Agricultural machinery building at Ivy House Farm, Leek Road, Cellarhead

What was proposed

The application proposed an agricultural building for machinery and hay bales, with a roughly L-shaped footprint and timber-clad walls.

“The application is for the erection of an agricultural building at Ivy House Farm, Leek Road, Cellarhead. The application form states that the new building would store machinery and hay bales. The Location and Block Plans show the proposed new building positioned on the northern side of the application site and to the rear of an existing, detached outbuilding. The plans show the building having a roughly ‘L’ shaped footprint with an overall length of 27.432m.”

Officer report

The site

The site was a 7.5-acre holding with a dwelling, outbuilding, machinery, rubble and bare earth, within the Green Belt.

“The application site is Ivy House Farm, Leek Road, Cellarhead. The site consists of a detached dwelling and a detached outbuilding which the planning agent has previously advised he believes is a garage/workshop serving the dwelling. The property benefits from plenty of off-road parking and external amenity space and the Planning Statement informs that the holding equates to 7.5 acres.”

“For the purposes of planning policy consideration, the application site is located within the Green Belt. Records also show that the site forms part of a low-risk, coal development area. The site is not within any Conservation Area and there are no protected trees or listed building matters which need to be considered.”

Officer report

Why officers advised refusal

Officers found Green Belt harm, an unjustified building size affecting rural character, and insufficient access and turning space for vehicles.

“Staffordshire County Council Highways Department have objected to the application. Full Highways comments can be read within the ‘Consultations’ section of this report but essentially the objection relates to the single width of the access and it not being sufficient for 2 agricultural vehicles to access/egress simultaneously which increases the likelihood of stationary vehicles upon this busy stretch of road.”

“The application is for inappropriate development within the Green Belt. The proposed building does not fall within one of the listed exceptions within paragraph number 154 of the National Planning Policy Framework and although the site is considered to constitute Grey belt land, the scheme does not comply with the relevant provisions within NPPF paragraph number 155.”

Officer report

What consultees said

The parish council had no objection subject to neighbours’ approval, highways recommended refusal, and Environmental Health had no objection in principle subject to conditions.

“Environmental Health (SMDC) No objection in principle subject to conditions including pollution control, times of operations, importation of fill material, unexpected contamination, lighting, and plant and machinery noise. The application is for an agricultural storage building for hay and machinery.”

Officer report

What people said

One representation supported the building because machinery repairs occurred outside and storage would improve views from surrounding properties.

“Public Comments One representation received offering support for the application. The representation can be summarised as follows;”

“- Repair and maintenance of the agricultural machinery is out in the open. Repairs recently being undertaken in the open with snow on the ground and temperatures down to -4 degrees C. The task took 6 hours in total. - Applicant owns a number of very large agricultural vehicles which are of no nuisance but a building would allow for them to be stored and therefore improve the vista from surrounding properties.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent spoke for the application, and a councillor spoke in support.

What members discussed

Members discussed agricultural exemptions, the proposal’s size, appearance and highways objections.

“Members discussed agricultural exemptions, size of the proposal in relation to the size of the site, aesthetic considerations and the objections from highways.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee approved the application contrary to officers’ recommendation, citing economic prosperity, farm diversification, design quality, landscape character and agricultural use.

“RESOLVED: That contrary to officers’ recommendation the application be APPROVED for the following reasons: • That in line with principles in SS1, the development increased economic prosperity, • That the development would support the diversification of existing farm enterprises in accordance with the Other Rural Areas Strategy (SS10), • That the design was of high quality and would tidy up the site adding value to the local area whilst being respectful to the local…”

“That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.”

Minutes