Greenwell Farm - Durham County Council

Transcription

Planning ServicesCOMMITTEE REPORTAPPLICATION DETAILSAPPLICATION NO:FULL APPLICATION DESCRIPTION:NAME OF APPLICANT:ADDRESS:ELECTORAL DIVISION:CASE OFFICER:1/2011/0172Erection of farm workers dwelling (Resubmission)Mr L OliverGreenwell FarmLanchesterCounty DurhamDH7 0STLanchesterSteve FranceSenior Planning OfficerTelephone: 0191 3872263steve.france@durham.gov.ukDESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND PROPOSALSThe Site1.Greenwell Farm is situated 0.75miles due south of Lanchester Village, alongsideand west of the B6301 that connects Lanchester to Cornsay Colliery. Sited on thenorth facing, steep valley side of the River Browney, the farm faces towards theAncient Monument and archaeological remains of Longovicium Roman fort, withthe course of Dere Street Roman Road running through the Farm, and immediatelyadjacent the site of the proposed farm workers dwelling. The line of the RomanRoad and where it crossed the River Browney is not accurately determined.2.The farm unit and surrounding land is wholly within agricultural and countrysideuse, characterised by pasture and woodland subdivided by a mixture of dry-stonewalling and agricultural three bar fencing, with a number of large farm buildinggroups visible on the surrounding slope of the river valley incorporating traditionaland modern agricultural structures. In addition 0.25 miles south-east is LanchesterGarden Centre, with a dwelling, and a series of low sheds and poly-tunnelstructures containing various sales and storage areas and a café.3.The land is designated as Area of High Landscape Value, with the River Browneyidentified in the Local Plan as a Wildlife Corridor.4.The proposed siting of the Agricultural workers dwelling is physically and visuallydetached from the existing, traditional farm group, which is now within separatelegal title. The chosen site is adjacent a newly formed access to the farmland andthe modern farm buildings, from a single track metalled public highway thatconnects the B6301 to the Ragpathside area, opposite a small copse. There areglimpsed views of the site from the B6301 as it leaves Lanchester Village, and as it

drops down the bank past The Lodge of Newfield Hall at Bargate Bank on thenorthern slopes of the river valley. There are long distance views of the site fromthe B6296 between Lanchester and Hollinside. A Public Right of Way runs acrossthe farmland equidistant between the River Browney and the single track roadbetween the traditional farm group of Greenwell Farm, leading to those buildingsfrom the dwellings of 1 and 2 Bargate.The Proposal5.The application proposes erection of a detached dormer bungalow at the newlyformed farm access to house a farm worker responsible for working GreenwellFarm, which forms part of a larger farm unit. The bungalow faces north across theBrowney river valley, and consists of a main dwelling with lounge, dining,kitchen/diner, and various small rooms, with two bedrooms and a bathroomupstairs. The side of the bungalow is attached to the double garage by a small link,giving the appearance in longer views of an evolved series of small buildings in thescale and vernacular of a traditional small agricultural dwelling. Materials proposedare likewise traditional, whilst the bay windows and fenestration arrangement is ofmore modern appearance in deference to the residential amenity required of theproperty. The building will be seen from the public domain in medium distanceglimpsed views, where scale, form and materials are of greater importance forvisual integration than fenestration. The dwelling is situated at the new farmentrance to give natural surveillance and security to the main agricultural buildings.In this regard the proposed siting has advantages compared to the original farmgroup.PLANNING HISTORY6.This application is a resubmission of an application submitted in 2010 andwithdrawn earlier this year for a similar proposal. Again, earlier this year anapplication for Agricultural Determination for the erection of a silage pit andcreation of new access road was approved – this has been fully implemented. Anagricultural building was approved on application in 2004, with agriculturaldeterminations for modern agricultural stock buildings approved in 1999 and 2003.PLANNING POLICYNATIONAL POLICY7.The Government has indicated an intention to consolidate all planning policystatements, circulars and guidance into a single policy statement, and this intentionis of material weight when considering a proposal. Termed the draft NationalPlanning Policy Framework (NPPF), the overriding message from the Frameworkis that planning authorities should plan positively for new development, andapprove all individual proposals wherever possible. In particular they shouldapprove proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay. The Frameworkproposes that planning permission should be granted where the plan is “absent,silent, indeterminate, or where relevant policies are out of date”. The draft NPPFstates that the primary objective of development management is to “foster thedelivery of sustainable development, not to hinder or prevent development”. Itrequires local planning authorities to approach development managementdecisions positively, attach significant weight to the benefits of economic andhousing growth, influence development proposals to achieve quality outcomes, andenable the delivery of sustainable development proposals. Therefore in this

application, both the emerging intent of the NPPF and the existing PPSs and PPGsneed to be given appropriate weight.8.Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development sets out theGovernments overachieving planning policies on the delivery of sustainabledevelopment through the planning System.9.PPS4 – Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth - Economic developmentincludes all B Use Classes, public and community uses and main town centreuses. The policies also apply to uses providing either employment opportunities,general wealth or producing/generating an economic output/product.Theoverarching objective is sustainable economic growth by - building prosperouscommunities; - reducing the gap in growth rates between regions, promotingregeneration and tackling deprivation; - delivering more sustainable patterns ofdevelopment, reducing the need to travel and responding to climate change; promoting viability of town and other centres as important places for communities;and - raising the qualities of life and the environment in rural areas by promotingthriving, inclusive and locally distinctive communities whilst continuing to protectthe countryside for the benefit of all. In promoting the vitality and viability of centresthe Government wants – new economic growth to be focused in existing centres;competition between retailers and enhanced consumer choice; and the historic,archaeological and architectural heritage of centres conserved/enhanced toprovide a sense of place and for civic activity. The policy also encourages supportof farm diversification, equine enterprises, tourism and leisure.10.PPS 5 – Planning for the Historic Environment – (this replaces PPG 15 and 16)These policies are material considerations that must be taken into account inarriving at development management decisions. Developers should provide adescription of the significance of the heritage assets affected and the contributionof their setting to their significance. Where appropriate, this should include a deskbased archaeological assessment. In considering applications, Local PlanningAuthorities should take into account the effect of an application on the significanceof heritage assets. There should be a presumption in favour of the conservation ofdesignated heritage assets. Where substantial loss or significance, permissionshould be refused. Local Planning Authorities should treat applications favourablywhere they preserve elements of the setting that contribute to the significance.Opportunities should be identified that enhance / improve setting or significance.Enabling developments that secure the future conservation of an asset should beassessed against the dis-benefits of departing from the development plan. Wherethe loss of the whole or part of a significant asset is justified, Local PlanningAuthorities should require the developer to record and advance understanding ofthe asset’s significance before it is lost.11.PPS 7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas –Within rural areas thegovernment’s key objectives include the preferential development of brownfieldsites, and resisting new building in the open countryside. Good quality, carefullysited and accessible developments within existing towns and villages should beallowed where it benefits the local economy and /or community, maintains orenhances the local environment. All development should be well designed,inclusive, in keeping and scale with its location and sensitive to the character of thecountryside and local distinctiveness.12.PPG 13 – Transport – Its objectives are to integrate planning and transport at thenational, regional, strategic and local levels and promote more sustainable

transport choices both for carrying people and moving freight. It also promotesaccessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport,walking and cycling. Finally, it aims to reduce the need to travel, especially by car.REGIONAL PLANNING POLICY13.The North East of England Plan - Regional Spatial Strategy to 2021 (RSS) July2008, sets out the broad spatial development strategy for the North East region forthe period of 2004 to 2021. The RSS sets out the region's housing provision andthe priorities in economic development, retail growth, transport investment, theenvironment, minerals and waste treatment and disposal. Some policies have anend date of 2021 but the overall vision, strategy, and general policies will guidedevelopment over a longer timescale.14.In July 2010 the Local Government Secretary signalled his intention to revokeRegional Spatial Strategies with immediate effect, and that this was to be treatedas a material consideration in subsequent planning decisions. This wassuccessfully challenged in the High Court in November 2010, thus for the momentreinstating the RSS. However, it remains the Government’s intention to abolishRegional Spatial Strategies when Orders have been made under section 109 of theLocalism Act 2011, and weight can now be attached to this intention. The followingpolicies are considered relevant.15.The Policies of the RSS are designed as strategic Policies, and whilst important inthe hierarchy of material policies do not contain a level of detail that affect anythingother than the general principle of the development, as a single residential unit.16.Policy 2 - Sustainable Development (essentially requiring new developmentproposals to meet the aim of promoting sustainable patterns of development).17.Policy 8 - Protecting and Enhancing the Environment (which requires newdevelopment to maintain local distinctiveness).18.Policy 11 - Rural Areas - proposals should support development of a vibrant ruraleconomy whilst protecting the Region’s environmental assets from inappropriatedevelopment.19.Policy 31 - Landscape Character states planning proposals should, sustainnationally, regionally and locally valued landscapes, having regard to landscapecharacter assessments and local landscape designations, recognising the rolecharacter based planning tools such as Village Design Statements can play inpromoting high quality development that respects local character anddistinctiveness.20.Policy 32 – Historic Environment – Planning proposals should seek to conserveand enhance the historic environment by encouraging refurbishment & reuse ofappropriate disused / under-used buildings and seeking to preserve in situnationally important archaeological sites and other remains of regional / localimportance. Opportunities of heritage led regeneration should be used in aconstructive way to achieve social / economic regeneration and encourage itspotential for business, education and tourismLOCAL PLAN POLICY:21.Policy GDP1 – General Development Principles – outlines the requirements thatnew development proposals should meet, requiring high standards of design,

protection of landscape and historic features, protection of open land with amenityvalue, respecting residential privacy and amenity, taking into account ‘designingout crime’ and consideration of drainage.22.Policy EN1 – Development in the Countryside – will only be permitted where itbenefits the rural economy / helps maintain / enhance landscape character.Proposals should be sensitively related to existing settlement patterns and tohistoric, landscape, wildlife and geological resources.23.Policy EN6 - Development within Areas of High Landscape Value - Developmentwill only be permitted provided that it pays particular attention to the landscapequalities of the area in the siting and design of buildings and the context of anylandscaping proposals.24.Policy EN19 - Protection of Sites and Settings of Ancient Monuments andArchaeological Features - there will be a presumption of the retention in situ ofnationally important remains. Remains of more local significance will be protectedfrom damage.An archaeological assessment may be requested prior todetermining an application. Recording of known remains will be required wherethese would be affected.25.Policy AG3 – Agricultural Development – permission will be granted providing itmeets operational needs and is designed for the purposes of agriculture; is sited/designed to be in scale with/be unobtrusive in the landscape; does not result inloss of amenity to surrounding occupiers; incorporates adequate landscapingwhere appropriate.26.Policy TR2 – Development and Highway Safety – relates to the provision of safevehicular access, adequate provision for service vehicle manoeuvring, etc.ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE:27.The Lanchester Village Design Statement – outlines guidance to conserve thevalued aspects of the village and the land around it and seeks to enableappropriate development based on guidance and aspirations. This documentstates that care should be taken of the Roman remains around Lanchester’ andnotes that ‘views from within the village of the surrounding countryside areimportant to the character of the village and should be retained wherever possible’.Although there are no specific design guidelines relating to new farm-houses in thecountryside, with over 30 farms in the Parish, the design of any new buildingshould respect the site location and usually follow a ‘traditional format’.The above represents a summary of those policies considered most relevant in the Development Plan the fulltext, criteria, and justifications of each may be accessed m.CONSULTATION AND PUBLICITY RESPONSESSTATUTORY RESPONSES:28.Highways - No objections.

29.The Environment Agency confirmed no objection to the proposal for erection of afarm workers dwelling in February 2011.INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES:30.The County Rights of Way Officer no objections.31.The County Archaeologist has worked with the applicants during the course of theapplication to agree an investigation of the site to ensure the proposed workswould not affect the Roman Road. As this report is prepared, the final reportconfirming a lack of archaeological impact is being prepared, and will be submittedto the Archaeologist for County Records before the application is considered,meeting the requirements of the approach required by PPS5. No further conditionsare considered required.32.The County Ecologist confirmed on the previous application in 2010 that the siteshould not affect ecology interests.PUBLIC RESPONSES:33.Lanchester Parish Council have confirmed that their original objections to theprevious application remain, the principle issue relating to the ownership of theresidential buildings that formed the original farm group and the availability of theseto the applicant, and do not feel an appropriate case has been made for it, with thesubmitted financial information not relating to this farm in isolation. The dwelling isconsidered as unacceptable in the open countryside, with size, style and scaleinappropriate for the use. The access to the B3021 is queried.APPLICANTS STATEMENT:34.‘The application was resubmitted after satisfying concerns regarding design andlocation on 25th March 2011.35.The reason for the application is to try and establish a farm worker’s dwelling atGreenwell Farm to serve the cattle and sheep enterprise, which is carried out atGreenwell over the 72.30 hectares (178.83 acres), whilst managing livestock in themodern agricultural buildings. Unfortunately the farm cottage and the farmhouse atGreenwell Farm do not form part of the ownership and as a consequence areunable to be used to house a farm worker/manager to look after livestock atGreenwell Farm.36.A revised application was submitted as stated on 25th March 2011 after concernsover the initial design. The application was supported with an AgriculturalAppraisal, which found the need to have a minimum of 13 agricultural workerscarrying out the work over all of the holdings farmed by the applicant and for ahouse to be positioned at Greenwell Farm to be within sight and sound of theagricultural buildings to provide biosecurity and animal welfare to any livestockhoused in the agricultural buildings.37.Concerns were raised by the Council prior to the resubmission regarding theownership of Greenwell Farm and Greenwell Cottage and it was explained thatthese properties are registered separately under two different trading names anddifferent ownerships and as a consequence were unable to be occupied by theapplicant or his employees.

38.There was a number of issues raised with the first application by Lanchester ParishCouncil and the Community Partnership and as a consequence the first applicationwas withdrawn and then after discussing the application again with the Council andconsidering alternative sites and refining the design of the property it was agreedthat the current position would be the most suitable and would stem any concernsof the Parish Council and the Community Partnership.39.Prior to the resubmission there were various discussions with Durham CountyCouncil’s Solicitor and Planning Officers who found that there was no case law orevidence to substantiate that the applicant was able to use the farm cottage andfarmhouse and the fact that these were under different ownership at the LandRegistry confirmed this. There was various correspondence during May 2011regarding the ownership with Durham County Council’s solicitor and my client’ssolicitor when it was agreed that even if the cottage and house were available to MrOliver there was significant functional justification to require a further farm workerto be housed within sight and sound of the agricultural buildings, with the proposedhouse having better views of the agricultural buildings rather than the currentsituation of the farm cottage and farmhouse as the farm steading is expanding westaway from the original farmhouse and farm cottage at Greenwell Farm. Againfurther agricultural justification was provided on the account that Greenwell Farmwas assessed on a stand alone basis away from Mr Oliver’s other land holdingsand farm holdings and the fact that there was no alternative accommodationavailable in the close proximity to Greenwell Farm. Financial figures were notseparated out as this would be impossible as all the holdings farmed by theapplicant are run as one business.40.During June 2011 Planning Officers raised concerns with the siting and this wasdiscussed, but due to the positioning of gas mains, overhead power lines and stockmovements across the public highway which runs through Greenwell Farm therewere limited sites available and it was decided that the best location would be thatin this application.41.Concerns were also raised regarding the design and this was significantly reducedto provide an appearance of a small bungalow with dormer windows and structureof stone under a blue slate roof fitting to the local area.42.The design and concerns of the Parish Council and Lanchester Partnership wereaddressed and further justification again provided on 31st August 2011 when theapplication was put forward to go to the next committee meeting, it was found thatthere needed to be an archaeological survey carried out due to the close proximityto Dere Street Roman Road causing further delay. This was finally produced andcompleted in December 2011 which then made the application available to go tothe next committee meeting with recommendation for approval by the officer.However the reason for this application attending committee is on the request ofthe Parish Council and Lanchester Partnership.43.The proposal for an agricultural farm worker’s dwelling has been justified throughworking for nearly a year with two Planning Case Officers to ascertain that there isa genuine need for a further farm worker’s dwelling at Greenwell Farm and it is nowbelieved that this has satisfactorily been done while also answering the concernsand addressing issues raised by the Parish Council and Lanchester Partnershipalong with dealing with the archaeological issues of the site. It is hoped thatapproval will be given and it is appreciated that the new dwelling will have anagricultural tie on it which again to further reiterate the suitability of the farmworker’s dwelling as the existing cottage and house at Greenwell neither have anagricultural tie on and therefore were unable to be purchased by the applicant at

the time and as a consequence are in separate business ownership of adevelopment company and do not need form part of Greenwell Farm due to nothaving an agricultural tie on them.44.The proposed house is to be used solely in conjunction with Greenwell Farm as anagricultural unit and the agricultural tie will reinforce this.45.Any questions by the committee are welcomed either beforehand or at thecommittee meeting.’The above represents a summary of the comments received on this application. The full written text isavailable for inspection on the application file which can be viewed athttp://82.113.161.89/WAM/showCaseFile.do?action show&appType planning&appNumber 10/00955/FPAPLANNING CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSESSMENT46.As identified in Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004the key consideration in the determination of a planning application is thedevelopment plan. Applications should be determined in accordance with thedevelopment plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The keyconsiderations with regard to this application are the principle of the development,design and siting, archaeology, and highways.Principle of the Development47.PPS7 states that new isolated houses in the countryside require specialjustification for planning permission to be granted. One of the few circumstances inwhich new dwellings can be justified is when accommodation is required to enableagricultural, forestry or certain other full time rural workers to live at or in theimmediate vicinity of their place of work. The PPS sets out a number of criteria thatshould be met before permission is granted for permanent agricultural dwellings tosupport existing agricultural activities on well established agricultural units. Thesecriteria are as follows – 48.There is a clearly established existing functional need.The need relates to a full time worker, or one who is primarily employed inagriculture.The unit and the agricultural activity concerned have been established for atleast three years, have been profitable for at least one of them, are currentlyfinancially sound and have a clear prospect of remaining so.The functional need could not be fulfilled by another existing dwelling on theunit, or any other existing accommodation in the area.Other planning requirements e.g. access, design etc.The key determinant of this application is therefore whether there is ademonstrated functional and financial need for the dwelling, as required by PPS7.The tests are addressed below.The Functional Test49.Officers accept the operational need for a worker on the Greenwell Farm Unit, apoint that also appears to have been accepted in the course of the previousapplication. Detailed operational information has been submitted during the courseof the application, indicating that the lack of an agricultural worker at GreenwellFarm has meant that the stock – suckler cows in particular – have to be located at

Hastings House during calving, having a detrimental effect on operations andpreventing increases to the herd and the proper business expansion the landpotentially allows. Calculations on the man hours needed for the operation of cattle,lambs, forage and winter cereals on Greenwell Farm was set out in an appendix toa letter in August 2011. It is stated this issue cannot be resolved until a suitabledwelling can be provided at Greenwell. The financial information submitted showsthat four workers are needed on site, but it is appreciated by the applicant that onlyone is needed for full-time surveillance.50.The Annex to PPS7 also requires that the functional need could not be fulfilled byanother existing dwelling on the unit, or any other existing accommodation in thearea which is suitable and available for occupation by the workers concerned. Thecrux of this case, it is suggested, falls on the phrase ‘suitable and available’.51.The traditional farm group sits within the traditional farm unit, and includes theformer farmhouse and a cottage. As the more recent developments on the farmhave been carried out on the far side of the farm group, it has been suggested thatthese buildings are now not ideally situated for the surveillance required of the newagricultural buildings and the new farm access. The applicants therefore argue theexisting buildings are functionally deficient their siting for an agricultural workerproviding surveillance of the farm.52.Furthermore, the applicant’s state that they do not own the existing properties –they being owned by a different business, with different directors, albeit in the samefamily. They state that when the string transfer at the point of sale of the landoccurred, the applicant as operators of the farmland were not in a financial positionto be able to buy the farmhouse and cottage, as not being subject to an agriculturaltie, the properties were significantly more expensive than an agricultural worker’sdwelling could justify. The argument therefore is that being of greater value than anagricultural workers dwelling could justify, and further being transferred intoseparate legal ownership, the buildings were not suitable, and are therefore notavailable.53.The PPS advises that in cases where the Local Planning Authority is particularlyconcerned about possible abuse, it should investigate the history of the holding toestablish the recent pattern of use of land and buildings and whether, for example,any dwellings, or buildings suitable for conversion to dwellings, have recently beensold separately from the farmland concerned. Such a sale could constituteevidence of lack of agricultural need. Officers have struggled with this issue, giventhe extent of information available. There is no suggestion that the separation ofthe farm holding and the farm buildings was in any way illegal – there being no tieor planning conditions to require such. In business terms dwellings in thecountryside without such legal ties are always an asset, attracting a greater valuethat properties with an agricultural occupancy restriction, to the extent that their usefor agricultural purposes becomes beyond economic reach.54.The need for a dwelling on the farm could of course be met by one of the existingdwellings on the unit. The question is whether the applicant could secure a tenancyfor their employee in those existing dwellings, and this reverts back to their current(untied) value. Legally that step is not within the control of the applicants becausethe freehold is held by a company they do not control. It is then relevant that theapplicants propose to build a modest dwelling of a scale that might be expected byan agricultural worker, rather than a ‘grand’ main farmhouse. Despite muchnegotiation, and to the frustration of both the applicants and officers, this issue hasnot been comprehensively resolved. There is no strong caselaw to assist in the

assessment, and it is relevant to note that a refusal could lead to a potentiallyexpensive appeal.55.It is Officers view that it has been reasonably proved there is a functionalrequirement for a dwelling to control Greenwell Farm as an individual farmcomponent of what is now a far larger whole agricultural business. At this point intime the dwellings traditionally controlling the farm are legally separate from it, andnot financially available to it. Whilst those buildings have been legally separatedfrom the farm, this is not considered to have indicated a lack of agricultural need. Inthe hierarchy of Policy required to underpin any decision, the key consideration inthe determination of a planning application is the development plan, and for thisissue, Policy AG3. That Policy sets out criteria to ensure the dwelling is; requiredfor operational needs, sited to be in scale with the landscape, does not result inloss of amenity to neighbours and incorporates landscaping where appropriate.The application is considered in accordance with this Policy in terms of this issue.In complying with the Policy, and in the absence of a strong evidence base thatwould justify a refusal, the presence and legal position of nearby dwellings inseparate ownership, outside the control of the applicants, is accepted at face value.The Financial Test56.The ability of the development to meet the financ

between the traditional farm group of Greenwell Farm, leading to those buildings from the dwellings of 1 and 2 Bargate. The Proposal 5. The application proposes erection of a detached dormer bungalow at the newly formed farm access to house a farm worker responsible for working Greenwell Farm, which forms part of a larger farm unit.