COMMITTEE REPORT

Application Ref. 15/02005/FUL

Site Address Holycombe House, Church Road, Whichford, Shipston On Stour, Warwickshire, CV36 5PH

Description of Development

Change of Use of Holycombe House with The Studio and The Lodge and grounds to a mixed use of dwelling, residential study course and holistic retreat business (As defined in Appendix 1 - Business Operations Dated 6th February 2017). Additional use of Studio and Lodge accommodation as holiday lets. Retention of woodwork shop, 4 no. storage outbuildings, hen pen, gazebo, compost WC, tree house and hexagon summerhouse. Gazebo and tree house to be used for overnight accommodation

Applicant Mr & Mrs Birtwell

Reason for Referral to Committee

At the discretion of the Head of Planning and Housing in light of significant public interest in the application

Case Officer Alice Cosnett

Presenting Officer Alice Cosnett

Ward Member(s) Councillor S Gray

Town/Parish Council Whichford Parish Council

Description of Site Constraints

All other settlement Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) Part of the site is within the Whichford Conservation Area Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM) to the south of the site Whichford Wood Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) to

southwest/west of the site Public footpaths to south and east

Summary of Recommendation

GRANT

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

Planning permission is sought to regularise a number of uses and structures within the site known as Holycombe House. The proposal comprises:

change of use of Holycombe House and associated garden area to a mixed use dwelling, bed and breakfast accommodation, residential study course and holistic retreat business to be operated in accordance with the submitted document Appendix 1 – Business Operations dated 6th February 2017;

change of use of accommodation over existing garage (The Studio) to provide ancillary residential accommodation to Holycombe House (use by extended family) and use as a holiday let, residential letting and for use in connection with holistic retreat business;

change of use of ancillary building (The Lodge) to provide ancillary residential use to Holycombe House (use by extended family) and use as holiday let, residential letting and for use in connection with holistic retreat business;

use of The Tree House and Gazebo (identified as such on plan no. 15-5485-101 P1) to provide ancillary residential use to Holycombe House (use by extended family) and use as a holiday let and for use in connection with holistic retreat business;

use of outbuildings (identified as wood work shop, minor storage outbuilding, large storage outbuilding, hen pen, compost WC and the hexagon summerhouse on plan no. 15-5485-101 P1) for purposes ancillary to the mixed use of the site;

change of use of land, including domestic garden, to use in connection with Holycombe House and the holistic retreat business.

For the purposes of clarification, the buildings referred to as ‘Holycombe Retreat Centre’, ‘The Lodge’ and ‘The Studio & Garage’ on plan no. 15-5485-101 P1 were approved under applications 96/01534/FUL and 98/00155/FUL as a dwelling and associated outbuildings (see ‘Summary of Relevant History’ section below). Consent is now sought to regularise their use as described above. All other buildings referred to above do not benefit from formal planning permission.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Development Plan

Core StrategyRelevant Policies in the Development Plan for this application are

CS.1 Sustainable Development CS.4 Water Environment and Flood Risk CS.5 Landscape CS.6 Natural Environment CS.8 Historic Environment CS.9 Design and Distinctiveness CS.11 Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty CS.15 Distribution of Development CS.16 Housing Development CS.20 Existing Housing Stock and Buildings CS.22 Economic Development CS.24 Tourism and Leisure Development AS.10 Countryside and Villages CS.25 Healthy Communities CS.26 Transport and Communications

Other Material Considerations

Central Government guidance NPPF 2012 & PPG 2014 Circular 06/05: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation

Other documents Stratford on Avon District Design Guide – While no longer having the

status of a Supplementary Planning Document, it still contains substantial and relevant guidance on design

Historic England Good Practice Notes 2105:o GPA 1 – The Historic Environment in Local Planso GPA 2 – Manging Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic

Environmento GPA 3 – The Setting of Heritage Assets

Whichford and Ascott Parish Plan November 2010 Cotswold AONB Management Plan 2013-2018 Cotswold AONB A Strategy and Action Plan for Sustainable Tourism in the

Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty 2011-2016

Other Legislation

Human Rights Act 1998 Equalities Act 2010 Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 Localism Act Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act of 1979 Town & Country Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990

SUMMARY OF RELEVANT HISTORY

Reference Number Proposal Decision and date

16/04039/FUL 1. Use of approximately 4565sqm of land for camping, accommodating not more than 40 campers in tents or small camper vans and associated areas for vehicle parking alongside tents;2. Glamping structures accommodating not more than 26 people comprising: 4 moveable wooden bases accommodating canvas yurts and bell tents , airstream wheeled caravan, gypsy caravan on wheels, Showman's living van on wheels, wooden boat house and associated areas for vehicle parking alongside glamping structures;3. Associated wooden facilities: compost WC, shower shed, flush WC, camping kitchen, disabled WC;4. Alterations to access to campsite

Pending consideration

15/00708/COUENF Enforcement notice against unauthorised works

Served 09.01.2017

SCOPE/00028 EIA Scoping application for the following development:Element 1- the redetermination of the development forming the subject of planning application reference 15/02005/FUL, which is described as Change of Use of Holycombe House with The Studio and The Lodge and grounds to a mixed use of dwelling, residential study course and holistic retreat business (As defined in Appendix 1 - Business Operations Dated 27th August 2015). Additional use of Studio and Lodge accommodation as holiday lets.

Element 2: (to be considered in a separate planning application)- the use of approximately 4565 of land for camping, accommodating not more than 40 campers in tents or small camper vans. Associated vehicles to be parked alongside tents;- Glamping structures accommodating not more than 26 people comprising 2 No. moveable canvas yurts, 2 No. moveable canvas bell tents, an airstream wheeled caravan, a Gypsy caravan on wheels, a Showmans living van on wheels and a wooden boat house, and associated parking areas;- Timber camping facilities including a compost WC, a shower shed, a flush WC, camping kitchen and a disabled WC- Alterations to the existing access

Closed 15.09.2016

SCREEN/00051 Proposed campsite EIA required 05.07.2016Appeal against EIA screening decision – Secretary of State directed that ‘The Project’ was not EIA development (see ‘EIA Screening’ section of report below) 21.11.2016

14/00776/LDE Retention of structures/buildings (which have been in situ for 4 years or more) and include:1. Woodwork shop2. Wooden Garage, Shed and Loo3. Gazebo Camping Hut4. Blockboard Camping Loo5. Terracing for Large Tent6. Hexagonal Camping Kitchen

Pending consideration

7. Double compost Camping Loo8. Double Camping Shower Block9. Wooden Camping Kitchen10. Camping Shed

14/00775/LDE Use of the original buildings (Associated with the property Holycombe) from C3 to a mixed use of C1, C2, C3, D1(a), D1(b), D1(c) and D2(e) uses and use of the land (Associated with the property Holycombe) to use D2 to provide camping site and facilities for over 10 years.

Pending consideration

12/01758/FUL Part change of use of Holycombe House to mixed use of residential and residential study courses under a combined C2 and C3 Use Class. Part change of use of studio accommodation over garage to provide ancillary residential use to Holycombe House (use by extended family) and occasional use as C3 use holiday let and C2 use overspill for holistic business. Part change of use of ancillary building to occasional C3 Use holiday let and C2 Use overspill for holistic business. Change of use of land to camping area. Change of use of land to site photovoltaic array and 1no polytunnel to grow produce for own consumption. Change of use of timber structures to allow use as camping kitchen. Change of use of land to station 2 wooden camping trailers. Retrospective planning permission for 1 demountable yurt base, 1 tree house, 1 nature observation hut, 1 seating area and a camping shower and toilet. Erection of wedding marquee (4 times a year) with restriction on amplified music between 8pm and 12pm. Creation of new access for camping area and associated works including re-positioning of existing gates and piers.

Pending consideration

(original decision issued 12.09.2013 but quashed following successful judicial review challenge)

00/00518/FUL A conservatory Granted 13.04.2000

98/00155/FUL An extra garage block Granted 30.04.1998

96/01534/FUL Demolition of part of existing house and its conversion to a garage/office block. Demolition of disused farm buildings and building of a replacement house on site. Change of use of agricultural land to residential

Granted 13.02.1997

curtilage

The site has been operating as a holistic retreat centre for some time. In 2011 investigations by the Council’s Enforcement team resulted in a retrospective application (ref. 12/01758/FUL) being submitted to the Council to regularise the unauthorised use of the site as a whole (both use of Holycombe House as a holistic retreat and camping on land to its south). Whilst this application was granted, following a successful judicial review, the decision was quashed. This application therefore remains pending.

Since then, the applicants have submitted two lawful development certificates for the proposed unauthorised development, which also remain pending.

This application seeks consent to use the buildings and grounds of Holycombe House as described in the amended description of development and supporting information, and for the purposes of clarification, does not seek to regularise the unauthorised camping use, which is the subject of a separate application (ref. 16/04039/FUL).

Notwithstanding the conclusions reached by the Secretary of State in that the development proposed under this application and application 16/04039/FUL should be considered as one project for the purposes of EIA (and that the development is not EIA), in terms of processing the applications for planning permission, I have concluded that assessing the holistic retreat use separate to that of the use of the land for camping/glamping is appropriate for the reasons set out below:

1. the holistic retreat use is an independent and separate planning unit/project which, although some users of the retreat centre may choose to camp, is not reliant on the camping use or vice versa, as confirmed by the applicants; and

2. the two uses have separate points of access and are run as separate entities by the applicants.

It is on this basis that the application has been evaluated.

The Enforcement Notice referred to in the Summary of Relevant History above was served on the basis of all of the unauthorised works/uses which cover both the Holycombe House site and agricultural land to its south (red lines for both this application and pending application 16/04039/FUL). When assessing the enforcement case, it was not considered that there was any reason why all of the unauthorised works/uses should not be enforced against in a single Enforcement Notice.

However, as described above, I am satisfied that the holistic retreat business/associated uses within the site edged red for this application, can be operated completely independently from the camping/glamping proposed on land to the south (considered under ref. 16/04039/FUL) and two applications have been submitted on this basis. Because the two elements are not dependent on one another and can be operated completely independently from one another, I do not consider this to be inappropriate.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant’s Supporting DocumentsList of documents: Planning Statement Appendix 1 – Business Operations dated 6 February 2017 Management Plan

Ward Member

None received

Whichford and Ascott Parish Council

Original consultation responseObjects for the following reasons:

Concerned that, if granted, future owners of Holycombe would apply to operate commercial operations of a type and scale out of proportion to the village;

Also concerned that there is an inconsistency in the application in that it expressly said camping activity would not be part of the activities for which planning was sought but in the Appendix to the Consultant’s report, it expressly mentioned camping as part of the holistic activities;

Opposes the application on the grounds that it is imprecise in a number of important areas and therefore are unable to gauge its impact on the village. The PC has opposed commercial camping at Holycombe and it is clear from the Appendix that camping is part of the application (06.08.2015)

Consultation on revised Appendix 1:No objection for the following reasons:

The revised Appendix 1 removes camping as an inherent part of the holistic experience.

The Council however remains concerned that this application establishes that a future application for camping be made (29.09.2015)

Further consultation on revised Appendix 1:Support the application subject to an agreement between the applicants and their neighbours (09.02.2017)

Third Party ResponsesThe planning-related comments made by third parties have been summarised by the case officer.

27 letters of objection from 17 residents received. Planning grounds for objection: Camping should not and cannot be considered separately to the holistic

retreat business Neighbours have not been correctly notified Imprecise description of development Imprecise, unclear and contradictory Planning Statement Inconsistencies within submission Importance of maintaining the character of a quiet village in the AONB Change of use from C3 to C1, C2 and D1 could give rise to applications for

hotel, boarding house, hospital, nursing home or residential school Contravenes paras 116, 28 and 123 of NPPF Intensification in the use of a sensitive site which would adversely impact

on village

Disproportionate to size of village Inappropriate to site so close to the village centre Nuisance and noise to neighbours and village Adverse impact on SAM Adverse impact on SSSI Adverse impact on St Michael’s Church Adverse impact on conservation area Damage and irreversible change to village Radically change the nature of the quiet Cotswold village Major development in the AONB when having regard to the camping to the

south (being separately considered under 16/04039/FUL) Question whether the retreat does provide local employment Increased traffic congestion – road insufficient to cope Parking within on roads and verges within the village Dangerous access Insufficient foul drainage Existing problem of standing water on the lane Sewage smell Intentional unauthorised development guidance of relevance (Ministerial

Statement 31.08.2015) Strict conditions required to control uses Weddings should not be permitted Conditions cannot adequately restrict the use

Other non-planning related matters were also raised as were issues about the campsite (falling outside the application site and being assessed under pending application 16/04039/FUL).

63 letters of support from 58 local residents, including a letter from the Federation of Small Businesses, the CPRE and Miss Dixon (Disability Advisor) received. Planning grounds for support:

Positive effect on the area Physical development is sympathetic Rural community needs enterprises like this Enables others to enjoy and share the location – invaluable Respects environment AONB is the ideal location for such a centre as Holycombe – does not

detract or contravene AONB policies In keeping with village life Support for local economy with guests visiting local business Local employment Provides much needed service in the classes and courses offered – people

would not have travel further afield if Holycombe closed – unsustainable Offers facilities for improved health and wellbeing Closure of business would harm the vitality of the village Cars do not clog up local lanes Considerable distance from its nearest neighbours Sufficient parking Does not increase traffic Operated to respect the local community and neighbours Created a haven for wildlife and humans alike No noise or nuisance Conserved the SAM Facilitates access to SAM – encouraged by Historic England Vast improvement to scrap yard which formally occupied the site Conforms with Cotswolds Conservation Board’s Management Plan Provides tourist facilities

Positive impact on economy of Stratford on Avon District, through employment, generation of business rates income and in supporting the vibrancy of a local rural community – small businesses form the heart of many rural communities

Afford significant social and economic benefits Facilitates a strong, vibrant and healthy community Operates on a low carbon basis (solar panels and wood pellet

consumption) Planting carried out to minimise visual impact Compliant with Core Strategy policies Compliant with Council’s Corporate Strategy – a flourishing local economy Compliant with Council’s Business and Enterprise Strategy Should encourage live/work units There is a need for tourist accommodation within the area Development could be adequately controlled through planning conditions –

covenant not required

Other non-planning related matters were also raised as were issues about the campsite (falling outside the application site and being assessed under pending application 16/04039/FUL).

5 letters of no representations received. Comments relate to: Every consideration for the environment Due to distance to village centre, disturbance is minimal Provides local employment Maintains a vital and thriving community in a rural area Quiet nature of use Detrimental to village

2 letters of no objection received. Comments relate to: Huge benefit to locality and visitors

Petition from change.org with 1,141 signatures. Supporting comments also received. Subject title of the petition:

‘Stop Stratford District Council shutting down Holycombe – a vital small rural business’

Additional petition with 59 signatures. Subject title of the petition: ‘Petition to stop Stratford District Council shutting down all uses of

Holycombe a vital, small business which models Rural Enterprise Planning Policy – in my view the proposed plan, for which planning consent is sought, fully complies with local and national government policy, because it provides jobs and stimulates the local economy by bringing money into the pub, the café and the pottery &c. It is supported by an overwhelming number of local people, which provides support for the application and underscores the importance of the policy’

ConsultationsThe full responses are available in the application file.

Cotswold Conservation BoardNone received

Historic EnglandNo objection:

No objection – the proposals do not have an impact upon the significance of the SAM or its setting. The works covered by this application do not affect the physical remains of the monument (24.09.2015)

SDC ConservationMakes the following comments:

SAM: As Historic England have identified no harm to the SAM, restricted comments to assessment of potential impact on the Whichford Conservation Area, and Listed Buildings within the nearest part of the settlement

Listed buildings: No direct impact on any listed buildings and impact on setting is negligible

Conservation area: Whilst largely screened from the conservation area to its east, the site can be viewed from outside the conservation area from higher ground surrounding the settlement. Undoubtedly some increase in activity in what was a low-key area providing a transition to the fully rural and tranquil surrounding land. However, character and appearace of conservation area as a whole is very mixed with differing degrees of commercial and other human activity. Direct harm to the conservation area as a whole is therefore minor, and does not constitute ‘less than substantial harm’ in NPPF terms. Similarly, the changes resulting from the proposals cannot be deemed to have affected the setting of this or other parts of the conservation area to any substantive degree, so as to trigger paragraph 134 of The NPPF (31.01.2017)

SDC Environmental HealthNo objection (06.07.2015)

WCC ArchaeologyNo representation (29.06.2015)

WCC Highways No objection subject to condition (25.01.2017)

WCC EcologyNo representation (30.06.2015)

ASSESSMENT OF THE KEY ISSUES

Principle of Development

The Council is required to make a decision in line with the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. (Section 38(6) PCPA 2004 and Section 70(2) TCPA 1990). The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is a key material planning consideration.

Policy CS.15 of the Core Strategy sets out the distribution of development during the lifetime of the Strategy, through Stratford-upon-Avon, the Main Rural Centres, proposed new settlements, Local Service Villages and all other settlements. The application site falls on the edge of Whichford, an all other settlement location, and as such it is appropriate to assess the application against Policy AS.10.

Part (k) of Policy AS.10 states that the conversion of a building for business purposes will be acceptable in principle in countryside and village locations,

subject to the location and character of the building being suitable for the proposed used and it having been in existence for at least ten years.

In addition, part (s) of Policy AS.10 states that small-scale tourism, visitor accommodation and leisure based uses will be acceptable in principle in countryside and village locations, particularly where the development would help to provide local employment and support rural services.

The application seeks to regularise the use of Holycombe House and associated garden area/outbuildings as a mixed use site with dwelling, bed and breakfast accommodation, residential study course and holistic retreat business. As above part (k) of AS.10 provides support for the conversion of a building for business purposes subject to its location and character being suitable for the proposed use and it having been in existence for at least ten years.

I consider that the mixed use of the site as proposed would be appropriate for the location and character of the site. Whilst the site is within a countryside location, my view is that a holistic retreat (plus associated uses) is an appropriate use for such a countryside setting. In addition, the dwelling known as Holycombe House has been in existence for at least ten years and as such I consider the development to accord with part (k) of Policy AS.10.

The application also proposes the change of use of accommodation over the existing garage (The Studio) and ancillary building (The Lodge) to provide ancillary residential accommodation to Holycombe House (use by extended family), use as a holiday let, residential letting and for use in connection with holistic retreat business. In addition, it seeks to regularise the use of the Tree House and Gazebo to provide ancillary residential use to Holycombe House (use by extended family), use as a holiday let and for use in connection with the holistic retreat business.

As above, part (s) of Policy AS.10 provides support for small-scale tourism, visitor accommodation and leisure based uses, particularly those which would help to provide local employment and support rural services. I am satisfied that the level of accommodation provided at the site constitutes ‘small-scale’ as required by part (s) of this policy and, as confirmed within both supporting information submitted with the application and third party representations, the development provides local employment (21 part-time jobs) and supports local services within this rural location. I therefore consider the development to accord with part (s) of Policy AS.10.

Policy AS.10 goes onto state that tourism and leisure related schemes will also be assessed against the provisions of Policy CS.24.

Policy CS.24 states that, to be acceptable in principle, tourism and leisure developments should (numbering added):

1. be appropriate to the size and role of the settlement and/or to the specific nature of the location

2. be sensitive to the character of the area and designed to maximise the benefits for the communities affected in terms of job opportunities and support for local services

3. be located in existing or replacement buildings if they are suitable for the purpose, particularly where they are located outside settlements. Where new buildings are required, be provided within or close to a settlement

I will now go through each of these points in turn.

1. Be appropriate to the size and role of the settlement and/or to the specific nature of the location

The application site is located on the edge of the village of Whichford, categorised as an all other settlement within the Core Strategy.

I am satisfied that the scale of development which includes both the change of use of Holycombe House itself and associated outbuildings, is appropriate to the size and role of the settlement.

With regards to the size of the settlement, in my view, the scale of the operations undertaken at Holycombe are not disproportionate to the size of Whichford. The maximum number of overnight guests would not exceed 31 (as secured by the Management Plan and associated condition), and whilst the number of visitors may exceed this during the day when attending classes, etc. I do not consider the scale to be significantly different to that of a typical country pub found in such a village location.

With regards to the role of the settlement, the site is located on the edge of a village within the AONB where tourism/visitor accommodation uses should be encouraged in line with key objectives 5 and 7 of the ‘Strategy and Action Plan for Sustainable Tourism in the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty 2011-2016’. Key objective 5 is ‘to actively support and encourage tourism businesses to develop and promote environmentally sound practices to improve their competitiveness and act as ambassadors for the AONB’ whilst key objective 7 is ‘to encourage wider access, exploration and quality provision to attract all people’. The Cotswold AONB Management Plan states that this strategy and action plan seeks to ensure that organisations, local people and businesses are working together to protect the area, whilst at the same time increasing opportunities for visitors to discover and enjoy its special qualities.

In light of the above, I am satisfied that the proposal is appropriate to the size and role of the settlement and specific nature of this AONB location in accordance with Policy CS.24 of the Core Strategy.

2. Be sensitive to the character of the area and designed to maximise the benefits for the communities affected in terms of job opportunities and support for local services

The permitted use of the site is as a single dwelling and domestic curtilage. The application seeks to regularise a range of buildings/uses within the site. As discussed above, I consider that the proposed buildings and uses are appropriate for this rural location and I am therefore satisfied that they are sensitive to the character of the area.

Supporting information submitted with the application confirms that the holistic retreat and associated uses provide 21 part-time jobs (2 being for the applicants themselves), which include cleaners, gardeners and therapists. In my view, this local employment can only be of benefit to this small, rural community. In addition, a number of third party representations have been received which confirm that the holistic retreat and associated uses do provide additional trade to local businesses as a result of people staying/using the facilities at Holycombe House. A letter of support has been received from The Federation of Small Businesses.

I am therefore satisfied that the proposal is sensitive to the character of the area and maximises job opportunities within the locality and support for local services.

3. Be located in existing or replacement buildings if they are suitable for the purpose, particularly where they are located outside settlements. Where new buildings are required, be provided within or close to a settlement

The application site is located on the edge of Whichford and the buildings which have been erected are located within the permitted domestic curtilage associated with Holycombe House. I am satisfied that the new buildings which have been erected are suitably located adjacent to the existing built form of Whichford.

In addition, as a mixed use site it would not benefit from permitted development rights under Part 1, Schedule 2 of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015. I therefore consider that the Authority has an element of control if any further structures were to be erected on site.

Policy CS.24 also states that in areas that are statutorily designated for their natural and cultural heritage qualities, there will be scope for tourist and leisure related developments, subject to appropriate control over their number, form and location to ensure the particular qualities or features that justify the designation are conserved.

The application site is located within the Cotswold AONB which is designated due its special landscape qualities and scenic beauty. Whilst I will consider the impact of the development on the AONB in detail later in this report (under sub-heading ‘Impact on Landscape, Character of the Area and Special Landscape Qualities and Scenic Beauty of the AONB’), I am satisfied that, subject to conditions which will ensure appropriate control over the number, form and location of the development (see conditions section of this report), the special landscape qualities and scenic beauty of the AONB would be preserved.

I am therefore satisfied that the development seeking regularisation, subject to appropriate conditions, complies with Policy CS.24 of the Core Strategy.

Policy CS.22 states that opportunities for business development will be provided in the countryside, including farm-based activities, in accordance with Policy AS.10.

Having assessed the development against Policy AS.10 and found it to be compliant with parts (k) and (s), I am satisfied that the development accords with Policy CS.22 of the Core Strategy.

Having regard to the above, I consider the development to be acceptable in principle in accordance with Policies CS.15, CS.22, CS.24 and AS.10 of the Core Strategy.

Principle of development in the Cotswolds AONB

The application site is also located within the Cotswold AONB and as such it is appropriate to assess the principle of development against Policy CS.11.

Policy CS.11 states that development proposals in the District involving land either within, or outside but affecting, the Cotswolds AONB should conserve and enhance the special landscape qualities and scenic beauty of the AONB and be consistent with the objectives set out in the Cotswolds AONB Management Plan. It states that those parts of the AONB that lie within the District are defined as

‘tranquil areas’ where the minimisation of noise, traffic congestion and light pollution is a priority.

It goes onto state that large scale development will not be allowed unless exceptional circumstances and public interest are demonstrated in accordance with all the criteria set out in paragraph 116 of the NPPF.

The Cotswold Conservation Board (CCB) sets out policies within their Management Plan and in Position Statements, which includes the document ‘A Strategy and Action Plan for Sustainable Tourism in the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty 2011-2016’. This document, at key objectives 5 and 7 (detailed above), provides support for tourist development in AONB locations.

With regards to the principle of development in this AONB location, I must first consider whether the proposals should be classed as ‘large scale development’ in line with Policy CS.11 and paragraph 116 of the NPPF (termed ‘major development’ in the NPPF). No response has been received to the consultation sent to the CCB, but in my view, what constitutes ‘large scale development’ is a matter of planning judgement and I will now go on to assess the proposal on this basis.

The Planning Practice Guidance states that ‘where a proposed development in these designated areas should be treated as major development, to which the policy in paragraph 116 of the Framework applies, will be a matter for the relevant decision taker, taking in account the proposal in question and the local context’.

Having regard to the contents of the PPG, as well as case law on the issue (Aston v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2013] EWHC 1936 and R. (Forge Field Society) v Sevenoaks DC [2014] EWHC 1895) and relevant appeal decisions (APP/Y2736/A/13/2197184, APP/D3830/A/13/2198213 and APP/U1105/A/14/2211701), rather than merely applying the definition of major development contained within the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) as amended, I consider that it is appropriate to have regard to the following when assessing whether a proposal is indeed ‘large scale development’:

- how the proposal relates to the local context of the site;- whether the scheme has the potential to have a serious adverse impact on

the natural beauty of the AONB by reason of its scale, character and nature;

- whether the proposal could reasonably be regarded as ‘large-scale’ when applying a common sense interpretation of the term;

- whether the development is EIA development.

This application seeks to regularise the use of the site for mixed use purposes to include a holistic retreat business, dwelling and holiday let units of accommodation.

Whilst the site is located on the edge of the village of Whichford, the buildings which have been erected fall within the domestic curtilage associated with Holycombe House and take the appearance of small-scale domestic structures. Therefore, whilst a range of uses would be incorporated within the site, when having regard to the proposal (scale, character and nature) and how it relates to the local context of the site, the development would not have a serious impact on the natural beauty of the AONB subject to appropriate conditions. In addition, I am satisfied that the site has the capacity to accommodate the development up to the scale proposed (which would be controlled by planning conditions) whilst

retaining the defining characteristics of the AONB (further discussed in the ‘Impact on the landscape and character and character of the area and special landscape qualities and scenic beauty of the AONB’ section of the report below). Furthermore, I am satisfied that when applying a common-sense definition of ‘large-scale’, the proposal falls short of this, and, following the issuing of a screening opinion on the 5 January 2017, I am satisfied that the proposal does not constitute EIA development (see ‘EIA development’ section of the report).

Having considered the contents of the PPG, as well as case law on the issue and relevant appeal decisions, I do not consider the proposal to constitute ‘large scale development’ as per Policy CS.11 of the Core Strategy or ‘major development’ as per paragraph 116 of the NPPF.

In coming to this view, I have also had regard to the pending application which seeks to regularise the use of land to its south for camping/glamping (16/04039/FUL). I am satisfied that when assessing the cumulative impact of the development proposed under this application and the development proposed under 16/04039/FUL, the proposal does not constitute ‘large scale development’. The proposal does not therefore need to prove exceptional circumstances in the public interest.

I am therefore satisfied that, subject to an assessment of the development on the special landscape qualities and scenic beauty of the AONB, the principle of development within this AONB location is acceptable.

Impact on the Landscape, Character of the Area and Special Landscape Qualities and Scenic Beauty of the AONB

Policy CS.5 states that the landscape character and quality of the District will be maintained by ensuring that development takes place in a manner that minimises and mitigates its impact and, where possible, incorporates measures to enhance the landscape. The cumulative impact of development proposals on the quality of the landscape will be taken into account.

Policy CS.11 states that development proposals in the District involving land either within, or outside but affecting, the Cotswold AONB should conserve and enhance the special landscape qualities and scenic beauty of the AONB and be consistent with the objectives set out in the Cotswolds AONB Management Plan. It goes onto state that those parts of the AONB that lie within the District are defined as ‘tranquil areas’ where the minimisation of noise, traffic congestion and light pollution is a priority.

Policy CS.9 of the Core Strategy states that all forms of development will improve the quality of the public realm and enhance the sense of place, reflecting the character and distinctiveness of the locality.

The site comprises a large detached building and associated curtilage, the lawful use of which is as a dwelling (Holycombe House), with associated ancillary outbuildings.

The Cotswold Conservation Board (CCB) categorises the application site as being within the Ironstone Hills and Valleys landscape character type. The CCB Landscape Strategy and Guidelines state that ‘the rural landscape of the Ironstone Hills and Valleys is highly sensitive to large scale developments that would introduce built and urbanising elements to otherwise agricultural areas’ and goes onto state that ‘areas fringing existing villages are the obvious location for

new development. However, these are sensitive to proposals that may disrupt their characteristic cluttered form, or obscure views to older village buildings’.

Of relevance to this application is part 6.1 of the Landscape Strategy and Guidelines which specifically relates to development and expansion of settlements including residential, industrial and leisure uses. The document provides a list of potential landscape implications, strategies and guidelines which I have had regard to in the assessment of this application.

Any structures/buildings which have been erected without the benefit of planning permission have a minimal impact on the landscape and character of the area. They are small in size and have been located adjacent to site boundaries and within the domestic curtilage minimising encroachment of built form within open expanses of countryside.

Holycombe House and much of its curtilage are visible from the public footpaths to the south of the site and public highway to its north which are both elevated in relation to Whichford village. However, much of the development proposed would be confined within the existing building and those buildings which have been erected without planning permission are largely obscured by vegetation. Whilst they may be more visible during winter months when the trees are not in leaf, I do not consider the resultant impact on public views from these footpaths to be unacceptable. Due to the topography within the area, the site is not visible from the public footpaths to the east of the site.

I am also aware that the track located approximately 120m to the south of the site is used as an informal walking route from the village to the woods to its west. Whilst this footpath is not a public right of way, I have considered the impact of the development on views available from this undefined footpath and, subject to appropriate conditions, the impact would be acceptable.

The structures which do not benefit from planning permission (wood work shop, two storage outbuildings, hen pen, gazebo, compost WC, Tree House and Hexagon Summerhouse as identified on plan no. 15-5485-101 P1), are all relatively small structures and are all constructed/finished in timber. In my view they do not represent incongruous additions to this countryside location and I am satisfied that their presence does not cause harm to the landscape character of the settlement edge of Whichford.

Significant tree planting within the site aids in the screening of public views, but I am satisfied that even if this tree planting were to fail, the resultant impact on the landscape and character of the area would be acceptable.

The lawful use of the site in its entirety is as one residential unit with associated curtilage. I acknowledge that its change to a mixed use site to incorporate dwelling, bed and breakfast accommodation, residential study course/holistic retreat business and holiday lets represents an increase in activity at the site when compared to its lawful use as a single dwelling. However, subject to appropriate conditions, I am satisfied that the resultant impact on the landscape and character of the area is acceptable.

In addition, subject to the attachment of a condition to ensure that the site is operated in accordance with the submitted Management Plan and a condition to control external lighting at the site, I am satisfied that the development would respect the ‘tranquil area’ of the AONB with the minimisation of noise, traffic congestion and light pollution.

In light of the above, I consider the development to accord with Policies CS.5, CS.9 and CS.11 of the Core Strategy.

Impact on Heritage Assets

Listed BuildingsSection 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires that, "In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses."

The Council’s Conservation Officer has been consulted on the application and has concluded that the development does not directly impact upon any listed buildings, whilst any impact on their settings is considered to be negligible.

I concur with this view and I am satisfied that appropriate conditions would ensure that the ongoing operation of the site does not result in harm which goes above and beyond that considered to be less than substantial.

I am therefore satisfied that, having given special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses, the development does preserve listed buildings and their settings in accordance with Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and Policy CS.8 of the Core Strategy.

Conservation AreasSection 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires that, “In the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in a conservation area…..special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area.”

The Council’s Conservation Officer has also had regard to the impact of the development on the Whichford Conservation Area. The site lies on the north western edge of the conservation area and, although largely screened from much of the conservation area to its east, it can be viewed from outside the conservation area from higher ground surrounding the settlement.

In terms of direct impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area, there is undoubtedly some increase in activity in what (prior to the developments and new uses) was a low-key area providing a transition to the fully rural and tranquil surrounding land. However, the character and appearance of the conservation area as a whole is very mixed with differing degrees of commercial and other human activity and the Conservation Officer concludes that the direct harm to the conservation area as a whole is minor, and does not constitute less than substantial harm in NPPF terms. Similarly, it is concluded that the changes resulting from the proposals do not materially affect the significance or setting of this , or other parts of the conservation area.

I concur with this view and I am satisfied that appropriate conditions would ensure that the ongoing operation of the site does not result in harm which goes above and beyond that considered to be less than substantial.

Therefore, having paid special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation area, I am satisfied

that the development accords with Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and Policy CS.8 of the Core Strategy.

ArchaeologyTo the south of the application site is a SAM which includes the earthwork and buried remains of a moated site believed to have been built by Reginald Mohun in the early 13th century. An excavation in the western half of the island in the early 1950s uncovered the foundations of stone buildings, believed to date from the early 13th century, and fragments of painted glass, fine quality pottery and stone-lined drains. The remains of a curtain wall of large ironstone blocks was also located along the inner edge of the western moat ditch.

Historic England has been consulted on the application and no objection is raised. The consultation response states that, whilst the monument is used for some of the purposes of the residential study courses and holistic retreat business, these do not have an impact upon the significance of the monument or its setting. Historic England state that the application does not affect the physical remains of the monument and that no objection is raised to the development proposed.

WCC Archaeology was also consulted on the original application on its receipt and a response of no representation was received.

Whilst amended forms of Appendix 1 have been received through the course of the application, because this document relates only to the way in which the business is operated, I am satisfied that it does not provide the potential to impact any further on archaeological deposits at the site.

Having regard to the above, I am therefore satisfied that the development would preserve the character, appearance of setting of the SAM.

Impacts on Residential Amenity

Policy CS.9 of the Core Strategy states that occupants of new and neighbouring buildings will be protected from unacceptable levels of noise, contamination and pollution, loss of daylight and privacy, and adverse surroundings.

In assessing the impact on residential amenity, I intend to assess the impact of the development in its entirety, both in terms of buildings/structures and uses which do not benefit from formal planning permission.

There are a number of residential properties to the north, east and south of the site.

The nearest dwelling in distance terms is Wincotts Hill, located approximately 80m to the north of the site edged red. Having regard to this separation distance coupled with the fact that this dwelling is on much higher land than the application site, I am satisfied that the buildings/structures would not result in an unacceptable overbearing, overshadowing or overlooking impact to it. As all other residential properties are located in excess of 80m away, I do not consider the buildings/structures are giving rise to unacceptable harm through overbearing, overshadowing or overlooking.

The holistic retreat in particular has the potential to cause some noise and disturbance to neighbouring residential properties and a number of objections from third parties have been received on this basis.

SDC Environmental Health has been consulted on the application and no objections have been raised.

In support of the application a Management Plan has been submitted which confirms, among other things, the following:

the retreat shall provide overnight accommodation for not more than 31 people at any one time

hours restrictions on the commercial use of the grounds a restriction on drumming courses within the grounds the Holycombe Holistic Retreat website to contain details of the

restrictions imposed on the site.

Subject to a condition requiring that the site is operated in accordance with this Management Plan, I am satisfied that the use of the site as proposed would not give rise to unacceptable noise or disturbance to neighbouring residential properties.

I am therefore satisfied that the development accords with Policy CS.9 of the Core Strategy.

Highways Matters

Policy CS.26 of the Core Strategy states that development will only be permitted if the necessary mitigation is provided against any unacceptable transport impacts which arise directly from that development.

An existing site access toward the northeast corner of the site provides vehicular access to the development. A total of 24 car parking spaces are provided within the site, as well as areas for turning to allow cars to enter and exit the site in a forward gear.

County Highways have been consulted on the application and have raised no objection. I am therefore satisfied that safe and suitable access is provided to the site.

Whilst third parties have raised concern with increased traffic and congestion within the village as a result of the development, I do not consider that the scale of the proposal generates such a level of traffic to be inappropriate.

With regards to parking, whilst the Council does not have specific parking standards, Policy CS.26 of the Core Strategy states that parking provision will reflect local circumstances and have regard to the need to promote sustainable transport outcomes. Development should not have excessive on-site parking but provision will need to be sufficient in relation to an individual scheme to avoid unacceptable impact on the amenity of the local area or highway safety.

The Management Plan submitted with the application states that the holistic retreat would provide overnight accommodation for no more than 31 people at any one time. In addition, the agent for the application has confirmed that in terms of employees, 21 people are employed on a part-time basis (to include the applicants themselves). These roles range from cleaners to therapists.

Although 24 car parking spaces are proposed, which falls short of the number of people who could be visiting the site at any one time, in my view it is reasonable to conclude that not all would travel independently to the site by car. In addition, in terms of employees, they are likely to be at the site for short periods of time (for example, a therapist or cleaner), rather than all day, reducing the need for

considerable off-street parking. I consider the proposed level of parking provision to be acceptable when having regard to the scale of operation proposed.

I am therefore satisfied that the development accords with Policy CS.26 of the Core Strategy.

Flood Risk and Drainage

Policy CS.4 states that all development proposals will take into account, dependent on their scale, use and location, the predicted impact of climate change on the District’s water environment.

The site is located within Flood Zone 1 and the drainage is proposed to remain as existing. Having regard to the scale of operation, coupled with the existing drainage facilities at the site, I am satisfied that the development accords with Policy CS.4 of the Core Strategy.

Ecological Impacts, including on the SSSI (Whichford Wood)

It is the duty of the Authority to have regard to conserving biodiversity, including in relation to living organisms or types of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006.

Policy CS.6 states that development will be expected to contribute towards a resilient ecological network throughout the District that supports ecosystems and provides ecological security for wildlife, people, the economy and tourism.

The application site is located outside, but to the northeast of Whichford Wood, a SSSI. Policy CS.6 states that SSSIs will be subject to a high degree of protection and that development proposals should seek to avoid adverse effects on SSSIs.

The County Ecologist has been consulted on the application and has provided a response of no representation. Having regard to the scale and nature of development undertaken at the site, I am satisfied that it has had/is having an acceptable impact on the SSSI and that the biodiversity impacts of the development are acceptable in accordance with Policy CS.6 of the Core Strategy and the NERC Act 2006.

EIA Screening

The development has been screened on a number of occasions throughout the consideration of the application. Most notably, the Council issued a screening opinion on the 6 July 2016 (ref. SCREEN/00051) which determined that the Authority held the opinion that ‘The Project’ (which included works described as Element 1 and Element 2 within both the red and blue edged areas on drawing no. 15-5485-100 P2 submitted with the screening request) did constitute development which required an Environmental Impact Assessment. This was against The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (and any subsequent amendments).

For clarity, the two Elements are described below:

Element 1 Change of use of Holycombe House with the Studio and The Lodge and

grounds to a mixed use dwelling, residential study course and holistic

retreat business. Additional use of Studio and Lodge accommodation as holiday lets;

Element 2 The use of approximately 4565 square metres of land for camping,

accommodating not more than 40 people camping in tents or small camper vans. Associated vehicles to be parked alongside tents;

Glamping structures accommodating not more than 26 people comprising 2 no. moveable canvas yurts, 2 no. moveable canvas bell tents, an airstream wheeled caravan, a gypsy caravan on wheels, a Showman's living van on wheels and wooden boat house and associated parking areas;

Timber camping facilities including a compost wc, a shower shed, a flush WC, camping kitchen and a disabled WC; and

Alterations to existing access.

In response to this positive screening opinion, the applicant applied to the Secretary of State for a Screening Direction. On the 21 November 2016 the Secretary of State directed that whilst Schedule 2 development, ‘The Project’ was not EIA development within the meaning of the 2011 Regulations.

This application seeks planning permission for the works proposed under Element 1 as described above. The plans which have been submitted for the application correspond with those that were considered by the Secretary of State within his Screening Direction (drawing no. 15-5485-100 P2 submitted with the screening request and drawing no. 15-5485-200 P1 submitted with the application, albeit with the application site outlined in blue on the plan considered by the Secretary of State).

The Secretary of State determined that whilst the development which is the subject of this application is not Schedule 1 or 2 development, if considered with Element 2, 'The Project' does constitute Schedule 2 development as defined by the 2011 Regulations. This is because the development falls within the criteria within 12(e) of Schedule 2 (permanent camp sites and caravan sites) and is located within a sensitive area, in this case the AONB.

The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 came into force on the 16 May 2017. However, as per section 76 of these regulations, where screening directions made by the Secretary of State were made or the relevant planning authority or Secretary of State, initiated the making or adoption of such screening opinions or screening directions before the coming into force of the 2017 Regulations, Part 1 (General) and Part 2 (Screening) of the 2011 Regulations (as amended) shall continue to apply.

Having regard to the conclusions reached by the Secretary of State within the Screening Direction, when considering the characteristics of development, location of development and characteristics of potential impact, the proposed development, when taking into account its cumulative impact with Element 2, is not likely to have significant effects on the environment when assessed against the criteria in Schedule 3 enough to trigger the requirement for an Environmental Impact Assessment.

As such I do not consider that an Environmental Impact Assessment needs to be submitted for the development proposed under application 15/02005/FUL. I have taken this view whilst having regard to the cumulative impact with Element 1 (development proposed under 16/04039/FUL).

All additional information submitted in support of the application since the issuing of the Secretary of State’s Screening Direction has been considered and, having regard to The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (as amended), I do not consider that it changes the Secretary of State’s conclusion stated in his decision of the 21 November 2016 that an Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.

In addition, if it were screened against The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017, I would remain of the view that the proposal is not EIA development.

I am therefore satisfied that although ‘The Project’, formed of both Element 1 and Element 2, would constitute Schedule 2 development, an Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.

Other Matters

A number of third party representations have been received which raise concern that the approval of the application would give rise to permitted changes of use through the provisions of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015.

If Members are minded to approve the application, it would be for a specific mix of uses amounting to a sui generis use. There are no permitted changes of use from a mixed use, sui generis site and as such I am satisfied that there would be no permitted changes of use through the GPDO. Therefore, if the applicants intended to use the site for any other purposes materially different to those specifically approved through the application, planning permission would be required.

A number of third party representations have made reference to the Ministerial Statement dated 31 August 2015 which relates to ‘intentional unauthorised development’ and states that ‘this statement introduces a planning policy to make intentional unauthorised development a material consideration that would be weighed in the determination of planning applications and appeals. This policy applies to all new planning applications and appeals received from 31 August 2015’. This application was received on the 05 June 2015 and as such I do not consider the contents of this Ministerial Statement to be of relevance in the assessment of this application.

Covenant

The applicants as well as a number of objectors suggested that any forthcoming grant of planning permission should be subject to a legal obligation containing a number of covenants with which the applicants would need to comply.

Paragraph 203 of the NPPF states that planning obligations should only be used where it is not possible to address unacceptable impacts through a planning condition.

I am satisfied that the proposed conditions are sufficient to adequately control the use/operation of the site on a day to day basis. Having regard to paragraph 203 of the NPPF, I therefore do not consider that, in this instance, a planning obligation is required.

Conclusions

I consider that the current application should be determined in accordance with the adopted Development Plan. I can identify no material considerations that warrant an alternative approach.

Policy CS.1 states that the Council will take a positive approach to applications that reflect the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in the NPPF.

On the basis of the above considerations, I have concluded that the proposal is sustainable development. I therefore consider that the presumption in favour does apply in this case and that Planning Permission should be granted.

RECOMMENDATION

It is therefore recommended that the application be GRANTED subject to the following conditions and notes:

1. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans and drawings:15-5485-100 P115-5485-101 P115-5485-102 P115-5485-103 P115-5485-104 P115-5485-105 P115-5485-106 P115-5485-107 P115-5485-108 P2

2. The holistic retreat business hereby approved shall inure solely for the benefit of Mr and/or Mrs Birtwell. When the site ceases to be occupied by Mr and Mrs Birtwell, the use of the site as a holistic retreat shall cease. The lawful use shall thereafter revert to:

- Holycombe House – single dwelling- ‘The Lodge’ – ancillary accommodation to Holycombe House and/or

holiday let - ‘The Studio & Garage’ – ancillary accommodation to Holycombe

House and/or holiday let (holiday let within The Studio only)The land outlined in red on approved plan no. 15-5485-100 P1, together with any other buildings within it, shall only be used for purposes ancillary to the lawful uses identified above.

3. Other than the Tree House and Gazebo (including the camping kitchen and compost WC used in conjunction with the use of the Tree House and Gazebo as glamping structures) as identified on plan no. 15-5485-101 P1, no tents or structures shall be erected and no camping/glamping for financial reward shall take place within the red line identified on the approved site location plan no. 15-5485-100 P1.

4. ‘The Lodge’ and ‘The Studio & Garage’, as identified on approved plan no. 15-5485-101 P1, shall only be used for ancillary accommodation to Holycombe House and/or for holiday accommodation purposes (The Lodge and The Studio only) and not for any other residential use falling with

Class C3 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended), or any Statutory Instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification. For the avoidance of doubt ‘any other residential use’ includes a person’s or persons’ main residence, or a permanent residential unit of accommodation. The Lodge may also be used for therapies.

5. Details of any external lighting to be installed shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for their formal approval in writing. Any external lighting within the site shall be installed wholly in accordance with the approved lighting scheme. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) there shall be no other external illumination of the development.

6. The development hereby approved shall be operated in accordance with the document entitled ‘Management Plan Holycombe Holistic Retreat’ dated 15 May 2017.

7. Other than where temporary buildings/structures are required solely in connection with the residential use of Holycombe House, notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no development covered by Part 4, Class A of Schedule 2 to that Order shall be carried out without planning permission granted by the Local Planning Authority.

Notes:1. Paragraph 186/187 NPPF

Robert WeeksHEAD OF PLANNING AND HOUSING