Hay and farm store at Quarry Lane, Woolley Moor

The site and surroundings

The site is beside a bridleway, is widely visible from roads and higher ground, and lies in a sensitive landscape area.

“The site is widely open to public view, from the bridleway that adjoins the site (to the north), the road (to the east and south and south west) and from the north from Quarry Lane at a distance of approx. 100m. The site is readily visible due to it being located on higher ground and sky lining from this vantage point.”

“The site is within the Wooded Slopes & Valleys character type of the Peak Fringe and Derwent Valley Landscape Character area. It is also within a primary Area of Multiple Environmental Sensitivity (AMES) representing the most sensitive areas of landscape in North East Derbyshire (page 126/para 8.18 of the North East Derbyshire Local Plan).”

Officer report

Why officers recommended refusal

Officers found insufficient evidence of an agricultural need and considered the building unsuitable for modern agriculture and harmful to the landscape.

“The proposal is not designed for the purposes of modern agriculture and insufficient evidence has put forward to indicate that the building is required to ensure the viability of an existing agricultural business.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways requested further access and parking information, while rights of way officers raised conditions; the Ramblers Association had no objection.

“Highways Authority (DCC) and Rights of Way – Recommends the application be deferred because the visibility splays for the site access off Quarry Lane have not been provided; also parking provision has not been provided which would also need to demonstrate turning for vehicles and trip generation was requested.”

“The Ramblers Association (CNEDRA) - We note that Brackenfield BW 34, (part), runs approximately east west along the northern boundary of the area under consideration. Having perused the drawings provided we can see no reason why the development under consideration would adversely affect either the convenience or aesthetics of the aforementioned bridleway 34. As a consequence, we have neither objection nor comment to offer to the proposal as presented.”

Officer report

Support for the proposal

One supporter said rebuilding the structure to building regulations and the previous permission would not have been possible.

“As an experienced builder and neighbor to the development the supporter considers it would never have been possible to rebuild the building to building regs and the planning permission given. • Other buildings in the area have collapsed and been allowed to be replaced.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard from a supporter and the agent before considering the application.

Members’ discussion

Members questioned whether the building’s form was consistent with modern agricultural use and considered that it did not comply with local policies.

“Committee considered the application. It took into account the relevant Local and National Planning Policies. These included Local Plan policy SS9, concerning development in the countryside, and Local Plan policy SDC 12, concerning High Quality Design and Place Making.”

“Committee discussed the application. Some Members suggested that the form of the building was not consistent with modern agriculture usage. In this context, it was considered that the proposal did not accord with the policies of the Local Plan.”

Minutes

The vote

A motion to refuse the application in line with the officer recommendation was proposed, seconded and approved.

“At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor L Hartshorne and Councillor T Lacey moved and seconded a Motion to refuse the application, in line with officer recommendation. The Motion was put to a vote and approved.”

Minutes

The final decision

Planning permission was refused because the building lacked an agricultural justification and its design and location harmed the area’s character and landscape.

“1.The applicant has no significant agricultural land holding in the locality from which to generate the need for an agricultural building in this location and the proposed building is not considered to be suitable for modern agricultural purposes, this is because of its design, its size, its openings and its traditional stone construction. It is also noted that the site is in an isolated location away from any groups of existing agricultural building.”

“The proposed building is located away from any group of existing agricultural buildings and open to public view, located next to a public right of way and at a site which skylines when viewed from Quarry Lane. By virtue of the buildings design and siting the proposal would result in harm to the character and…”

Minutes