Domestic Paraphernalia In Agricultural Storage

[Welshgang]

Hi, I own some land with a couple of buildings, all for agricultural use only. While I work on the land (growing, harvesting etc veg and fruit) I let my children play and when wet watch dvd's. I've been sent a "planning contravention notice" saying the toys, tree house and TV are domestic paraphernalia and must be removed. He says the building is therefore being used as a dwelling. We eat lunch there but not usually dinner and never sleep there.
Do I have to comply?
I also wondered, my eldest daughter is 15, I have photos of her there at 4 years old, could the 10 year rule apply so I can claim change of use to include play area?
Any advice appreciated!

[Maydup]

I think in this case, it will be the use of the building rather than the land that will be of interest to the planners. What type of building is it Welshgang?

And does a neighbour have a problem with you? Seems strange for the planners to take an interest in a few kids playing there after school. How frustrating for you.

[Buenchico]

Write back asking which definition of a dwelling (if any) the planner is relying upon. If he points out that your buildings are being used for the storage of domestic items, advise him that Section 3(4) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 states that "private storage premises used wholly or mainly for the storage of articles of domestic use" shall not be regarded as constituting a 'dwelling'
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/14/section/3

I'd advise against complicating things by claiming any change of use,as that might be seen as accepting that there really has been a change of use, adding fuel to the planner's case.

[buildersmate]

The issue is not to do with it being a dwelling (or not) Buenchico.
It is not a dwelling, because it is a building on a parcel of agricultural land. As such, it can only be used for uses wholly associated with that agricultural use. Storage of equipment used in the management of the land, storage of seeds or produce - all of those would be OK. You can get away with an electricity supply to a barn, because it can associated with equipment used in managing the land, but anything that smacks of a leisure activity is likely to raise eyebrows. Toys, treehouses are out - a tree house is not a structure wholly associated with an agricultural use.
By serving you the notice, the authority are guarding against you maintaining at a later date that you have been using it for a different planning use for more than ten years. This is obviously something you already know something about.
A single photo that demonstrates you once allowed your daughter to undertake in another use isn't going to help much - the use needs to be proven as regular

[Buenchico]

>>>The issue is not to do with it being a dwelling (or not) Buenchico

According to the question it is, BM! Quote:
"He says the building is therefore being used as a dwelling"

If the planning enforcement officer has actually taken that view then, clearly, that's what needs to be challenged!

[buildersmate]

Buenchico. Land development use categories in the UK (England & Wales, at least), are driven by the parcel of land, not the building(s) on it. So a parcel of land with consent for a dwelling is use C3. This entitles the owner to have a dwelling on the parcel of land (of a size, style etc as permitted by the consent), and use the rest of the land parcel as a domestic garden. It also entitles the owner to erect permitted developments allowed within that C3 land use, as permitted within GPDOs, passed by Goverment. This explains why one can generally erect a shed in a garden without asking for consent, but stops one doing the same in an agricultural field. The answer you originally gave would thus not seem relevant to the question. The planners are already questioning the right of the OP to undertake uses in the buildings on the land that are greater than those of an agricultural use. Agricultural use no number attached to it - like A1, A2 etc, for retail, B codes for business use, and C for residencies, of which C3 are dwellings.
OP - you might like to look at the recent relaxation put in place from April 2014, which permitted greater flexibility including from agricultural to dwellings, including a new MB class. Not sure if you could try to use that. It involves something referred to as a prior application process to the planning authority.

[Welshgang]

Thanks ever so much. We got permission for the building to process and store our produce. We need a fridge, two sinks etc to comply with health and safety. Yes a neighbour claimed someone is living there. I often spend all day working there, my children help and play all day, surely this is OK? I think it is wholly associated as I do the work, they have to be with me. I don't know what rules apply, while looking I spoted the 4 year and 10 year rules but am still confused

[buildersmate]

This, I agree, is a confusing area of planning law, which is why as a non-lawyer I have spent considerable time trying to get my head around it.
What you have evidently got permission for is to use the the buildings for uses associated with agriculture, aka the growing crops or produce. However extending that to uses that require H&S suggests to me some form of processing for commercial or retail sale. I suspect, though I am not sure, but you will get difficulties with business use. I am still learning some of this stuff.
Have you got more than five hectares? (I haven't regrettably) - it gets a lot easier if you have. I will try and help further if I can. BM

[Welshgang]

Thanks again Buildersmate. Less than 5 hectares :(. I have permission and the right health and safety certificates to run a business and sell in local farm shops etc, that is all fine. I don't need to be a full time "farmer". They don't have a problem with any of that. Someone complained that we were living there (we are not!) so an inspector came out. He says the place "looks domestic" so I have to get rid of the TV, kids trikes, sofa (that we sit on for tea breaks) and dismantle the tree house. If we were living there they could enforce, I can see that. But we are not, I wish I knew where to look for the relevant laws. I wonder if I can argue that since we are not changing the use (unless letting my children play is?) we don't need to, as the complaint was false.?
I looked at 2014 relaxation or rules, I think only applies if building is vacant

[buildersmate]

Allowing kids to play on agricultural issue cannot be the issue. What causes the issue is undertaking "agricultural development" namely structures on the land that are in excess of those required for undertaking the agricultural uses. So a tree house causes an issue and so does using an existing agricultural buildings that are on the land aka old barns for non-agricultural uses. I'm surprised you've managed to trade from the site without a fuss, but just keep going. I am convinced that many planners don't understand the finer points of this sort of thing and have to go back to their lawyers to interpret.
The 4 year thing versus 10 years works as follows. If you undertake a development on a parcel of land that extends the existing use without permission and no GPDO exists for you to do that, and you manage to do it for four years without challenge, the development cannot be challenged. You can then apply for a certificate of lawfulness.
So, add an unauthorized extension on your barn, that's the four year rule.
If you undertake a development that changes the use classification from one to another code, it is ten years of no challenge before the certificate of lawfulness can be applied for.

[Welshgang]

Thanks everyone for your answers, I've written to them, "to stand my ground" so will have to wait and see what happens next