Site Assessment
Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Project: The construction of an agricultural workers dwelling
Client: X
Site Address: X
Issue and Revision Record: X
Local Authority: X
Highways Authority X
MDP Reference: X
Drafted by: X
Checked by: X
Contents
- Introduction
- Headline Constraints
- Policy Position
- Discussion
- Conclusion
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Thank you for your instruction on the Summary Assessment following discussions regarding your circumstances and ambitions for the area of land identified in Figure 1 below (the precise boundaries are not particularly important at this stage).
X
Figure 1: The area of land to which this report relates.
1.2 Based on our discussions, it is understood that you wish to construct an agricultural workers’ dwelling at the site.
1.3 The fate and planning merits of the site are critically dependent upon a number of factors which can, and do, change over time. The headline policy and physical constraints are shown below. It is also important to note that the ‘shelf life’ of this report is limited to around four months.
2.0 Headline Constraints
2.1 The many and various physical and policy constraints to a site can impact upon the acceptability of the site irrespective of the planning policy provisions. As such, it is necessary to understand the development in the context of its headline constraints shown below.
Constraint
Resource
Site Address
XXXXXX
LPA Name
Wiltshire Council.
Green Belt
No.
National Landscape (formerly AONB)
North Wessex Downs National Landscape.
Flooding
Flood Zone 1 (lowest risk).
Surface Water
Very low risk.
Public Rights of Way*
None across or near site.
Ecology*
Ecological value of site unknown. Given nature of existing building, likely require Preliminary Ecological Assessment – unlikely to be fundamental issue.
European sites – Around 7km away from Pewsey Downs SAC. Around 6.6km away from Salisbury Plain SPA/SAC. Could also be deemed to fall within catchment area of River Avon SAC.
Agricultural Land
Yes.
Landscape Designation
National Landscape (outside settlement).
Historic Environment
Not in conservation area. Closest listed building is XXX (Grade II). Site not in setting.
Local Plan Hierarchy*
Open countryside.
Neighbourhood Plan*
Devizes Neighbourhood Plan.
Access*
Appears to be access to carriageway. Unlikely to be an issue.
5YLS Position *
Around 4.2 years.
Utilities*
Likely available.
Services and Facilities
Wide range of services at Devizes.
3.0 Policy Position
3.1 The starting point for assessing the site according to Section 38(6) of the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act are the provisions of the Council’s development plan. In this instance, key policies are within the 2015 Wiltshire Core Strategy (including policies saved from former District Council Local Plans as shown at Appendix D to the Core Strategy) (CS) and the Devizes Neighbourhood Plan (NP).
3.2 Other material planning policy considerations include the National Planning Policy Framework (2023) (henceforth referred to as ‘the Framework’ or the NPPF) and Planning Practice Guidance (PPG).
3.3 Key policies relevant to residential development at this site are set out below.
Wiltshire Core Strategy
3.4 Core Policy 1: Settlement Strategy – This policy identifies the settlements where sustainable development will take place. Development is directed to Principal Settlements, Market Towns, Local Service Centres and Large and Small Villages.
3.5 Core Policy 2: Delivery Strategy – This policy outlines the considerable overall housing need for the local authority area (42,000 homes). Outside of defined limits of development, development will not be permitted other than in circumstances as permitted by this plan.
3.6 Core Policy 12: Devizes Community Area – Development in this area should be in accordance with Core Policies 1 and 2 and should not, amongst other things, worsen traffic congestion or harm the character of the National Landscape.
3.7 Core Policy 45: Meeting Wiltshire’s Housing Needs – New housing should address local housing need incorporating a range of different types, tenures and sizes of homes to create balanced communities.
3.8 Core Policy 48: Supporting Rural Life – Outside the defined limits of development of the Principal Settlements, Market Towns, Local Service Centres and Large Villages, and outside the existing built areas of Small Villages, proposals for residential development will be supported where these meet the accommodation needs required to enable workers to live at or in the immediate vicinity of their place of work in the interests of agriculture or forestry or other employment essential to the countryside. Proposals for accommodation to meet the needs of employment essential to the countryside should be supported by functional and financial evidence.
3.9 Core Policy 50: Biodiversity and Geodiversity – Amongst other things, this policy seeks to ensure that developments protect features of nature conservation and geological value and avoid disturbance to species and habitats. Biodiversity enhancement is encouraged.
3.10 Core Policy 51: Landscape – This policy states that development should protect, conserve and where possible enhance landscape character and must not have a harmful impact upon landscape character. Amongst other things, this policy seeks to conserve landscape features of historic and heritage value and ensure developments do not harm important views and visual amenity. It also gives great weight to the conservation and enhancement of the landscape and scenic beauty within the AONB (now known as a National Landscape).
3.11 Core Policy 57: Ensuring High Quality Design and Place Shaping – Amongst other things, this policy seeks to ensure that proposals are sympathetic to historic buildings and that they have regard to the amenities of existing occupants and the compatibility with adjoining buildings and uses.
3.12 Core Policy 60: Sustainable Transport – Amongst other things, this policy seeks to reduce the reliance on travel by private car and supports and encourages sustainable transport modes.
3.13 Core Policy 61: Transport and Development – New Development should be located and designed to reduce the need to travel, particularly by private car. Sustainable transport alternatives are encouraged.
Devizes Neighbourhood Plan
3.14 Policy H1: Strategic Policy Intent – Settlement Framework Boundary – Development is directed to within the Settlement Framework Boundary shown on the Policies Map. The design of new buildings will have a tangible characteristic link to existing buildings in the locality in which they will be built.
3.15 Policy H2: Strategic Policy Intent – Built Environment and Sustainability – Amongst other things, all new housing must be capable of being readily assimilated within the existing built environment and the social fabric of the settlement.
3.16 Policy T1: Strategic Policy Intent – Getting Around – Amongst other things, this policy supports the use of sustainable transport modes.
3.17 Policy ESD1: Strategic Policy Intent – Environment and Sustainability - Additional housing should cause no significant harm to the Neighbourhood Plan Area’s identity or the environment and be pleasant places where residents can lead active and healthy lives.
Relevant National Planning Policy
Approach to Sustainable Development
3.18 Paragraph 7 of the Framework states that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development.
3.19 Paragraph 8 states that achieving sustainable development means that the planning system has three overarching objectives, which are interdependent and need to be pursued in mutually supportive ways (so that opportunities can be taken to secure net gains across each of the different objectives):
a) an economic objective – to help build a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right types is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth, innovation and improved productivity; and by identifying and coordinating the provision of infrastructure;
b) a social objective – to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by ensuring that a sufficient number and range of homes can be provided to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by fostering well-designed, beautiful and safe places, with accessible services and open spaces that reflect current and future needs and support communities’ health, social and cultural well-being; and
c) an environmental objective – to protect and enhance our natural, built and historic environment; including making effective use of land, improving biodiversity, using natural resources prudently, minimising waste and pollution, and mitigating and adapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy.
3.20 Paragraph 9 states that planning decisions should play an active role in guiding development towards sustainable solutions, but in doing so should take local circumstances into account, to reflect the character, needs and opportunities of each area.
3.21 Paragraph 10 states that, so that sustainable development is pursued in a positive way, at the heart of the Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development. This is then detailed at Paragraph 11.
3.22 Paragraph 38 makes it clear that decision-makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible.
Housing
3.23 The Framework shows a clear Government intention to significantly boost the supply of housing. Paragraph 60 states that is important that sufficient amount and variety of land can come forward where it is needed and that the needs of groups with specific housing requirements are addressed.
3.24 Paragraph 70 states that small and medium sized sites can make an important contribution to meeting the housing requirement of an area.
3.25 Paragraph 84 states that planning policies and decisions should avoid the development of isolated homes in the countryside unless one or more of identified circumstances apply. This includes where there is an essential need for a rural worker, including those taking majority control of a farm business, to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside.
3.26 Paragraph 135 seeks to ensure that developments optimise the potential of sites and function well.
Design
3.27 Paragraph 131 states that the creation of high quality, beautiful and sustainable buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve.
3.28 Paragraph 135 seeks to ensure that developments add to the overall quality of the area.
3.29 Paragraph 139 states that development that is not well designed should be refused.
Economic Strength
3.30 Paragraph 85 states that planning decisions should help create the conditions in which businesses can invest, expand and adapt. Significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity.
Living Conditions
3.31 Paragraph 135 seeks to secure a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.
Biodiversity
3.32 Paragraph 185 seeks, amongst other things, to improve biodiversity in and around developments and secure measurable net gains for biodiversity.
Highway Safety
3.33 Paragraph 114 seeks to ensure that safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all users.
3.34 Paragraph 115 states that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.
National Landscape (AONB)
3.35 Paragraph 182 states that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues.
4.0 Discussion
4.1 In our opinion, it is likely that the main town planning issues with the development shown at paragraph 1.2 to this report would be;
- Whether or not this is a suitable location for residential development, with particular regard to local and national planning policy concerning the delivery of housing; and
1) Suitable Site?
- The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, including the National Landscape.
Policy Context
4.2 Core Policy 2 of the Core Strategy (CS) outlines the considerable housing need (42,000 units) within the local authority area over the plan period. It states that housing development will not be permitted other than in accordance with the objectives of the CS. Core Policy 1 of the CS identifies the settlements where sustainable development will take place. Development is directed to Principal Settlements, Market Towns, Local Service Centres and Large and Small Villages. Outside of defined limits of development, development will not be permitted other than in circumstances as permitted by the development plan. This strategy is echoed by Policies H1 and H2 of the NP.
4.3 One such circumstance is outlined at Core Policy 48 of the CS. This states that proposals for residential development in the countryside will be supported where they meet the accommodation needs required to enable workers to live at or in the immediate vicinity of their place of work in the interests of agriculture or forestry or other employment essential to the countryside. Proposals for accommodation to meet the needs of employment essential to the countryside should be supported by functional and financial evidence.
4.4 This is in line with paragraph 84 of the Framework, which states that the development of isolated homes in the countryside should be resisted unless one or more of identified circumstances apply. This includes where there is an essential need for a rural worker, including those taking majority control of a farm business, to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside.
Discussion
Agricultural Workers Dwelling
4.5 The site falls outside of any settlement and within the countryside for the purposes of planning policy. It is also likely to be considered as ‘isolated’ within the meaning defined in case law Braintree DC v SSCLG (2018) EWCA Civ 610; (2018) and City & Country Bramshill Limited and SOSHCLG (2019) EWHC 3437 (Admin).
4.6 While typical, open market, housing would therefore be resisted by the Council (as this would contravene its overarching spatial housing strategy), the development plan provides applicable exceptions for rural workers’ dwellings. These may be acceptable in a countryside location such as this. Considering the relevant policy outlined above, one would need to demonstrate that:4.7 In addition, the PPG chapter ‘Housing needs of different groups’ sets out some considerations which could be taken into account when assessing the need for isolated homes in the countryside for essential rural workers. The link to this chapter is provided below for ease of reference.
- The agricultural workers’ dwelling enables workers to live at or in the immediate vicinity of the agricultural business; and
- There is an essential functional and financial need for the agricultural workers’ dwelling;
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/housing-needs-of-different-groups
4.8 The circumstances set out in the PPG include:
- Evidence of the necessity for a rural worker to live at, or in close proximity to, their place of work to ensure the effective operation of an agricultural, forestry or similar land-based rural enterprise (for instance, where farm animals or agricultural processes require on-site attention 24-hours a day and where otherwise there would be a risk to human or animal health or from crime, or to deal quickly with emergencies that could cause serious loss of crops or products);
4.9 In MDP’s experience, there is a general resistance to rural workers dwellings due to the cumulative effect these can have on the countryside. As a consequence, the threshold for achieving a dwelling tied to a rural business is high. As an example, we have recently dealt with a scheme outside of Wantage in which the farmer had an established agricultural business of 20 years and a substantial number of cattle, sheep, chickens and other animals. The Council strongly resisted the need for a new dwelling to manage this business. Only after a lengthy period and the submission of a considerable amount of evidence did it accept a small dwelling.
- The degree to which there is confidence that the enterprise will remain viable for the foreseeable future;
- Whether the provision of an additional dwelling on site is essential for the continued viability of a farming business through the farm succession process;
- Whether the need could be met through improvements to existing accommodation on the site, providing such improvements are appropriate taking into account their scale, appearance and the local context; and
- In the case of new enterprises, whether it is appropriate to consider granting permission for a temporary dwelling for a trial period.
4.10 It follows that evidence addressing the aforementioned criteria must be robust. In particular, it should be shown that; the new dwelling is in close proximity to the farming activity, workers need to be on or near the site at most times, there would be adverse effects for the agricultural business if workers were not present at most times, workers are required to be on site all year round, temporary accommodation could not be provided for workers in existing dwellings nearby, there is no suitable accommodation at the agricultural unit, the agricultural enterprise will endure in the long term, considerable investments have been made in the enterprise and it has been profitable, the new dwelling is of the minimum size required and, lastly, that temporary accommodation (such as a mobile home) would not suffice to meet business needs.
4.11 Detailed statements may be required to illustrate this, including from agricultural specialists to convey the nature of farming practices. Moreover, detailed financial statements may be required to show that the business is profitable in the long term and justifies the construction of a new dwelling for workers. Evidence in the form of income/expenditure and profit/loss in recent years and/or business plans forecasting future performance may be requested by the Council. Any financial evidence provided should be based on up-to-date industry standard reference books such as the John Nix Farm Management Pocketbook or the Agricultural Budgeting and Costing Book.
4.12 As discussed, although there are provisions in national and local planning policy for agricultural workers’ dwellings, this is not straightforward. Councils are often reluctant to grant permission for these units unless they are presented with robust evidence of the type we have identified above. That said, MDP has successfully obtained permission for agricultural dwellings on a number of occasions and, provided that evidence is appropriate, there is no reason why this could not be the case here.
4.13 However, given our experience with Councils when dealing with agricultural workers’ dwellings, it is recommended that pre-application advice is first sought to establish how receptive Wiltshire’s Local Planning Authority (LPA) is to such a proposal at this site. We will return to this mechanism later in this report. Notably, this would provide a good platform for discussions on the overall size of the dwelling, which is often a point of concern for Councils.
4.14 Furthermore, should permission be granted for an agricultural workers’ dwelling, it is common that a condition is attached restricting occupancy to that which is tied to the agricultural business. This may also be necessary to secure through a Unilateral Undertaking or S106 legal agreement (this is not particularly complex). Such conditions/legal obligations are difficult to vary or remove post-consent.
Access to services
4.15 To support the overarching housing strategy, Core Policies 12, 60 and 61 of the CS and Policy T1 of the NP seek to reduce the reliance on private vehicles and promote sustainable transport modes. As such, it would also be prudent to evidence the site’s proximity to services in Devizes and the short nature of trips to and from the site to reach these in any planning application. Overall, environmental harm resulting from travel would be limited, but it is still a matter the Council will consider in the overall balance.
Overall Conclusion – Suitable Site
4.16 Taking everything together, the new dwelling would be within the countryside where there is a general resistance to development. Nevertheless, there are provisions in local and national planning policy for agricultural workers’ dwellings. Provided that the evidence outlined in this statement is robustly presented to the Council, there is no good reason why the Council should not accept such a dwelling at this site.
4.17 However, there is a high bar to be passed for the relevant evidence and Council’s are naturally obstructive/sceptical of proposals for any new dwellings in the countryside. Accordingly, you are advised to apply for pre-application advice proper to making any formal submission to gauge the stance of the LPA to the principle of this development.
2) Character and Appearance
4.18 The impacts upon the character and appearance of the area will be a significant material consideration and any submission will need to be supported by robust evidence showing that the scheme would not cause harm in this regard. Illustrative layouts and illustrative elevations may be advisable.
4.19 The site falls within the National Landscape (AONB). This is provided with statutory protection by section 85(1) of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, which provides:
“In exercising or performing any functions in relation to, or so as to affect, land in an area of outstanding natural beauty, a relevant authority shall have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the area of outstanding natural beauty.”
4.20 The site therefore falls within a sensitive landscape and the Council has a statutory duty to ensure that all decisions have regard to the purpose of both conserving and enhancing its natural beauty.
4.21 The introduction of a residential property, regardless of its size, together with associated hardstanding, gardens and residential paraphernalia such as parked vehicles, would inevitably urbanise the site. The LPA could identify harm in this regard. This alone may fundamentally flaw the scheme. However, this will depend upon the individual judgement of the planning officer and the strength of the case presented. It will also depend on whether or not the Council has accepted the principle of an agricultural workers dwelling at this site.
4.22 To attempt to overcome risks in this regard, the site should be placed in the context of surrounding development. A case should be made to show that the character to the area is influenced by sizeable settlements that are nearby. Advancing that the site is read in a peripheral countryside context, and does not comprise any of the key features of the National Landscape, will be crucial. However, there is no guarantee that such an argument would be accepted.
4.23 In terms of design, any new unit should appear simple in form. Facades and elevations should incorporate subtle and traditional architectural features to reflect those found within the wider area and the units should be constructed using a sympathetic materials palette. The re-use of the existing barn may be seen as less harmful to the character of the countryside. Nonetheless, should the Council accept the principle of a new agricultural workers dwelling, it may also be receptive to the demolition of the barn and the re-positioning of a new unit away from the carriageway. MDP can provide further design advice in terms of design and layout in due course if requested.
Overall Conclusion – Character and Design
4.24 The effect of the proposal on the character of the area and the acceptability of its individual layout and design will be subjective matters judged by the Council’s planning officer. There is no guarantee that the Council would not identify harm in this regard. This provides another reason to seek pre-application advice prior to any formal submission.
Other Material Considerations
Biodiversity
4.25 Given the presence of the existing barn, an ecological survey would be necessary to demonstrate that the site is of no real ecological value. If any protected species are identified, we would anticipate that suitable mitigation could be deployed, and this is unlikely to make any application fundamentally unacceptable.
4.26 In addition to the above, it should be noted that the site is relatively close to Pewsey Downs SAC, Salisbury Plain SPA/SAC and could be deemed to fall within catchment area of River Avon SAC. These are all designated European sites (international wildlife sites protected by European law) and are considerable biodiversity resources. The Council may raise concern with regard to increased recreational pressure here, together with possible nutrient imbalances from foul water discharge from a new dwelling.
4.27 This issue may not arise. Moreover, if it does, Council’s often have mitigation plans developed with Natural England (to which a financial contribution may be required). However, it is drawn to your attention as this matter is notoriously problematic for new developments. It further emphasises the prudency of pre-application engagement.
Living Conditions
4.28 It is likely that a building could be positioned at this site so that it did not prejudice living conditions at neighbouring properties in terms of outlook, privacy, access to daylight and noise and disturbance.
4.29 Moreover, appropriate external amenity space should be provided for new residents (this could be achieved in our view), and it is advised that internal room standards meet those identified within the Government’s ‘Technical housing standards – nationally described space standard’. In practical terms, these standards a low and easily met. A link to this document is provided below for your convenience. MDP can provide more assistance in this regard at a later stage if required.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/technical-housing-standards-nationally-described-space-standard
Flooding
4.30 The site is within Flood Zone 1, indicating a low probability of flooding. Furthermore, there is no evidence of significant surface water collection at this location. Consequently, it is unlikely that the proposal would be fundamentally unacceptable in this regard.
Highway Safety and Parking
4.31 It is likely that suitable levels of parking could be provided. Furthermore, it will be important to show that any housing development does not prejudice highway safety. Appropriate technical experts may need to be engaged to ensure, amongst other things, that suitable visibility splays exist and that vehicles could safely manoeuvre at the site and be accommodated onto the carriageway. There are no apparent concerns at this early stage in this regard.
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)
4.32 The Council operates a CIL (a charge that local authorities can impose on new developments in their area). The money generated through the levy will contribute towards the funding of infrastructure to support growth.
4.33 Residential development at this site may be liable for CIL charging. Even for small scale developments, this may be sizeable. Self-build developments can be exempt from this charge. More advice on this can be provided in due course if required as MDP is considerably experienced in the management of developments that interact with CIL. Importantly, CIL is usually deducted from the value of the site, but at a single dwelling, a self-builder is a likely end-buyer for the site, meaning that no CIL need be paid provided the correct forms and process are followed.
Self-build
4.34 It would be prudent to advance that any new unit at the site would be a self-build project. In general terms, self-build projects involve parties to be directly involved in the design and construction of their own home. Both self-build and custom build are viewed as a potential additional source of housing supply by Government and have been expressly encouraged therefore (see below). This is a key point often missed by decision takers; self-build units are seen by the Government as a new stream of housing not necessarily part of an existing body of consents. This has been the case in a recent salvo of applications we have seen be approved, such as land to the east of the A429.
4.35 The Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015 (as amended), introduced a new mechanism to the Town and Country Planning system involving a duty being placed upon LPAs to keep a register of persons who wish to undertake such projects and then imposes a “duty to grant planning permission” for serviced plots to facilitate such development in order to seek to meet the demand for it evidenced by the register that the LPA is mandated to keep and which needs to be updated annually. This Act was amended by The Housing and Planning Act 2016, such that from 1st April 2016, LPAs are required to:
(i) Keep a Self-Build and Custom-Build Register (s.1);
(ii) Grant sufficient planning permissions for serviced plots in order to meet the registered demand for self-build and custom-build homes set out on their Register (s.2A);
(iii) Have regard to the register when carrying out functions relating to planning (s.2)
4.36 Additionally, the NPPF requires Local Planning Authorities to address the need for all types of housing stating:
“…the size, type and tenure of housing needed for different groups in the community should be assessed and reflected in planning policies (including, but not limited to, … people wishing to commission or build their own homes).”
4.37 There is clearly support for self-build projects across the country in national planning policy, together with other relevant legislation. Indeed, we are aware of other nearby Council’s granting permission for such development recently. Consequently, advancing that any new unit at the site would be of a self-build nature should weigh considerably in favour of it. It may be necessary to support the planning application with a legal agreement (Unilateral Undertaking) to secure this. However, this a matter that MDP has dealt with frequently. It is not an onerous process, nor is it financially burdensome.
Housing Land Supply
4.38 Councils are required to demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing land (5YHLS). This is important, as in its absence paragraph 11 of the Framework is engaged. This considerably reduces the weight that can be afforded to the Council’s housing policies and should add a significant layer of weight in favour of new housing.
4.39 At present, the Council cannot demonstrate a 5YHLS. That said, the engagement of paragraph 11 is not a panacea since the local planning authority can (and likely will) argue that a small number of additional dwellings would not resolve the housing shortfall and that the shortfall itself is modest.
5.0 Conclusion
Overall Advice
5.1 Applying for housing at sites in open countryside locations is not often straightforward. That said, an agricultural workers’ dwelling at this site could be acceptable should the evidence provided satisfy the LPA. There is, however, a risk in terms of the principle of development given MDPs knowledge of the cautious approach Council’s take with this form of development. There is also a risk that the Council could find harm to the scenic beauty of the National Landscape (particularly should it conclude that there is insufficient evidence in relation to the principle of an agricultural workers’ dwelling at the site).
5.2 Overall, it is our opinion that, while a proposal for housing at this site could be an uphill battle, it could be appropriately justified and steered successfully through the local planning authority. Taking everything together, it is our professional opinion that there is a good chance (around 70% chance) of a positive outcome for housing development if handled correctly. However, we feel that a pre-app may be the best way to test the LPAs position without this becoming a public matter.
Next Steps
5.3 To validate our opinion, you are advised to apply for pre-application advice from the Council prior to making any formal planning submission. This would provide a platform for feedback on key planning matters and constraints (notably the ‘principle’ of development and effects on the National Landscape), and on any details provided (such as an indicative layout and design). Multiple schemes can be provided for comment. In essence, little needs to be provided to the Council under the pre-application mechanism. However, in our experience, the greater the detail that is provided, the more in depth the response will be.
5.4 MDP would be happy to assist with such a request for a fee of £XXX plus VAT plus disbursements of around £XXX paid to the local planning authority. While this is not a small sum of money, the alternative is to advance a speculative application. This will cost much more and is not without risk (as identified). Some of the information created for the pre-application submission can also be recycled in other submissions were it to come forward, so the investment is a prudent one. A pre-app is a sensible next move to establish the LPAs initial position.
End of planning opinion
I hope this assessment has been useful to you. It has been undertaken in good faith, with the information provided and that which is publicly available elsewhere. The advice is intended to give a “steer” for investment decisions and to ensure that if planning activity is pursued that landowners do not enter into this lightly and have awareness of risks. Please note that MDP would act in your interests and what we consider to be the realistic short, medium or long-term prospects if instructed to handle any forthcoming planning application or request for pre-application advice.
Kind regards
Mark Doodes MSc MRTPI
Independent Planning Consultant
Site Assessment
Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Project: The construction of an agricultural workers dwelling
Client: X
Site Address: X
Issue and Revision Record: X
Local Authority: X
Highways Authority X
MDP Reference: X
Drafted by: X
Checked by: X
Contents
- Introduction
- Headline Constraints
- Policy Position
- Discussion
- Conclusion
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Thank you for your instruction on the Summary Assessment following discussions regarding your circumstances and ambitions for the area of land identified in Figure 1 below (the precise boundaries are not particularly important at this stage).
X
Figure 1: The area of land to which this report relates.
1.2 Based on our discussions, it is understood that you wish to construct an agricultural workers’ dwelling at the site.
1.3 The fate and planning merits of the site are critically dependent upon a number of factors which can, and do, change over time. The headline policy and physical constraints are shown below. It is also important to note that the ‘shelf life’ of this report is limited to around four months.
2.0 Headline Constraints
2.1 The many and various physical and policy constraints to a site can impact upon the acceptability of the site irrespective of the planning policy provisions. As such, it is necessary to understand the development in the context of its headline constraints shown below.
Constraint
Resource
Site Address
XXXXXX
LPA Name
Wiltshire Council.
Green Belt
No.
National Landscape (formerly AONB)
North Wessex Downs National Landscape.
Flooding
Flood Zone 1 (lowest risk).
Surface Water
Very low risk.
Public Rights of Way*
None across or near site.
Ecology*
Ecological value of site unknown. Given nature of existing building, likely require Preliminary Ecological Assessment – unlikely to be fundamental issue.
European sites – Around 7km away from Pewsey Downs SAC. Around 6.6km away from Salisbury Plain SPA/SAC. Could also be deemed to fall within catchment area of River Avon SAC.
Agricultural Land
Yes.
Landscape Designation
National Landscape (outside settlement).
Historic Environment
Not in conservation area. Closest listed building is XXX (Grade II). Site not in setting.
Local Plan Hierarchy*
Open countryside.
Neighbourhood Plan*
Devizes Neighbourhood Plan.
Access*
Appears to be access to carriageway. Unlikely to be an issue.
5YLS Position *
Around 4.2 years.
Utilities*
Likely available.
Services and Facilities
Wide range of services at Devizes.
3.0 Policy Position
3.1 The starting point for assessing the site according to Section 38(6) of the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act are the provisions of the Council’s development plan. In this instance, key policies are within the 2015 Wiltshire Core Strategy (including policies saved from former District Council Local Plans as shown at Appendix D to the Core Strategy) (CS) and the Devizes Neighbourhood Plan (NP).
3.2 Other material planning policy considerations include the National Planning Policy Framework (2023) (henceforth referred to as ‘the Framework’ or the NPPF) and Planning Practice Guidance (PPG).
3.3 Key policies relevant to residential development at this site are set out below.
Wiltshire Core Strategy
3.4 Core Policy 1: Settlement Strategy – This policy identifies the settlements where sustainable development will take place. Development is directed to Principal Settlements, Market Towns, Local Service Centres and Large and Small Villages.
3.5 Core Policy 2: Delivery Strategy – This policy outlines the considerable overall housing need for the local authority area (42,000 homes). Outside of defined limits of development, development will not be permitted other than in circumstances as permitted by this plan.
3.6 Core Policy 12: Devizes Community Area – Development in this area should be in accordance with Core Policies 1 and 2 and should not, amongst other things, worsen traffic congestion or harm the character of the National Landscape.
3.7 Core Policy 45: Meeting Wiltshire’s Housing Needs – New housing should address local housing need incorporating a range of different types, tenures and sizes of homes to create balanced communities.
3.8 Core Policy 48: Supporting Rural Life – Outside the defined limits of development of the Principal Settlements, Market Towns, Local Service Centres and Large Villages, and outside the existing built areas of Small Villages, proposals for residential development will be supported where these meet the accommodation needs required to enable workers to live at or in the immediate vicinity of their place of work in the interests of agriculture or forestry or other employment essential to the countryside. Proposals for accommodation to meet the needs of employment essential to the countryside should be supported by functional and financial evidence.
3.9 Core Policy 50: Biodiversity and Geodiversity – Amongst other things, this policy seeks to ensure that developments protect features of nature conservation and geological value and avoid disturbance to species and habitats. Biodiversity enhancement is encouraged.
3.10 Core Policy 51: Landscape – This policy states that development should protect, conserve and where possible enhance landscape character and must not have a harmful impact upon landscape character. Amongst other things, this policy seeks to conserve landscape features of historic and heritage value and ensure developments do not harm important views and visual amenity. It also gives great weight to the conservation and enhancement of the landscape and scenic beauty within the AONB (now known as a National Landscape).
3.11 Core Policy 57: Ensuring High Quality Design and Place Shaping – Amongst other things, this policy seeks to ensure that proposals are sympathetic to historic buildings and that they have regard to the amenities of existing occupants and the compatibility with adjoining buildings and uses.
3.12 Core Policy 60: Sustainable Transport – Amongst other things, this policy seeks to reduce the reliance on travel by private car and supports and encourages sustainable transport modes.
3.13 Core Policy 61: Transport and Development – New Development should be located and designed to reduce the need to travel, particularly by private car. Sustainable transport alternatives are encouraged.
Devizes Neighbourhood Plan
3.14 Policy H1: Strategic Policy Intent – Settlement Framework Boundary – Development is directed to within the Settlement Framework Boundary shown on the Policies Map. The design of new buildings will have a tangible characteristic link to existing buildings in the locality in which they will be built.
3.15 Policy H2: Strategic Policy Intent – Built Environment and Sustainability – Amongst other things, all new housing must be capable of being readily assimilated within the existing built environment and the social fabric of the settlement.
3.16 Policy T1: Strategic Policy Intent – Getting Around – Amongst other things, this policy supports the use of sustainable transport modes.
3.17 Policy ESD1: Strategic Policy Intent – Environment and Sustainability - Additional housing should cause no significant harm to the Neighbourhood Plan Area’s identity or the environment and be pleasant places where residents can lead active and healthy lives.
Relevant National Planning Policy
Approach to Sustainable Development
3.18 Paragraph 7 of the Framework states that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development.
3.19 Paragraph 8 states that achieving sustainable development means that the planning system has three overarching objectives, which are interdependent and need to be pursued in mutually supportive ways (so that opportunities can be taken to secure net gains across each of the different objectives):
a) an economic objective – to help build a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right types is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth, innovation and improved productivity; and by identifying and coordinating the provision of infrastructure;
b) a social objective – to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by ensuring that a sufficient number and range of homes can be provided to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by fostering well-designed, beautiful and safe places, with accessible services and open spaces that reflect current and future needs and support communities’ health, social and cultural well-being; and
c) an environmental objective – to protect and enhance our natural, built and historic environment; including making effective use of land, improving biodiversity, using natural resources prudently, minimising waste and pollution, and mitigating and adapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy.
3.20 Paragraph 9 states that planning decisions should play an active role in guiding development towards sustainable solutions, but in doing so should take local circumstances into account, to reflect the character, needs and opportunities of each area.
3.21 Paragraph 10 states that, so that sustainable development is pursued in a positive way, at the heart of the Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development. This is then detailed at Paragraph 11.
3.22 Paragraph 38 makes it clear that decision-makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible.
Housing
3.23 The Framework shows a clear Government intention to significantly boost the supply of housing. Paragraph 60 states that is important that sufficient amount and variety of land can come forward where it is needed and that the needs of groups with specific housing requirements are addressed.
3.24 Paragraph 70 states that small and medium sized sites can make an important contribution to meeting the housing requirement of an area.
3.25 Paragraph 84 states that planning policies and decisions should avoid the development of isolated homes in the countryside unless one or more of identified circumstances apply. This includes where there is an essential need for a rural worker, including those taking majority control of a farm business, to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside.
3.26 Paragraph 135 seeks to ensure that developments optimise the potential of sites and function well.
Design
3.27 Paragraph 131 states that the creation of high quality, beautiful and sustainable buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve.
3.28 Paragraph 135 seeks to ensure that developments add to the overall quality of the area.
3.29 Paragraph 139 states that development that is not well designed should be refused.
Economic Strength
3.30 Paragraph 85 states that planning decisions should help create the conditions in which businesses can invest, expand and adapt. Significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity.
Living Conditions
3.31 Paragraph 135 seeks to secure a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.
Biodiversity
3.32 Paragraph 185 seeks, amongst other things, to improve biodiversity in and around developments and secure measurable net gains for biodiversity.
Highway Safety
3.33 Paragraph 114 seeks to ensure that safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all users.
3.34 Paragraph 115 states that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.
National Landscape (AONB)
3.35 Paragraph 182 states that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues.
4.0 Discussion
4.1 In our opinion, it is likely that the main town planning issues with the development shown at paragraph 1.2 to this report would be;
- Whether or not this is a suitable location for residential development, with particular regard to local and national planning policy concerning the delivery of housing; and
1) Suitable Site?
- The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, including the National Landscape.
Policy Context
4.2 Core Policy 2 of the Core Strategy (CS) outlines the considerable housing need (42,000 units) within the local authority area over the plan period. It states that housing development will not be permitted other than in accordance with the objectives of the CS. Core Policy 1 of the CS identifies the settlements where sustainable development will take place. Development is directed to Principal Settlements, Market Towns, Local Service Centres and Large and Small Villages. Outside of defined limits of development, development will not be permitted other than in circumstances as permitted by the development plan. This strategy is echoed by Policies H1 and H2 of the NP.
4.3 One such circumstance is outlined at Core Policy 48 of the CS. This states that proposals for residential development in the countryside will be supported where they meet the accommodation needs required to enable workers to live at or in the immediate vicinity of their place of work in the interests of agriculture or forestry or other employment essential to the countryside. Proposals for accommodation to meet the needs of employment essential to the countryside should be supported by functional and financial evidence.
4.4 This is in line with paragraph 84 of the Framework, which states that the development of isolated homes in the countryside should be resisted unless one or more of identified circumstances apply. This includes where there is an essential need for a rural worker, including those taking majority control of a farm business, to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside.
Discussion
Agricultural Workers Dwelling
4.5 The site falls outside of any settlement and within the countryside for the purposes of planning policy. It is also likely to be considered as ‘isolated’ within the meaning defined in case law Braintree DC v SSCLG (2018) EWCA Civ 610; (2018) and City & Country Bramshill Limited and SOSHCLG (2019) EWHC 3437 (Admin).
4.6 While typical, open market, housing would therefore be resisted by the Council (as this would contravene its overarching spatial housing strategy), the development plan provides applicable exceptions for rural workers’ dwellings. These may be acceptable in a countryside location such as this. Considering the relevant policy outlined above, one would need to demonstrate that:4.7 In addition, the PPG chapter ‘Housing needs of different groups’ sets out some considerations which could be taken into account when assessing the need for isolated homes in the countryside for essential rural workers. The link to this chapter is provided below for ease of reference.
- The agricultural workers’ dwelling enables workers to live at or in the immediate vicinity of the agricultural business; and
- There is an essential functional and financial need for the agricultural workers’ dwelling;
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/housing-needs-of-different-groups
4.8 The circumstances set out in the PPG include:
- Evidence of the necessity for a rural worker to live at, or in close proximity to, their place of work to ensure the effective operation of an agricultural, forestry or similar land-based rural enterprise (for instance, where farm animals or agricultural processes require on-site attention 24-hours a day and where otherwise there would be a risk to human or animal health or from crime, or to deal quickly with emergencies that could cause serious loss of crops or products);
4.9 In MDP’s experience, there is a general resistance to rural workers dwellings due to the cumulative effect these can have on the countryside. As a consequence, the threshold for achieving a dwelling tied to a rural business is high. As an example, we have recently dealt with a scheme outside of Wantage in which the farmer had an established agricultural business of 20 years and a substantial number of cattle, sheep, chickens and other animals. The Council strongly resisted the need for a new dwelling to manage this business. Only after a lengthy period and the submission of a considerable amount of evidence did it accept a small dwelling.
- The degree to which there is confidence that the enterprise will remain viable for the foreseeable future;
- Whether the provision of an additional dwelling on site is essential for the continued viability of a farming business through the farm succession process;
- Whether the need could be met through improvements to existing accommodation on the site, providing such improvements are appropriate taking into account their scale, appearance and the local context; and
- In the case of new enterprises, whether it is appropriate to consider granting permission for a temporary dwelling for a trial period.
4.10 It follows that evidence addressing the aforementioned criteria must be robust. In particular, it should be shown that; the new dwelling is in close proximity to the farming activity, workers need to be on or near the site at most times, there would be adverse effects for the agricultural business if workers were not present at most times, workers are required to be on site all year round, temporary accommodation could not be provided for workers in existing dwellings nearby, there is no suitable accommodation at the agricultural unit, the agricultural enterprise will endure in the long term, considerable investments have been made in the enterprise and it has been profitable, the new dwelling is of the minimum size required and, lastly, that temporary accommodation (such as a mobile home) would not suffice to meet business needs.
4.11 Detailed statements may be required to illustrate this, including from agricultural specialists to convey the nature of farming practices. Moreover, detailed financial statements may be required to show that the business is profitable in the long term and justifies the construction of a new dwelling for workers. Evidence in the form of income/expenditure and profit/loss in recent years and/or business plans forecasting future performance may be requested by the Council. Any financial evidence provided should be based on up-to-date industry standard reference books such as the John Nix Farm Management Pocketbook or the Agricultural Budgeting and Costing Book.
4.12 As discussed, although there are provisions in national and local planning policy for agricultural workers’ dwellings, this is not straightforward. Councils are often reluctant to grant permission for these units unless they are presented with robust evidence of the type we have identified above. That said, MDP has successfully obtained permission for agricultural dwellings on a number of occasions and, provided that evidence is appropriate, there is no reason why this could not be the case here.
4.13 However, given our experience with Councils when dealing with agricultural workers’ dwellings, it is recommended that pre-application advice is first sought to establish how receptive Wiltshire’s Local Planning Authority (LPA) is to such a proposal at this site. We will return to this mechanism later in this report. Notably, this would provide a good platform for discussions on the overall size of the dwelling, which is often a point of concern for Councils.
4.14 Furthermore, should permission be granted for an agricultural workers’ dwelling, it is common that a condition is attached restricting occupancy to that which is tied to the agricultural business. This may also be necessary to secure through a Unilateral Undertaking or S106 legal agreement (this is not particularly complex). Such conditions/legal obligations are difficult to vary or remove post-consent.
Access to services
4.15 To support the overarching housing strategy, Core Policies 12, 60 and 61 of the CS and Policy T1 of the NP seek to reduce the reliance on private vehicles and promote sustainable transport modes. As such, it would also be prudent to evidence the site’s proximity to services in Devizes and the short nature of trips to and from the site to reach these in any planning application. Overall, environmental harm resulting from travel would be limited, but it is still a matter the Council will consider in the overall balance.
Overall Conclusion – Suitable Site
4.16 Taking everything together, the new dwelling would be within the countryside where there is a general resistance to development. Nevertheless, there are provisions in local and national planning policy for agricultural workers’ dwellings. Provided that the evidence outlined in this statement is robustly presented to the Council, there is no good reason why the Council should not accept such a dwelling at this site.
4.17 However, there is a high bar to be passed for the relevant evidence and Council’s are naturally obstructive/sceptical of proposals for any new dwellings in the countryside. Accordingly, you are advised to apply for pre-application advice proper to making any formal submission to gauge the stance of the LPA to the principle of this development.
2) Character and Appearance
4.18 The impacts upon the character and appearance of the area will be a significant material consideration and any submission will need to be supported by robust evidence showing that the scheme would not cause harm in this regard. Illustrative layouts and illustrative elevations may be advisable.
4.19 The site falls within the National Landscape (AONB). This is provided with statutory protection by section 85(1) of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, which provides:
“In exercising or performing any functions in relation to, or so as to affect, land in an area of outstanding natural beauty, a relevant authority shall have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the area of outstanding natural beauty.”
4.20 The site therefore falls within a sensitive landscape and the Council has a statutory duty to ensure that all decisions have regard to the purpose of both conserving and enhancing its natural beauty.
4.21 The introduction of a residential property, regardless of its size, together with associated hardstanding, gardens and residential paraphernalia such as parked vehicles, would inevitably urbanise the site. The LPA could identify harm in this regard. This alone may fundamentally flaw the scheme. However, this will depend upon the individual judgement of the planning officer and the strength of the case presented. It will also depend on whether or not the Council has accepted the principle of an agricultural workers dwelling at this site.
4.22 To attempt to overcome risks in this regard, the site should be placed in the context of surrounding development. A case should be made to show that the character to the area is influenced by sizeable settlements that are nearby. Advancing that the site is read in a peripheral countryside context, and does not comprise any of the key features of the National Landscape, will be crucial. However, there is no guarantee that such an argument would be accepted.
4.23 In terms of design, any new unit should appear simple in form. Facades and elevations should incorporate subtle and traditional architectural features to reflect those found within the wider area and the units should be constructed using a sympathetic materials palette. The re-use of the existing barn may be seen as less harmful to the character of the countryside. Nonetheless, should the Council accept the principle of a new agricultural workers dwelling, it may also be receptive to the demolition of the barn and the re-positioning of a new unit away from the carriageway. MDP can provide further design advice in terms of design and layout in due course if requested.
Overall Conclusion – Character and Design
4.24 The effect of the proposal on the character of the area and the acceptability of its individual layout and design will be subjective matters judged by the Council’s planning officer. There is no guarantee that the Council would not identify harm in this regard. This provides another reason to seek pre-application advice prior to any formal submission.
Other Material Considerations
Biodiversity
4.25 Given the presence of the existing barn, an ecological survey would be necessary to demonstrate that the site is of no real ecological value. If any protected species are identified, we would anticipate that suitable mitigation could be deployed, and this is unlikely to make any application fundamentally unacceptable.
4.26 In addition to the above, it should be noted that the site is relatively close to Pewsey Downs SAC, Salisbury Plain SPA/SAC and could be deemed to fall within catchment area of River Avon SAC. These are all designated European sites (international wildlife sites protected by European law) and are considerable biodiversity resources. The Council may raise concern with regard to increased recreational pressure here, together with possible nutrient imbalances from foul water discharge from a new dwelling.
4.27 This issue may not arise. Moreover, if it does, Council’s often have mitigation plans developed with Natural England (to which a financial contribution may be required). However, it is drawn to your attention as this matter is notoriously problematic for new developments. It further emphasises the prudency of pre-application engagement.
Living Conditions
4.28 It is likely that a building could be positioned at this site so that it did not prejudice living conditions at neighbouring properties in terms of outlook, privacy, access to daylight and noise and disturbance.
4.29 Moreover, appropriate external amenity space should be provided for new residents (this could be achieved in our view), and it is advised that internal room standards meet those identified within the Government’s ‘Technical housing standards – nationally described space standard’. In practical terms, these standards a low and easily met. A link to this document is provided below for your convenience. MDP can provide more assistance in this regard at a later stage if required.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/technical-housing-standards-nationally-described-space-standard
Flooding
4.30 The site is within Flood Zone 1, indicating a low probability of flooding. Furthermore, there is no evidence of significant surface water collection at this location. Consequently, it is unlikely that the proposal would be fundamentally unacceptable in this regard.
Highway Safety and Parking
4.31 It is likely that suitable levels of parking could be provided. Furthermore, it will be important to show that any housing development does not prejudice highway safety. Appropriate technical experts may need to be engaged to ensure, amongst other things, that suitable visibility splays exist and that vehicles could safely manoeuvre at the site and be accommodated onto the carriageway. There are no apparent concerns at this early stage in this regard.
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)
4.32 The Council operates a CIL (a charge that local authorities can impose on new developments in their area). The money generated through the levy will contribute towards the funding of infrastructure to support growth.
4.33 Residential development at this site may be liable for CIL charging. Even for small scale developments, this may be sizeable. Self-build developments can be exempt from this charge. More advice on this can be provided in due course if required as MDP is considerably experienced in the management of developments that interact with CIL. Importantly, CIL is usually deducted from the value of the site, but at a single dwelling, a self-builder is a likely end-buyer for the site, meaning that no CIL need be paid provided the correct forms and process are followed.
Self-build
4.34 It would be prudent to advance that any new unit at the site would be a self-build project. In general terms, self-build projects involve parties to be directly involved in the design and construction of their own home. Both self-build and custom build are viewed as a potential additional source of housing supply by Government and have been expressly encouraged therefore (see below). This is a key point often missed by decision takers; self-build units are seen by the Government as a new stream of housing not necessarily part of an existing body of consents. This has been the case in a recent salvo of applications we have seen be approved, such as land to the east of the A429.
4.35 The Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015 (as amended), introduced a new mechanism to the Town and Country Planning system involving a duty being placed upon LPAs to keep a register of persons who wish to undertake such projects and then imposes a “duty to grant planning permission” for serviced plots to facilitate such development in order to seek to meet the demand for it evidenced by the register that the LPA is mandated to keep and which needs to be updated annually. This Act was amended by The Housing and Planning Act 2016, such that from 1st April 2016, LPAs are required to:
(i) Keep a Self-Build and Custom-Build Register (s.1);
(ii) Grant sufficient planning permissions for serviced plots in order to meet the registered demand for self-build and custom-build homes set out on their Register (s.2A);
(iii) Have regard to the register when carrying out functions relating to planning (s.2)
4.36 Additionally, the NPPF requires Local Planning Authorities to address the need for all types of housing stating:
“…the size, type and tenure of housing needed for different groups in the community should be assessed and reflected in planning policies (including, but not limited to, … people wishing to commission or build their own homes).”
4.37 There is clearly support for self-build projects across the country in national planning policy, together with other relevant legislation. Indeed, we are aware of other nearby Council’s granting permission for such development recently. Consequently, advancing that any new unit at the site would be of a self-build nature should weigh considerably in favour of it. It may be necessary to support the planning application with a legal agreement (Unilateral Undertaking) to secure this. However, this a matter that MDP has dealt with frequently. It is not an onerous process, nor is it financially burdensome.
Housing Land Supply
4.38 Councils are required to demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing land (5YHLS). This is important, as in its absence paragraph 11 of the Framework is engaged. This considerably reduces the weight that can be afforded to the Council’s housing policies and should add a significant layer of weight in favour of new housing.
4.39 At present, the Council cannot demonstrate a 5YHLS. That said, the engagement of paragraph 11 is not a panacea since the local planning authority can (and likely will) argue that a small number of additional dwellings would not resolve the housing shortfall and that the shortfall itself is modest.
5.0 Conclusion
Overall Advice
5.1 Applying for housing at sites in open countryside locations is not often straightforward. That said, an agricultural workers’ dwelling at this site could be acceptable should the evidence provided satisfy the LPA. There is, however, a risk in terms of the principle of development given MDPs knowledge of the cautious approach Council’s take with this form of development. There is also a risk that the Council could find harm to the scenic beauty of the National Landscape (particularly should it conclude that there is insufficient evidence in relation to the principle of an agricultural workers’ dwelling at the site).
5.2 Overall, it is our opinion that, while a proposal for housing at this site could be an uphill battle, it could be appropriately justified and steered successfully through the local planning authority. Taking everything together, it is our professional opinion that there is a good chance (around 70% chance) of a positive outcome for housing development if handled correctly. However, we feel that a pre-app may be the best way to test the LPAs position without this becoming a public matter.
Next Steps
5.3 To validate our opinion, you are advised to apply for pre-application advice from the Council prior to making any formal planning submission. This would provide a platform for feedback on key planning matters and constraints (notably the ‘principle’ of development and effects on the National Landscape), and on any details provided (such as an indicative layout and design). Multiple schemes can be provided for comment. In essence, little needs to be provided to the Council under the pre-application mechanism. However, in our experience, the greater the detail that is provided, the more in depth the response will be.
5.4 MDP would be happy to assist with such a request for a fee of £XXX plus VAT plus disbursements of around £XXX paid to the local planning authority. While this is not a small sum of money, the alternative is to advance a speculative application. This will cost much more and is not without risk (as identified). Some of the information created for the pre-application submission can also be recycled in other submissions were it to come forward, so the investment is a prudent one. A pre-app is a sensible next move to establish the LPAs initial position.
End of planning opinion
I hope this assessment has been useful to you. It has been undertaken in good faith, with the information provided and that which is publicly available elsewhere. The advice is intended to give a “steer” for investment decisions and to ensure that if planning activity is pursued that landowners do not enter into this lightly and have awareness of risks. Please note that MDP would act in your interests and what we consider to be the realistic short, medium or long-term prospects if instructed to handle any forthcoming planning application or request for pre-application advice.
Kind regards
Mark Doodes MSc MRTPI
Independent Planning Consultant
Site Assessment
Town and Country Planning Act 1990
Project: The construction of an agricultural workers dwelling
Client: X
Site Address: X
Issue and Revision Record: X
Local Authority: X
Highways Authority X
MDP Reference: X
Drafted by: X
Checked by: X
Contents
- Introduction
- Headline Constraints
- Policy Position
- Discussion
- Conclusion
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Thank you for your instruction on the Summary Assessment following discussions regarding your circumstances and ambitions for the area of land identified in Figure 1 below (the precise boundaries are not particularly important at this stage).
X
Figure 1: The area of land to which this report relates.
1.2 Based on our discussions, it is understood that you wish to construct an agricultural workers’ dwelling at the site.
1.3 The fate and planning merits of the site are critically dependent upon a number of factors which can, and do, change over time. The headline policy and physical constraints are shown below. It is also important to note that the ‘shelf life’ of this report is limited to around four months.
2.0 Headline Constraints
2.1 The many and various physical and policy constraints to a site can impact upon the acceptability of the site irrespective of the planning policy provisions. As such, it is necessary to understand the development in the context of its headline constraints shown below.
Constraint
Resource
Site Address
XXXXXX
LPA Name
Wiltshire Council.
Green Belt
No.
National Landscape (formerly AONB)
North Wessex Downs National Landscape.
Flooding
Flood Zone 1 (lowest risk).
Surface Water
Very low risk.
Public Rights of Way*
None across or near site.
Ecology*
Ecological value of site unknown. Given nature of existing building, likely require Preliminary Ecological Assessment – unlikely to be fundamental issue.
European sites – Around 7km away from Pewsey Downs SAC. Around 6.6km away from Salisbury Plain SPA/SAC. Could also be deemed to fall within catchment area of River Avon SAC.
Agricultural Land
Yes.
Landscape Designation
National Landscape (outside settlement).
Historic Environment
Not in conservation area. Closest listed building is XXX (Grade II). Site not in setting.
Local Plan Hierarchy*
Open countryside.
Neighbourhood Plan*
Devizes Neighbourhood Plan.
Access*
Appears to be access to carriageway. Unlikely to be an issue.
5YLS Position *
Around 4.2 years.
Utilities*
Likely available.
Services and Facilities
Wide range of services at Devizes.
3.0 Policy Position
3.1 The starting point for assessing the site according to Section 38(6) of the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act are the provisions of the Council’s development plan. In this instance, key policies are within the 2015 Wiltshire Core Strategy (including policies saved from former District Council Local Plans as shown at Appendix D to the Core Strategy) (CS) and the Devizes Neighbourhood Plan (NP).
3.2 Other material planning policy considerations include the National Planning Policy Framework (2023) (henceforth referred to as ‘the Framework’ or the NPPF) and Planning Practice Guidance (PPG).
3.3 Key policies relevant to residential development at this site are set out below.
Wiltshire Core Strategy
3.4 Core Policy 1: Settlement Strategy – This policy identifies the settlements where sustainable development will take place. Development is directed to Principal Settlements, Market Towns, Local Service Centres and Large and Small Villages.
3.5 Core Policy 2: Delivery Strategy – This policy outlines the considerable overall housing need for the local authority area (42,000 homes). Outside of defined limits of development, development will not be permitted other than in circumstances as permitted by this plan.
3.6 Core Policy 12: Devizes Community Area – Development in this area should be in accordance with Core Policies 1 and 2 and should not, amongst other things, worsen traffic congestion or harm the character of the National Landscape.
3.7 Core Policy 45: Meeting Wiltshire’s Housing Needs – New housing should address local housing need incorporating a range of different types, tenures and sizes of homes to create balanced communities.
3.8 Core Policy 48: Supporting Rural Life – Outside the defined limits of development of the Principal Settlements, Market Towns, Local Service Centres and Large Villages, and outside the existing built areas of Small Villages, proposals for residential development will be supported where these meet the accommodation needs required to enable workers to live at or in the immediate vicinity of their place of work in the interests of agriculture or forestry or other employment essential to the countryside. Proposals for accommodation to meet the needs of employment essential to the countryside should be supported by functional and financial evidence.
3.9 Core Policy 50: Biodiversity and Geodiversity – Amongst other things, this policy seeks to ensure that developments protect features of nature conservation and geological value and avoid disturbance to species and habitats. Biodiversity enhancement is encouraged.
3.10 Core Policy 51: Landscape – This policy states that development should protect, conserve and where possible enhance landscape character and must not have a harmful impact upon landscape character. Amongst other things, this policy seeks to conserve landscape features of historic and heritage value and ensure developments do not harm important views and visual amenity. It also gives great weight to the conservation and enhancement of the landscape and scenic beauty within the AONB (now known as a National Landscape).
3.11 Core Policy 57: Ensuring High Quality Design and Place Shaping – Amongst other things, this policy seeks to ensure that proposals are sympathetic to historic buildings and that they have regard to the amenities of existing occupants and the compatibility with adjoining buildings and uses.
3.12 Core Policy 60: Sustainable Transport – Amongst other things, this policy seeks to reduce the reliance on travel by private car and supports and encourages sustainable transport modes.
3.13 Core Policy 61: Transport and Development – New Development should be located and designed to reduce the need to travel, particularly by private car. Sustainable transport alternatives are encouraged.
Devizes Neighbourhood Plan
3.14 Policy H1: Strategic Policy Intent – Settlement Framework Boundary – Development is directed to within the Settlement Framework Boundary shown on the Policies Map. The design of new buildings will have a tangible characteristic link to existing buildings in the locality in which they will be built.
3.15 Policy H2: Strategic Policy Intent – Built Environment and Sustainability – Amongst other things, all new housing must be capable of being readily assimilated within the existing built environment and the social fabric of the settlement.
3.16 Policy T1: Strategic Policy Intent – Getting Around – Amongst other things, this policy supports the use of sustainable transport modes.
3.17 Policy ESD1: Strategic Policy Intent – Environment and Sustainability - Additional housing should cause no significant harm to the Neighbourhood Plan Area’s identity or the environment and be pleasant places where residents can lead active and healthy lives.
Relevant National Planning Policy
Approach to Sustainable Development
3.18 Paragraph 7 of the Framework states that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development.
3.19 Paragraph 8 states that achieving sustainable development means that the planning system has three overarching objectives, which are interdependent and need to be pursued in mutually supportive ways (so that opportunities can be taken to secure net gains across each of the different objectives):
a) an economic objective – to help build a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right types is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth, innovation and improved productivity; and by identifying and coordinating the provision of infrastructure;
b) a social objective – to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by ensuring that a sufficient number and range of homes can be provided to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by fostering well-designed, beautiful and safe places, with accessible services and open spaces that reflect current and future needs and support communities’ health, social and cultural well-being; and
c) an environmental objective – to protect and enhance our natural, built and historic environment; including making effective use of land, improving biodiversity, using natural resources prudently, minimising waste and pollution, and mitigating and adapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy.
3.20 Paragraph 9 states that planning decisions should play an active role in guiding development towards sustainable solutions, but in doing so should take local circumstances into account, to reflect the character, needs and opportunities of each area.
3.21 Paragraph 10 states that, so that sustainable development is pursued in a positive way, at the heart of the Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development. This is then detailed at Paragraph 11.
3.22 Paragraph 38 makes it clear that decision-makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible.
Housing
3.23 The Framework shows a clear Government intention to significantly boost the supply of housing. Paragraph 60 states that is important that sufficient amount and variety of land can come forward where it is needed and that the needs of groups with specific housing requirements are addressed.
3.24 Paragraph 70 states that small and medium sized sites can make an important contribution to meeting the housing requirement of an area.
3.25 Paragraph 84 states that planning policies and decisions should avoid the development of isolated homes in the countryside unless one or more of identified circumstances apply. This includes where there is an essential need for a rural worker, including those taking majority control of a farm business, to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside.
3.26 Paragraph 135 seeks to ensure that developments optimise the potential of sites and function well.
Design
3.27 Paragraph 131 states that the creation of high quality, beautiful and sustainable buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve.
3.28 Paragraph 135 seeks to ensure that developments add to the overall quality of the area.
3.29 Paragraph 139 states that development that is not well designed should be refused.
Economic Strength
3.30 Paragraph 85 states that planning decisions should help create the conditions in which businesses can invest, expand and adapt. Significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity.
Living Conditions
3.31 Paragraph 135 seeks to secure a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.
Biodiversity
3.32 Paragraph 185 seeks, amongst other things, to improve biodiversity in and around developments and secure measurable net gains for biodiversity.
Highway Safety
3.33 Paragraph 114 seeks to ensure that safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all users.
3.34 Paragraph 115 states that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.
National Landscape (AONB)
3.35 Paragraph 182 states that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues.
4.0 Discussion
4.1 In our opinion, it is likely that the main town planning issues with the development shown at paragraph 1.2 to this report would be;
- Whether or not this is a suitable location for residential development, with particular regard to local and national planning policy concerning the delivery of housing; and
- The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, including the National Landscape.
Policy Context
4.2 Core Policy 2 of the Core Strategy (CS) outlines the considerable housing need (42,000 units) within the local authority area over the plan period. It states that housing development will not be permitted other than in accordance with the objectives of the CS. Core Policy 1 of the CS identifies the settlements where sustainable development will take place. Development is directed to Principal Settlements, Market Towns, Local Service Centres and Large and Small Villages. Outside of defined limits of development, development will not be permitted other than in circumstances as permitted by the development plan. This strategy is echoed by Policies H1 and H2 of the NP.
4.3 One such circumstance is outlined at Core Policy 48 of the CS. This states that proposals for residential development in the countryside will be supported where they meet the accommodation needs required to enable workers to live at or in the immediate vicinity of their place of work in the interests of agriculture or forestry or other employment essential to the countryside. Proposals for accommodation to meet the needs of employment essential to the countryside should be supported by functional and financial evidence.
4.4 This is in line with paragraph 84 of the Framework, which states that the development of isolated homes in the countryside should be resisted unless one or more of identified circumstances apply. This includes where there is an essential need for a rural worker, including those taking majority control of a farm business, to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside.
Discussion
Agricultural Workers Dwelling
4.5 The site falls outside of any settlement and within the countryside for the purposes of planning policy. It is also likely to be considered as ‘isolated’ within the meaning defined in case law Braintree DC v SSCLG (2018) EWCA Civ 610; (2018) and City & Country Bramshill Limited and SOSHCLG (2019) EWHC 3437 (Admin).
4.6 While typical, open market, housing would therefore be resisted by the Council (as this would contravene its overarching spatial housing strategy), the development plan provides applicable exceptions for rural workers’ dwellings. These may be acceptable in a countryside location such as this. Considering the relevant policy outlined above, one would need to demonstrate that:
- The agricultural workers’ dwelling enables workers to live at or in the immediate vicinity of the agricultural business; and
- There is an essential functional and financial need for the agricultural workers’ dwelling;
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/housing-needs-of-different-groups
4.8 The circumstances set out in the PPG include:
- Evidence of the necessity for a rural worker to live at, or in close proximity to, their place of work to ensure the effective operation of an agricultural, forestry or similar land-based rural enterprise (for instance, where farm animals or agricultural processes require on-site attention 24-hours a day and where otherwise there would be a risk to human or animal health or from crime, or to deal quickly with emergencies that could cause serious loss of crops or products);
- The degree to which there is confidence that the enterprise will remain viable for the foreseeable future;
- Whether the provision of an additional dwelling on site is essential for the continued viability of a farming business through the farm succession process;
- Whether the need could be met through improvements to existing accommodation on the site, providing such improvements are appropriate taking into account their scale, appearance and the local context; and
- In the case of new enterprises, whether it is appropriate to consider granting permission for a temporary dwelling for a trial period.
4.10 It follows that evidence addressing the aforementioned criteria must be robust. In particular, it should be shown that; the new dwelling is in close proximity to the farming activity, workers need to be on or near the site at most times, there would be adverse effects for the agricultural business if workers were not present at most times, workers are required to be on site all year round, temporary accommodation could not be provided for workers in existing dwellings nearby, there is no suitable accommodation at the agricultural unit, the agricultural enterprise will endure in the long term, considerable investments have been made in the enterprise and it has been profitable, the new dwelling is of the minimum size required and, lastly, that temporary accommodation (such as a mobile home) would not suffice to meet business needs.
4.11 Detailed statements may be required to illustrate this, including from agricultural specialists to convey the nature of farming practices. Moreover, detailed financial statements may be required to show that the business is profitable in the long term and justifies the construction of a new dwelling for workers. Evidence in the form of income/expenditure and profit/loss in recent years and/or business plans forecasting future performance may be requested by the Council. Any financial evidence provided should be based on up-to-date industry standard reference books such as the John Nix Farm Management Pocketbook or the Agricultural Budgeting and Costing Book.
4.12 As discussed, although there are provisions in national and local planning policy for agricultural workers’ dwellings, this is not straightforward. Councils are often reluctant to grant permission for these units unless they are presented with robust evidence of the type we have identified above. That said, MDP has successfully obtained permission for agricultural dwellings on a number of occasions and, provided that evidence is appropriate, there is no reason why this could not be the case here.
4.13 However, given our experience with Councils when dealing with agricultural workers’ dwellings, it is recommended that pre-application advice is first sought to establish how receptive Wiltshire’s Local Planning Authority (LPA) is to such a proposal at this site. We will return to this mechanism later in this report. Notably, this would provide a good platform for discussions on the overall size of the dwelling, which is often a point of concern for Councils.
4.14 Furthermore, should permission be granted for an agricultural workers’ dwelling, it is common that a condition is attached restricting occupancy to that which is tied to the agricultural business. This may also be necessary to secure through a Unilateral Undertaking or S106 legal agreement (this is not particularly complex). Such conditions/legal obligations are difficult to vary or remove post-consent.
Access to services
4.15 To support the overarching housing strategy, Core Policies 12, 60 and 61 of the CS and Policy T1 of the NP seek to reduce the reliance on private vehicles and promote sustainable transport modes. As such, it would also be prudent to evidence the site’s proximity to services in Devizes and the short nature of trips to and from the site to reach these in any planning application. Overall, environmental harm resulting from travel would be limited, but it is still a matter the Council will consider in the overall balance.
Overall Conclusion – Suitable Site
4.16 Taking everything together, the new dwelling would be within the countryside where there is a general resistance to development. Nevertheless, there are provisions in local and national planning policy for agricultural workers’ dwellings. Provided that the evidence outlined in this statement is robustly presented to the Council, there is no good reason why the Council should not accept such a dwelling at this site.
4.17 However, there is a high bar to be passed for the relevant evidence and Council’s are naturally obstructive/sceptical of proposals for any new dwellings in the countryside. Accordingly, you are advised to apply for pre-application advice proper to making any formal submission to gauge the stance of the LPA to the principle of this development.
2) Character and Appearance
4.18 The impacts upon the character and appearance of the area will be a significant material consideration and any submission will need to be supported by robust evidence showing that the scheme would not cause harm in this regard. Illustrative layouts and illustrative elevations may be advisable.
4.19 The site falls within the National Landscape (AONB). This is provided with statutory protection by section 85(1) of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, which provides:
“In exercising or performing any functions in relation to, or so as to affect, land in an area of outstanding natural beauty, a relevant authority shall have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the area of outstanding natural beauty.”
4.20 The site therefore falls within a sensitive landscape and the Council has a statutory duty to ensure that all decisions have regard to the purpose of both conserving and enhancing its natural beauty.
4.21 The introduction of a residential property, regardless of its size, together with associated hardstanding, gardens and residential paraphernalia such as parked vehicles, would inevitably urbanise the site. The LPA could identify harm in this regard. This alone may fundamentally flaw the scheme. However, this will depend upon the individual judgement of the planning officer and the strength of the case presented. It will also depend on whether or not the Council has accepted the principle of an agricultural workers dwelling at this site.
4.22 To attempt to overcome risks in this regard, the site should be placed in the context of surrounding development. A case should be made to show that the character to the area is influenced by sizeable settlements that are nearby. Advancing that the site is read in a peripheral countryside context, and does not comprise any of the key features of the National Landscape, will be crucial. However, there is no guarantee that such an argument would be accepted.
4.23 In terms of design, any new unit should appear simple in form. Facades and elevations should incorporate subtle and traditional architectural features to reflect those found within the wider area and the units should be constructed using a sympathetic materials palette. The re-use of the existing barn may be seen as less harmful to the character of the countryside. Nonetheless, should the Council accept the principle of a new agricultural workers dwelling, it may also be receptive to the demolition of the barn and the re-positioning of a new unit away from the carriageway. MDP can provide further design advice in terms of design and layout in due course if requested.
Overall Conclusion – Character and Design
4.24 The effect of the proposal on the character of the area and the acceptability of its individual layout and design will be subjective matters judged by the Council’s planning officer. There is no guarantee that the Council would not identify harm in this regard. This provides another reason to seek pre-application advice prior to any formal submission.
Other Material Considerations
Biodiversity
4.25 Given the presence of the existing barn, an ecological survey would be necessary to demonstrate that the site is of no real ecological value. If any protected species are identified, we would anticipate that suitable mitigation could be deployed, and this is unlikely to make any application fundamentally unacceptable.
4.26 In addition to the above, it should be noted that the site is relatively close to Pewsey Downs SAC, Salisbury Plain SPA/SAC and could be deemed to fall within catchment area of River Avon SAC. These are all designated European sites (international wildlife sites protected by European law) and are considerable biodiversity resources. The Council may raise concern with regard to increased recreational pressure here, together with possible nutrient imbalances from foul water discharge from a new dwelling.
4.27 This issue may not arise. Moreover, if it does, Council’s often have mitigation plans developed with Natural England (to which a financial contribution may be required). However, it is drawn to your attention as this matter is notoriously problematic for new developments. It further emphasises the prudency of pre-application engagement.
Living Conditions
4.28 It is likely that a building could be positioned at this site so that it did not prejudice living conditions at neighbouring properties in terms of outlook, privacy, access to daylight and noise and disturbance.
4.29 Moreover, appropriate external amenity space should be provided for new residents (this could be achieved in our view), and it is advised that internal room standards meet those identified within the Government’s ‘Technical housing standards – nationally described space standard’. In practical terms, these standards a low and easily met. A link to this document is provided below for your convenience. MDP can provide more assistance in this regard at a later stage if required.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/technical-housing-standards-nationally-described-space-standard
Flooding
4.30 The site is within Flood Zone 1, indicating a low probability of flooding. Furthermore, there is no evidence of significant surface water collection at this location. Consequently, it is unlikely that the proposal would be fundamentally unacceptable in this regard.
Highway Safety and Parking
4.31 It is likely that suitable levels of parking could be provided. Furthermore, it will be important to show that any housing development does not prejudice highway safety. Appropriate technical experts may need to be engaged to ensure, amongst other things, that suitable visibility splays exist and that vehicles could safely manoeuvre at the site and be accommodated onto the carriageway. There are no apparent concerns at this early stage in this regard.
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)
4.32 The Council operates a CIL (a charge that local authorities can impose on new developments in their area). The money generated through the levy will contribute towards the funding of infrastructure to support growth.
4.33 Residential development at this site may be liable for CIL charging. Even for small scale developments, this may be sizeable. Self-build developments can be exempt from this charge. More advice on this can be provided in due course if required as MDP is considerably experienced in the management of developments that interact with CIL. Importantly, CIL is usually deducted from the value of the site, but at a single dwelling, a self-builder is a likely end-buyer for the site, meaning that no CIL need be paid provided the correct forms and process are followed.
Self-build
4.34 It would be prudent to advance that any new unit at the site would be a self-build project. In general terms, self-build projects involve parties to be directly involved in the design and construction of their own home. Both self-build and custom build are viewed as a potential additional source of housing supply by Government and have been expressly encouraged therefore (see below). This is a key point often missed by decision takers; self-build units are seen by the Government as a new stream of housing not necessarily part of an existing body of consents. This has been the case in a recent salvo of applications we have seen be approved, such as land to the east of the A429.
4.35 The Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015 (as amended), introduced a new mechanism to the Town and Country Planning system involving a duty being placed upon LPAs to keep a register of persons who wish to undertake such projects and then imposes a “duty to grant planning permission” for serviced plots to facilitate such development in order to seek to meet the demand for it evidenced by the register that the LPA is mandated to keep and which needs to be updated annually. This Act was amended by The Housing and Planning Act 2016, such that from 1st April 2016, LPAs are required to:
(i) Keep a Self-Build and Custom-Build Register (s.1);
(ii) Grant sufficient planning permissions for serviced plots in order to meet the registered demand for self-build and custom-build homes set out on their Register (s.2A);
(iii) Have regard to the register when carrying out functions relating to planning (s.2)
4.36 Additionally, the NPPF requires Local Planning Authorities to address the need for all types of housing stating:
“…the size, type and tenure of housing needed for different groups in the community should be assessed and reflected in planning policies (including, but not limited to, … people wishing to commission or build their own homes).”
4.37 There is clearly support for self-build projects across the country in national planning policy, together with other relevant legislation. Indeed, we are aware of other nearby Council’s granting permission for such development recently. Consequently, advancing that any new unit at the site would be of a self-build nature should weigh considerably in favour of it. It may be necessary to support the planning application with a legal agreement (Unilateral Undertaking) to secure this. However, this a matter that MDP has dealt with frequently. It is not an onerous process, nor is it financially burdensome.
Housing Land Supply
4.38 Councils are required to demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing land (5YHLS). This is important, as in its absence paragraph 11 of the Framework is engaged. This considerably reduces the weight that can be afforded to the Council’s housing policies and should add a significant layer of weight in favour of new housing.
4.39 At present, the Council cannot demonstrate a 5YHLS. That said, the engagement of paragraph 11 is not a panacea since the local planning authority can (and likely will) argue that a small number of additional dwellings would not resolve the housing shortfall and that the shortfall itself is modest.
5.0 Conclusion
Overall Advice
5.1 Applying for housing at sites in open countryside locations is not often straightforward. That said, an agricultural workers’ dwelling at this site could be acceptable should the evidence provided satisfy the LPA. There is, however, a risk in terms of the principle of development given MDPs knowledge of the cautious approach Council’s take with this form of development. There is also a risk that the Council could find harm to the scenic beauty of the National Landscape (particularly should it conclude that there is insufficient evidence in relation to the principle of an agricultural workers’ dwelling at the site).
5.2 Overall, it is our opinion that, while a proposal for housing at this site could be an uphill battle, it could be appropriately justified and steered successfully through the local planning authority. Taking everything together, it is our professional opinion that there is a good chance (around 70% chance) of a positive outcome for housing development if handled correctly. However, we feel that a pre-app may be the best way to test the LPAs position without this becoming a public matter.
Next Steps
5.3 To validate our opinion, you are advised to apply for pre-application advice from the Council prior to making any formal planning submission. This would provide a platform for feedback on key planning matters and constraints (notably the ‘principle’ of development and effects on the National Landscape), and on any details provided (such as an indicative layout and design). Multiple schemes can be provided for comment. In essence, little needs to be provided to the Council under the pre-application mechanism. However, in our experience, the greater the detail that is provided, the more in depth the response will be.
5.4 MDP would be happy to assist with such a request for a fee of £XXX plus VAT plus disbursements of around £XXX paid to the local planning authority. While this is not a small sum of money, the alternative is to advance a speculative application. This will cost much more and is not without risk (as identified). Some of the information created for the pre-application submission can also be recycled in other submissions were it to come forward, so the investment is a prudent one. A pre-app is a sensible next move to establish the LPAs initial position.
End of planning opinion
I hope this assessment has been useful to you. It has been undertaken in good faith, with the information provided and that which is publicly available elsewhere. The advice is intended to give a “steer” for investment decisions and to ensure that if planning activity is pursued that landowners do not enter into this lightly and have awareness of risks. Please note that MDP would act in your interests and what we consider to be the realistic short, medium or long-term prospects if instructed to handle any forthcoming planning application or request for pre-application advice.
Kind regards
Mark Doodes MSc MRTPI
Independent Planning Consultant