Planning Permission Advice!

FRB

I presently have FPP for a single storey dwelling in West Clare. I received grant of permission back in October 2010.
During pre-planning I was advised that my property could have a maximum height of 5.5 metres, the same height as my parents property which is immidiately adjacent to the site. I was also informed that I could only have either a T or H shaped design. This resulted in a very unsightly design of 185m2. It is a poor quality design and I do not wish to proceed with construction.
I am now considering to make an application to change the building design. A design which I found on Irish-house plans online has caught my eye (Dorm 054) and I think that it would suit the site rather well and is also 185m2. This design is of 6.8 metres in height and is very similiar to a local property that the Clare County Council planner originally advised me to base my design on. I advised my engineer to do so but the plans ended up nothing like this, the restrictions advised in pre-planning being the biggest problem ofcourse.
To give some background on the site; it is adjacent to the N67 road which runs along the scenic coast of West Clare. My parents property has a number of farm building immidiately behind it, the hay barn being the highest of these at 7.5m. A hill of approximately 60m in height lies 250 metres behind the site.
I am considering on applying for a pre-planning meeting to run the design by the Council, the idea being not to waste any more time or expense. Two architects have advised me not to do this and to simply just apply with new plans. They reckon that the council will simply bully me into what they want. Rationally it would make sense to have a pre-planning meeting with Clare County Council, but I am now confused by the conflicting information. Any advice would be appreciated.

richban

I'd definitely go for pre-planning meeting else you're wasting time at a later stage.

Sometimes these meetings are formalities where planners barely look at plans, other times there's constructive advice given. Depends on planner/county/day of week, whatever - if its your second pre-planning meeting, mention both meeting dates in planning application form.

As with any 'negotiation' if the planner feels he/she can change at least one thing, or you take a single piece of advice on board, he/she will feel happier granting permission.

I'd also appoint one of your 2 architect advisors to design house thoroughly and prepare/lodge planning permission, let the engineer do percolation test, sightline stuff only. The architect will ensure correct orientation, best daylighting layout, best layout for solar gain etc.,

Good luck

rayjdav

From experience, those ready to go plans never really suit a specific site. They are just generic plans and to optomise your site, they usually have to be tweaked, for sun/frontage/views/your needs etc etc, so much so that it is never what you saw at the start in the book and invariably it's your designers fault........
By all means have another preplanning, for what they are worth, but I would advise you get someone to look at your site, with a copy of the plan, and see beforehand if it will actually work. No point agreeing something with coco and then submit something else. Waste of everybodys time that.

FRB

I agree with the importance of hiring an architect to look at the site before submitting plans. Nonetheless, my hands have been seriously tied behind my back when it comes to plan design. For instance, the building can be no more than 20 metres from my parents house, it must be in line with my parents house, it must be either T or H shaped, and worst of all it must not exceed 5.5 metres in height. This was all dictated to me in the last pre-planning meeting, not much leeway to be honest!
I'm just trying to fathom why two architects would advise not to have the pre-planning meeting, of course it crosses my mind that it creates more business for the architect when it all goes wrong.
Any more thoughts would be appreciated.

Ramonapixie

Hi FRB,

I find your post very interesting. I think you are obviously unhappy with your granted design so you should go for pre planning as it is the only way to sound out your new potential design.
If 5.5m is your max height, well there may be nothing you can do with that. The planners are trying to be sympathic to existing building(s) which is probably fair enough. I dont get the T or H shape option given to you. Generally a regular rectangle shape acceptable if not peferable. Id ask about that. I wonder if there is something written/adopted by the Council to say that that is policy. I had a planner tell me not so long ago that my site of 0.7acres was too small and that they would advise i go for a 2.5acre site! When i looked into it and spoke to a different planner, they told me that that larger site would be the preference of the planner but wasnt policy, therefore couldnt really be enforced.
Personally i like T shape designs. If you didnt like it, maybe you should speak to your architect, it is i feel a very workable footprint.
TBH because your site is on a senic route you are going to have a tighter design spec, but to be fair, i can understand why. Some authorities may very well consider refusing you permission on this alone.
Your architects i think are wrong to discount further preplanning. The planners may very well try and guide you, but at the end of the day, you are free to apply for what you want, whether you get it or not is another matter.
good luck.

mickdw

Are you actually tied to a building height of 5.5m or do you have to keep under the current ridge of parent house?

FRB

Ok...I'm starting to see a pattern here...go for the pre-planning. Without a doubt it's the rational thing to do.

Ya Ramonapixie, I'm not sure where they get this stuff. I think it can be very subjective. I actually had two pre-planning meeting the last time, with different planning officials. The first planner wanted me to build limestone cornerstones into the house, even though there is absolutely no limestone in the locality! At least there was none of that nonsense the second time around. I think it really depends who you are dealing with.

Yep, unhappy with the T shape. You open your front door to look down an extremely long and dark corridor, poor design. And the house looks very spread out and ugly. Retrospectively, the H would have probably been a better design.

And yes, it's a beautiful part of the country so I can appreciate why they want to protect it, I count myself lucky to have planning at all.

Mickdw, I'm not sure about that, I assume they are basing that maximum height off my parents house. Nonetheless, the hay barn immediately behind it is 7.5 metres. In my opinion I don't think an additional 1.3 metres would hurt, but hey, that's not for me to decide.

Has anyone else had experience or thoughts on pre-planning?

BryanF

As far as I can tell you've been visiting the planners with an engineer! Why not bring an architect?

sydthebeat

FRB wrote: »

Ok...I'm starting to see a pattern here...go for the pre-planning. Without a doubt it's the rational thing to do.

Ya Ramonapixie, I'm not sure where they get this stuff. I think it can be very subjective. I actually had two pre-planning meeting the last time, with different planning officials. The first planner wanted me to build limestone cornerstones into the house, even though there is absolutely no limestone in the locality! At least there was none of that nonsense the second time around. I think it really depends who you are dealing with

Yep, unhappy with the T shape. You open your front door to look down an extremely long and dark corridor, poor design. And the house looks very spread out and ugly. Retrospectively, the H would have probably been a better design.

And yes, it's a beautiful part of the country so I can appreciate why they want to protect it, I count myself lucky to have planning at al

Mickdw, I'm not sure about that, I assume they are basing that maximum height off my parents house. Nonetheless, the hay barn immediately behind it is 7.5 metres. In my opinion I don't think an additional 1.3 metres would hurt, but hey, that's not for me to decide.

Has anyone else had experience or thoughts on pre-planning?

im confused.. have you already had plans drawn up or what?? how do you know where corridors etc are going to be located?

the requirements from planners for good rural design are simple.
the house should not be bulky, or show great mass. This is difficult to do if your looking for a large floor area.
the 5.5 height restriction is there way of saying, single storey only... trying to design dormers into that height is awkward and leads to a more 'massy' house.

the best thing to do is to go to a pre planning meeting fully armed with photos, design sketches, contiguous elevations showing levels etc.... draft landscaping proposals....

offer them something to work off, dont let them dictate from a blank canvas

richban

Yes, theres definitely a pattern in the advice.

I'd be happy with a T or H shaped house - far preferable to a rectangle. A rectangle implies you will have a dark central double-loaded corridor i.e. rooms on both sides - voila - another dire bungalow!

A T or H shape probably means more corridor/ circulation as a percentage of floor space than a rectangle but rooms at end of legs of the H or T will be dual or triple aspect and have great light.

Sketch it out yourself - keep corridors to north or west side of each leg - you'll have lovely spaces and try keep lots of light where legs meet.

This all sounds weird, but not so restrictive - that's my last word - again good luck

FRB

Yes sydthe beat, the plans have been drawn up and FPP has been obtained. I merely want to change the design. That's a good idea though, have something to work off for the meeting. As regards designing a dormer with 5.5 metres...impossible I reckon. I could do it comfortably with 6.5 metres.
Thanks for the design advice on the H or T design richban, I'll keep that in mind. I reckon I'll go with the H if I can't get to go up in height.
One question though, what kind of space is normally left between the legs of the H, as a rough guide?
Has anyone else had experience with this house design?

BryanF

FRB have you actually sat down with a designer / architect, looked at your requirements and worked this out with someone who has aeen the site? to me this seems like a prime opportunity to think outside of the box, even the bungalow bliss box. But This 'H' rubish has me confused, before you go an further, will you tell us the orientation of the sun to your site, the road, The sites slope and where the views are? These are juat a few of the things that SHOULD impact any design!!!

This H thing??? Are we taking about about two single storey blocks (approx 5m gable ends) essentially staggered slightly to break up the visual massin? will you please go a speak to a good designer/ architect before going near a planner again?

rayjdav

Have to agree with BryanF here.:eek:;) You appear to have been advised T or H type and you have the house tiled and painted before you seem to know what the house will look like or even accomodate etc. As above, especially rural setting, the site mostly dictates and therfore designs the house, not the other way around. Thats akin to fitting a square peg into round hole scenario. It won't work.

If you have never seen it, have a look at the attached link, the Cork Rural Design Guide. You can extract many sensible items from it and it can aide in the design process. You don't have to reinvent the wheel, which many people on here try on a daily basis. You just have to be very clever, in all aspects, with what you have got to work with. This is usually acheived by hiring a professional who has done it, successfully, many times and do it as early as possible for your own sanity.

http://www.corkcoco.ie/co/pdf/578944050.pdf