Green Belt Archives - Planning Design Ltd

Barn storming Green Belt success!

24th January 202416th January 2024 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice is delighted to announce that planning permission has recently been secured for the change of use and conversion of existing traditional red brick agricultural buildings to form 3 houses at a farmstead, within the Green Belt in Ockbrook, Derbyshire (Erewash Borough Council).

The application relates to a series of traditional red brick and plain tiled barns located to the rear (northwest) of the host Farmhouse. The site is bounded by open agricultural fields to the north and west, existing modern agricultural buildings to the east and a single track lane to the south. The site is wholly located within the Green Belt.

Full planning permission was sought for the change of use and conversion of existing traditional red brick agricultural buildings to form 3 dwellings with associated conversion works. A collaborative approach between Planning & Design Practice’s in-house Architects and Planning Consultants was required to produce a sensitive but functional scheme.

Barn 1 relates to a single storey ‘L’ shaped red brick and tiled barn located to the north side of the courtyard. The proposed conversion would comprise an open plan kitchen/living area, 2 bedrooms and bathroom. A residential curtilage and parking for up to 2 vehicles will be provided to the rear of the building.

**Figure 2:** Barn 1 – Approved Elevations and Floor Plans

Barn 2 relates to a split single and two storey red brick and tiled barn located toward the east side of the courtyard. The proposed conversion would comprise an open plan living/kitchen/dining area, 2 bedrooms (with ensuites), pantry and utility room with a WC on the ground floor. A single bedroom would be located on the first floor. A residential curtilage will be provided to the rear of the building and parking for up to 2 vehicles at the entrance to the site.

**Figure 3:** Barn 2 – Approved Elevations and Floor Plans

Barn 3 relates to a one and half storey red brick and tiled barn and a steel portal framed carport located along the western edge of the courtyard. The conversion would comprise an office, utility room, WC, kitchen, lounge, bedroom (with ensuite) and a snug on the ground floor and 2 bedrooms and bathroom across the first floor. A residential curtilage and parking for up to 2 vehicles will be provided to the rear and side of the building.

**Figure 4:** Barn 3 – Approved Elevations and Floor Plans

The application site is wholly located within the Green Belt. Paragraph 155 of the NPPF states certain other forms of development are also not inappropriate in the Green Belt provided they preserve its openness and do not conflict with the purposes of including land within it. These include:

“a) mineral extraction;

b) engineering operations;

c) local transport infrastructure which can demonstrate a requirement for a Green Belt location;

d) the re-use of buildings provided that the buildings are of permanent and substantial construction;

e) material changes in the use of land (such as changes of use for outdoor sport or recreation, or for cemeteries and burial grounds); and

f) development, including buildings, brought forward under a Community Right to Build Order or Neighbourhood Development Order.”

Criterion (d) was most pertinent to this application as it supports the re-use of buildings provided that the buildings are of permanent and substantial construction. The main consideration there-fore was whether or not the buildings are of permanent and substantial construction. The application was accompanied by a Structural Report which independently assessed the structural rigidity of each building to which this application relates. It was successful argued that the buildings are of permanent and substantial construction capable of being converted through carrying out some remedial and repair work.

The proposed change of use and associated conversion works to form 3 houses would have little impact on the character and appearance of the existing buildings as only very minor works were proposed as part of the application including the installation of new windows (including roof-lights) and doors. No extensions were proposed as part of the application. Furthermore, it was proposed to retain all existing agricultural detailing as part of the conversion work.

The complete refurbishment of the buildings and repair to roofs using traditional materials are considered to be a significant benefit of the proposal which would significantly enhance the character and appearance of the existing buildings and the surrounding area.

Gaining planning permission is a key step in almost any development. Planning & Design Practice Ltd is a multi-disciplinary team of Town Planners, Architects, Architectural Assistants, Design Professionals, and Heritage Specialists. Barn conversions are something Planning & Design Practice Ltd are well versed in, having helped lots of clients imagine and realise their dream homes. We have vast experience of working on rural projects for homeowners, landowners and farmers in including barn conversions (both via a planning application and Class Q).

For a free, no obligation consultation to discuss your project, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Andrew Stock, Associate Director – Chartered Town Planner at Planning & Design Practice Ltd

Fighting with the Green Belt

21st June 202320th June 2023 by Gary Stringer

Always an emotive topic and one that our main political parties are using to fight the housing crisis and win over the electorate, our Heritage Consultant Ruth Gray looks at the history, purpose and future of the Green Belt.

The Green Belt is an emotive topic and one that our main political parties are using to fight the housing crisis and win over the electorate. Back in 2020 The Heritage Alliance stated:

‘Government data shows that there has been a 62% increase in the loss of greenfield Green Belt land since 2013, with 315 hectares lost in 2016/17 alone. The National Government should develop clear guidance for local authorities on housing requirements to protect designated land, support the creation of new Green Belts where local authorities have established a clear need for them and ensure departments work together to direct economic and housing growth towards areas with capacity for redevelopment on brownfield sites. This will protect a significant proportion of our nature reserves and our valuable natural heritage.’ ¹

The nineteenth-century precedents for the greenbelt, (also at the time called ‘the agricultural belt’) include the 1837 plan for Adelaide attributed to William Light, and James Silk Buckingham’s scheme for a model town. The agricultural belt was promoted by the early Garden City movement. The agricultural belt was intended to give a precise edge to the town, provide fresh air, act as a buffer from surrounding communities, and be used for the production of food. Economically, it was a way of limiting the growth of the town, of controlling land speculation on the edges of the town, and of stabilizing the value of land in the surrounding agricultural area.²

From the concept of the agricultural belt arose a whole host of new green models that have that informed twentieth-century urban design: greenbelts, green wedges, greenwebs, green corridors, and greenways. But it is the greenbelt that receives the most attention and is integral to many political debates. The Metropolitan Green Belt around London was first proposed by the Greater London Regional Planning Committee in 1935. The Town and Country Planning Act 1947 then allowed local authorities to include green belt proposals in their development plans. In 1955, Minister of Housing Duncan Sandys encouraged local authorities around the country to consider protecting land around their towns and cities by the formal designation of clearly defined green belts. The Green Belt we know today has remained largely unreviewed throughout the post-war era. ³

Today the Green Belt has become a bit of a political football between the two main parties and a recent government survey found that there is considerable misunderstanding about the purpose and function of green belt, including that people often conflated Green Belt and green fields, and overlook its original purpose having been to keep urban areas apart. ⁴ Recent proposals to change the planning system within the ‘Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill’, have some commentators arguing that the need for housing will only be met if development takes place on the Green Belt. As things stand, local councils decide their own housing requirements while considering local needs and whether building on the green belt is necessary. The Governments Research Briefing released on 7 February 2023 states:

‘The Government has proposed amending the NPPF to make clear that local planning authorities “are not required to review and alter Green Belt boundaries if this would be the only way of meeting [housing] need in full”. It has also suggested that National Development Management Policies, which the Bill would introduce, might include protections for Green Belt land.’ ⁵

Sir Keir Starmer has said Labour would give English councils more powers to build on green belt land to boost housing. However, he said construction would only take place where it does not “affect the beauty of our countryside”.⁶ Housing targets will come back under Labour but expect to be relaxed under the Conservatives. The current Conservative government are under pressure from their backbenchers to protect Green Belt from further development whilst Labour plan to increase powers to build. More power to local authorities and residents over development are being promised by both main parties. Either way the green belt is set to be the focus of much debate in the run up to the general election.

It is no doubt a complex process to consider development within the Green Belt however, Planning & Design are experts in assisting property and landowners with planning enquiries so please do get in touch on 01332 347371.

Ruth Gray, Heritage Consultant, Planning & Design Practice Ltd

Out of the dog house! Planning permission for former Green Belt kennels

28th November 202220th July 2022 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice is pleased to announce that planning permission has recently been secured for Outline planning permission with all matters reserved apart from access, scale and layout for the erection of a dwellinghouse at North Lodge Boarding Kennels, in the Green Belt within Derbyshire.

Figure 1: Illustrative render of the approved dwellinghouse

The site formerly occupied by North Lodge Boarding Kennels and latterly as an Alsatian rescue centre contains a number of redundant buildings of varying size, scale and condition. Having regard to the nature of the application which is for the demolition of existing commercial buildings and the erection of a single open market dwelling house, one of the main points of consideration was to demonstrate that the proposed redevelopment would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing situation.

When having regard to the extent of demolition proposed (as detailed below) and the degree of land returned back to grassland it was considered that the proposed redevelopment of the site to form a single residential dwelling of modest proportions would not just have ‘no greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development’ as required by Paragraph 149 of the National Planning Policy Framework, but would significantly enhance the openness of the Green Belt by the significant reduction of built development within the immediate and wider site context.

Whilst the Outline application was submitted to determine the ‘in principle’ acceptability of residential development the application was accompanied by two illustrative plans prepared by the Architectural Team depicting a ‘U’ shaped building of traditional agricultural form.

The proposed layout was considered to be complementary to the local distinctiveness of the site which would be read as a plain utilitarian functional agricultural building and would sit comfortably against the host residential dwellinghouse, known as North Lodge.

Figure 3: Illustrative render of the approved dwellinghouse

Erewash Borough Council confirmed in a report published in December 2019 that they can only provide 3.43 years supply of deliverable land for housing when factoring in the need to incorporate a 20% buffer in housing supply, due to the significant under delivery of housing in Erewash in the years preceding December 2019.

Paragraph 11 d) in the National Planning Policy Framework advises that where policies which are most important for determining the application are out-of-date, including situations where the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites (with the appropriate buffer), planning permission should be granted unless;

i. the application of policies in this Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed; or

ii. any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole.

The tilted balance was therefore engaged as the Council cannot demonstrate a 5-year supply of deliverable housing sites which means permission should be granted unless the adverse impacts of the development would significantly outweigh the benefits or if other Paragraphs within the Framework provides a clear reason for refusal.

It was successfully argued that proposal would constitute a sustainable form of development, in accordance with the aims of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Gaining planning permission is a key step in almost any development. Planning & Design Practice is a multi-disciplinary team of Town Planners, Architects, Architectural Assistants and Design Professionals, and Heritage Specialists. We can take a project through from inception to completion, but we also offer the flexibility to engage a client’s own architects and provide a planning service, whilst our design team can also work with clients who have engaged other town planning professionals.

We have extensive knowledge about the policies and procedures of individual Councils and the approach taken by planning officers and Councillors.

For a free, no obligation consultation to discuss your project, please don’t hesitate to get in touch on 01332 347371 or enquiries@planningdesign.co.uk.

Andrew Stock, Principal Planner, Planning & Design Practice Ltd.

Appeal success means Derbyshire couple can stay in their dream self-build home

29th November 202220th January 2021 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice Ltd has successfully overturned an enforcement notice that sought to evict a Derbyshire couple from their dream home, writes Director Richard Pigott. The converted barn, completed in late 2019 using Class Q permitted development rights, was subject to enforcement action by Erewash Borough Council who considered that the dwelling was a new building rather than a conversion, and therefore contrary to Green Belt policies. The appellants had secured prior approval under class Q of the GPDO to convert a farm building on a smallholding to a dwelling. The council took enforcement action when they discovered, soon after building work had commenced, that the original timber roof support frame had been replaced with a steel frame. At this point PDP were engaged to advise the appellants. A retrospective application to regularise the work was refused and the council subsequently issued an enforcement notice directing that the building be demolished.

However, following an appeal hearing held in December Planning Inspector Melissa Madge concluded that very special circumstances justify retrospective approval of the barn conversion. The inspector agreed that the building operations undertaken exceeded what had been reasonably necessary to facilitate change of use from an agricultural building to a dwelling and had resulted in the erection of a new dwelling. Turning to the deemed application, whilst determining that the dwelling was an inappropriate form of development in the Green Belt, she noted that during the course of the works, the appellants had been advised that the timber frame would not support insulated roof panels and had failed to appreciate that replacing it went outside the scope of class Q. The inspector was satisfied that the appellants had intended to implement the approved scheme and worked with the existing building as much as they felt was necessary. Since the resultant dwelling was not dissimilar in appearance to what it would have been had the timber framework been retained and strengthened, she concluded that it did not harm the area’s character. She also gave weight to the appellant’s health and financial circumstances in deciding that the very special circumstances needed to justify inappropriate development in the Green Belt had been shown.

Commenting on the decision, Richard Pigott said “we are delighted to have won this appeal for our clients who have faced over 2 years of stress and uncertainty. The threat of eviction has now gone and they can finally settle in properly without the enforcement proceedings hanging over them.” Richard said that the case highlighted two important lessons. Firstly, Class Q is a complex piece of legislation with many ‘grey areas’ and, with this in mind, it is important to have in place a set of parameters in a construction method statement that has been agreed with the council as this will clearly identify what can and cannot be done to a building with class Q consent. Secondly, the particular circumstances of this case were pivotal – the fact that this was a self-build project by ‘lay people’ who clearly attempted to convert the building afforded them a degree of leniency which could not always be relied upon. A link to the Inspector’s decision letter can be found here:

Richard has produced a webinar on Class Q permitted development rights which can be found here:

If you would like to discuss whether your barn qualifies for Class Q permitted development rights please get in touch.

Developer to appeal after council rejects business park expansion

30th November 202212th October 2020 by Gary Stringer

Following a recent decision by Amber Valley borough councillors to reject plans to extend Denby Hall Business Park we are planning to appeal on behalf of the applicant.

With 60,000 square metres of floor space, the extension to Denby Hall Business Park would create 680 new jobs as well as safeguarding 100 more in the first 5 years of the development going ahead.

Councillors and residents said safeguarding jobs and boosting the local economy did not justify construction on protected green belt land, which was formerly a colliery. This decision was against the recommendations of council officers.

We believe that the council’s decision is wrong and we have recommended that our client goes to appeal. The proposals represent a major investment in a sustainable location and the view of planning professionals is that the development should go ahead.

Defending a planning appeal could cost the council thousands of pounds. This could increase much further if government planning inspectors mandate that the council pay the developer’s appeal costs.

Jonathan Jenkin, Managing Director of Planning Design, acting as agent for the applicants, told the Local Democracy Reporting Service: “We were disappointed by the decision the planning board made last night to refuse planning permission.

“We put forward a very good case that had the support of planning officers. Developing in the green belt is not taken lightly. We were able to show that there are very special circumstances that outweigh the harm to the Green Belt.

“There are no reasonable alternative sites and this was confirmed by the council’s own independent report.

“The minimum amount of green belt land would be used; the project would create and protect 780 jobs and it would create a world leading indigenous and green manufacturing facility.”

Planning and Design Practice Ltd has extensive experience of the appeals system and can take forward written representation; informal hearing and full public inquiries. We also can deal with all types of enforcement action.

A planning appeal is there to allow the opportunity for an independent inspector to review the decision that was made by the Planning Authority and to assess it purely on its planning merits. Both the applicant and objectors can attend the Inquiry ad all points of view will be taken into account.

For more information about the appeals handling process, the types of procedure or to discuss your own case please get in touch.

Main Image: Derby Telegraph

Fore! Planning permission rides on Ryder success

30th November 202217th August 2020 by Gary Stringer

The Secretary of State (SoS) has granted planning permission for a major development within the Manchester green belt consisting of a golf resort, 1,036 homes and heritage restoration works at Hulton Park to the southwest of Bolton. However, the development can only go ahead if the site is successful in its bid to host golf’s Ryder Cup in either 2031 or 2035.

In granting planning permission, the SoS concluded that whilst the proposal did not comply with the development plan, the contribution to meeting the council’s housing land supply shortage and the very substantial economic and social benefits of the golf resort proposal (with estimates for jobs created and Gross Value Added generated being 1686 jobs and £1.1 billion (GVA) respectively). The secretary of state saw this as particularly significant in an area with high levels of deprivation and economic inactivity. He also held that the project represented the optimum viable use for the historic park in which it was proposed, in accordance with Planning Practice Guidance. It was concluded that very special circumstances which outweigh the harm to the Green Belt exist, so as to justify the grant of planning permission – but they will only exist if the Ryder Cup is held at the site.

Richard Pigott, Director at Planning & Design Practice, said: “This is a highly unusual decision given that it is by no means certain that the venue will ever win the right to host the Ryder Cup. The biennial golf competition, which pits the best American and European golfers against each other, only takes place at a European venue every four years. Much like the Olympics, it is a much sought-after event and may well go to a country in continental Europe in 2031 given that the 2027 event will be held in Ireland. Furthermore, it is not yet clear when a decision will be made about the 2031 and 2035 host venues but we will be sure to let you know when there is further news.”

If your property is located within the Green Belt and you propose something which is deemed to be ‘inappropriate development’, it will be necessary to demonstrate Very Special Circumstances (VSC). However, VSC need not be a single wholly exceptional reason such as the hosting of a major sporting event. VSC can include existing permitted development rights, a high-quality design, public benefits, energy from renewable sources and any number of other valid considerations. It’s important to remember that a collection of factors together, while not ‘special’ on their own, can combine to constitute very special circumstances.

As a practice we are highly experienced in submitting planning applications in Green Belt locations. If you have a property located in the Green Belt and would like some advice, please get in touch.

Images: Peel Holding Land and Property (UK) Limited

Planning Success on a Difficult Green Belt Site

3rd February 2020 by Gary Stringer

We are pleased to have received planning permission for a spacious three bedroom single storey dwelling on Green Belt land to the east of Derby, located within the Derby/Nottingham Green Belt.

The site lies to the south of a village, in an area of low density housing interspersed with small fields, paddocks and woodland. The site is not part of an area of continuous development and is not infill.

The site was created by subdividing a large garden and using an existing garage as the basis for a new home. The land had permission to alter and extend the garage but the design was very poor and in order to keep the height down, head heights within the building were sacrificed to the absolute minimum, creating a home with severe limitations. Notwithstanding the very poor design the consent created a backstop for the consideration of revised proposals.

We worked with the LPA and proposed a replacement three bedroom dwelling. We proposed digging down so as not to increase the height of the building but to provide an attractive two storey dwelling with good head heights. The volume of the new building was substantially greater than the approved conversion and extension.

We had a good pre-app and we submitted the application. New buildings in the Green Belt represent inappropriate development and should not normally be permitted but the council had to this point taken a relaxed attitude towards infilling and we remained confident that planning consent would be granted.

There were major staff changes in the council team and we lost ’our’ planning officer from the case almost as soon as it had been submitted. The planning team had new leadership .The leadership are determined to tighten the council’s approach to the Green Belt and we were the first casualty. The application was recommended for refusal and we withdrew it. We then tried for a second pre-app but were told that the council did not have the staff resources to continue with a pre-app service.

We tried to submit amended proposals for a replacement dwelling and eventually applied for a smaller replacement but were again knocked back. Eventually we were able to get a meeting and agree the parameters of a fresh application. We agreed to retain the existing building but to extend it across the site to create a good sized three bedroom single storey dwelling. We were able to double the size which addressed the problems of the extant consent but technically we were still at the edge of acceptability. We were pleased to finally receive the consent and work is expected to start later this year.

This was a difficult case, the LPA were inconsistent in their approach and then they were uncommunicative. We wasted time and client’s money on proposals which could have been stopped had we’d been able to meet and negotiate. We will always try to get the best permission we can for our clients. But where a council is working outside of national guidance there can be real problem and in such circumstances as there is no appeal option.

Barn storming Green Belt success!

Fighting with the Green Belt

Out of the dog house! Planning permission for former Green Belt kennels

Appeal success means Derbyshire couple can stay in their dream self-build home

Developer to appeal after council rejects business park expansion

Fore! Planning permission rides on Ryder success

Planning Success on a Difficult Green Belt Site

Offices

Services

Useful Links

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

GET IN TOUCH