Several things have happened over the past few months.
Due to an enquiry via the Community Council in Dollar on "the Wendy House in the wood" the planning department were obliged to investigate again the summer house. Temporary permission (granted for 2 years) had expired in 2008 and although I had written to the department at the time i got no reply so just let it be. No doubt it would have stayed this way without the query.
I duly applied for full permission, which included a site visit, but ultimately heard they couldn't recommend the building for planning, basically because there was insufficient evidence of a rural activity (woodland management). The respective letters are copied below. I should have prepared a much fuller management plan in the first place of course. We have been given 1 year to consider a plan but must take the building down by the end of October 2012 whatever. This is a nuisance but it will be a kick to get our focus and future for the woods together.
Response from Planning
Any application for planning permission requires to be determined in accordance with the terms of the development plan for the area, unless there are material considerations that indicate otherwise. In this context, we reply upon the terms of the Clackmannanshire Local Plan in deciding whether the building is policy compliant. The site of the building is in the countryside as identified in the local plan map. On that basis, the main policy that applies is EN18, titled Development in the Countryside. It indicates that developments outwith settlement boundaries will not normally be acceptable, unless one or more of a number of criteria can be met. In this instance, there is one criterion that may apply. That indicates that the development is an essential requirement of a rural activity, and in your submission, forestry management is described as the activity that the building is required for. The criterion requires amongst other things that the design and siting of the building respects the character of the surrounding area. When the original planning permission was granted for a temporary period, this was partly in recognition of the uncertainty over the need for the building. The test of need is now a lot clearer. In the attached paper, you have described forthcoming objectives, and highlighted the fact that you do not stay locally. From the information provided before the application was submitted, and the additional information, we conclude that for the land identified in the application, a facility of this nature is not an essential requirement of the rural activity. There was clearly no such facility in place before your acquisition of the land, and it is not typical at all of similar areas of woodland plantation. It is conceded that a decision to own and look after land that is not local to your place of residence presents some challenges that might exist in other circumstances, but it does appear from my site visit that the use of the building and land is not entirely for forestry management purposes. It was noted that much of the area is of increasing domestic character, evidenced by the design of the building itself, the timber decked verandah, the greenhouse located nearby, man made ponds, areas for soft fruit and "artefacts" such as garden swings and equipment. The use of the internal space was also appeared to be used partly for domestic type use. Based on the foregoing observations, it is difficult to conclude that the development is in line with the development plan policy position. We have taken account of the other material considerations relevant to your application, including the supporting information, the comments from the Dollar Community Council, and any relevant national guidance Accordingly, it is unlikely that the Service will be able to renew the temporary permission on a permanent basis. However, we may be able to consider a final extended period of temporary consent, say for a period of 12 months, to allow you to consider development and management options for the plantation. This however, would have to be reliant upon an undertaking from you at this stage that the building will be removed upon the expiry of that period on a voluntary basis.
My Response to the Response
....The points on which we would appreciate clarification:
‘not typical at all of similar areas of woodland plantation’
· There are many different kinds of woodland plantation with different management aims. Some plantations are managed as clear cut monocultures, with comparatively little maintenance outside planting and felling. Roundel Woods is different because we are developing a variety of uses for the land which involve timber and non timber aspects. Our aims are perhaps not typical to that of many other woodland owners.
‘clearly no such facility in place before your acquisition of the land’
· Prior to our purchase in 2005 the woodland was part of a much larger estate
· On purchase there was little evidence of much recent activity in the woods other than the existence of a disused pheasant rearing pen, old shooting cartridges and some dugout hides suggesting recreational shooting was the main activcity.
· The work we have carried out over the past 6 years, and intend to continue doing, involves work that was not being carried out previously.
· Comparisons between ourselves and the previous owner seem irrelevant.
‘use of the building and land is not entirely for forestry management purposes’
‘design of the building itself’
· We would argue the building is aesthetically appropriate for a woodland environment as it is wooden and blends into the environment
· It is all but invisible to any neighbours
‘internal space was also appeared to be used partly for domestic type use’
· The building is a store and shelter, it is not clear to us what is inappropriate about the interior
‘timber decked verandah’
· It is normal to have hard standing outside a building to help keep the interior space clean, and to provide an open work space. Due to the slope wooden decking seems the most appropriate material.
‘greenhouse’
· The greenhouse is used for seed cultivation, and plant tending as we intend to continue increasing the species within the woods
‘man made ponds’
· Ponds slow the movement of water and increase biodiversity and are quite common, artificial or natural in many woodlands. Is there any particular concern with the ponds we have created?
‘areas for soft fruit’
· soft fruit is a natural part of the woodland under story and ground cover. It seems confusing that this is seen to be purely domestic.
‘artefacts’ such as garden swings and equipment’
· Recreational and educational pursuits are increasingly becoming an integral part of national woodland management. Woodlands for health and enjoyment is a key theme in the Scottish Forestry Strategy, and this is also one of our key aims for Roundel Woods.
I could have perhaps argued the points much further with reference to national guidelines and documents, but decided to go with their suggestion.
Moving on. I haven't seen any sign of the 3 goldfish for a few months now. They may be hiding in semi hibernation, or they may have died and, since there is no body evidence, have been eaten by something? Time, and perhaps spring, will tell.
A good harvest of sturdy dandelion roots, on two occasions, has provided us with a batch of the root coffee. Roasted till it almost seems burnt worked well. I scrubbed, shredded, then scrubbed again the roots before putting in the oven. Also collected a few kilos of chantrelles. It strikes me that I need to work more with what works, and less with imposing my will to grow particular things. Some permaculturalist!
Iain and I stopped for the night during a walk along the Ochils on fireworks night. Arriving in the dark made getting organised with a fire tricky, but we managed. Whisky sent me to sleep, but a need for a pee in the night woke me to a sub zero temperature and several hours of not quite being warm enough to get back to sleep. -2 that night apparently.
