garrymartin Posted July 1 Author Share Posted July 1 1 hour ago, Jilly said: Counterintuitive, but my architect was instrumental in getting us planning permission. I'm certain they will be when we get to the other reserved matters, but for the initial outline application with only access as a reserved matter, I don't think they can add anything to be honest. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelvin Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Well, it all really depends on the architect. Our plot probably shouldn’t have got planning permission. The architect that achieved outline planning permission for it has a reputation for being very successful in achieving planning on otherwise difficult sites. Read into that what you will… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Mine too. He knows our LPA Planner. Knew when to push and when to back off. Networks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LnP Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 On 30/06/2024 at 13:58, Dave Jones said: employ a professional who knows crack. +1 and I'm very happy to pay for my planning consultant. I've noticed BH has a strong DIY ethos. I even remember somebody on here commenting that if you don't have hands on the tools, you're not a self-builder. In my opinion, being a successful self-builder (which I'm hoping to eventually be), involves knowing when to buy help in. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe90 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 14 minutes ago, LnP said: involves knowing when to buy help in. I agree, I employed a builder to do the work I knew I was either not good at or would take to long, I did the stuff I enjoyed and was capable at doing. THAT made the self build enjoyable. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeSharp01 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 6 hours ago, LnP said: In my opinion, being a successful self-builder (which I'm hoping to eventually be), involves knowing when to buy help in. Seems like a sound and pragmatic principle to me. I am also an exponent of the idea that you can either spend time saving money or spend money saving time AND, for me, often times its just fun to give it a go after extensive research to ensure success while having a backup route to the professionals if needed. Occasionally we do a job twice once in house and once via the professionals, EG the air test, many here do their own to get an impression of the air tightness but we need a registered outcome so had to have a professional do one as well. We ran ours got a result (.29 on the PH scale) the pro came in and got it as .2 on the PH scale so we weren't that far out and on the right side - very pleasing even though I doubled the 'cost' but learned a lot along the way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrymartin Posted July 2 Author Share Posted July 2 Reminds me somewhat of a tweet that caught my eye yesterday. "If you aren't willing to look like a foolish beginner, you'll never become a graceful master." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bassanclan Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 You may have to wait until a new local plan is being drawn up and then lobby to get the definition of non sustainable location changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrymartin Posted July 2 Author Share Posted July 2 4 minutes ago, bassanclan said: You may have to wait until a new local plan is being drawn up and then lobby to get the definition of non sustainable location changed. The Local Plan is the 2016 version currently, so considerably out of date. Although the formation of the new Local Plan is at the Regulation 19 Stage, the Inspectors have asked for so many clarifications and additional evidence that it's looking like it won't be in place until at least early 2025. I did provide some input but to be honest, unless you are a powerful group (i.e. large developers, housing associations, government functions, etc.) the commentary is pretty much brushed aside and changes aren't made. It is comforting that the Inspectors are giving the LPA a tough time though. 😉 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bassanclan Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 By lobby I didn't mean provide a submission to the local plan. As you say an individual has little power, but if you can get councillors on your side it could help shape the policy in your favour 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe90 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 On 01/07/2024 at 08:50, garrymartin said: although I've also asked a few specific policy questions of the Head of Planning as a precursor so I am 100% clear on how the LPA would interpret some fundamental wording. I think (hope) this gives you a bit more direction on how to proceed and if appropriate you can quote the head of planning. I know they are busy with the election but what about your local MP (all parties banging on about building more houses and being “green”). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrymartin Posted July 2 Author Share Posted July 2 20 minutes ago, joe90 said: I think (hope) this gives you a bit more direction on how to proceed and if appropriate you can quote the head of planning. If he responds... 😉 They were very carefully crafted questions that make it difficult to respond in a wooly way that would be open to further interpretation, and he'll know exactly why I'm asking them! 20 minutes ago, joe90 said: I know they are busy with the election but what about your local MP (all parties banging on about building more houses and being “green”). I have the details of what will almost certainly be my MP, as well as the details for the Green Councillor that covers the area where I currently live in Worcester, and the Conservative Councillor (who also happens to be chair of the Planning Committee) for the area that covers the plot. I intend to write to all of them to a) explain how a very sustainable development has already been refused on grounds of sustainability (!!) and b) to ask for support for any subsequent application. As you rightly note though, they're likely very busy right now so it's on my list of things to do in the coming weeks/months and possibly after engaging a planning consultant (feelers out to one of the best ones in our area right now). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrymartin Posted July 2 Author Share Posted July 2 Just found this little nugget in the conditions of an outline application that has been approved by my LPA... 🤪🤣 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jilly Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 Start a small community bus company…? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrymartin Posted July 2 Author Share Posted July 2 2 minutes ago, Jilly said: Start a small community bus company…? Or an ultra low or zero emission car sharing scheme... 🤣 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bassanclan Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 2 hours ago, garrymartin said: Just found this little nugget in the conditions of an outline application that has been approved by my LPA... 🤪🤣 Yes, but that is not of any help to you unless it is a similarly remote location. Adding an electric charge point to a house in a marginally sustainable location makes it a more sustainable. Adding an electric point to a house in a non-sustainable location does not make it a sustainable location Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrymartin Posted July 2 Author Share Posted July 2 4 minutes ago, bassanclan said: Adding an electric charge point to a house in a marginally sustainable location makes it a more sustainable. Adding an electric point to a house in a non-sustainable location does not make it a sustainable location Agreed. There should be a choice of sustainable transport modes, so a non-sustainable location does not become a sustainable location just because you add an electric vehicle charge point. Otherwise everywhere would potentially be sustainable. However, in this case, it can be demonstrated that cycling is a viable option for sustainable transport, providing access to the whole of Droitwich Spa (a town, with excellent access to services and employment opportunities) at less than 5 km distance, and adding an electric vehicle charge point "encourages" the use of another form of sustainable transport - that of ultra low or zero emission vehicles. There's no point this being a valid form of sustainable transport according to the NPPF and then completely discounting it as a choice in location planning decisions. Words are also very important. Notice the use of the word "or" in the following from the Campaign for Better Transport guide - "Sustainable transport and the NPPF – a guide for local councils and communities"... "It will not be sufficient for sites to be located on the road network and accessible by car. They must also be accessible by walking, cycling or public transport." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeSharp01 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 42 minutes ago, garrymartin said: located on the road network and accessible by car That means it IS accessible by walking, cycling, crawling, and public transport so there must be more detail somewhere that says that walking can only be along pavemented roads or less than some notional distance, that cycling must be along designated cycle paths etc, public transport must include taxi's & rickshaws not just buses and soon to be self driving cars which I suspect will be a subscription service of sort - if they ever perfect them for the general case. I'll get my coat 🙄 or just get back to boxing in the soil pipe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrymartin Posted July 2 Author Share Posted July 2 3 minutes ago, MikeSharp01 said: ...so there must be more detail somewhere that says that walking can only be along pavemented roads or less than some notional distance, that cycling must be along designated cycle paths etc The catch-all is generally that it must be "safe" and therefore walking along an unlit A-road with no footpaths, although not illegal, would generally not be regarded as particularly "safe". There are more or less universally accepted distances for walking and cycling concerning access to local services and employment opportunities. For walking, 800m is generally considered the maximum, and for cycling it is 5km. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProDave Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 If those sustainability guidelines were applied here, none of the plots in our road would have got planning permission. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrymartin Posted July 2 Author Share Posted July 2 53 minutes ago, ProDave said: If those sustainability guidelines were applied here, none of the plots in our road would have got planning permission. Dave, I can't tell you how frustrating it is to have the only reason that the proposal is refused to be on sustainability grounds when I almost exclusively work from home, have shopping delivered, rarely access public services in person, have only a very small number of friends that could currently walk, cycle or get public transport conveniently to where I live, plan to build to Passivhaus Plus standards, and build in some of the most environmentally friendly ways. My wife does not work, my son is at University in Manchester and my daughter works for a company based some distance away, so is either working at home, travelling to their HQ, or to their store in London. It drives me mad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bassanclan Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 It's not about your personal circumstances though. It's not whether you personally can make the location sustainable whilst living there. To be really classed as a sustainable location you need to be able to walk to a bus stop. If you were disabled and unable to walk or drive you would not choose to build a house in a "remote location" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 I think that a 'hidden' issue here is the way that the meaning of the term 'sustainability' has changed in recent times. We got PP, and our neighbour didn't - despite being just a few meters away , and there being no significant differences between the two plots. Our neighbour applied about a year later than we did. In that time - and without clear reference to the evidence base - our little road (one-lane 'C' road) morphed from a sustainable location to one that wasn't. As if to illustrate @bassanclan's point, a local resident - who has (had) an incurable degenerative disease - used to make her painful way up and down our lane. Rude, exasperated drivers would make her life more of a Hell than it was. Upon meeting her in the road and with her unable to climb into the fence to get out of the way , they would slam the car into reverse and - at speed - rejoin the main road they were trying to avoid. "I'm better than a Sleeping Policeman " she would say cheerfully. No longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrymartin Posted July 3 Author Share Posted July 3 50 minutes ago, bassanclan said: To be really classed as a sustainable location you need to be able to walk to a bus stop. I understand where you are going with your commentary, but that statement is just not true. In many rural areas, bus services have been stopped due to cuts. Is that an effective way to stop any further rural development? All of this is a planning balance judgement, and different groups are treated differently. For example, Traveller's Sites don't *have* to be in a sustainable location; it is accepted that they will primarily use a private motor vehicle because the locations where they are typically sited (and where people are typically happy for them to be sited) generally have poor access to services. It is allowed despite this because it is important for Traveller's children to be able to get to School etc. and the private motor vehicle provides one of the few ways of enabling that to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 17 minutes ago, garrymartin said: ... but that statement is just not true. In many rural areas, bus services have been stopped due to cuts. Is that an effective way to stop any further rural development? ... Fairness, truth, merit, evidence - what's that? Rules ma boi - we can break them. You -pleb- can't . But of course dwahhhling they don't apply to us. Shhh, don't tell anyone. Buildhub could reasonably be renamed Build-Cynics Central. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now