News Archives - Page 44 of 45 - Planning Design Ltd

PDP Secure Permission for New Sheep Dairy Enterprise at Historic Derbyshire Farm

21st August 201914th February 2019 by Gary Stringer

We were delighted to obtain planning and Listed Building consent in December for the redevelopment of Wakebridge Farm, Crich, to form a sheep dairy enterprise with an associated creamery, hotel, restaurant and bar.

Wakebridge Farm is a former dairy farm including a Grade II Listed late 18th Century farmhouse and attached stone barns (all in need of restoration and repair), built by Peter Nightingale on the site of a medieval manor house and chapel. The farm sits in a small valley overlooking the Derwent Valley, within the World Heritage Site Buffer Zone. On the adjacent hillside is the Grade II* Listed Crich Stand, as well as the Crich Tramway Village, a popular tourist attraction.

Our clients, who have many years’ experience in farming and veterinary practice, wish to develop on of the first sheep’s milk enterprises of its type in the country, with an on-site creamery to produce cheese and other dairy products, and viewing platforms to allow visitors to see the whole process in action.

The old farmhouse and barns will be sensitively converted into a small hotel and restaurant (selling produce from the farm), as well as a training room for veterinary and agriculture students.

This multi-faceted proposal, in a sensitive area the subject of many restrictions and designations, required careful navigation through the planning process. We took on board the views of various consultees and adjusted the plans where appropriate, culminating in what we hope will be an exciting but neighbourly development, contributing positively to the local economy and tourist offer.

We were very pleased when the Amber Valley Planning Board unanimously voted to approve the application at their December meeting.

If you want to know more about this project, please contact us and ask to speak to Jon Millhouse or Lindsay Cruddas.

Government considering key changes to the General Permitted Development Order

21st August 201914th February 2019 by Gary Stringer

The Government published a consultation which ran from 29th October 2018 until 14th January 2019 titled “Planning Reform – Supporting the high street and increasing the delivery of new homes.”

The most significant proposal is to introduce new Permitted Development (PD) rights “to provide additional self-contained homes by extending certain premises upwards”. It is proposed that the new rights would apply to premises in a range of uses that are compatible with C3 residential use. These are defined as potentially including:

“C3 residential premises, those A class and sui generis high street uses that can already change use to housing under a permitted development right ((shops (A1), financial and professional services (A2), restaurants and cafes (A3), betting shops, pay day loan shops and launderettes), offices (B1 (a)), and buildings in mixed use within these uses.”

It is proposed that the PD rights would not apply to: Article 2(3) land (including conservation areas, areas of outstanding natural beauty, the Broads, National Parks and World Heritage Sites), Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), the standard 4 exclusions (i.e. listed building, scheduled monument, safety hazard area, or military explosives storage area) or safeguarded land within 3km of the perimeter of an aerodrome.

The Government is proposing two different ways to deal with the height restrictions. Either, a PD right could allow premises in a terrace (of two or more properties) to extend upwards to be no higher than the main roofline of the highest building in the existing terrace, or, upward extensions could be permitted more widely to a height no higher than the prevailing roof height in the locality.

There is additionally a proposed maximum limit of no more than 5 storeys above grand level once extended (based on an additional storey not exceeding 3m in height). However it is proposed that this height limit would not apply in the case of purpose built, free standing blocks of flats over 5 storeys, which would be allowed to extend upwards (i.e. to a height greater than 5 storeys above ground level).

The applicant would still be required to apply to the Local Planning Authority for approval on a number of issues, such as flood risk and impact on neighbouring amenity.

The document also asks the question of whether these PD rights should additionally allow the upward extension of a dwelling for the enlargement of an existing home.

The second significant proposed change is to allow the demolition of commercial buildings and redevelopment as residential. At present, PD rights allow new homes to be delivered through change of use of existing buildings. The Government suggest that allowing demolition of commercial buildings and replacement build as residential, would allow high quality development to be secured which is consistent with national planning policy.

Feasibility really needs to be explored before this becomes a PD right and factors such as the height and density of new buildings would also need to be considered. It is also being considered whether the right should just apply to smaller sites, as this would be more practical. However it would still have the benefit of setting a precedent for larger sites.

Other matters being considered are:

-To allow shops (A1), financial and professional services (A2), hot food takeaways (A5), betting shops, pay day loan shop and launderettes to change to office use (B1). It is also proposed to allow hot food takeaways (A5) to change to residential use (C3);

-The removal of the existing right that allows the installation of, and advertising on, new public call boxes;

-Increasing size limits for off-street electric vehicle charging points;

-Greater flexibility for temporary changes of use;

-Making permanent two currently time-limited PD rights (B8 to C3 & larger extensions to dwellinghouses)/

There have been some fierce critics of the proposed changes. The Town and Country Planning Association has warned that the proposed changes will deprive local authorities of essential funding and risks creating poor living conditions for vulnerable people.

Dr Hugh Ellis, interim chief executive of the TCPA, said:

“Converting commercial and disused high-street properties into homes is fine, so long as it doesn’t condemn desperate people — often young people or poor families — to live in badly designed boxes without consideration for their health and wellbeing.

“Under the existing system of permitted development, 1,000 new flats can be built in an old 1970s office building or industrial estate, and the local council can’t require a single sq. ft. of play space for the children who live there — and the communities have effectively no say. This cannot become the norm.

“The rebirth of town centres requires vision and masterplanning, with real investment in culture and the built environment. How can we pay for this investment when permitted development removes the power of local authorities to get one penny in section 106 contributions from developers?”

The responses to the consultation will now be considered before any proposed amendments are published. We will provide an update on this in due course.

PDP secures permission for conversion of historic buildings in Longford

29th July 20195th December 2018 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design have successfully obtained planning permission for the sensitive conversion of a listed Farmstead in Longford, Derbyshire Dales. The farmstead had been a dairy farm up until summer 2018, however the farm was no longer viable and the client wished to consider other practical uses for the listed barns. The client has already successfully converted another building on their land to a holiday let, which is frequently occupied.

The proposed scheme comprises six holiday lets – two in the Grade II brick Cowshed, one in a section of the Grade II* brick Hay Barn and a further three in a modern steel frame barn.

Careful consideration had to be given to the setting of the listed farmstead and the location of parking and given its proximity to public footpaths.

Design details had to be resolved at an early stage, which is common for Listed building applications, as Local Planning Authority Conservation officers are required to approve the details. We ensured that the open feel of the barn was retained by having open plan living/kitchen areas, retaining and replacing the rooflights to the internal roof pitches and keeping the roof trusses exposed.

Changing the use of the barns to holiday lets means that the barns will remain in the same ownership and control as the rest of the listed farmstead. Whilst this is not a mandatory item for planning, it is an aspect that is considered more favourably in planning and listed building consent applications for conversion to dwellings.

As the project was so large, complex and detailed, we negotiated with Derbyshire Dales District Council to resolve planning and design issues before the project was recommended for approval at Planning Committee.

The Planning Committee spoke highly of the scheme and were pleased to see a new use for the redundant barns, commenting how they would like to be invited back to see the finished project. The committee unanimously approved the scheme in November 2018.

Class Q appeal in Staffordshire Moorlands establishes that modern agricultural building conversion is acceptable

12th December 20225th December 2018 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice have recently won an appeal against refusal of Prior Approval by Staffordshire Moorlands District Council, in relation to a barn conversion under Class Q of Permitted Development.

This permission was hard won, involving 2 applications for prior approval and several re-designs of the scheme, along with the appeal against the second refusal, as well as providing comments in relation to the updated NPPF (July 2018) during the appeal process. Several members of the team were involved in the whole project, eventually achieving the result our clients were after by gaining approval from the Secretary of State’s appointed Inspector.

The Council has a reputation for strongly resisting applications under Class Q, when the building in question is of modern construction, as opposed to more historical barns that are built from brick or stone. However the permitted development legislation makes no distinction in this respect.

Indeed, it could be argued that Class Q has been enacted to facilitate the conversion of modern agricultural buildings, given that a normal planning permission for change of use is still an available route for applicants with traditional buildings.

Key points from the Inspector’s report that found favour with our arguments and evidence included; that the building is structurally capable of conversion; that none of the proposed works would fall outside of those building operations permitted, that they would be reasonably necessary for the building to function as a dwelling; and that the replacement of the roof materials, provided they are not structural elements, would fall within the scope of works permissible.

Other more general comments of note by the Inspector include:

“The nature of agricultural buildings will invariably mean that they will not have all of the necessary elements of a residential dwelling, or have them to the necessary standard or condition, hence the provisions of paragraph Q.1.(i).”

On the matter of the number of windows in the proposed scheme:

“I do not share the Council’s view that the number of windows proposed is excessive or unnecessary.”

In relation to the Council’s criticism of a ‘domestic’ appearance of the scheme:

“The very nature of a change from an agricultural building to a dwelling will invariably introduce a more domestic appearance in the form of windows and doors.”

In response to the Council’s criticism of full height windows:

“The full height form of the windows would not be uncharacteristic in my view, given the size of openings commonly found on agricultural buildings.”

The most interesting comment from the Inspector however, in my opinion, draws a line once and for all under Staffordshire Moorlands District Council’s “resistance in principle” to the conversion of modern agricultural buildings:

“…the permitted development right under Class Q, which as its starting point, grants permission for agricultural buildings to be converted to dwellings, andit must therefore be the government’s intention that, in principle, such buildings can remain in the landscape and serve a new function as dwellings.”

This appeal decision sets a clear precedent for the acceptability of conversion of modern agricultural buildings under permitted development, and there are many sections of this appeal decision that we will refer to in future. It is hoped that the Planning Officers at SMDC will take on board the Inspector’s reasoning and take a more pragmatic view of these types of applications in future.

If you are considering a barn conversion under Permitted Development Class Q or are currently experiencing difficulties with, or a refusal of, a submitted application, please get in touch with us at Planning & Design Practice for advice on 01332 347371 or email enquiries@planningdesign.co.uk.

Planning & Design Practice secure planning consent for barn conversion in Amber Valley

12th December 20225th December 2018 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice recently secured planning permission for a barn conversion within the Amber Valley Borough. The barn was starting to become weaker, with one wall on the rear elevation beginning to crumble and a steel bracing holding the two main walls firmly in an upright position.

We were approached by the client to prepare designs for the conversion of the building to create an aspirational dwelling in this highly sought-after location. An RIBA Chartered Practice, our approachable and experienced team is comprised of architects, architectural assistants, designers and technicians, who offer a comprehensive design service from concept through to completion.

After a number of sketch scheme ideas, we decided on a design to maximise the space and comfortability of the building. The barn will be converted into a 2-bedroom dwelling including one with an ensuite. We also decided that the dilapidated timber extension could be demolished and re-built on the same footprint to add a contemporary touch to the barn, whilst retaining an agricultural feel.

The application achieved planning consent with minimal complications. Approval was granted in November 2018.

We believe that good design is a crucial part of the planning process. Getting the design of a project right is critical to gaining a successful planning consent and avoiding unnecessary delay and costs.

Our team of RIBA Chartered Architects and Architectural Assistants have a wealth of experience working with homeowners, developers and the public sector.

For more information and for a no obligation consultation to discuss your project, please call us on 01332 347371.

NEDDC ordered to foot £300k appeal costs for ‘unreasonable behaviour’

29th July 20195th December 2018 by Gary Stringer

PDP_North East Derbyshire District Council

North East Derbyshire District Council has had a very bad fortnight, losing 2 appeals on major housing developments in quick succession.

The first scheme, submitted by Rippon Homes Ltd, was for 180 dwellings on Land at Deerlands Road, Wingerworth. The Inspector concluded that there is a five year housing land supply in the District but this is not a ceiling and that the provision of general needs housing together with 40% affordable housing were very significant material considerations weighing in favour of the appeal scheme.

He found that whilst the housing land supply position does not trigger the so called ‘tilted balance’ in paragraph 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework, this is triggered by the fact that the spatial strategy and settlement boundaries are out of date. Permission should therefore be granted unless the adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. In this case the inspector considered that the adverse impacts would not come close to outweighing the benefits. To make matters worse for the council, the Inspector ordered the council to pay the all of Rippon’s costs of around £300,000.

In the second appeal, submitted by Persimmon Homes, a scheme for 160 dwellings at Land off Mansfield Road, Winsick, Chesterfield was allowed. The Inspector found that although the proposal would conflict with Local Plan policies GS1, GS6 and H3, the weight which should be attributed to them is greatly reduced given the age of the Local Plan (adopted in 2005). The proposals would be in accordance with the most important policies to the determination of the appeal, namely policies BE1 and H12. He concluded that the appeal would accord with the development plan and the Framework as a whole and would constitute sustainable development.

For more information on the above appeals or if you have your own potential housing sites that you are looking to pursue, please get in touch.

Permission secured for log cabin scheme near Matlock

12th December 20228th November 2018 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice have recently secured permission for a development of 5 log cabins on a site at Doehole, near Matlock, for use as holiday accommodation. The project represents a farm diversification scheme for our client, who also produced their own business plan in support of the application.

A substantial amount of preparatory work was involved in the preparation of the application itself, including a Landscape and Visual Appraisal, which assessed the potential impact of the development from viewpoints in the wider landscape, as well as traffic surveys to inform the safest point of access to the proposal site. Given that the site is an agricultural field, a tree report was required to establish which trees should be retained and to define root protection areas, as well as an ecological appraisal of the site to assess any potential impacts on biodiversity.

The scheme included a new entrance to the site from the highway, an access road, and parking spaces for each cabin. The site layout was carefully designed to fit around and between existing trees and hedges on the site, to make best use of the existing landscape screening that this provided.

The development was approved after lengthy negotiations with the planning officers at North East Derbyshire District Council – their planning policy states that new tourist accommodation comprising of static caravans (which the proposed log cabins technically are) will not normally be acceptable outside of the built framework of settlements. In order to make the scheme acceptable, additional detail had to be provided regarding the construction of the access road, and the positioning of the cabins had to be amended to make the layout more ‘informal’.

A Transport Statement also had to be submitted to provide more information to County Highways officers, to satisfy their concerns.

Additionally, a substantial amount of supplementary landscaping planting was proposed, along with a detailed schedule of tree types and sizes, plus a maintenance plan for the landscaping as it matures. This is to ensure that the planning policy requirements can be met, by not having an adverse impact upon – but being assimilated into – the surrounding landscape, and that the site is well screened and is of a sympathetic design and layout.

Viability – does the new NPPF represent a seismic shift?

31st July 201910th October 2018 by Gary Stringer

The level of public goods to be provided alongside development in the form of affordable housing and payments towards schools, health, highways Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and open space (tariff payments) is often challenged by developers in the name of ‘viability’. Providing public goods is expensive; a scheme for 150 houses can generate education payments of £1.2m upwards, with another half a million on payments towards health, CIL and open space. This is before the direct costs of roads, main services and ground conditions are taken into account. A standard 30% affordable housing requirement will reduce the market housing element of a 150 house scheme to 105 homes. This means that all the infrastructure and tariff costs are shouldered by a smaller number of houses than the planning permission indicates.

Viability appraisals have been used as a way for developers to reduce these costs by arguing that the costs of developing a site are too great to allow the full range of public goods to be provided. Often it is the ‘abnormal costs’ – the de-contamination of land, or dealing with difficult topography which can make a site less viable. However issues of land/site value can come into play.

The approach to dealing with viability appraisals has varied across the country and this has fuelled public concern that developers are making money without providing the public goods that a community can rightfully expect. The government has reacted to these concerns in its updated National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) by attempting to standardise the method of calculating viability.

The starting point is that councils should set out their requirements for public goods in their local plans but in a way that does not undermine deliverability. Planning applications that comply with the plan should be considered as viable. This means that at the local plan examination stage, sites that get through examination as allocations are considered to be viable.

The value of land should have regard to development plan policies. This means that viability appraisals should be undertaken at the plan making stage using a new standard approach. The price paid for a site is not a relevant justification for failing to comply with the development plan and hope value should also be dis-regarded.

For existing allocated sites in plans where viability was not fully considered at the plan making stage the starting point for considering land value is ‘existing use value plus’. An agricultural greenfield site could have an existing use value of perhaps £12,000 per acre. For a brownfield former mining site this could be zero as the site contains liabilities. The ‘plus’ is a premium for the landowner, a profit to the developer of perhaps 15 -20%, abnormal costs and market evidence based on policy compliant schemes in the locality. The premium for the landowner ‘should reflect the minimum return which it is considered a reasonable landowner would be willing to sell their land’. This is further clarified in the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) which states “The premium should provide a reasonable incentive for a landowner to being forward land for development while allowing a sufficient contribution to comply with policy requirements”.

It also requires developers to take an ‘open book’ approach, meaning that all future viability appraisals will be made public other than in exceptional circumstances.

It also means that it is the abnormal costs which become the focus for an appraisal and whether these are in fact reasonable. The public exposure will increase testing and will require LPAs to be seen to consider all aspects raised by the local community.

These measures should improve public confidence in the system and leave less room for manoeuvre for developers. It also means that the value of land is explicit and what the landowner receives is in the public domain. It will be interesting to see how this affects values and the potential political fallout that will follow on from such exposure.

Jonathan Jenkin is Managing Director at Planning & Design Practice

What is CDM 2015 and what does it mean for you?

31st July 201910th October 2018 by Gary Stringer

Last month I had the privilege of taking a course on the Construction Design and Management (CDM) Regulations run by a fellow Bondholder, Kedleston Safety. With Planning & Design evolving and increasingly taking projects all the way through the entire process of development and into Construction, we are investing time and money into training and development on the Building Regulations and Construction aspects of our projects.

CDM is based on sound industry practice and will particularly help small businesses and organisations deliver building and construction projects in a way that prevents injury and ill health. The CDM Regulations were updated in 2015 but many within the construction Industry are unaware of their implications. It used to be that CDM only applied when a project was notifiable to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and this only applied to larger projects. However, with the changes in 2015, all building work must comply with the CDM Regulations. This includes new build, demolition, refurbishment, extensions, conversions, repair and maintenance.

What most people don’t know is that when you employ a builder even on a small domestic project such as a small kitchen extension or the removal of a single wall, you as the Client are liable for all Health and Safety on that site, and if anything goes wrong, you are responsible for rectifying it. CDM 2015 puts sole ownership of liability onto the Client unless an Advisor, a Principal Designer, or a Principal Contractor has been appointed in writing. What is important to know is that if you employ a contractor, unless you agree to appoint them as the Principal Contractor, they do not take ownership of the CDM responsibilities.

So my advice is clear – when you are next considering a building project don’t forget to think about who is going to take on the CDM responsibilities. If you wish to learn more about this subject please follow this link to the HSE website –

http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/cdm/2015/summary.htm

Ciaran Spalding is an Architectural Technologist at Planning & Design Practice

Planning & Design help Royal Derby Hospital secure planning consent for ward extensions

27th August 201910th October 2018 by Gary Stringer

We were delighted this week to receive, on behalf of the Royal Derby Hospital, planning permission for 3 substantial ward extensions. A three storey extension will be built across the front of the hospital, on top of an existing flat roof, a two storey extension to the eastern side, and a rooftop extension on top of the Kings Treatment Centre. There will be minimal loss of parking.

We are also currently working with the hospital to finalise details for an extension to their staff car park. Construction work on the staff car park is due to commence shortly, helping to free up more spaces for patients and visitors on the main hospital site in time for the new extensions.

Visuals produced by Module Co. Ltd

PDP Secure Permission for New Sheep Dairy Enterprise at Historic Derbyshire Farm

Government considering key changes to the General Permitted Development Order

PDP secures permission for conversion of historic buildings in Longford

Class Q appeal in Staffordshire Moorlands establishes that modern agricultural building conversion is acceptable

Planning & Design Practice secure planning consent for barn conversion in Amber Valley

NEDDC ordered to foot £300k appeal costs for ‘unreasonable behaviour’

Permission secured for log cabin scheme near Matlock

Viability – does the new NPPF represent a seismic shift?

What is CDM 2015 and what does it mean for you?

Planning & Design help Royal Derby Hospital secure planning consent for ward extensions

Offices

Services

Useful Links

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

GET IN TOUCH