper, and ask the horiest old git at the oldest local estate agency for a recommendation.

 

(And remember, KD AONB are probably reading this thread.)

 

ATB

 

F

[Drellingore]

Thanks for the thoughts @Ferdinand!

 

15 minutes ago, Ferdinand said:

(And remember, KD AONB are probably reading this thread.)

 

Good - hopefully they can consider how outstandingly beautiful nature will be when it's wrecked through climate change. At least all those natural barns that grow in Kent will have the 'right' tiles on though  

[IanR]

Sorry to hear the outcome, it's a long wait to hear a rejection and then feel you are starting again.

 

I didn't want to post previously and bring negative comments about your scheme just as you were going to committee. I did feel however it is over-developed for the plot, and I know my LPA would have rejected it out of hand against their interpretation of the NPPF rules.

 

My feeling was that you had overdone the massing and scale with your proposal, and not traded off anything else within the site to mitigate it. The extra width on front and side elevations, to achieve a full height second floor, does lead to a tangible increase in massing that I feel would be considered as harmful to the openness of the countryside by most LPAs. I've not watched the linked videos or read the Officer's report, so perhaps they've not rejected it on that basis, but it stood out to me.

 

 

 

To get around those rules you are in Para 80 (e) territory, where you need to demonstrate: 

 

Quote

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.

Which is a high bar to pass.

Edited December 15, 2023 by IanR

[Drellingore]

1 hour ago, IanR said:

I didn't want to post previously and bring negative comments about your scheme just as you were going to committee. I did feel however it is over-developed for the plot, and I know my LPA would have rejected it out of hand against their interpretation of the NPPF rules.

 

Thanks for the consideration of my position, it was kind of you to defer posting. If only more people on the internet thought about the impact on the reader before posting  

You're absolutely correct about the massing, and that was something we were conscious of. From the road it appears 19% larger, which I'm not sure whether they'd consider significant or not. The planning committee didn't comment on that; they were more focused on the shape. The report did mention the greater visual impact, although it wasn't their leading argument. In my head the decision was "So it'll be more eco-friendly, cheaper, and give us more house? Worth a try!"

Paragraph 197 of the NPPF basically says that any harm to an NDHA needs to be a balanced judgement. We were hoping that the BNG and eco credentials would be enough to tilt that balance in our favour. There have been examples of NDHAs in conservations areas being approved for demolition, so my line of thinking was "if there's nothing explicitly saying that this is unpossible, let's push the issue to find out for sure, rather than just accepting 'no chance, mate'." I wanted to prove empirically that it wasn't possible, rather than take someone else's word for it. It was a calculated gamble in which I staked money and time, and always knew it was a long shot. Gotta try with 100% effort to find out for sure, though. I used to do some martial arts, and I was told about some likely mistranslated apocryphal Japanese concepts: issen and mushin. The first can mean "single strike of lightning:" you act with 100% conviction, committing utterly to what you're doing. The latter means "empty/remaining mind", meaning that you're open to whatever happens without expectations. Combining the two is complementary but contradictory, and means going at everything full tilt, but rolling with the punches when things don't go your way. So this was a bit like that  

Again, thanks for the thoughts, and hopefully this journey and everyone's comments can be a useful learning for others thinking along similar lines.

Edited December 15, 2023 by Drellingore