7 replies to this topic

[che]

Anyone considering this area should read this

The document in full

http://northdevon-co...?pointId=147408


Q) I am considering a new enterprise. I propose to buy some land. Should I apply for buildings first?

A) If you are considering an enterprise for which you expect there will be a need for a dwelling, you should try to find land with a dwelling and (ideally) buildings already attached. For example, a parcel of land with an agriculturally restricted dwelling would meet your needs, or a parcel of land close to where you currently live. Not only will this avoid a complex and often expensive planning application process, it will also avoid the need to live in a mobile home for the first three years.

If you are or have bought a block of land without buildings, you should ideally apply for buildings and a mobile home at the same time.

If you decide to apply for a building or buildings on their own, the local authority can legitimately ask for information about your proposed enterprises. They may question or refuse the buildings if they consider it will lead to pressure for a new dwelling. They may ask you to confirm that you will not need a dwelling for the enterprises you explain will be in the buildings.



Q( What Enterprises need Dwellings?

A) Many enterprises can operate perfectly well without a dwelling. It is for each application to provide evidence of a need to live on site, and it would be inappropriate for this SPD to list such enterprises.

However, dwellings will rarely (if ever) be needed for forestry, livery, arable and outdoor cropping, most horticultural, free-range pigs or poultry, sheep and diversified enterprises.
Security of livestock can contribute to the need to live on site, but cannot justify a dwelling. Other security needs (e.g. to stop theft) should be addressed by other means, and will not warrant a dwelling.

[Piglet]

Crikey that is a bit severe and restrictive - do you think that it is written in response to the f2f theory Piglet

[Cornish Gems]

Do you suppose that this could be because so much of the area is classed as AONB? We visited a number of parcels of land in the area a couple of which might have been suitable had we not heeded Dave's advice to avoid any AONB if possible.

North Devon AONB Map

[Piglet]

Do you suppose that this could be because so much of the area is classed as AONB?

North Devon AONB Map

Yes that could be a good point - most likely reason... Piglet

[che]

Consultation period for this document ended Sept 2008 which is probably pre F2F. Call me cynical but my view is "Planners who dont like the law using your money to take away your rights"
Dont think it would affect any appeals but it will put a lot of people off.

In their eyes "Job Done"

[Wiseowl]

This looks like a DRAFT consultation document only, for a revision of 1997 supplementary planning guidance - as fas as I can see, the revision has not actually been adopted. Either way it would have been DAFT to include a blanket presumption that " dwellings will rarely (if ever) be needed for forestry, livery, arable and outdoor cropping, most horticultural, free-range pigs or poultry, sheep and diversified enterprises".

[Cornish Gems]

This looks like a DRAFT consultation document only, for a revision of 1997 supplementary planning guidance - as fas as I can see, the revision has not actually been adopted. Either way it would have been DAFT to include a blanket presumption that " dwellings will rarely (if ever) be needed for forestry, livery, arable and outdoor cropping, most horticultural, free-range pigs or poultry, sheep and diversified enterprises".

Our sentiments exactly a DAFT presumption and I doubt if it was implimented.

[che]

This looks like a DRAFT consultation document only, for a revision of 1997 supplementary planning guidance - as fas as I can see, the revision has not actually been adopted. Either way it would have been DAFT to include a blanket presumption that " dwellings will rarely (if ever) be needed for forestry, livery, arable and outdoor cropping, most horticultural, free-range pigs or poultry, sheep and diversified enterprises".

Read it all Wiseowl it is more than one DAFT statement. It is an attempt by an LPA to rewrite the law to suit themselves. It was a blatent waste of council tax payers money and it sits there as a testimony of how planners operate. Draft it may be but it remains there to mislead the public with no attempt to indicate clearly that it was sent to the junk area.
Do you really think if we followed your advice that this crew would treat us fairly. If you do you are in "Cloud CUCKOO Land"