- Location
- Portsmouth
So local policy trumps national?
Planning Applications, PD and the like (General Chat)
- Thread starter George from SJM Planning
- Start date
No, there is no National Policy on small sites so it would be down to local level to insist on BNG.
Posted in this space last year but sadly the nightmare continues so wondering if anyone can help? We bought a property in May 2022 the farmer next door can access the whole of his farm from his own land but has a short prescriptive agricultural easement over our small outdoor space. Our vendor didn't disclose that the farmer and his wife are truly the neighbours from hell (NFH) ! Wont bore you with the details but last year our NFH put in a planning application to build stables across the road saying that they had grazed their recreational horses in the field for 10+ years. They got permission but as yet they haven't built the stables however their recreational horses are being grazed over in the field. We are being forced (with a gun to our heads) to give them a registered agricultural easement so we have asked that the field across the road which has just got permission for a change of use to equestrian (having been used for their recreational horses for 10+ years) be removed from the Plan relating to the prescriptive agricultural easement as it is no longer deemed agricultural. However, they are arguing that as they cut grass in the field , cutting grass is still an agricultural activity even though the field is now deemed equestrian. Are they correct? Surely they can't have got a change of use to equestrian and then argue that cutting the grass in the field is still agricultural can they? If they changed all 3 fields on the farm to equestrian but cut the grass could they honestly argue that they were still using the access for agricultural purposes? Thanks
Couldn't see how to edit and I have another question. Up until last year our NFH kept their horses in the stables in the barn behind our property until they found out that having done this for 10+ years meant they had been using the agricultural access unlawfully! So for 10+ years the barn has never been used for storing bales as there is another huge barn behind this one where they have historically stored the bales. However, wanting to re establish the easement as agricultural they started to store their bales in the barn behind our property and then started to leave the huge barn doors open over our small outdoor space arguing that they need them for ventilation!!! We read online that any Fire Risk Assessment (although they don't have to do one as they don't have employees) should consider safety and therefore bales should not be stored within 10m of other buildings let alone next to stables or residential properties. The barn is 2 foot away from our property and about 3 foot away from the bungalow next door so as there is another barn further away from residential property would they be expected to use it and safeguard the properties in close proximity? We did speak to a Fire Safety Officer last year who said (looking at the pictures) there was sufficient ventilation without leaving the doors open over our land but we are wondering if there is any way we can get someone to put this in writing? We are wondering if we should let our insurer know about the close proximity of the bales?
- Location
- Acton Scott, South Shropshire
Is it simply a change of use requirement for a dog-walking paddock?
serf
Member
- Location
- warwickshire
I would guess it depends if you are out in the sticks or in the "ribbon " of existing developments ( village type situation) where there's a "gap that could be filled "
It is easier than most scenarios as there is no change of use but change in legislation in December eased the pressure on councils to allow new dwellings in the countryside even if it is previously developed land (such as gardens) unless they have a dire housing need and do not have a new local plan forthcoming.
- Location
- South Wales UK
Wales totally draconian to everything as usual of course. ☹I would guess it depends if you are out in the sticks or in the "ribbon " of existing developments ( village type situation) where there's a "gap that could be filled "
serf
Member
- Location
- warwickshire
Well that's what you get with commies in power I suppose, rest of us are not quite at that point just yet ....
- Location
- Portsmouth
Would a barn conversion need 10% Bng after April?
Apologies if this has been covered in this thread previously.
Putting an application in for a roof to cover an existing silage clamp.
In the list of documents required is a “planning statement “. Is this something that refers to housing development solely?
Last time we applied was in 2019, and can’t remember this being a necessity, can we add something to our design and access statement to cover it?
Putting an application in for a roof to cover an existing silage clamp.
In the list of documents required is a “planning statement “. Is this something that refers to housing development solely?
Last time we applied was in 2019, and can’t remember this being a necessity, can we add something to our design and access statement to cover it?
Yes it would if full planning permission - Class Q has no requirement
A Planning Statement is a document that outlines how the proposal complies with Local and National Planning Policy. It isn't normally a validation requirement unless the application is considered a major application but we include Planning Statement's with all our applications. If you are submitting via the Planning Portal and it is saying it is a required document then press the "Mark a document as covered by another" button and say it is included in your D&A statement - that should at least get it looked at by a human who will decide if you really do need a Planning Statement.
Thank you
Have a prior notification query if anyone knows the answer please. Looking to put up shed of approx. 220 sq m. General purpose store so no livestock etc. Feel its well within the scope of PD however last year we put some ground mount solar panels that are within 90 m so believe this area counts towards the 1000 sq m. The only are mention of area on the panel planning application is the site area of 1104 sq m that the consultant put down. This is the field area not the area of the panels. Now when filling new form out there is no where to explain this when you tick the box to say there has been development within 90 m. So will they assume the panels are 1104 sq m and PD for new shed is out?
Yes it would be. I mistakenly assumed that the 1000sqm only related to development within the same class but I stand corrected - the legislation states;
"an area “calculated as described in paragraph D.1(2)(a)” comprises the ground area which would be covered by the proposed development, together with the ground area of any building (other than a dwelling), or any structure, works, plant, machinery, ponds or tanks within the same unit which are being provided or have been provided within the preceding 2 years and any part of which would be within 90 metres of the proposed development."
So to meet the legislation you either need to wait 2 years from the completion of the solar panels or move it more than 90m from the solar panels.
Thanks for the swift answer. The actual ground area of the panels is far less than 1100 m2 as there’s plenty of space between the rows but you think that’ll be a lost cause trying to persuade the planners of that?
If you can demonstrate the actual area developed by the panels they I would certainly give it a go.