Application Ref: / 3/2017/0458 /
Date Inspected: / 15/06/2017
Officer: / RH
DELEGATED ITEM FILE REPORT: / REFUSAL
Development Description: / Change of use of existing agricultural building to a dwelling under Class Q (a) and (b).
Site Address/Location: / Agricultural building off Chapel Close, Clitheroe
CONSULTATIONS: / Parish/Town Council
Clitheroe Town Council: The Town Council expressed concern regarding incremental development along Chapel Close leading to potential over-development of the area.
CONSULTATIONS: / Highways/Water Authority/Other Bodies
LCC Highways:
The proposal raises no highway concerns therefore Highways raise no objection to the proposal.
Environmental Health:
No issues.
CONSULTATIONS: / Additional Representations.
No representations have been received in respect of the proposed development.
RELEVANT POLICIES AND SITE PLANNING HISTORY:
Schedule 2 Part 3 Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)
Relevant Planning History:
3/1991/0218: Retention of two existing stables within barn area and construction of new stable and tack room (Approved with Conditions).
ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:
Site Description and Surrounding Area:
The application relates to a single storey building located off Chapel Close, accessed via a shared access track. The building is located outside of the defined settlement of Clitheroe on land located within the open countryside.
Proposed Development for which consent is sought:
This application relates to the conversion of an agricultural building to a dwelling off Chapel Close, Clitheroe under the provision of Schedule 2 Part 3 Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015.
The application seeks the prior approval under Classes Q(a) and Q(b) of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 for a change of use of an agricultural building to a dwelling (Q(a)) and for the detailed alterations to the building that are “reasonably necessary” to convert the building for residential use (Q(b)).
To satisfy the requirements of Class Q(b) the Local Planning Authority’s approval is required in respect of the following:
(f) the design or external appearance of the building, and the provisions of paragraph W (prior approval) of this Part apply in relation to that application.
Assessment:
7.1.1 Class Q of Schedule 2, Part 3 of the Order sets out that ‘Development consisting of a change of use of a building and any land within its curtilage from use as an agricultural building to a use falling within Class C3 (dwellinghouses) of the Schedule to the Use Order’; and ‘building operations reasonably necessary to convert the building referred to in paragraph (a) to a use falling within Class C3 (dwellinghouses) of that Schedule’ may be permitted development.
The first issue is whether the land identified as the agricultural building’s “curtilage” would comply with the Order. In identifying a building’s curtilage, paragraph X (“Interpretation of Part 3”) of the Order, sets out:
““curtilage” means, for the purposes of Class Q, R or S only—
(i) the piece of land, whether enclosed or unenclosed, immediately beside or around the agricultural building, closely associated with and serving the purposes of the agricultural building, or
(ii) an area of land immediately beside or around the agricultural building no larger than the land area occupied by the agricultural building, whichever is the lesser;”
The Council considers that the extent of the land closely associated with and serving the purposes of the agricultural building is contained within the blue line. The above cited definition of curtilage set out at Part 3 of the Order makes it clear that any area of land said to be curtilage may not for the purposes of Class Q, R or S in any event exceed the area occupied by the agricultural building. In this case the existing agricultural building occupies an area of 101sqm. The total area proposed by this application to form the dwelling’s curtilage is 175sqm including the building therefore the application complies with paragraph X.
Notwithstanding the above, the Council must have due regard to Class Q, Part 3 of GPDO 2015 and the proposal must assessed against each of the criterion within Class Q.1. Each criterion is listed below and assessed accordingly
Development is not permitted by Class Q if—
(a) the site was not used solely for an agricultural use as part of an established agricultural unit—
(i) on 20th March 2013, or
(ii) in the case of a building which was in use before that date but was not in use on that date, when it was last in use, or
(iii) in the case of a site which was brought into use after 20th March 2013, for a period of at least 10 years before the date development under Class Q begins;
Paragraph X of Schedule 2, Part 3 of the GPDO, states that an ‘agricultural building’ means a building (excluding a dwellinghouse) used for agriculture and which is so used for the purpose of a trade or business. Further to this paragraph Q.1(a) of the GPDO state that if the site was not solely used for an agricultural use as part of an established agricultural unit on or before 20 March 2013 or for 10 years before the date the development begins. The GPDO also sets out that an ‘established agricultural unit’ means agricultural land occupied as a unit for the purposes of agriculture.
Permission was granted in 1991 for the retention of two existing stables within barn area and construction of new stable and tack room. This application relates to the same building. The application form states that the building was used exclusively for agricultural purposes in connection with an agricultural unit. The application building at the time of the site visit appeared to be have been previously used for agriculture. The applicant advises that the land and building was used for agricultural purposes by his father up until his death and the applicant has continued to farm the land to keep hens and other animals such as goats. The applicant advises that this was the case as of March 2013.
At the time of my site visit, I observed that the application building faced into a field, which included a number of different uses. Attached to the application building is a smaller annexe building which appeared to be used as a tack room and storage in association with the adjacent stable block and the remaining land within the field included the siting of 2 static caravans & the storage of a horse box. There were also chickens evident on the site. It was therefore considered that the site has not been solely used for the purposed of agriculture as part of an established agricultural unit.
The stables are located to the south east corner of the site and are used in associated with the adjacent field. The equestrian use of the land can be considered as agricultural if the horses are kept for working purposes or if that are simply turned out on land with a view to feeding them from that land ie. Grazing. However, if they are fed additional food or if they are ridden or exercised that is the keeping of horses then the use ceases to be agricultural. At the time of my site visit there was no indication that the equine use of the land within the defined agricultural unit of the applicant or the stables adjacent to the application building have or are being used for agricultural purposes. I note that the equine use of the site may be minimal but for the purposes of this application the site should have been or is being used solely for the purposes of agriculture.
As it was not clear that the building or site which is the subject of this application has been used for agricultural purposes or as a trade or business, the applicant was asked to provide further information to demonstrate that the application site does form part of an established agricultural unit in use for the purpose of a trade or business. The applicant provided animal movement records but the records show animal movement relating to a plot of land named Winney Corner. No evidence has been provided alongside this to support that the plot of land the application relates to is or was formerly known as Winney Corner.
The applicant provided a map showing the agricultural unit as a whole this included the land to the south of the application site which is currently used for equestrian use in association with the stables. Therefore it was considered that insufficient information has been provided to show that the agricultural business was operating on the site and that the activity was nothing more than hobby farming rather than an established agricultural trade or business. As the land identified by the applicant as the agricultural holding the application building relates to has not been or is not being used solely for the purposes of agriculture then it is not considered to be an ‘established agricultural unit’.
Taking into account the above, based on the evidence submitted and my observations during my site visit, I am not satisfied that the site and building have been used solely for an agricultural use as part of an established agricultural unit as required, therefore the proposed development would not accord with Q.1(a) of the order.
b) the cumulative floor space of the existing building or buildings changing use under Class Q within an established agricultural unit exceeds 450 square metres;
The application building has a floor space of approximately 101 square metres, however the building is not considered to be part of an established agricultural unit and therefore does not comply with Q.1 (b).
(c) the cumulative number of separate dwellinghouses developed under Class Q within an established agricultural unit exceeds 3;
It is proposed to convert the building to one dwelling. The planning history for the building has been checked and the building was originally erected for use as stables. Further to this the building is not considered to be part of an established agricultural unit and therefore does not comply with Q.1 (c).
d) the site is occupied under an agricultural tenancy, unless the express consent of both the landlord and the tenant has been obtained;
(e) less than 1 year before the date development begins—
(i) an agricultural tenancy over the site has been terminated, and
(ii) the termination was for the purpose of carrying out development under Class Q,
unless both the landlord and the tenant have agreed in writing that the site is no longer
required for agricultural use;
The application form stipulates that the building and area surrounding it is owned by the applicant and are not subject to any tenancy agreement on the land. There is no evidence to contradict or disbelieve this and therefore the application complies with Q.1(d) and Q.1(e).
(f) development under Class A(a) or Class B(a) of Part 6 of this Schedule (agricultural
buildings and operations) has been carried out on the established agricultural unit—
(i) since 20th March 2013; or
(ii) where development under Class Q begins after 20th March 2023, during the period
which is 10 years before the date development under Class Q begins;
No previous application under Part 6, Class A or B of the GPDO has been submitted to the LPA in relation to the application site or building, however the building is not considered to be part of an established agricultural unit and therefore does not comply with Q.1 (f).
(g) the development would result in the external dimensions of the building extending beyond the external dimensions of the existing building at any given point;
The proposed plans submitted indicate that the proposal would not extend beyond the existing external dimensions of the building. Therefore, the application complies with Q.1(g).
(h) the development under Class Q (together with any previous development under Class Q) would result in a building or buildings having more than 450 square metres of floor space having a use falling within Class C3 (dwellinghouses) of the Schedule to the Use Classes Order;
The Order defines ‘floor space’ at paragraph 2 as ‘the total floor space in a building or buildings’. The Local Planning Authority determines that the floor space of a building to be the ground, first and any other internal floor space within the proposed dwelling including basement levels. The current floor space of the building is 101 sqm. Even with the introduction of the first floor element the proposal would not exceed 450 sqm. No other buildings within the site have been changed under Class Q. Section 192 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires a local planning authority to consider whether the use or operations described in the application would be lawful if begun at the time of the application. At the time of this application no other development has been commenced in reliance on any permitted development right and accordingly the local planning authority is not required to assess Q.1(h) against any other development.
(i) the development under Class Q(b) would consist of building operations other than—
(i) the installation or replacement of—
(aa) windows, doors, roofs, or exterior walls, or
(bb) water, drainage, electricity, gas or other services, to the extent reasonably necessary for the building to function as a dwellinghouse; and
(ii) partial demolition to the extent reasonably necessary to carry out building operations allowed by paragraph Q.1(i)(i);
Class Q (b) refers to ‘building operations reasonably necessary to convert the building’. In respect of this part of the Order paragraph 105 of the National Planning Policy Guidance provides guidance in the relation to the definition of works “reasonably necessary”, stipulating “the right allows for the installation or replacement of windows, doors, roofs, exterior walls, water, drainage, electricity, gas or other services to the extent reasonably necessary for the building to function as a dwelling house; and partial demolition to the extent reasonably necessary to carry out these building operations. It is not the intention of the permitted development right to include the construction of new structural elements for the building’. It is noted that some works to the external aspects of the building, i.e. upgraded walls and roof would be required.
The extent of works proposed by this current application includes alterations enlarging the existing window openings and the insertion of 5 rooflights to the front elevation and the insertion of 2 window openings and a bi-fold door opening to the rear elevation.
It is recommended that any structural appraisal is based on the guidance set out in the BRE Digest 366 Part 2: (Structural appraisal of existing buildings, including for a Material change of use). The appraising engineer must determine the condition of the existing building or structure and provide a written report on its suitability for future use as a dwelling without the addition of new structural elements to the building:
- The structural appraisal should clearly identify retained structural elements and if they are sufficient for future residential use
- The appraisal should clearly and specifically answer the question of whether any new structural elements are required for the scheme proposed and if so, identify them
The application states that a first floor element will be introduced. A structural survey has been submitted in support of the application however it is considered insufficient by the LPA, as it not include sufficient details regarding the extent of works that would be involved. I am not persuaded that there can be any certainty that the building is structurally sound or that the proposed works could be achieved without a degree of structural work such that, arguably, the result would constitute the erection of a new structure to facilitate the conversion.
In the structural report provided by the applicant it is confirmed that it the erection of additional internal walls are proposed to support the proposed first floor element as part of the conversion of the building to a dwelling.
In considering this issue PPG states that ‘Building works are allowed under the change to residential use. The permitted development right under Class Q assumes that the agricultural building is capable of functioning as a dwelling. However, it recognises that for the building to function as a dwelling some building operations which would affect the external appearance of the building, which would otherwise require planning permission, should be permitted. The right allows for the installation or replacement of windows, doors, roofs, exterior walls, water, drainage, electricity, gas or other services to the extent reasonably necessary for the building to function as a dwelling house; and partial demolition to the extent reasonably necessary to carry out these building operations. It is not the intention of the permitted development right to include the construction of new structural elements for the building.’
The introduction of a first floor element is considered as a new structural element, therefore the proposal is not permitted development under Part 3, Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 as it fails to comply with Q.1(i) in that building operations likely to be required to facilitate the development would fall outside the scope of paragraph (i) and amount to substantial or structural works.
Taking into account the above, the proposed development would not accord with Q.1(i) of the order.
(j) the site is on article 2(3) land;
(a) an area designated as a conservation area under section 69 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (designation of the conservation areas);
(b) an area of outstanding natural beauty;