Planning Applications, PD and the like (General Chat)

[Agri Design]

Yesterday I had a meeting with a Senior Planning Officer from a LPA in the South East on an non-agricultural site visit and over a cup of coffee I put a couple of these hypothetical queries based on the fact he knows I'm a smallholder.

Firstly, on the 90m separation he agrees with David's reading of the GPDO.

Secondly, on the "what defines a holding" in relation to PD, he admitted that there is no hard and fast way of determining a holding but for PD he would ideally like to see that each portion could/is working as a self contained farm i.e a retirement bungalow on a paddock with no other infrastructure would be looked upon dimly but if that bungalow had a yard, maybe a muck heap and direct access to surrounding fields it may be eligible. Ultimately, the building must be reasonably necessary for the holding that it is being applied on. Separate RPA maps would be the ideal proof I believe.

Finally, on the overhang being part of the floor area. He said that he would consider the area as part of the floor area if it was integral to the internal use of the building as for example a feed passage or an external (covered) collecting yard. If the area beneath the canopy was not linked to the main shed i.e it has a solid wall between them then it may be excluded.

All of his comments were unofficial and off the record and he said that every PD application will be interpreted by an individual who may have a different reading than he.

That doesn't sound like a planner you were talking to, far to sensible a response. I do sometimes use the RPA maps - IACS maps as poof. In general though it is case by case. If we look at you example and alter it slightly.
"a retirement bungalow on a paddock with no other infrastructure would be looked upon dimly" and change the same to
a bungalow on a parcel of land with no other infrastructure, with a young farmer looking to establish - grow a herd would generally be looked on more favourably.

David

 

[George from SJM Planning]

That doesn't sound like a planner you were talking to, far to sensible a response. I do sometimes use the RPA maps - IACS maps as poof. In general though it is case by case. If we look at you example and alter it slightly.
"a retirement bungalow on a paddock with no other infrastructure would be looked upon dimly" and change the same to
a bungalow on a parcel of land with no other infrastructure, with a young farmer looking to establish - grow a herd would generally be looked on more favourably.

David

Touch wood the planners in the LPA's we work in most of the time are reasonable people and are happy to work to resolve an issue with an application rather than issue a refusal. Less paperwork that way too.

An application can be swayed by the description of the work. Don't lie, just think how the wording would sound if yu were sitting on the other side of the fence.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Don't lie, just think how the wording would sound if you were sitting on the other side of the fence.

Always a good approach.

 

[Moorlands]

Hi I'm planning a new building and neighbours can be a bit of a pain just wondering is there a set distance from private residences to foot prints of proposed buildings that neighbours get consultation letters?

 

[George from SJM Planning]

Hi I'm planning a new building and neighbours can be a bit of a pain just wondering is there a set distance from private residences to foot prints of proposed buildings that neighbours get consultation letters?

For all planning applications, there is no set distance from which neighbours get consultation letters. It is usually everyone who has a piece of land immediately adjoining the land which you outline in red on the site location plan.


Some local authorities do not send letters; some just put up site notices; some do both. The planning regs just make clear that adjoining neighbours have to be notified. In some cases, adverts are also taken out in the local newspapers known as a weekly list.

 

[Greenbeast]

Ours doesn't do letters. My step-dad's even tucked he notice in hedge...

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Is there any truth in the comment I've heard allot that you can rebuild a building without needing pp if there's a wall still standing?

In the late 70's dad had the building outlined below demolished to build our cattle shed but left the end wall standing. These days the old buildings would be worth good money to convert (but would cost a fair bit to rebuild).

 

[George from SJM Planning]

Is there any truth in the comment I've heard allot that you can rebuild a building without needing pp if there's a wall still standing?

In the late 70's dad had the building outlined below demolished to build our cattle shed but left the end wall standing. These days the old buildings would be worth good money to convert (but would cost a fair bit to rebuild).

I checked with Simon (my boss) as I've heard this rumour as well and this was his response:

I fear it it quite a grey area. In my experience, Council’s aren’t required to allow you to rebuild a building once it has been substantially demolished. If it is as part of a permitted scheme, it might be worth arguing, but generally once a building is largely demolished, the LPA is not obliged to allow its reconstruction.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

I checked with Simon (my boss) as I've heard this rumour as well and this was his response:

I fear it it quite a grey area. In my experience, Council’s aren’t required to allow you to rebuild a building once it has been substantially demolished. If it is as part of a permitted scheme, it might be worth arguing, but generally once a building is largely demolished, the LPA is not obliged to allow its reconstruction.

Like much of planning then

In a few years we're looking to develop the farmyard. The traditional buildings are crying out for it and planning would be relatively straightforward.

Under the new rules we could seek to replace the 465m2 cattle shed with another 3 houses and that would probably be cheaper than rebuilding the old buildings but, if we needed to prove things, the footings of them can still be seen and we have photos.

It's our NZ funding project

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

I've been listening to the radio 4 series "Against the grain" and today's episode included a bit about the history of hedgerows. It got me thinking. Our LA's insist that new hedgerows associated with development screening are multi species, often allowing their colleagues to specify the species mix. Do they have to be?

 

[Still Farming]

I've been listening to the radio 4 series "Against the grain" and today's episode included a bit about the history of hedgerows. It got me thinking. Our LA's insist that new hedgerows associated with development screening are multi species, often allowing their colleagues to specify the species mix. Do they have to be?

Most prob. You'll have to engage an ecology officer and list of consultants to explain to them and GREAT cost to you -to tell them the answer's they already know ?
Crazy !

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Most prob. You'll have to engage an ecology officer and list of consultants to explain to them and GREAT cost to you -to tell them the answer's they already know ?
Crazy !

I recall an EA conservation officer objecting to a hedgerow removal on a planning permission once on the grounds of it being "historic and ecologically valuable". It was 20% thorn and 80% elder!

 

[Bruce Almighty]

My friend has a traditional brick barn and has recently got planning to convert it. Does this remove his pd rights for a 465 m2 building elsewhere on his farm ?

Behind the traditional barn is a portal frame building 50' X 40' which has to be removed under the planning conditions. He could do with this being re-erected to continue to use for hay & straw, machinery etc.

Will he need full PP to re-erect the building or will 28 day notice suffice ?

 

[George from SJM Planning]

My friend has a traditional brick barn and has recently got planning to convert it. Does this remove his pd rights for a 465 m2 building elsewhere on his farm ?

Behind the traditional barn is a portal frame building 50' X 40' which has to be removed under the planning conditions. He could do with this being re-erected to continue to use for hay & straw, machinery etc.

Will he need full PP to re-erect the building or will 28 day notice suffice ?

Was the application for the conversion done under PD or a full application?

If the conversion was under PD it is likely that it a new building will require full permission as I'm fairly certain that conversion to residential effectively nullifies the PD rights as the premise of the prior notification application is that the building was redundant.



In my experience it's still common to secure permission for future buildings as the one you've converted might not have been suitable anyway for the purpose you now seek.

If the application for conversion was a full application it may not affect future PD applications unless a condition of the decision was to remove all future PD rights. This will be made clear on the decision notice.

 

[Greenbeast]

Was the application for the conversion done under PD or a full application?

If the conversion was under PD it is likely that it a new building will require full permission as I'm fairly certain that conversion to residential effectively nullifies the PD rights as the premise of the prior notification application is that the building was redundant.



In my experience it's still common to secure permission for future buildings as the one you've converted might not have been suitable anyway for the purpose you now seek.

If the application for conversion was a full application it may not affect future PD applications unless a condition of the decision was to remove all future PD rights. This will be made clear on the decision notice.

although it's not the conversion that is being re-erected. the brick barn was 'redundant' and therefore available for conversion...

 

[Bruce Almighty]

Thanks @GeorgieB82 and @Greenbeast

I'm not sure if the application was for full PP or PD

The brick barn was / is used for storage of machinery & the portal frame behind for cattle. I think some more homework is required.

 

[George from SJM Planning]

Thanks @GeorgieB82 and @Greenbeast

I'm not sure if the application was for full PP or PD

The brick barn was / is used for storage of machinery & the portal frame behind for cattle. I think some more homework is required.

If you want me to look into the details for you I'd be happy to take a look. Either drop me a message or email me at [email protected]. We have done some research pro bono for other members so don't feel uncomfortable asking.

 

[Still Farming]

What's the do's and don't's please on upgrading existing farm tracks and access as old and grassed over to use for farm and parking /access for a shop .
Local Authority say full planning fee plus change of use fee etc. but really dragging their feet as put application in and 4 months passed and not validated yet ?
Under PD do /did I need planning anyhow ?

 

[George from SJM Planning]

What's the do's and don't's please on upgrading existing farm tracks and access as old and grassed over to use for farm and parking /access for a shop .
Local Authority say full planning fee plus change of use fee etc. but really dragging their feet as put application in and 4 months passed and not validated yet ?
Under PD do /did I need planning anyhow ?

What is their excuse for not validating the application? 4 months without validation is ridiculous

 

[Still Farming]

What is their excuse for not validating the application? 4 months without validation is ridiculous

Stated mid Nov .last - location and site plan did not match up ?
They did.
Then came back again -not to scale required 1-200
so sent in 1-100 better drawn plans -no reply ?
Other utilities have sent in simular works to a track for their apparatus in area and on checking that online there is maps/plans but NO Scale to theirs and all passed weeks ago there and sent in same time ?
I have wrote to authority planning head to see what delays are now ???