New self-build project - design method question

[Benpointer]

Hi all,

 

We have sold our house STC and have an accepted offer on a 0.85a plot with full permission for a 3-bed 160m2 chalet bungalow.  We naturally want to do our own thing - we'd like a modern design, single story house of about the same area, 160m2 with the following features, so we expect to get a new design and apply for a planning variation.  Features we want: 

 

• High insulation levels and low energy use; target u-values of 0.12 max for walls, floor and roof.
• Light and airy inside
• Open plan living areas
• High ceilings including pent ceilings where appropriate
• Underfloor heating throughout
• ASHP
• Whole house MVHR
• Triple-glazed windows
• Solar PV panels and battery storage 
• The design needs to be wheelchair-friendly - I'm a full-time wheelchair user.

 

The plot is really good: edge of village, flat, easy access, electricity and water already on site.  Only minor issues are that it's on clay and there's a mature oak tree about 5m inside next door's plot which will restrict where we can build a bit, but... 0.85 acre, so not a major issue.

 

We want to self-manage using contractors (we know some good ones who we trust, from previous refurb projects).  We're open to basing the project on a SIPS or timber frame build.

 

What we need is somebody to create a design to meet our needs.  We don't want to full architect route, we feel we're pretty savvy and don't need an expensive hand-holding.  We're assuming we need someone who can:

• Produce the planning drawings and get it through planning.
• Produce BC drawings and specification and get that agreed with BC.
• Produce a design specification that a SIPS or timber frame company will be able to quote sensibly on and that our groundworks contractor can deliver to.

 

Does that sound about right or are there other things we should be thinking about?

 

Does anyone have a recommendation for a South West company that can deliver those design outputs?  We're on the Dorset, Wilts, Somerset border.

 

Thanks all! 

 

 

Edited August 26 by Benpointer

[Redoctober]

2 minutes ago, Benpointer said:

What we need is somebody to create a design to meet our needs.  We don't want to full architect route, we feel we're pretty savvy and don't need an expensive hand-holding.  We're assuming we need someone who can:

• Produce the planning drawings and get it through planning.
• Produce BC drawings and specification and get that agreed with BC.
• Produce a design specification that a SIPS or timber frame company will be able to quote sensibly on and that our groundworks contractor can deliver to.

 

Hi @Benpointer if you are considering a TF have you looked at the likes of Fleming Homes? Although based in the Scottish Borders, they do cater for the whole of the UK. The reason I mention them is becasue they do offer an in house Plan drawing service and that will get you through the planning stages as well as BC - My experience with them has been a positive one and they will adapt to your designs, it's not just from a catalogue so to speak. 

[Alan Ambrose]

>>> apply for a planning variation

 

Unless your new design is a minor variation of the old one with the same footprint, you’ll need to go with a full application. You might want an architectural technologist or similar if you have a good idea what you want already. You can, of course, get an architect to do the concept design and drawings for planning and then someone else for the detail design later.

[nod]

49 minutes ago, Alan Ambrose said:

>>> apply for a planning variation

 

Unless your new design is a minor variation of the old one with the same footprint, you’ll need to go with a full application. You might want an architectural technologist or similar if you have a good idea what you want already. You can, of course, get an architect to do the concept design and drawings for planning and then someone else for the detail design later.

Plus 1,

Go back to planning with a new design 

TF While more expensive than a solid build Is perfect for the novice Absolutely no need for a project manager Just someone to coordinate and make on the spot decisions 

[PNAmble]

We bought with planning. In the end it was someone elses design and no matter how we tweaked it was never going to work -  not to mention we really didn’t get on the original architect.   
 

start with a blank piece of paper, and assume you’ve just got some land.  It is difficult as you’ve probably paid ££ to buy it with the permission. But in the end you’ll need to do all your own reports etc , and whether it’s 1,2,3 years you’ll live the house you designed not something you compromise on.  
 

 

[Russell griffiths]

For the planning part I used two different people, not one

Architectural technician for the drawings and a planning consultant to get it through planning. 
if my planning consultant fees had been 10 times more than they were they would still have been worth it. 

[Benpointer]

Great feedback already folks - many thanks.  

 

Interestingly, we have spoken to a local planning consultant in order to satisfy ourselves that we would have enough flexibility with the planning, before we exchange on the plot purchase.  He was the one who suggested trying for a variation but to be fair to him he may not have appreciated how 'modern' a design we are seeking, nor how different from the current design we envisage it being.

 

Will check out Fleming homes.

 

Thanks all 

[Omnibuswoman]

As a starting point, it may be worth taking the existing design footprint and seeing whether it could work for you with some changes. This is the route we took - we based the house on the footprint of the plan that had won planning, then amended the room layout and windows to suit our needs (like yours, ground floor wholly disabled accessible, TF, passive or near passive house for heating load, triple glazed windows, solar panels, etc). We got this through planning under a S73 amendment application and it was easily waved through. 
 

However I recognize that that only works if your needs can easily be met by something similar to the existing design, and if it looks like a house you could live in. 
 

We used a passive house specialist builder, and an architect he had a business relationship with to draw up the plans and get us through building control. We didn’t want the full architect’s works, just drawing stuff, and his fees packages were flexible enough to accommodate that. Happy to send a recommendation. 

[Oz07]

With regards to s73 what dies this mean in laymans terms? Does it literally mean only altering the conditions not the plans?

 

There is no statutory limit on the degree of change permissible to conditions under s73, but the change must only relate to conditions and not to the operative part of the permission.

[Benpointer]

9 hours ago, Omnibuswoman said:

...We used a passive house specialist builder, and an architect he had a business relationship with to draw up the plans and get us through building control. We didn’t want the full architect’s works, just drawing stuff, and his fees packages were flexible enough to accommodate that. Happy to send a recommendation. 

Yes please could you PM me details?  Thank you.

Edited August 27 by Benpointer

[TommoUK]

All of your bullet points other than windows relate to internal changes so won't need planning. If you want to save time and money..maybe consider working out whether you can live with the existing design and footprint. If so, sit down with an engineer to work out what you would need to do structurally to make the internal layout work for you. Changes to the windows, doors and external facing materials  could give you the look you want (without a full planning application) and you will just need a minor amendment to the existing permission. 

Edited August 27 by TommoUK

[Bancroft]

14 hours ago, Russell griffiths said:

For the planning part I used two different people, not one

Architectural technician for the drawings and a planning consultant to get it through planning. 
if my planning consultant fees had been 10 times more than they were they would still have been worth it.

+1 for this way forward.
We're in a national park so having a local planning consultant who knew the local planners was, I think, a real bonus.  A couple of meetings between the architectural consultant and the planning consultant gave us a strong application and the planners passed it first time.

[torre]

10 hours ago, Oz07 said:

conditions under s73, but the change must only relate to conditions

There will usually be a condition along the lines of "The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans and drawings" and that allows you to make updates to the plans if you're updating the design

[Omnibuswoman]

Yes, a S73 is a minor amendment - in our case we just moved and re-sized a few windows to match the significant internal re-design, and changed a velux window to a dormer. The internal changes were not of any interest to the planning dept, and as the outside looked very similar to the original consented design they were happy to wave it through. It is simply a case of replacing the original design drawings with the new drawings on the consent. All of the other original conditions remained unchanged. 

[Omnibuswoman]

One important factor was not increasing the ‘mass’ of the house. We actually very slightly reduced it by removing a winter garden, so the footprint was a tiny bit smaller. This was actually commented on by the planning officer in a positive way. The loss of the winter garden still left us with a 200m2 house, as we changed the second floor from a mezzanine to a full floor. 

[Benpointer]

In terms of working with the existing plans we have several issues:

1. It's on two storeys and I am a full-time wheelchair user.  Our current house is a chalet bungalow with two bedrooms and a bathroom that I can't get to - that's rather frustrating.
2. The ground floor is circa, 100m2 - we want and will be paying for, rather more useable space than that.
3. The existing design is exceedingly boring - if we're going to do this we want at least a bit of 'wow' factor in the finished house.

I did ponder amending the current plans to remove the second storey and lower the roof to give a bungalow of 100m2... then apply for a 60m2 extension under permitted development rights (which I assume the new house will come with?).  

 

But overall it would seem simpler just to apply for the building we actually want.

[Mike]

4 minutes ago, Benpointer said:

apply for a 60m2 extension under permitted development rights (which I assume the new house will come with?)

Any planning permission in a sensitive location will normally have a condition removing the Permitted Development rights, so probably not.

 

22 hours ago, Benpointer said:

The design needs to be wheelchair-friendly

That could include a lift to the 1st floor, if you have space (and keep the 2nd floor).

[saveasteading]

21 hours ago, nod said:

TF While more expensive than a solid build Is

Debatable.

I agree though that there is added value in a kit.

You say you have a builder in mind. If the design is not experimental then they won't need lots of drawings telling them how to do their job. If you trust that they will price fairly, then they might either include design, or give you a name. 

[Alan Ambrose]

>>> In terms of working with the existing plans we have several issues

 

Ah, I might then just either put in a simple pre-app with a single storey - sketch the footprint you might like in the approximate location and size that you fancy. It's a big plot, so go for whatever size you want from say, 160m^2, up to, say, 30% bigger than the biggest neighbour.

 

Even better if your LPA will engage over the phone for that kind of early enquiry.

 

I'm going to challenge your 'don't want an architect' statement. Either you have a very good idea what you want and can sketch it out (however badly) enough for a technologist to draw up.

 

Or, if you're looking for concept and design ideas, then just interview a few architects and choose one to do enough design to get you through planning. Say, external look and feel and room layout only. You don't have to buy any services past that point. There's a couple here on the 'ub.

 

Depending on how difficult you think it's going to be to get it past planning (a local architect will know) then that's with or without a planning consultant .

Edited August 27 by Alan Ambrose

[Benpointer]

37 minutes ago, Mike said:

Any planning permission in a sensitive location will normally have a condition removing the Permitted Development rights, so probably not.

 

That could include a lift to the 1st floor, if you have space (and keep the 2nd floor).

I don't think it's really a sensitive location, it's not national park, conservation area or anything else as far as I can see.  There is nothing written in the PP Approval about PD rights.

 

We've done a through the floor lift before.  It's not a bad solution though you do lose a bit of usable space, of course.  It's quite hard to fit them in a position that works well on both floors.  When you add the space required on each floor for the lift and the space taken up by a stairwell, landing, etc. it's quite a lot of useable space lost.

[Benpointer]

34 minutes ago, Alan Ambrose said:

>>> In terms of working with the existing plans we have several issues

 

Ah, I might then just either put in a simple pre-app with a single storey - sketch the footprint you might like in the approximate location and size that you fancy. It's a big plot, so go for whatever size you want from say, 160m^2, up to, say, 30% bigger than the biggest neighbour.

 

Even better if your LPA will engage over the phone for that kind of early enquiry.

 

I'm going to challenge your 'don't want an architect' statement. Either you have a very good idea what you want and can sketch it out (however badly) enough for a technologist to draw up.

 

Or, if you're looking for concept and design ideas, then just interview a few architects and choose one to do enough design to get you through planning. Say, external look and feel and room layout only. You don't have to buy any services past that point. There's a couple here on the 'ub.

 

Depending on how difficult you think it's going to be to get it past planning (a local architect will know) then that's with or without a planning consultant .

Good steer Alan, thanks - we're going to start talking to potential architects. 

[saveasteading]

53 minutes ago, Benpointer said:

it's quite a lot of useable space lost.

It is. But if you can build bigger, the middle of a house is relatively inexpensive to increase.

[Dave Jones]

1 hour ago, Benpointer said:

I don't think it's really a sensitive location, it's not national park, conservation area or anything else as far as I can see.  There is nothing written in the PP Approval about PD rights.

 

We've done a through the floor lift before.  It's not a bad solution though you do lose a bit of usable space, of course.  It's quite hard to fit them in a position that works well on both floors.  When you add the space required on each floor for the lift and the space taken up by a stairwell, landing, etc. it's quite a lot of useable space lost.

 

removal of PD rights is not looked on favourably by appeal inspectors.

 

The National Planning Policy Framework (the NPPF), the granddaddy of planning policies, states that (paragraph 52):

“…planning conditions should not be used to restrict national permitted development rights unless there is clear justification to do so.”


The government’s national Planning Practice Guidance (the PPG) goes further, says that:

“Conditions restricting the future use of permitted development rights or changes of use may not pass the test of reasonableness or necessity.”

[saveasteading]

12 minutes ago, Dave Jones said:

unless there is clear justification to do so.”


The justification would be that you have submitted your proposal and are not asking for more space. So you don't need it. Whereas with an old house it can need enlarging to modern expectations.

Otherwise every application would be on the understanding that it will be extended. 

[Dave Jones]

of course you can extend once PD kicks in. Clear justification is not 'just in case you extend' it must be overriding and proportionate.