Site Address:Flecknoe Farm Stud & Livery, Flecknoe Village Road, Flecknoe, CV23 8AU

Reference number: R13/1053

Site address:Flecknoe Farm Stud & Livery, Flecknoe Village Road, Flecknoe, CV23 8AU

Description:Erection of bungalow, to replace existing residential mobile home

Case Officer Name & Number: Karen McCulloch, 01788 533623

Description of site

This application relates to land at Flecknoe Farm Stud and Livery which is located outside of the village boundary to the south east of the village of Flecknoe.

The Stud and Livery previously formed part of Flecknoe Farm which also carried out agricultural and fishery activities. This property has now been separated and land sold off, the stud and livery are now in separate ownership.

The stud comprises a large barn/stable building sited adjacent to a hard surfaced parking area accessed from the highway. To the south east of this building are a yard area, ménage and paddocks. The existing mobile home is located to the south of the yard and is accessed through the barn.

The existing mobile home has 3 bedrooms, a kitchen, a lounge/diner, bathroom and utility room. A porch/utility room has been added to the side.

The existing mobile home has been on site since 1989 and is in a poor condition. Since the photographs provided by the applicant were taken white UPVC cladding has been added to the mobile home, works have also been carried out to the porch extension which now has brick walls with a polycarbonate roof. The mobile home is on a brick plinth.

The mobile home is in a poor condition, the timber floor has holes and is springy in places which indicates the joists are damaged, there are issues with damp and rodents and doors and windows have dropped within the walls and do not operate properly. The boiler and gas fires were also dangerous and have been removed.

To the south of the mobile home is a small hardsurfaced area however there is no defined residential curtilage. Car parking is provided to the north of the mobile home.

Description of proposals

This application is for a bungalow to replace the existing mobile home. This will be positioned on the site of the existing mobile home.

This will have a larger footprint than the mobile home measuring 15.5m by 9-10.2m (this measurement varies due to a projecting gable element) whilst the mobile home measures 14.6m by 7m. The bungalow would have a pitched roof, incorporating solar panels, and would be a maximum height of 6.1m.

The bungalow would have a combined lounge/kitchen/diner, 2 bedrooms, a study, bathroom and utility room.

The application form states the bungalow will be built of red brick with a tiled roof although no details of the specific types of materials to be used have been provided.

Relevant planning history

The agent advises that the mobile home was brought onto the site in 1989.

Planning applications were approved in 1993 and 1994 which extended the temporary period for the mobile home to remain on site, subject to agricultural occupancy conditions.

A further application to retain the mobile home (R95/0168) was refused on the basis that the mobile home was not occupied by people involved in agriculture and therefore the retention of the dwelling in the countryside was not acceptable.

This decision was appealed and the appeal was upheld and planning permission was granted. This was on the basis that there was a functional need for an additional dwelling on the farm to support the agricultural business as well as other activities including fisheries, livery and butchery. This approval was subject to a condition that the mobile home be occupied by people employed in businesses at Flecknoe Farm, rather than specifically agriculture. This granted permanent consent.

The Council’s agricultural consultant questioned whether the applicants, who have occupied the mobile home and run the livery business for 9 years, comply with this condition as the business is not linked to Flecknoe Farm which is no longer a working farm. However, the applicant’s livery business utilises land which was within the application site boundary of R95/0168 and it is considered their occupation is in accordance with this condition.

An application to replace the mobile home with a dwelling was submitted and refused in 2005 (R05/0387). This refusal was on the grounds that the functional need for the dwelling was met by the mobile home and that the livery, as a stand-alone business, had only been operating since August 2004 so did not meet the tests which were contained within PPS7 at that time that for permanent dwellings to be allowed businesses should have been operating for 3 years, been profitable for 1 of these years and have a clear prospect of remaining so.

Third party comments

Wolfhampcote Parish CouncilComments

-Do not object to the principle of the development;

-Would like restrictions that dwelling is single storey, preventing further extensions and linking dwelling to stable yard.

Technical consultation responses

WCC EcologyNo objectionSubject to informatives

Relevant planning policies and guidance

Rugby Borough Core Strategy, 2011

CS1CompliesDevelopment Strategy

CS16CompliesSustainable Design

Rugby Borough Local Plan, 2006 – Saved policies

E6CompliesBiodiversity

T5CompliesParking facilities

National Planning Policy Framework, 2012 (NPPF)

Planning Obligations SPD, 2012

Assessment of proposals

The key issue to assess in relation to this application is whether the principle of the erection of a permanent dwelling is acceptable in this location.

The site is located outside of the settlement boundary in the countryside. Policy CS1 states that within the countryside development will be resisted and will only be permitted where allowed by national policy.

The NPPF states that the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside should be recognised. In relation to dwellings the NPPF states that isolated new homes should be avoided unless there are special circumstances, including the essential need for a rural worker to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside.

The applicant operates the existing equestrian business at Flecknoe Farm Stud and currently lives in the mobile home with her family. The Council’s Agricultural Advisor was consulted on the application and visited the applicant to discuss the business operations.

Flecknoe Farm Stud comprises 20 acres (8.09 hectates) of land, stabling for 15 DIY livery horses, 7 stables for the applicants horses (competition horses, brood mares and retired horses), 2 tack rooms, fodder, bedding and machinery storage and a ménage.

The applicants run an assisted DIY livery business, clients manage their own horses but when they cannot attend the applicants manage the horses, deal with turn out and exercise and provide out of hours observations including any necessary veterinary call outs. The applicants also have 2 brood mares who are put to foal and the foals reared and sold.

The applicant and her daughter work in the business, however they do not draw wages. The applicant’s husband is employed elsewhere.

The Council’s Agricultural Advisor assessed the proposed operations in terms of the tests previously contained within Annex A to PPS7 namely business need, established business/profitability and availability of alternative accommodation.

He concluded that although livery clients have 24 hour access to the site the applicants provide additional assistance as and when necessary and that there is a need for the applicants to be on site in relation to the 2 brood mares. He concluded that the business resulted in “a marginal functional need to be present to monitor welfare out of hours and to provide security for horses under the applicants’ control.”

The applicants’ business has been in operation for 9 years however, the applicant and her daughter do not draw a wage from the business and the profits are fairly low. Based on this the advisor questioned the long term financial sustainability of the business.

The advisor detailed that houses for sale within Flecknoe are too expensive for the applicants to consider in relation to the business and that there are no houses available to rent locally.

He concluded, using the previous advice in Annex A of PPS7 that “the functional test is marginally met, but financially the business is currently below the level of profitability necessary, and the longer term sustainability of the business must also be questioned.”

However, consideration must be given to the fact that Annex A to PPS7 was revoked by the Government when the NPPF was published in March 2012. There is no similar guidance contained in the NPPF detailing how applications for rural workers dwellings should be assessed and paragraph 55 simply refers to the essential need for a worker to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside.

As detailed above there is a functional need, albeit marginal, for a worker to live at Flecknoe Farm Stud and this must be given weight in the determination of the application.

A recent High Court decision (Embleton v Gaston heard 6/12/2013) considered, amongst other matters, the different requirements of paragraph 55 of the NPPF and the revoked Annex A of PPS7. This judgement concluded that the test in the NPPF is different from that within Annex A and states “The NPPF test simply requires a judgement of whether the proposed agricultural enterprise has an essential need for a worker to be there or near there.” It is therefore considered limited weight should be given to the advisors concerns regarding the profitability of the business.

Consideration should also be given to the fact that the business, whilst of limited profitability, has been established on site for 9 years and there is no indication that the business will not continue to operate as it currently does.

The applicant’s currently occupy the mobile home on site. This has been on site since 1989 and is in a poor condition which is likely to deteriorate further in the future. It is therefore considered this will not remain suitable to meet the applicant’s need for accommodation. Other houses within Flecknoe are too costly for the applicant and weight must be given to the lack of alternative accommodation.

The proposed dwelling will be built on the site of the mobile home. The site cannot be accessed other than through the barn/stables associated with the business and it is considered that this arrangement reinforces the link between the dwelling and the business. The proposed dwelling is a fairly modest 2 bedroom bungalow, slightly larger than the existing mobile home. The application site does not include a defined garden area and parking is to be provided at the front of the dwelling, as at present. The access arrangements, modest size of the dwelling and lack of residential curtilage should also be given weight in the determination of the application.

On balance, it is therefore considered that there is an essential need for the applicant to live at, or near, their business and that there is no other suitable accommodation available in the area. The principle of the development is considered to comply with paragraph 55 of the NPPF and policy CS1.

Notwithstanding the above the impact of the proposals on neighbour properties, visual amenity, parking etc. must also be assessed.

The application site is located at the rear of the barns associated with the livery business and is therefore not visible from public areas to the front of the site. The proposed dwelling is a similar size to the existing mobile home, although the roof and overall height will be increased from the existing mobile home, and will be provided in the same location. The building will also be seen in association with the existing buildings associated with the business.

It is therefore considered that the visual impact of the proposed bungalow, over and above the existing permanent mobile home, is not so significant as to warrant refusal of the application. If extensions or alterations are carried out to the bungalow these could have an adverse impact on the character of the area. A condition removing permitted development rights is therefore considered necessary.

Details of materials have not been provided at this stage and this can be controlled by condition, the agent has confirmed this approach is acceptable.

It is therefore considered, subject to conditions, that the impact on visual amenity is acceptable in accordance with the relevant part of CS16.

There are no neighbouring properties immediately adjacent to the site of the proposed bungalow. Underwood Cottage and Flecknoe Farm are located to the north of the proposed bungalow and will be over 65m from the proposed building, it is therefore considered that there will not be an adverse impact on neighbours in accordance with policy CS16.

This policy also requires development to use sustainable drainage systems where possible and to comply with the water conservation standards in Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. The application form refers to a soakaway being used for surface water drainage and water conservation standards can be secured by condition in accordance with these requirements.

The Council’s parking standards, contained within the Planning Obligations SPD require 2 car parking spaces and 1 cycle space for a bungalow of the size proposed, the same as the requirement as for the existing mobile home. Car spaces are provided to the front of the property and it is considered cycle parking could be accommodated within the site. This is in accordance with saved policy T5.

The County Ecologist initially requested a bat survey as, based on the photographs supplied by the applicants, it appeared that bats could access the building. However, since the submitted photographs were taken works have been undertaken to improve the building including the addition of cladding and replacement fascias and soffits. On this basis the County Ecologist advised that there are no apparent access points for bats and a survey is not required in this instance. Informatives were requested relating to bats and nesting birds and it is considered the impact on protected species is acceptable in accordance with saved policy E6.