Visit to Hockerton Housing Project

View from roof over photovoltaic cells and conservatory
roofs, towards the lake. Photo: Chris Morton

Two Beacon Project Charlbury members attended an introductory day at Hockerton Housing Project on Saturday 28 January 2012 to learn more about this important environmental project near Newark. 


Although the Hockerton project dates back to 1998 it took a considerable amount of time to develop some of the infrastructure, especially the wind turbines, due to planning delays. The five houses at Hockerton, built together as a terrace, make use of high thermal mass building materials, including concrete and layers of insultation, to keep heat loss from the structure to a minimum. 


Warm air is generated within the southwest–facing conservatories fronting all the properties, which is then drawn into the house, only one room deep but spacious. The house itself is covered with a thick turf roof which slopes down towards the rear of the structure.

Turf roof sloping behind the Hockerton house terrace. Photo: Chris Morton

The houses remain warm throughout the year, with a variation of only four or five degrees between the summer and winter. The addition of a wood burner in the conservatories makes these spaces more usable in the winter months. Along the top of the conservatories runs a line of low maintenance photovoltaic cells, which generates one third of the energy needs of the project.


The remaining two thirds of the site's energy requirements is generated by two wind turbines, located in a field adjacent.

Wind turbines at Hockerton. Photo: Chris Morton

One of the most fascinating aspects of the Hockerton infrastructure is the water capture and treatment system that is used. Rain water that falls over the site is guided towards a lake that was dug in the clay soil in front of the houses. This lake also gives additional reflected light to the houses. From this lake water is pumped to another small lake on another part of the site where a bund was created from displaced earth at the highest point on the site. The intention was that gravity would enable water to be fed down into the houses from this point. Unfortunately the use of narrow pipes within the houses meant that there was insufficient pressure and a pump is needed to do this. This makes the use of the lake on the high bund somewhat redundant, and since it is also quite a distance from the houses it is also more difficult to maintain.

The small lake up on the bund supplies the houses with all their non-potable water needs. The water feeds through from the lake into a 3 foot deep sand filtration tank sunk into the earth, from where it feeds through to a holding tank from where it is drawn down on demand.

Sand filtration tank with insulated lid. Part of the non-potable
water system on the site. Photo: Chris Morton

For drinking water, another pump system draws water from the main lake through a series of filters (including UV treatment) to a separate tap in the sinks.


At one end of the main lake is the sewage treatment reed bed. The waste from the houses is fed through to a sump where it is rotated around a reed bed and naturally broken down. The cleaned water then moves through into the main lake system, where carp are kept.

View across lake to houses, with reed bed system to left. Photo: Chris Morton

The five houses that make up the Hockerton community are thereby self-sufficient in water and energy requirements. In addition to this, they also produce half of all the food they require on site. This is done in a variety of ways, all needing a significant time investment from all community members – set at 300 hours per year – which is agreed upon when they buy houses within the project. This agreement means that additions to the community are self-selecting in terms of who is prepared to undertake work on behalf of the whole community. Vegetables for instance are not grown in individual allotments owned by each household, but in common, with households undertaking gardening work for the entire group. Bees are also kept for honey, and a small herd of sheep to keep grass down and for a small supply of meat.

Conservatories and decking fronting houses. Photo: Chris Morton

There are many lessons that can be learned from the Hockerton Housing Project. The self-sufficiency systems are now tried and tested at Hockerton, and although they require constant maintenance, the benefits are significant, and not just in financial terms. The generation of electricity via small wind turbines works well, but  they only work at 50% efficiency, due to being located in a less than ideal location for wind as a result of planning restrictions. Hockerton village nearby also has a single large wind turbine which was financed with a share sale, and this would be a preferable model for Charlbury. A large turbine sited in a good wind location would benefit the whole community and reduce the need for a smaller turbine on any potential Beacon Project site. From an architectural point of view, the 'greenhouse' principle is shown to work well at Hockerton, with the conservatories serving to generate warmth for the whole house as well as being wonderful, light-filled spaces to live in. We were particularly struck however by the potential for turf covered structures, not only from a thermal point of view, but also in terms of reducing the visual impact of development.

Rural Exception Sites

source: Rural Housing Trust

In 1986, the Rural Housing Trust proposed – and went on to pioneer – a method of developing affordable homes which requires the participation and support of the local community. It is called the 'exception site' approach. Rural exception sites are now proven to successfully meet housing needs in the places they arise. It is a successful solution because the size of the development is guided by the identified local need, they are affordable for key workers and others, and they are for people either working or living locally, or who are from the area and would like to return for personal reasons, such as caring for relatives. Exception sites are not allocated for development in local plans/Local Development Frameworks. However, exceptional planning consent may be granted if:

• The District/Borough Council has a local needs planning policy 
• The site is well-related to the village development boundary
• There is a demonstrated current and likely future need for the proposed houses
• The proposed scheme meets the demonstrated needs in terms of size, price and tenure
• The proposed scheme conforms to all other planning policies, in terms of design, access, layout and materials
• There are adequate safeguards to ensure that the houses remain available for local people in perpetuity and cannot become part of the open market
• There is general local support, usually demonstrated through the Parish or Town Council, for the use of the site for this purpose.

This approach to building affordable housing in villages is now mainstream policy. It is supported by national government. It is also accepted at parish/town level because the aims are clear, local participation is positively promoted, and long term control of occupancy is guaranteed.

The Beacon Project is currently in discussions with both Charlbury Town Council leaders as well as West Oxfordshire District Council, to look closely at affordable housing needs in Charlbury and the sort of planning framework that would be most appropriate. It may be that the proposal of a rural exception site will be the best option, with an established national track record in bringing sustainable development. Given that the provisions for Community Right to Build as envisaged in the coalition Government's Localism Bill are yet to be fully understood or implemented, this may prove the best option locally in the short term.

in 2009 the Rural Housing Trust published an interesting fact sheet, called 10 Steps to achieving affordable housing on rural exception sites. Read.

Neighbourhood Planning Regulations

Source: Dept Communities and Local Govt.

In the consultation document on Neighbourhood Planning Regulations, published in October 2011 by the Department of Communities and Local Government, a number of recommendations are made about how Community Right to Build groups should be constituted:

13. For the purposes of paragraph 3(1)(b) of Schedule 4C (community right to build orders) to the 1990 Act, the following additional conditions are prescribed—
(a) individuals who live or work in the particular area must have the opportunity to become members of the community organisation (whether or not others can also become members);
(b) the constitution of the community organisation must provide that— 
(i) individuals who live in the particular area control at least 51% of its voting rights;
(ii) one of its objectives is to provide a benefit for the local community;
(iii) any assets of the community organisation cannot be sold or developed except in a manner which the trust’s members consider benefits the local community;
(iv) any profits from its activities will be used to benefit the local community (otherwise than by being paid directly to members);
(v) in the event of the winding up of the community organisation or in any other circumstances where the community organisation ceases to exist, its assets must be transferred to another body corporate which has similar objectives; and
(vi) the organisation has at least 5 members, who are not related to each other, who live in the particular area.


The Beacon Project Charlbury currently meets all of these proposed stipulations for a CRTB group, and will be discussing ways of opening the membership of the project when a site is identified and the extent of potential membership is thereby known.

Community Right to Build

Source: Dept of Communities and Local Govt.

The Coalition Government's Localism Bill, which gained Royal Assent on November 15 2011 potentially introduces important new rights and powers to allow local communities to shape new development in their area. There are two strands to the Bill in this regard: Neighbourhood Development Plans would be taken forward by either town or parish councils to decide what development they would like to see in their area, which would then be put to a referendum of the local population. The second strand is the Community Right to Build initiative, which would enable community organisations to bring forward smaller scale development proposals that are sustainable and bring benefits to their communities. The Bill states that it envisages Community Right to Build in this way:

"As part of neighbourhood planning, the Bill gives groups of local people the power to deliver the development that their local community want. They may wish to build new homes, businesses, shops, playgrounds or meeting halls. A community organisation, formed by members of the local community, will be able to bring forward development proposals which, providing they meet minimum criteria and can demonstrate local support through a referendum, will be able to go ahead without requiring a separate traditional planning application. The benefits of the development, such as new affordable housing or profits made from letting the homes, will stay within the community, and be managed for the benefit of the community. There will be support for communities wishing to bring forward development under the community right to build, providing information, advice and signposting to relevant expertise."


This initiative sits within the wider context of a proposed major shift in planning in the UK to meet the housing crisis and to drive economic growth. The proposed – and controversial – National Planning Policy Framework for instance is based on  three premises: planning for prosperity, planning for people, and planning for places (environmental role). The controversial element is the strong presumption in favour of 'sustainable development', which is as yet to be defined. Within this new framework Local Authorities should:

• Prepare local plans to meet locally assessed development needs
• Approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay
• Grant permission where the plan is absent, silent, indeterminate or where relevant policies are out of date

In other words, where a proposal is consistent with an adopted neighbourhood plan it should be approved unless there is an overriding national interest reason not to, or the proposal impinges upon a site designated for nature conservation, for example under the EU Habitats Directive etc. There is an emphasis upon a 'plan-led' approach in contrast the present system of 'development control'. The sustainable component emphasises the natural and historic environment, full use of public transport, walking and cycling; strategies for health and well-being; promotion of renewable energy etc.


The Beacon Project Charlbury sees this as a potentially important step towards allowing sustainable, environmentally-friendly development in Charlbury which will bring benefits to the community in the form of more affordable, and better quality, housing, as well as potential employment.

Charlbury Quarry Site

Charlbury Quarry, Oxfordshire. Source: Google Maps

In October 2011 Beacon Project Charlbury approached the owner of the former Charlbury Quarry site off the Ditchley Road to discuss the possibility of the site as a location for the Project. The proposal suggested that a small sustainable eco development with affordable housing for the community could be located to the southwest of the site, with a management plan developed for the SSSI (site of special scientific interest for geology) area of the site, in conjunction with local and scientific groups. This would have allowed for community access and enjoyment of the whole of the site as well as an ongoing management plan for biodiversity and geological education.

In their reply to the proposal in November 2011 the owner of the site argued that the Project's proposals did not sufficiently maximise the economic potential of the site from his perspective, and that in the meantime the site would remain closed to public access, due to stringent insurance conditions, but would also be a haven for wildlife.