Brackley Castle- Sketch Feasibility
5.02 DESIGN A:
This design is a conversion/rebuild of the existing barn and the planning application would be for conversion of an existing structure. Keeping to the same overall profile of the existing barn, the intention is to reuse the existing foundations and structure in part. There would be the most minimal disturbance of the ground with the addition of a lightweight timber deck supported on 150mm wide piles to bedrock. This version only allows for a four bedroom bungalow and does not meet the full accommodation requirements of the Client.
Similar to design 1 in that the original barn’s footings are reused and the silhouette is intended to remain similar to existing barn’s profile as seen from neighbouring properties, the intent is to greatly disguise the property’s increase in size. The proposal extends the accommodation out to one side on piles to increase the property to a 5 bedroom, 2 receptions single storey building more suited to a large 3 generation family.
5.04 DESIGN 3:
This is a building, which has been deigned to the Client’s accommodation needs, it has incorporated garages and garden workshops, and it has two storeys to separate family bedrooms on the first floor from family and entertaining space on the ground floor. It is designed to minimise interference with any archaeological remains by reusing the existing barn’s footings and for the new extension to be built off the minimum amount of piles. The design would intend to create a building significant architectural merit that would be of high visual interest and would enhance the area.
6.00 SITE CONCERNS
6.01 ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONCERNS:
The site appears to be little of archaeological interst on the site. The site is a natural limestone outcrop which the Normans inhabited for approximately 87 years as a keep, the remains are within a layer 150mm deep at a variable depth below the surface, in some locations on the keep the natural limestone is only 230mm below the surface.
All of the designs reuse the existing barn’s foundations in some way or another, where piles are proposed these would be at the maximum spacing possible and would be placed with an attempt to create the minimum amount of interference with any possible archaeological remains, i.e. Design 3
Would place piles on the slope to the Mott, which citing the excavations in trench 4 as a guide would suggest that this area was not built upon and would be unlikely to contain any archaeological remains. At all times each of the designs would seek to minimise any interference with the scarce remains that are there.
6.02 SITE CONCERNS:
The site is approximately 4 metres above the surrounding fields and road, though the site is in areas designated as a flood plane, it will built on foundations sitting on the natural limestone and the foundations are unlikely to be ever effected directly by flooding.
It would be the most South Western property in this area of the town, but we argue that the natural boundary of the town is the bypass beyond the site and the building of a building of architectural interest (Guidance note 7) would enhance an areas which is otherwise known for utility buildings such as Tesco superstore or low income hosing estate. The proposed property is sited at distance from any neighbouring properties that would not be invasive to those properties.
The existing road to borders the property on the Northern side was once the main road through this area, but is now a dead end road, we do not believe that the building of a single family residence with off street parking would significantly increase traffic down the road.
The building of a house would enhance these areas with the Client stating their intention is to create an interesting garden and reopen the castle fishponds to the north west of the property, all of which we believe would enhance the general prospect of this area next to the lake and public walking areas.
6.03 MATERIAL CONCERNS:
These proposals discuss the amount of accommodation and profile that could be possibly built on site, as this is not a full planning submission but a feasibility document for discussion purposes, the question of materiality has been left open. Guidance from the local council’s planning department will be sought as to the sensitivity of using various materials.