Development Control Committee: 24 June 2010 PROPOSAL: Use

Development Control Committee: 24 June 2010

SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 1

5.03 - SE/10/01066/FUL Date expired 7 June 2010

PROPOSAL: Use of 2 buildings for B8 storage purposes.

LOCATION: Warren Farm, Birchwood Lane, Knockholt, Sevenoaks TN14 7LP

WARD(S): Halstead, Knockholt & Badgers Mount

ITEM FOR DECISION

This application is reported to Development control Committee at the request of Councillor Grint to consider the impact of the proposed use on the openness of the Green Belt and the amenities of the area.

RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

In pursuance of section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Site plan received 12.04.2010; Block Plan DPP/SD/10/26/01 and Floor plans and elevations DPP/SD/10/26/02.

For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3) No part of the land shall be used for open storage or for the display of goods and products.

To safeguard the openness of the Green Belt in accordance with advice within PPG2 and policies GB3A and GB3B of the Sevenoaks District Local Plan.

4) The vehicle parking spaces shown on the approved plan shall be provided and kept available for such use at all times and no permanent development shall be carried out on the land so shown or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to the vehicle parking spaces. No vehicles shall be parked or stored outside the spaces shown on the approved plan DPP/SD/10/26/01.

To ensure an adequate retention of vehicle parking and to safeguard the openness of the site and wider rural character, in accordance with advice within PPG2, PPS7, EN1, and GB3 A of the Sevenoaks District Local Plan.

5) The buildings shall not be open for use outside the following hours:- 09:00-17:30 Mondays to Fridays, and 09:00- 14:00 hours Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays.

To safeguard the amenities of residential properties in accordance with policy EN1 of


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 2

the Sevenoaks District Local Plan.

In determining this application, the Local Planning Authority has had regard to the following Development Plan Policies:

The South East Plan 2009 - Policies CC6, C3, C4.

Sevenoaks District Local Plan - Policies EN1, EN6, GB3A, GB3B.

The following is a summary of the main reasons for the decision:

The development is considered to be appropriate development within the Metropolitan Green Belt.

The scale, location and design of the development would preserve the character and appearance of the countryside.

Any potentially significant impacts on the amenities of nearby dwellings can be satisfactorily mitigated by way of the conditions imposed.

The traffic movements generated by the development can be accommodated without detriment to highway safety.

Description of Proposal

1 The application seeks consent for the change of use of two metal clad single storey buildings to B8 for storage purposes. Both buildings provide a total storage space of 105sqm (Building 1- 60sqm and Building 2- 45sqm). In addition a smaller concrete building is proposed to be converted and used as a toilet block.

2 There are no external alterations proposed to any of the buildings, the existing double door openings to the north elevations would remain, as would the simple metal wall and roof cladding.

Description of Site

3 The site lies within an enclosed yard, to the east of a single storey dwelling house which was originally constructed as an agricultural workers dwelling. The yard area comprises a number of the metal clad structures which were originally farm buildings. There was previously permission to retain a use within these buildings for the storage and wholesale of pigeon food stuffs, however there does not appear to have been permission granted for any other use.

4 The buildings appear to be currently used for general storage, largely of machinery used in connection with the applicants vehicles and for overflow ancillary storage for the dwelling. To the south of the buildings lie a stable


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 3

block and beyond this a larger more modern steel framed barn which was erected for the purposes of storing hay and straw.

5 The yard is enclosed by 2-2.5m high brick walls to the north, east and west and the buildings in question abut the residential boundary with the bungalow. There is an area of hard standing to the front of the site enclosed by the boundary walls.

6 To the north of the site lies a collection of industrial units which were created through the conversion of disused agricultural buildings. To the east lie unrelated residential properties, The Bungalow, approximately 80m to the north east, and beyond this Rockley Cottage and Rose Cottage Farm, which lie approximately 300m to the east along a private farm track.

7 Planning permission has recently been refused for the retention of open storage for 22 vehicles within the yard.

Constraints

8 Metropolitan Green Belt

9 Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Policies

10 PPG2- Green Belts

11 PPS7- Sustainable Development in Rural Areas

South East Plan

12 CC6- Sustainable communities and Character of the Environment

13 C3- Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty

14 C4- Landscape and Countryside Management

Sevenoaks District Local Plan

15 EN1- General Principles

16 EN6- Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty

17 GB3A- Re-Use of Buildings in the Green Belt

18 GB3B- Re-Use of Buildings in the Green Belt

19 VP1- General Parking Standards

Other

20 SPG4- Kent Vehicle Parking Standards


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 4

Planning History

21 SW/5/72/789- Erection of a dwelling house for agricultural worker- Approved

22 SE/93/00704/FUL- Change of use of part of the farm to use by pigeon suppliers which involves the wholesale of pigeon corn and seeds.(retrospective application).- Refused

23 310/92/111- Change of use of three buildings for storage and sale of pigeon products- Enforcement Notice quashed and allowed at appeal

24 SE/97/01994/FUL- Stable block, feed store and ménage- Approved

25 SE/98/02102/FUL- Erection of Hay/Straw Barn- Approved

26 SE/00/2688/LDCEX- Lawful Development Certificate for the breach of condition (v) of SW/5/72/789 for more than 10 years- Approved

27 SE/09/00008/FUL- Demolition of four outbuildings, erection of one new building for storage and sales to the public- Refused

28 SE/10/01067/FUL- Change of use for storage of 22 motor vehicles for a limited period of 6 months (Retrospective)- Refused.

Site opposite

29 SE/95/01223/FUL- Change of use of existing rural buildings to B1 light industrial- Approved

Consultations

Parish Council

30 Knockholt Parish Council - Objection and Reasons :

“The current use does not seem to be in accordance with any permission which may have been granted. We have grave concerns as to what may be involved in B8 storage being granted. Such use would remove any control which may exist over this complex site. It may be appropriate to restrict the storage of such material as inconsistent with this Green Belt, Special Landscape Area and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty site”.

Kent Highways

31 There are two main considerations for us in this case, the first being whether there is any significant adverse impact on the highway network with the second being whether it is a sustainable form of development.

32 As far as highway impact is concerned, the lane is private and not, therefore, within our control as Local Highway Authority. As such, anything which happens within the lane is not a matter for us unless it impacts on the public highway. The most obvious issue would be problems arising where it meets


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 5

Star Hill Road. The mouth of the junction is quite generous and there would appear to be enough manoeuvring space for most vehicles. Visibility from the lane is also good in both directions.

33 The units are relatively small and although a general B8 use could generate either high levels of movement and/or involve use of large HGV's, it is more likely to be lower levels of movement. As such, I don't see this as being a problem.

34 The site is well related to the wider network and I saw no reason to object on the basis of adequacy of the local roads.

35 On the sustainability issue, the site is clearly not ideal being in a rural area without complete linkage in terms of accessibility by all means of transport. To offset that, though, a small B8 use would generate little scope for employment and I note that it is close to residential areas. In other words, it is not completely remote from any centres of population. If this were a greenfield site, I could support an objection because it is clearly not the most suitable place to have a commercial use. The buildings are there, however, and appear to have been used in the past for commercial purposes. There are also other commercial uses in the same complex so it can be argued that the increase in activity is likely to be small.

Representations

36 None received.

Head Of Development Services Appraisal

Principal Issues

Green Belt and impact on the countryside

37 PPG2 advises that with suitable safeguards, the re-use of buildings should not prejudice the openness of Green Belts, since the buildings are already there.

38 The re-use of buildings inside a Green Belt is not inappropriate development providing:

it does not have a materially greater impact than the present use on the openness of the Green Belt and the purposes of including land in it;

strict control is exercised over the extension of re-used buildings, and over any associated uses of land surrounding the building which might conflict with the openness of the Green Belt and the purposes of including land in it (e.g. because they involve extensive external storage, or extensive hard standing, car parking, boundary walling or fencing);

the buildings are of permanent and substantial construction, and are capable of conversion without major or complete reconstruction; and


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 6

the form, bulk and general design of the buildings are in keeping with their surroundings.

39 If a proposal for the re-use of a building in the Green Belt does not meet the above criteria, or there are other specific and convincing planning reasons for refusal (for example on environmental or traffic grounds), the local planning authority should not reject the proposal without considering whether, by imposing reasonable conditions, any objections could be overcome. It should not normally be necessary to consider whether the building is no longer needed for its present agricultural or other purposes. Evidence that the building is not redundant in its present use is not by itself sufficient grounds for refusing permission for a proposed new use. Policy GB3A of the Sevenoaks District Local Plan supports the above advice within PPG2. Policy GB3B advises that if the buildings were constructed within the last 10 years, it will be necessary to demonstrate there was a genuine agricultural justification for the building when it was constructed. There is no record of planning permission for the buildings, however they appear on the 1999 aerial survey and have not therefore been constructed within the last 10 years.

40 The use does not propose any external storage within the yard, only the allocation of 4 parking bays and two goods vehicle bays in front of either building. Whilst a B8 storage use may attract vehicles into the site which currently do not attend, the impact of these vehicles upon the openness of the Green Belt is transitory. With all storage contained within the buildings, it is not considered a B8 storage use would have any greater impact upon the openness of the Green Belt than currently exists from the parking of various vehicles within the yard and the retention of the existing buildings.

41 Opposite the site lies a collection of converted agricultural buildings which have consent for light industrial purposes. There are a range of uses which attract various types and sizes of vehicles, related to the uses undertaken such as car repair and scaffolding provision. As such, the current activity in and around the site is commercial in nature both in terms of the frequency of activity and the varying types of vehicles which may visit during business hours.

42 There are no external alterations proposed to the existing buildings and there would be no requirement for any additional hard standing, walls or fencing. In addition, regard should be had to the limited size and height of the units. The buildings are not substantial industrial units which would have the capacity to attract large quantities of materials. As a result the size of the buildings would to some extent restrict any potential end user. A B8 storage use, constrained to some extent by the limited size of the buildings, is unlikely to result in a significant increase in activity to the extent that the openness of the Green Belt would be harmed.

43 Upon visiting the site I noted that the buildings were currently being used to store small items of machinery, often related to car maintenance. Their construction is simple and indicative of their former agricultural use. Both buildings stand on a concrete base and appear sound. Given the proposal would not involve any structural alteration I am satisfied a B8 use could be


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 7

accommodated without requiring any substantial rebuilding or major reconstruction.

44 The buildings are not visually intrusive within the landscape by virtue of their modest size and height. Being located within a formal enclosure, abutting the larger dwelling house also limits their visual intrusion within the Green Belt. To retain them in their current form would not have any greater impact upon the openness of the Green Belt than currently exists.

45 Retrospective permission was refused under SE/93/00704/FUL to use the buildings to store and distribute (wholesale) pigeon feed. Subsequent to this refusal was an enforcement notice requiring the cessation of the use within 3 months. The applicants appealed under ground (a) which is that planning permission should be granted for the development to which the notice relates. In considering the case, the Inspector was concerned whether the retention of the use for wholesale storage and distribution of pigeon feed was acceptable in policy terms. The Inspector was not at liberty to consider a wider use as that was not stipulated within the enforcement notice against which the appeal was lodged. The Inspector concluded that the buildings were in keeping with their surroundings and appeared sound in the sense of being fully enclosed, weatherproof and appeared stable. The Inspector also concluded the buildings and yard whilst visible from the access track, were not prominent in the wider landscape.

46 The Inspector concluded that the use was appropriate development within the Green Belt and would not create material harm to the open landscape in this location.

47 Whilst the Inspector reached his conclusions primarily on the basis of the previous use, it is still considered the re-use of the two buildings and use of existing areas of hard standing and parking areas, would not result in a level of activity which would harm the wider openness of the Green Belt. Any parking of larger commercial vehicles would be transitory and parking areas could be limited solely to those indicated on the submitted block plan. In addition the open storage of goods outside the building could also be restricted by way of condition.

48 The proposal constitutes appropriate development within the Green Belt and would not result in a use which would have a materially greater impact upon openness than present or previous permitted uses.

Impact upon the countryside

49 PPS7 advises that the re-use of rural buildings is supported where they are appropriately located and suitably constructed. Re-use for economic purposes will normally be preferable to residential conversions. Local planning authorities should be particularly supportive of the re-use of existing buildings that are adjacent or closely related to country towns and villages, for economic uses.


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 8

50 Policies CC6, C3 and C4 of the SE Plan along with EN1 and EN6 of the Sevenoaks District Plan states that development, including the use of land should respect the character and distinctiveness of areas and within Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty the landscape character should be protected. In considering proposals for development, the emphasis should be on small-scale proposals that are sustainably located and designed. Proposals which support the economies of Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty will be encouraged.

51 The proposal would result in the re-use of rural buildings for economic purposes. As highlighted by the Kent Highways Engineer, the buildings, due to their size would offer little opportunity for significant levels of employment which may increase volumes of traffic. The buildings exist and are sited within an existing wider complex of industrial buildings, albeit adjacent to residential properties. Whilst there would be the potential for large commercial vehicles to attend the site, given the size of the buildings this is unlikely to be with significant frequency and would be seen within the context of the other commercial uses around the site.

52 It is considered the buildings would provide a small-scale business use, suitably located neighbouring other commercial uses, with adequate access links to the road network and adjacent to the existing village of Knockholt. It is not considered the re-use of the buildings and associated activity would result in material harm to the landscape character in this location, having regard to the existing layout of uses surrounding the site.

Residential Amenity

53 Policy EN1 states that development, including any changes of use should not have an adverse impact on the privacy and amenities of a locality by reason of form, scale, noise or activity levels arising from vehicular or pedestrian movements.

54 The buildings abut Warren Farm Bungalow which is occupied by the applicant. To the east lie three unrelated residential properties, the closest being The Bungalow, approximately 80m from the site. The two other properties lie some 300m away. As the adjacent bungalow is occupied by the applicant, all the time this arrangement remains, the applicant has direct control over the use and level of activity within the yard and therefore any impact on his amenities.

55 The Bungalow is located 80m beyond the entrance to the site and there would be no requirement for vehicles to continue along this track way. As such, it is unlikely that vehicles visiting the site would have cause to regularly pass the frontage of this property. Any noise or disturbance would be from the manoeuvring and unloading of vehicles within the yard. The bungalow is also located approximately 110m from the commercial units opposite the application site. Whilst some noise over these distances would be audible, I do not consider that the activity would generate a level of disturbance during controlled hours of operation, which would result in significant levels of disturbance to the occupants of this dwelling, which could be considered harmful.


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 9

56 It is unlikely that any significant disturbance from the use would affect Rose Cottage Farm or Rockley Cottage, given the significant separation distances involved.

57 The Inspector previously considered matters of residential amenity based on the use which was before him. As the Inspectors assessment of the scheme had been governed by the breech identified on the enforcement notice, the consent was limited to the storage and wholesale of pigeon feed as another use may have a materially different impact on the amenity of nearby residents. The current application for an unrestricted B8 use has to assume any potential occupier, whilst having regard to the limitations the size of the buildings may bring. A B8 use will largely create noises associated with visiting vehicles and the loading and unloading of goods. A B8 use would not permit the manufacturing of products such that there would be any consistent noise from working machinery. Any noise or disturbance is likely to be attributed to the loading and unloading of boxes, equipment or larger bulky goods which may entail a forklift. A B8 use on the scale of the buildings proposed, would not be dissimilar in intensity or nature to an agricultural use involving various vehicles, small and large, and including the manoeuvring of bulky farm goods (e.g. hay, animal feed, manure).

58 It is acknowledged that it is not within the Council’s control that Warren Farm Bungalow always stays within the same ownership as the yard. However, given the buildings physically abut Warren Farm Bungalow and having regard to the character of commercial uses around the site, any potential purchaser would be aware of existing commercial activities and any B8 storage use prior to purchase. In addition, provided reasonable hours of operation were controlled by way of condition, it is not considered that a B8 use on this scale would necessarily result in a level of activity which would appear as a noise or disturbance nuisance to the adjoining dwelling. The previous Inspector came to a similar conclusion on this point and restricted the hours of operation in case the occupier of Warren Farm Bungalow changes. It is considered reasonable to carry forward this condition limiting the use of the building to Monday-Friday 09:00-17:30 and 09:00-14:00 Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays.

59 With appropriate controls over the hours of operation, areas for vehicle parking and restrictions to prevent outside storage I am satisfied that the proposal could be accommodated without significant harm to the residential amenities of existing properties within the vicinity.

Highways issues

60 Policy EN1 of the Sevenoaks District Local Plan states that development should ensure satisfactory means of access for vehicles and pedestrians and provides parking facilities in accordance with the Council’s approved standards. PPG13 and regional policy do not set a standard for such development. The Kent standard for storage and distribution is a single maximum value of 1 car parking space per 110 m2 and 1 space per 35sqm for wholesale distribution. In addition 1 Goods vehicle space is required per 300sqm of unit space.


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 10

61 The proposal would provide a total storage space of 105sqm, working to the lower figure of parking thresholds for wholesale distribution (such as the previous pigeon food use), would require three vehicles parking spaces and up to one goods vehicle space. The proposal would provide 4 car parking spaces and two goods vehicles, to take account of the individual buildings. This exceeds current Kent standards for parking provision and therefore no objection can be raised to there being insufficient parking for the size of units.

62 In terms of safe access into the site, the units are located off a private, un-adopted track which the Highway Authority have no control over. As is currently the case with the industrial units to the north, manoeuvring of vehicles appears to occur without issue and is self managed to the convenience of users. Where the track meets the public highway at Star Hill Road, the Highways Engineer has advised that visibility and manoeuvring space are good and accordingly the use, with associated vehicles can be accommodated without hazard to road safety.

Conclusion

63 The proposal represents appropriate re-use of a rural building within the Green Belt. The proposal would not harm the existing character of the site within the context of the wider landscape and the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The proposal can be accommodated, with suitable conditions, to prevent harm to the amenities of neighbouring properties and can be accommodated without detriment to road safety.

Background Papers

Site Plan and Block Plan

Previous appeal decision

Contact Officer(s): Mrs E Gregson Extension: 7367

Kristen Paterson Community and Planning Services Director

Link to application details:

http://publicaccess.sevenoaks.gov.uk/publicaccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_detailview.aspx?caseno=L1OTDXBK0H900

Link to associated documents:

http://idox.sevenoaks.gov.uk/PLWAM/showCaseFile.do?appType=Planning&appNumber=10/01066/FUL






SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 11


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 12


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 13


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 14


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 15


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 16


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 17


SE/10/01066/FUL Item No 5.03

(Item No 5.03) 18

Documents

Development Control Committee: 24 June 2010 PROPOSAL: Use