Page 1


Countryside Building

Publishers: Ghyll House Publishing Ltd ATSS House Station Road East Stowmarket Suffolk IP14 1RQ

1 3 3 7 9

Tel: 01449 677500 Fax: 01449 770028 E-mail: chris@ghyllhouse.co.uk

14 16 17 20 23 24 24 27

Subscriptions - free to members of the RDBA Non-members UK: £20.00 Non-members Overseas: £25.00

31 Advertising Sales Chris Hutchinson, details as above Jason Craig, Tel: 0289 7519178 or 07947 360422 Editor: Tony Hutchinson National Secretary Rural Design and Building Association ATSS House Station Road East Stowmarket Suffolk IP14 1RQ Tel: 01449 676049 Fax: 01449 770028 Email: secretary@rdba.org.uk Cover: Deer Park, by kind permission of Mr. and Mrs. Prince. Photograph by Nigel Rigden. See the full story on Page 35. Countryside Building has been carefully prepared but articles are published without responsibility on the part of the publishers or authors for loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any view, information or advice included therein. The articles published do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Rural Design and Building Association. The publishers do not accept any responsibility for claims made by advertisers

35 39 40

Contents Secretaries column VOLUME 2 ISSUE 4 Secretary’s Column Amendments to members Directory Diary Dates The Bleasdale Column The RDBA 2002 National Spring Conference:Diversification and the Environmental Impact Is this Curtains for Yorkshire Boarding? Branch News Stone - Slate Quarries or Delphs Construction Group Members Dore Abbey Delve Offers Lifeline to Rural Economy Bats and Construction: “Ignorance is no defence“ Modern Markets for UK Softwood Sustainability in rural development:- the role of historic building conservation. Preparation for Change: Environmental Legislation, How it may affect you? The design and construction of a large timber framed farmhouse Tourist Accomodation in Nidderdale Sutton Hoo Visitor Centre – A Success for the U K Timber Industry

Secretary s Column The weather has not changed much since my last column although it is somewhat warmer. The market has though settled down with almost all contractors very busy and some having to turn business away. The increase in work is not because farming has become more profitable but following foot and mouth many farmers have taken the opportunity to reorganise their buildings and a number have decided to pull out all together, this means that their land has been either sold off or rented out with the new people needing to reorganise their buildings to take advantage of the new land. It is not clear how long this mini boom will last but until farming can be put back in to a more profitable business we cannot expect it to last for any length of time. If, though, the Government does decide that we should take on board the Euro and manages to get the correct exchange rate, this will help farmers as it will mean a drop in the value of our currency, which should help UK produce to compete on the world market and make us less attractive for those wishing to export in to the UK. We must expect far more regulations in the future; from our Spring Conference it was very obvious that the Environment Agency is unhappy that agriculture is treated differently from the rest of industry. With a typical example being the fact that so much waste produced on a farm can be treated as ‘agricultural waste’ and buried on the farm, if the same waste is produced by industry much of it would have to be specially treated. We can expect regulation in the not too distant future to ensure that waste produced on the farm is treated the same as if it was treated by industry.

In Association with the

RDBA RURAL DESIGN AND BUILDING ASSOCIATION

Main Features in our next issue Stone – slate quarries or Delphs, Part 4 Equestrian case study Environmental Assessment case study Construction Group National and Branch News

Countryside Building 1


RDBA RURAL DESIGN AND BUILDING ASSOCIATION

Membership Application Form (Includes information for the Membership Register) Please give your details below in block letters. If you do not want your details to be published please mark a cross here ( ) We/I wish to become members of the Rural Design & Building Association and agree to pay the annual subscription on 1 October each year. Name of Company or College (if applicable) Address

Post Code

Tel No

Fax No

Initials

Surname

E-mail Web address Title Mr./Mrs./Miss. Position Professional or other qualifications (abbreviations) Home Address

Post Code

Tel No

Fax No

Business, please describe materials, products or services offered, including Trade Names. If a College please describe courses available.

Signed

Date

The following prices are inclusive of VAT. Membership (circle)

Corporate - £258.50,

College - £129.25,

Individual - £45.83,

Retired -£20.00,

Student - £15.00.

Construction Group Membership is open to Corporate Members of the RDBA plus a £117.50 annual fee. Tick the box if you wish to join the Construction Group and you will be invoiced for the £117.50 fee once you are a Corporate Member. There is a special concessionary rate for small firms with less than 6 employees, who wish to join the Construction Group of £176.25. The cheques should be made payable to the RDBA Construction Group. Please return to the National Secretary with your cheque made payable to RDBA. A VAT receipt will be provided. National Secretary, Tony and Jeannie Hutchinson ATSS House, Station Road East, Stowmarket, Suffolk IP14 1RQ Tel: 01449 676049, Fax: 01449 770028, E-mail: secretary@rdba.org.uk


Diary Dates Diary Dates 1st to 4th July 2002: The Royal Show at the RASE, Stoneleigh, Warwickshire. We will be having a stand where members can promote their products and services. Contact the secretary on 01449 676049 for more information. 1st August 2002: Council Meeting, Preston. Contact the secretary on 01449 676049 for more information. 3rd September 2002: Construction Group Meeting and visit to Robinson Construction’s production facilities in Derby. Contact the secretary on 01449 676049 for more information. 17th September 2002: Possible Yorkshire Branch visit to Chatsworth, date and details to be confirmed. More details from David Marston on 01943 874564 18th & 19th September 2002: RABDF Dairy Event, RASE, Stoneleigh, Warwickshire. We will be having a stand where members can promote their products and services. Contact the secretary on 01449 676049 for more information. 12th to 15 November 2002: EuroTier 2002 the premier German Agricultural Exhibition. We are considering organising a trip, which will include a full day at the exhibition, and visits to local farms. The cost is likely to be in the region of £300.00 the itinerary will be agreed following discussion with those that are interested in joining the trip. More details from the National Secretary 01449 781307. 26th, 27th & 28th March 2003: Provisional date for the AGM and Spring Conference 2003 in Scotland in conjunction with the Scottish Agricultural college, Venue and theme to be confirmed. More details from the National Secretary 01449 676049

Amendments to members Directory Additions Mr G H Campbell, Individual, Scotland George H Campbell (Consultancy), 1 South Dean Road, Kilmarnock, Ayrshire, Scotland, KA3 7RE Phone: 01563 523404, Fax: 01563 523404 30 years as a Chartered Civil Engineer and Chartered Building Surveyor with 13 years specialising in agricultural buildings and structures throughout the UK. Expert witness, opinion and reports including building disputes, defects, accidents, personal injuries, animal housing and handling. Mr Mark Hill, Individual, South East Smiths Gore, Exchange House, Petworth, west Sussex, GU28 0BF Phone: 01798 342642, Fax: 01798 345998 Provide a wide range of services to all property owners and occupiers - Estate Management, Farm Consultancy, Architecture and Building Surveying, Mineral, Forestry, etc Mr B J Lancaster, Individual, Wessex Fisher German Chartered Surveyors, The Estate Office, Dumleton, Evesham Worcestershire, WR11 7TZ Phone: 01386 881214, Fax: 01386 881330 Chartered Surveyors, Land agents, Valuers. Mr M Pugh, Corporate, Construction, Wessex Supercraft Structures Ltd, Shobden Airfield, Shobden, Nr Leominster, Herefordshire, HR6 9NR, Phone 01568 708456 Fax: 01568 708212 Agricultural & Industrial steel framed buildings and cladding. Mr T J Stansby, Individual, Midlandshire Belvoir Estate, Estate Office, Belvoir Castle, Grantham, NG32 1PD Phone: 01476 871006 Fax: 01476 870443 Agricultural Estate consisting of in hand farm, 22 let farms and 320 houses Mr S P R Thorp, Individual, Scotland The Heather Trust, The Cross, Kippen, Sterlingshire, FK8 3DO Phone: 07850 789189 Fax: 07850 789189

Chartered Surveyors - All aspects of estate management, rural property consultants - sporting agency Mr M A Warden, Individual, Yorkshire 4 St Mathews Terrace, Leyburn, N Yorks, DL8 5EL Phone: 01969 623789 Planning Officer Harrogate B C

Amendments Mr J M H Chaplin, Change the first initial to K and e-mail address to parker.co.uk Mr Coke change to Mr S J Morgan MRICS with a revised phone number of 01225 713237 and add second line to the address of Strategic Property Services Group. Mr Jim French change the post code to TN6 1LR Mr Peter Hale Change the phone number to 01295 688100 and address to Hale Associates, Payn’s House, Back Lane, Oxhill, Wawick, CV35 0QN Mr S A Kenny, Rural Partners Ltd, Change address and phone to: Park House Farm, Harbottle, Morpeth, Northumberland, NE 65 7BD, Phone: 01669 650250 Mr D Morris change to Ms Janet McKenna Thorp S P R Change to J C Oston Mr Nial Watkin-Rees change address to TEG Environmental PLC, Unit 6 Meadowcroft Business Park, Whitestake, Preston, PR4 4BA Mr Peter Worthington change phone to 01584 811583

Construction Group Duraframe Structures Ltd, Change the phone to 01978 356164, Change the fax to 01978 362499.

Deletions Mr Nick Small

Countryside Building 3


Reader Enquiry 8

Reader Enquiry 4 Reader Enquiry 9

Reader Enquiry 59

Reader Enquiry 27

Countryside Building 4

Reader Enquiry 10


Reader Enquiry 12

Reader Enquiry 11

Reader Enquiry 13

Countryside Building 5


Reader Enquiry 18

Reader Enquiry 15 Reader Enquiry 17

Poundfield

Reader Enquiry 50

Countryside Building 6

Reader Enquiry 16


Opinion The Bleasdale Column Ian K. Bleasdale MRICS, Dipl.Town planning ,Dipl. Landscape Interpretation; has contributed to Countryside Building in the past and obviously has a great interest in rural construction. Like many of us he also has strong views on what is happening to the rural economy. He is not a farmer, but he has always lived and worked in the countryside and is a member of the Rural Faculty of the RICS. He has kindly agreed to provide a column on a quarterly basis, giving his views on various issues. This is the first of what we hope will be many. ED Firstly the new Building Regs. Oh dear isn’t life becoming just too complicated? I cannot escape the suspicion that all this regulating emanates from the EU somewhere back along the line, with their desire to tie us all up in knots as part of some dastardly plot. Everything is to be regulated so that the British, who they can be sure will be the only ones to enforce such nonsense, will thereby lose any or all competitive advantage they might once have had such that our Industries – all, not just agriculture – will be totally uncompetitive against the other European states. These other States, led by the example set by France, will carefully neglect to enforce any of these rules themselves, whereas in the British Isles there will always be some busybody who can be guaranteed to make it his or her business to ensure that these restrictive rules are imposed to the letter. In as much as higher and better standards, sought for energy conservation, insulation and the like, are desirable things, how much better if these can be achieved through education and people’s own innate sense of needing to, not only ‘do the right thing’, but be shown that saving energy can save you money. So much better than enforcement through petty regulations. Stone-Slate quarries or Delphs. I think that it cannot be too highly stressed that getting Planning Permission for the opening (or even re-opening) of such an enterprise, is going to be extremely difficult. Bearing in mind that sites where good stone outcrops are almost always going to be in Green Belt, National Parks and/or Areas of High landscape Value, I think the chances of success will essentially rest on the Conservation value of such traditional materials in restoring historic buildings and similar work. Thus I think would be operators need to fraternise with their local Conservation Officers before all else! There is another approach though which might just work in certain circumstances. That is to capitalise on any Planning History relating to past uses of the quarry site. If there was an old Planning Consent on the site, even a Provisional Order one going back to before the 1939-45 War, proof of its existence might count towards a new Permission or even an Established Use Certificate. Such a document could form a very good negotiating platform from which to overcome the many Planning objections which will inevitable arise to any re-opening.

Climate change. Design of buildings must always give equal importance to holding-down the roof as well as holding it up! Merlo 2002. Seems a splendid machine, pity it has to be foreign! Back in the 1970’s there was a British design of a similar-looking tractor unit offering high speed on the road combined with powerful off-road capabilities, being built in part of the old Foden’s works in Sandbach, Cheshire. I believe it was called “Saxon…” something? I suppose it was ahead of its time. Pity it came to nothing. Innovative timber engineering. Australian examples could have included the, all-timber, former railway bridge across Darling Harbour, Sydney, which now remains as a footbridge also supporting the Monorail. When I was learning building construction in the early 50’s, text-books were scarce because of war-time paper rationing and the ones we got to use often dated back to the 20’s. One of the interesting timber construction methods they showed were flitch-beams. Nobody was using them, of course, in 1950 because both timber and steel were rationed so reinforced concrete was the order of the day. I did however, come across a very good example in a country-house of 1890 vintage which was being demolished. Interesting to see how things come around full-circle! The appearance of Farm Buildings. In resurrecting past exhortations on rural design principles, I was surprised that your correspondent didn’t mention The Design Council’s “Catalogue of Farm Buildings” published in 1977 Even earlier than that, Cheshire County Planning Department had produced its own Farm Building Design Guide in 1971 followed up by a public version in 1972 (cover also photocopied). I imagine many other Planning Authorities produced something similar. As always, the general strictures are: A roof darker than the walls gives a lid or hat effect and helps to suppress the building into the landscape. New buildings should be sensitively grouped adjacent to the old. Artificial greens as a colour should be avoided as they never blend well with the subtle shades of natural green.Khaki, brown or dark grey or even yellow, are safer. An eaves overhang produces shadows which softens a harsh outline. Roof slopes should take account of the landform. These are not in any order of importance. The use of “Onduline” sheeting. For some years I owned a group of farm buildings in Cheshire, one of which was covered in red corrugated sheets of a steel/bitumen sandwich construction. These were either Onduline or one of the Robertson-Thane products. The property had been an ‘estate’ farm and from the Estate Records it seemed that it had been re-roofed to replace thatch in about 1910. Although a bit frayed around the edges, these sheets were still forming a satisfactory, waterproof roof in 1997 Countryside Building 7


Reader Enquiry 23

Reader Enquiry 24

Reader Enquiry 25

Reader Enquiry 26

Reader Enquiry 5

Countryside Building 8

Reader Enquiry 59

Reader Enquiry 7


Spring Conference 2002 The RDBA 2002 National Spring Conference Diversification and the Environmental Impact 18th & 19th April 2002 Many delegates arrived on the evening of 17th April 2002 in time for a visit to the local Interbrew brewery. This was only a quarter of a mile walk down the road and although it made ‘local’ beer it must be one of the largest and most automated plants in the country. We were shown around this vast plant, where the few people that were on duty were sitting in front of computer screens organising the production. The bulk of the beer being produced was either bottled or keg although they could produce draft. We asked how they could make beers that were ‘local’ to other parts of the country, when we had understood that the local water was an important part of a beer. We were advised that this was not a problem, they could take a sample of the local water, analyse it to find what was in the water and then using the water local to their plant they could take chemicals out and put others in to replicate it. They assured us that they could replicate beers made anywhere and we would not be able to taste the difference. We then sampled some of their brews with our buffet supper and had an interesting trip back to the hotel via a very dark and narrow road. A very enjoyable evening that was a good start to the conference.

The Presentations The Chairman of the conference, our North West Branch Chairman, Paul Cottrell opened the conference on time at 10.30, he welcomed the delegates and thanked the sponsors, Eternit UK Ltd for the Conference dinner, plus Farm Plus Construction Ltd, Landmark Environmental R E Buildings Ltd and TEG Environmental PLC. He referred the delegates to their stands at the back of the hall. The first speaker was Laurence Rankin from the Environmental Agency This very interesting and informative presentation focused on four main areas:

1. N i t r a t e Vulnerable Zones. The extension of the Nitrate Vulnerable Area controls to up to 100% of England will have

implications for the management and control of animal wastes on farms. This will affect management systems on farms both in terms of infrastructure provision and recording and auditing.

2. Pollution Prevention and Control (PPC) Regulations and Agricultural. Intensive pig and poultry farming is now subject to PPC regulation. Standard Farming Installation rules have been developed and a reduced charging mechanism introduced. Nevertheless these installations will be subject to rigorous regulation with regard to all environmental impacts.

3.

Agricultural Waste

Proposals for extending the EC Waste Framework Directive to farms in the UK are expected from government in the near future. Up to date wastes from premises used for agriculture were largely excluded from the definition of “controlled waste.” The aim will be to ensure that waste is recovered or disposed of in ways that protect the environment and human health.

4.

Rural Recovery Plans

Each Region and County in England is developing a Rural Recovery Plan to respond to the impacts of Foot and Mouth disease and to look forward to a new approach to the rural economy. The Environment Agency is supporting the delivery of advice to rural business to make best use of grants and support available. The Agency initiative “Best Farming Practice; Profiting from a good Environment” will form the centrepiece of our contribution to the plan. In questions after the presentation it became obvious that the expected regulation changes would mean that in future agricultural waste would be treated the same as any waste produced by industry. The next speaker was RDBA member David Pollard of Landmark Environmental Ltd. Who explained that where it is considered that intensive farming is involved prior to any new building an environmental assessment would need to be carried out. This will also need to be carried out if there is a risk of disturbing any rare or endangered species. It was difficult for David to provide a cost for the assessment as that will depend on the project, where there is little or no impact the cost would be small but where there is a major impact the assessment may take a considerable amount of time and so would cost considerably more. His advice is that if there is a suggestion that the farming may be classed as intensive (in many instances what is and is not ‘intensive’ is not clear) that you contact him before designs are started so that any environmental impacts can be reduced to the minimum. David explains more in his interesting article on page 31 .

Countryside Building 9


Spring Conference 2002 The next Speaker was Gareth Jones of Abacus Organic Associates He discussed the option of ‘going organic’ and pointed out some of the problems. It is an option for a small percentage of the market but it is not for everyone. There is a particular problem at the moment that although the organic market is well policed in the UK this is not always the case in other parts of the world. Since the Super Markets and others are able to buy on the world market, where in some instances the word organic does not have the same meaning as the UK, they are able to undercut the bona fide UK organic producer. This means that prices for many ‘organic’ products are not high enough for UK farmers to be able to produce profitably. Over the last few years there has been a very marked increase in the number of UK organic farms, with the numbers still accelerating. Gareth suggested that any one thinking of going Organic should carefully consider the market and whether the move will be profitable in the long term. The next Speaker was the RDBA Vice-Chairman Hazel Ronson of Dureble Ltd Hazel introduced the delegates to new ways of lighting and ventilating modern farm buildings and asked if it was “curtains for Yorkshire Boards” Dureble are importing a new high quality lighting ridge, which at the same time provides fully adjustable ridge ventilation. Hazel advised that by using their units it is easy to provide 10% roof lighting at the ridge, which will put the light where it is required in the building. Incorporated into the up stands of the light ridge are fully adjustable ventilation slots. When these are combined with curtains on the walls of the building then a relatively low cost fully adjustable whole building ventilation system is produced. The ventilation can either be adjusted by hand or the curtains and the ventilation at the ridge can be opened and closed by computer to produce optimum conditions for the animals. Hazel advised that the system could be used on all types of rural buildings, particularly housing for cattle, horses, sheep and chickens, but any building that required good ventilation and lighting would benefit by the use of their products. The next speaker was Beryl Smith of Business Link North and Western Lancashire Countryside Building 10

Beryl Smith discussed the different grants that were available for rural conversion: Redundant Building Grant, New Farming Horizons and Rural Enterprise Scheme; with all these grants if planning permission is applicable, then no grant application can be made until this has been obtained. Under the Rural Planning Facilitation Service up to two days of a planning consultants time can be obtained free of charge, to provide advice and assistance but not to draw up the plans. DEFRA offer a Planning Service similar to the Rural Planning Facilitation Service for Rural Enterprise Scheme applications only. There is also an ERDP Facilitation Service, which comprises a one-day service free of charge to assist preparation of grant applications to the England Rural Development Programme. At an early date contact should be made with you local Business Link, Rural services Co-ordinator. The next speaker was RDBA member Simon Thorp of The Heather Trust Simon provided interesting and very useful details of his development of buildings on an upland estate, pointing out some of the pitfalls and lessons learnt. His was a large development covering a very large estate with the challenge to erect 7 livestock buildings, improvements to 5 livestock handling systems, and to carry out work on 6 sheep dips. As this was in an environmentally sensitive area it was carried out under the Bowland Environmental Strategy, as an objective 5b scheme, started in 1998 for completion in 2002 and with a budget of £880,000, with partners of NWW, MAFF, EU Structural Funds, EN, RSPB, farm and shoot tenants. Some of the problems were; working for a large organisation, control from another large organisation, no clearly defined rules, change of key personnel and long paper work chains, which produced such situations as more than one party insisting on the original invoice for work before they would pay their part. The main lessons learnt were that ‘next time’ there needs to be simplified financial procedures to stop some suppliers through no fault of there own having to wait months for their money. Use professional expert support at an early stage, use standard buildings or call in the building supplier at an early stage and avoid winter working. The next speaker was RDBA Member Nial Rees of T E G Environmental PLC Nial discussed the opportunities for ‘Sustainable Hi-Tech InVessel Composting’ He provided the background on the site we would be visiting


Spring Conference 2002 tomorrow. He showed how the unit was fitted into the barn. The raw material being loaded into the mixer and the traversing rail mounted mixing unit, which rides above the composting chambers and supplies the correct charge of material to the top of each chamber daily. The chambers are charged at the top and the compost taken from the bottom on a daily basis. The charge takes approximately two weeks to pass down through the chamber, but this time can vary dependant on the raw material being used. As it passes through the chamber natural chemical and biological actions first heat and then cool the material, this is controlled to ensure that the material reaches a high enough heat for long enough to kill pathogens. At the end the compost is bagged or collected for bulk delivery and sale. The next speaker was RDBA Member Mike Kelly a leading farm building consultant Mike used his crystal ball to look in to the future and suggest some of the changes we might see in farm building design and construction. He started by showing some interesting graphs that illustrated how farm production in Europe as productivity increased would continue to expand far faster than demand. So farmers would be forced down two routes; either to become larger and more efficient or diversification. Those that are looking for increased efficiency, will need to re look at a number of areas and in particular feed and its efficacy is going to grow in importance, feed production dominates the energy budget, 60% for a bedded court, 85% for a woodchip corral. They will also need to look closely at the cost of different building designs. The environment is going to become more and more important and so the environmental ratings of different materials, systems and working patterns are going to have to be considered in detail.

buildings there may be a requirement to carry out an air tightness test and thermal imaging to confirm that the insulation is correctly in place. The subject could not be covered in adequate depth and so it was agreed that the Construction Group’s Seminar at the end of May, on Part L would be expanded so all members of the RDBA would be invited. Ian Orme kindly agreed to provide a presentation at this seminar. A very useful, informative and enjoyable conference was brought to an end by Paul Cottrell at 6.45pm.

The Eternit Conference Dinner The dinner was a great success with the local Mayor of Wyre Borough Council regaling us with stories of the ‘goings on’ in the local council. Our thanks to the staff who looked after us so well and to Eternit for being so generous in paying for the meal.

The Visits We were picked up at the hotel by coach at 8.30 am to be taken to our first visit:

Chris Bargh - Dairy Farm and Equestrian Centre Osbaldeston Hall Farm The Osbar Herd Chris Bargh extended a warm welcome during our visit to their 330 acres acres (300 owned 30 rented), with 100 mule ewes, 125 cows with 70 followers and 55 livery horses. Chris Bargh showing us around.

Cows were milked on the farm until 1987 when they decided to invest more into a riding centre following tighter health and safety regulations after the Bradford football ground fire. So the decision was taken to sell the cows and the quota, rear store cattle and run more sheep.

This will even go as far as causing a re-appraisal of the traditional materials that are used in construction of farm buildings.

In 1996 the decision was taken to go back into milking although this was not realised until 1998.

The next speakers were Carl Sutcliffe of the Ready-mixed Concrete Bureau and Ian Orme of Rickaby Thompson Associates

Chris was able to convert the existing buildings to gain the maximum output with the minimum input. The new parlour they installed is a 12/24 Fullwood herringbone, which has an output of up to 1300 litres an hour. It is situated on one side of the building, with calving boxes on the other side and A1 pens in the middle. “Everything is designed to save labour, every switch, every gate” says Chris Bargh.

They discussed in some detail the changes to Part L of the Building Regulations and how the new Trench Floor could be used to help compliance. The changes to part L are very wide ranging, with some of the routes to compliance very complicated. With large

Chris is adamant that to get as much as possible out of a cow they have to be comfortable, so he has installed large FARMPLUS cubicles, each 4’6” wide, 9’6” long with mats and a 7” heelstone. The other feature of the housing is the amount of space per cow, which is high at 60 square feet. There are cubicles on both outside walls, leaving 17’ between the cubicles and the feed passage. Chris says that Countryside Building 11


Spring Conference 2002 this not only gives the cows ample room to move about but the extra area means that slurry never builds up to cover their feet. The Building is of timber construction with a relatively low roof with little obvious ventilation and so it was surprising when Chris advised that he never had any problems with ventilation and in fact the air quality in the building all year round was particularly good. The Coach then took us to our next visit to:

Teg Environmental Modern In-vessel Composting Plant at Sherdley Farm, Ratten Lane, Hutton, Preston, Lancs. By the kind permission of Messer’s A & G Sanderson

Golden Acres Plocks Farm From grain to dog food

The composting plant at Sherdley farm.

Clive Mauder making the presentation at Plocks farm. An arable farm of 1400 hectares where the grain is converted into pet food in a purpose built on-farm factory that has the capacity to supply 50% of the total UK market. The pet food was originally manufactured by the dry extrusion method but to expand their range wet extrusion lines have been added. Like an iceberg, most of the Golden Acre’s factory is below the surface. Planning restrictions meant that no structure higher than 30’ is allowed on the farm, so 8000 tonnes of clay were removed producing a hole 4500 m2 in volume and so the 70’ high dryer sits with its base below ground level. Besides allowing compliance with planning restrictions, having this hole offers other advantages, to get to the top you only have to climb about half as far. It also allows them to hide unsightly pieces of machinery and keep the main part of the factory free of clutter and pipes. For example, kept below ground level, is the equipment which generates compressed air, which is used not only to blow lines clear with massive pulses of air but is also used in the conveying system which reduces product degradation by gently moving the finished product in pulses to its destination. Total expenditure on the plant was £5 million and has meant that maximum output is now 125,000 tonnes per annum. The pet food is packed on four lines, into packages ranging from 100 g up to 1 tonne and include the ability to form modern-style stabilo packs on the fly. The ability to shape, colour, vitaminise, make vet specials and add fresh meat gives rise to approximately 340 products. Sitting over the entire operation is an umbrella computer system, which not only controls the production but can also advise the amount of consumables such as gas and electricity that is used, so that the system can provide real time accounting - per product, per batch, per customer. A very impressive site visit. The Coach then took us on to the next visit: Countryside Building 12

On this site we were shown the plant that Nial had discussed yesterday. The TEG Silo-Cage system is a continuous operation thermophilic aerobic composting process, with mechanical loading and unloading which has been developed from an idea and invention of Dr Alan Heyworth, formerly on the faculty of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth. Dr Heyworth has made a study, over many years, defining the requirements for vigorous and efficient aerobic composting, identifying the most effective combinations and ratios of waste and amendment materials (bulking agents). Dr Heyworth’s work on difficult organic wastes were evaluated and tested by The Public Health Laboratory Service (CAMR) at Porton Down on behalf of major public companies. The CAMR tests showed that the composting process was able to break down persistent organic compounds (pesticides, explosives, etc.) The Silo-Cages have been developed from the concept that a container with perforated walls and with dimensions which allow the natural ingress of air to all parts will provide the environment for the most vigorous composting activity without the disadvantages of forced aeration and turning, which release dust, aerosols and odour, are costly with, in many cases, an unpredictable and likely a poor quality product. The TEG Silo-Cage process is a continuous 365 day/year operation consisting of a bank of from six to twenty four stainless steel louvered-wall cages of 32 cubic metres capacity each, supported above a concrete base within a large steel structure (similar in concept to a lattice-girder bridge). The bank has a hydraulic hoist with a travelling overhead feeder, which evenly supplies the pre-calculated amount of compost mix to each Silo-Cage daily. An unloading auger traverses beneath the bank of Silo-Cages, undermining and extracting the finished composted material as it reaches the bottom of the Silo-Cage. This interesting visit showed how clean and fragrant the composting system is. There were no nasty smells and the final product looked to be clean and wholesome. No doubt


Spring Conference 2002 when the government gets its act together the conversion of an old barn to composting could be a viable way of making some extra money from a redundant barn.

The Barn, Springfield Farm Garden Centre & Delicatessen on a beef and sheep farm

The coach then took us to our next visit:

Lunch At Garstang Golf Club We had a lovely lunch in their restaurant overlooking the Golf Course. We were so impressed by the facilities and food that we have booked their facilities for our next council meeting. We were advised that it was originally a Dairy Farm with 130 cows converted to a Golf Club in 1993 with a hotel added in 1995/6 The reason for the diversification was due to the farm not sitting easily into the urban landscape. Situated between the two residential areas of Garstang and Catterall they were receiving a growing number of complaints due to the smell produced by the silo and slurry operations and the late night working. As the number of cows increased, they also received complaints from the local population as they were held up getting to work by the herd being brought in for milking and so the diversification was a response to public pressure The 18 hole golf course is 6050 yards long with a par of 68 it includes a covered 18 bay floodlit driving range and a 32 ensuit roomed, family owned hotel with lovely views of the surrounding golf course and countryside. The complex also includes the Kingfisher Restaurant that specialises in fresh local produce; there is also the Bradbeer Bar for a relaxing drink or light snack, plus a selection of 6 meeting rooms able to accommodate up to 250 delegates. Spacious Lounge areas can also be used for weddings, formal banquets, private parties and family celebrations, etc. The Coach then took us on to our next visit:

Wallings Ice Cream and Farm Shop Dairy Farm and Ice Cream Factory We were advised that the farm is 110 acres with 80 dairy cows. The owners Peter and Jill Walling have both worked in the dairy industry and have considerable experience with milk and other dairy products, but until the mid 1980s had never made ice cream. It took some time to perfect their technique but they now use 100,000 litres of milk annually in the manufacture of the ice cream. We were shown around the manufacturing plant and cold rooms where the ice cream is made in a traditional manner using only fresh, natural ingredients, including milk from their own dairy cows. The ice cream soon gained a strong local The face says it all. following and is now sold throughout the UK and abroad. The next step in the farm’s diversification is the imminent opening of the new Butchers Shop. This will help to insure that the business continues to expand especially when the future looked doubtful due to a very close outbreak of F& M IN April 2001. This new shop will sell local meat from rare breeds. The Coach then took us on to our last visit:

This Barn and Plant Centre offers a range of garden products including compost, terracotta pots, seeds, fertilizer and indoor plants. The stone Barns are full of rustic character, a wealth of unusual gifts for any occasion are displayed on traditional dressers and shelving made from the old barn door. The farms Courtyard incorporates an outdoor Planteria that

Part of the tour around the Garden Centre at The Barn, Springfield Farm specialises in farm grown, hardy herbaceous perennials, many of which can be viewed in the newly renovated Orchard Garden. In the Christmas Season, the barn will provide the festive setting for a bonanza of unusual Christmas gifts and decorations, Christmas trees and holly wreaths. Many of us after the guided tour relaxed with a cup of tea, unfortunately we were all too full after sampling the ice creams at Wallings to try what looked like a very good range of home made cakes and scones. The Coach then returned us to the Hotel and most people left for home. Our thanks must go to the North West Branch for organising such an interesting conference that covered so much ground. We now know that Scotland have picked up the batten and in conjunction with the Scottish Agricultural College have started to organise next years Spring Conference, We look forward to seeing many of you there.

Reader Enquiry 14

Countryside Building 13


Technical Is this Curtains for Yorkshire Boarding? This is the question that was asked by Hazel Ronson, at the RDBA Spring Conference at the end of April during her presentation on Dureble’s new translucent ventilated ridge and curtain system. In early April I had been invited to Germany to see the system in place on a number of buildings. Surprisingly the first building I was shown was a free-range chicken house in the final days of construction. This already had

Photo 1 - The light and airy interior of the chicken house with the curtains half open Reader Enquiry 48

Reader Enquiry 49

Countryside Building 14

the ridge and curtains in place and as can be seen in photograph 1 it is very light and airy. I was under the impression that it was normal to insulate chicken house, as heating was required in the winter. The owner advised that she did not believe that a warm environment was necessary; until recently laying hens were free range with an unheated chicken house for protection at night. It was

Photo 2 - The vented light ridge with the vents open.


Technical

Photo 3 - An external view of the curtains, half open. important that the building did not get too hot or too cold and so heaters had been provided to keep the building above freezing in the winter and the ventilation would ensure that the building was not too hot in the summer.

once again the atmosphere in both buildings was light and airy. This can be seen in photographs 4 and 5, in the second building shown in photograph 5 the opening and closing of the ridge was computer controlled. The farmer set the temperature parameters that he requires both maximum and minimum and the computer did the rest. Although the parameters were set by the farmer, apart from the extremes, the aim was for the inside of the building to be at the same temperature as the out side air, but without drafts or winds, this should ensure that there was no condensation. The only time that this would change was where the outside temperature went above 20o C as above was harmful to cattle and so as much ventilation as possible would be provided. As the curtains were so large there was the risk that in windy conditions the rain would blow in and so there were sensors to ensure that the curtains on the side where the rain was entering were closed enough to stop its entry.

I was shown how the vertical sides to the ridge could be easily opened or closed. They are open in photograph 2. The curtains, which are half open in photograph 3 can easily be opened or closed either automatically or by hand, with even the by hand process being relatively easy with the use of a socket on an electric drill. Obviously a fly screen is also required to ensure that insects are kept out of the building. I asked what the situation was with roof lights for a wide building, as in the UK it would be normal for them to comprise 10% of the roof area. I was advised that the ridge width was adjustable and so it should be possible in most agricultural buildings to provide 10% of the roof area as a light ridge. It was also pointed out that the light was directed to where it was required in the centre of the building, with the semi-transparent curtains providing light at the sides. They went on to say that as the ridge is made from polycarbonate and aluminium it was very strong and probably non-fragile, but as it was on an up stand above the roof plain it was obvious that it should not be walked on. It was interesting to note that translucent sheets had been used on the gable peaks of the buildings that I visited; this certainly helped to reduce the dark corners in the buildings. I was assured that this was not because a light ridge had been used but was normal practice in the area. We then moved on to a couple of cow houses, where

Photo 5 - The inside of the 2nd cattle building A very sophisticated system but the farmer was confident that the cost was worthwhile as it allowed him to reduce his labour costs. With ventilation systems I am aware that animal size, stocking density, building span and size are all important in deciding on the ventilation required, with this system I was advised that Dureble will calculate the height of the up stand of the ridge and the depth of the curtains required to provide the necessary ventilation, so that every system is bespoke to the building. In my view the acid test will be the cost, there are a large number of different ventilation systems on the market, some more sophisticated than others, but because of the lack of profit in farming it is usually the lower cost system that is used. There is no way that this ventilated light ridge can be classed as a low priced system. Dureble assure me that the curtains are lower in cost than traditional walling and so as a system of curtains and ventilated light ridge the building, in most instances, will cost less than a traditional building with 10% non-fragile roof lights and a non sophisticated vent ridge and on top of that the ventilation is more controllable. If this is true then it does look to me to be an advance in animal husbandry and agricultural buildings. It will be interesting to see how the system performs in the UK and if the results for the free range chicken farmer in Germany are as good as she expected.

Photo 4 - The light and airy inside of the 1st cattle building

“To answer Hazel’s question, I have to say yes, I do expect the combined wall and ridge system to be extensively used in place of traditional non - flexible ventilation systems� ED. Countryside Building 15


Branch News Branch News Report of the Wessex Branch visit to view a Robotic Milking System in Somerset By Ian Everitt, Wessex Branch Secretary May 2002 The Wessex Branch was pleased to resume their farm visits after foot and month, and on 30 April and 1 May inspected a Robotic Milking system on a farm near Taunton. The event was held on two days at the request of the farmer, as he did not wish to disturb the cows too much, and so visitors were reduced for each day. Nevertheless, the meeting attracted 26 members who all benefited from seeing a robotic installation in action. The one-box parlour was installed 2 years ago, and replaced a 7/14 herringbone. At that time, a decision was made to reduce cow numbers from 90 cows to 75 cows. This saved on building costs associated with an alternative proposal to increase the herd size, and extend the herringbone parlour and cubicle accommodation. It was, of course, also possible to save on labour costs. Just prior to our visit, the unit was extended to two boxes, with

Cups in position on the cows teats made it work for him, and it suited his farm. The addition of the second unit was a further indication of the success of the system.

Arm in stop / rinse situation after milking Charles Morris (centre) explains the operation of the machine to Roy Hughes the intention that a herd size of 120 cows could be milked. This seemed to be working very well. Members were impressed by the calmness of the cows during their time in the unit, and the ingenuity of the machine itself. Our hosts also demonstrated the value of the computer recording system, which had been installed at the same time as

Machine arm under the Cow, milking in operation the robotic plant. Robotic milking may not suit everyone, but this farmer had Countryside Building 16


Technical STONE›SLATE QUARRIES or Delphs A guide to making a mineral planning application for stone-slate production - Part 3 In this issue 17. How long does it take to get Planning Permission? 18. Dealing with Public Objections to your Application 19. When you receive Planning Permission 20. If you are refused Planning Permission 21. Conclusion Appendix 1 - Agricultural Permitted Development Appendix 2 - Authorities, Agencies and Organisations to Consult Appendix 3 - Detailed Information to Submit with your Application Appendix 4 - Environmental Assessment

17. How Long does it Take to get Planning Permission? 17.1 Once your application is submitted, the process may become a bit of a waiting game. Because of the number of issues involved, applications for quarries tend to take longer than most other types of planning application. The amount of time it takes the MPA to come to a decision will depend on the completeness of the information submitted and the complexity of the issues. 17.2 The MPA is required by law to take all material factors into account. This means that it has to advertise the application, notify any neighbours (in England and Wales) and await any objections. It also has to consult with a number of other agencies and authorities from whom it must obtain views and opinions on your proposal. This process can often lead to more questions and the need for further information. This all takes time. 17.3 The MPA can only consider granting permission once it is fully satisfied that it has investigated all the issues involved and questions raised. It may first need to ask you to alter or improve some aspect of your proposal. Where a problem seems likely to be resolvable, the MPA will always work through it with you or include conditions in your permission to cover the issue concerned. 17.4 Your application will either be decided by an MPA’s Planning Committee or delegated to planning officers. The Committee or planning officer dealing with your application will need to come and see the site before making a decision. This visit may carried out with you or unaccompanied – if the latter leave them to it unless they ask you to attend.

usually appear in the local newspaper. 18.2 It is uncommon for there to be no objections at all to planning applications for quarrying. So do not be alarmed; instead, go into the process expecting them. Remember that to be valid, objections must be based on sound planning reasons. Objections of any substance will almost certainly involve issues already considered by the MPA’s planning officers. 18.3 Many public objections are based on assumptions, and sometimes on misunderstandings about the future impact of granting permission. Where necessary, it’s best to keep the public informed of exactly what is proposed and the scale of any likely impacts. To some extent, you will need to play this by ear. There is little point in raising issues unnecessarily, but if people are not informed they may assume you have something to hide! 18.4 A public meeting, or one with the Parish or Community Council, may be worth considering. This can give you the opportunity to explain your application and to deal with concerns, real or imagined. If there are worries about traffic deal with them sympathetically. Give the facts about the number and type of vehicle movements involved. Parish or Community Councils are normally statutory consultees, so they are likely to consider your application and make comments to the MPA at some point. 18.5 If you want to do any advance publicity, English Heritage has an exhibition that can be borrowed free of charge to put up in the local library, or in your village or town hall. Be wary of the press and local television and radio. They will often try to create controversy. On the other hand, local newspapers may welcome a well written article on the history of stone roofing in your area and building conservation objectives.

19. When you Receive Planning Permission 19.1 Eventually, you will, hopefully, receive a planning permission! This will arrive as a formal decision notice. You must not start work until you receive this. Even then, there may be requirements with which you must comply before you can start. 19.2 The notice will say that the MPA has granted permission and include a number of conditions. These will relate to the time within which work must begin, the length of the permission, any further information needed before you begin or before particular aspects of your proposal may commence, operational conditions, and a list of reasons for each condition. Read through these very carefully and make sure you understand and comply with them. If you do not and you breach any of the conditions, you may find yourself facing enforcement action by the MPA.

17.5 If the application does go to the Planning Committee for a decision, then a report and recommendation will be produced by the planning officer. You should be able to obtain a copy of this before the date of the Planning Committee. You may attend the Committee to listen to any debate on your application, but most MPAs will not normally allow you to speak or address members of the Committee.

19.3 If you are unhappy about any of the conditions on the permission, you may appeal against them. Details of how to do this should be included with the decision notice.

17.6 Even for a small delph, a decision is not likely to be made in less than two to three months and it may take a lot longer. Be patient and build an appropriate period of time into your planning. Ask the MPA how long they envisage the application taking to go through.

20.1 If you are refused Planning Permission, you may not start development but may appeal against the decision. Again details of how to do this should be included with your decision notice.

18. Dealing with Public Objections to your Application 18.1 When the MPA has received your application, it has to give people the opportunity to comment on or object to your proposal. Notices will be put up on or near the site, noting your application’s submission and inviting comments. Similar advertisements will

20. If you are Refused Planning Permission

21. Conclusion 21.1 Hopefully, this Guide has given you an idea of what is involved in applying for planning permission for stone-slate delphing and production. It has attempted to go into sufficient detail to be useful if you are seriously interested. It may seem daunting but don’t be put off; many inexperienced people have been successful by taking a careful and methodical approach to each step. Countryside Building 17


Technical 21.2 If having read this Guide, you think there is too much involved in applying for planning permission yourself but you do have a good source of fissile stone, consider getting someone else to do the work. There are specialist companies who will do everything, including applying for and obtaining planning permission and doing the quarrying, production and marketing. With this kind of arrangement, you lease the mineral rights to your stone in exchange for a royalty. This minimises the work you have to do but can still provide you with an income from the stone on your land.

(3) Development is permitted by this class subject to the condition that no mineral extracted during the course of the operation shall be moved to any place outside the land from which it is extracted, except to land which is held or occupied with that land and is used for the purposes of agriculture. Interpretation of Part 6 For the purposes of Part 6 ‘the purposes of agriculture’ includes fertilising land used for the purposes of agriculture and the maintenance, improvement or alteration of any buildings, structures or works occupied or used for such purposes on land so used.

21.4 Whichever route you choose, if you succeed it may allow you to develop a new business and source of income. It means you will also be playing a vital role in helping to conserve an important part of the country’s architectural heritage.

Appendix 1 - Agricultural Permitted Development

Appendix 2 - Authorities, Agencies and Organisations to Consult

Mineral extraction under agricultural permitted development rights are defined in England and Wales by the: Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 Part 6 – Agricultural Buildings and Operations Class C Mineral Working for Agricultural Purposes Permitted Development: C. The winning and working on land held or occupied with land used for the purposes of agriculture of any minerals reasonably necessary for agricultural purposes within the agricultural unit of which it forms part. Development not permitted: C1. Development is not permitted by Class C if any excavation would be made within 25 metres of a metalled part of a trunk road or classified road. Condition: C2. Development is permitted by Class C subject to the condition that no mineral extracted during the course of the operation shall be moved to any place outside the land from which it is extracted, except to land which is held or occupied with that land and is used for the purposes of agriculture. Implementation of Part 6 D7. In Class C ‘for the purposes of agriculture’ includes fertilising land used for the purposes of agriculture and the maintenance, improvement or alteration of any buildings, structures or works occupied or used for such purposes on land so used. and; in Scotland by the: Town and Country Planning (General Development) (Scotland) Order 1992

Permitted

Part 6 – Agricultural Buildings and Operations Class 19 - (1) The winning and working on land held or occupied with land used for the purposes of agriculture of any minerals reasonably necessary for agricultural purposes within the agricultural unit of which it forms part. (2) Development is not permitted by this class if any excavation would be made within 25 metres of a metalled portion of a trunk or classified road or a railway line. Countryside Building 18

Authorities and agencies to contact as statutory consultees These are authorities that the MPA are likely to consult about your application and from whom they may seek views. You should consider contacting them before submitting your application so that you can take account of any comments. Your MPA may be willing to give the names and addresses for the local contacts in each of these. For addresses, telephone numbers and web sites see Appendix 5: -

Environment Agency (in England and Wales only) Scottish Environment Protection Agency (in Scotland only) Highways Authority (the Unitary Authority or County Council in your area) English Nature (in England only) Countryside Agency (in England only) Countryside Council for Wales (in Wales only) Scottish Natural Heritage (in Scotland only) County Archaeologist (check with your County Council or Unitary Authority for details of whom to contact) County Landscape Officer (check with your County Council or Unitary Authority for details of whom to contact) English Heritage (in England only) Historic Scotland (in Scotland only) Cadw: Welsh Historic Monuments, Executive Agency (in Wales only) Farming and Rural Conservation Agency (in England and Wales only) National Park Authorities County Wildlife Trust

Authorities, Agencies Organisations from whom to seek support for your application These are organisations that you may wish to contact in order to establish interest in your application. Some may also be statutory consultees to your MPA but still be willing to support your application. For address and telephone numbers see Appendix 5: -

Ancient Monuments Society Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland Civic Trust Scottish Civic Trust National Park Authorities Local Council Building Conservation Officers (in areas where your stone is used) Stone Roofing Association Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings English Heritage Historic Scotland Cadw: Welsh Historic Monuments, Executive Agency National Trust - local building conservation officer or


Technical -

building surveyor National Trust for Scotland Local Diocesan Authority Local Historic Buildings Preservation Trust(s) Council for the Protection of Rural England Council for the Preservation of Rural Wales

When you contact these organisations, ask if they can give you a letter of support for your proposal. If they have a need for the type of stone you intend to supply, ask them if they can quantify this. If this is not possible, ask for something along the lines of : “ [ organisation ] has [ number ] listed buildings roofed in stone slate in its area. For many years, renovation and repair has had to be carried out using materials salvaged from redundant buildings. This inevitably reduces the number of stone roofs and also the available stock of suitable donor buildings has effectively dried up, an alternative source of [ slate type ] stone slates must be found. Under the guidelines of PPG 15*, new stone slates should be used to make up any shortfall when roofing work is carried out and [ organisation ] is fully supportive of this policy. We are therefore keen to see a new source of [ slate type ] stone slates being quarried.” Although not specific to your particular application, this type of letter may be important in convincing the planners, the planning committee and local residents that there is a need for what you are proposing to do. The more of this type of letter you can get, the better. * Planning Policy Guidance Note 15 ‘Planning and the Historic Environment’ is applicable in England. In Wales Quote Welsh Office Circular 61/96 on Planning and the Historic Environment: Historic Buildings and Conservation Areas. This states that ‘Local Planning Authorities should encourage the retention and development of sources of traditional roofing materials. The cannibalising of other buildings for traditional materials should be discouraged…’

Appendix 3 - Detailed Information to Submit with Your Application The precise nature and extent of the information that must be submitted with your application is in part defined in law. However, it will also depend on what your proposal consists of, where it is and the specific requirements of your MPA. Forms: Your application will need to be made on a form obtained from the MPA. This will either be a special form for quarry applications or a shorter, more basic form with an additional minerals questionnaire attached. All forms include standard questions about you, your agent and a description of what your application is for. In addition, they require some or all of the following information as it applies to stone-slate quarries. Plans, Sections and Drawings: Full details on what is required by way of plans, sections and drawings should be included with the application forms you obtain from the MPA. Read these carefully. You will also need to supply several copies, so make sure you know how many the MPA want and supply that number. In most cases, applications involving mineral extraction require the following plans, sections and drawings. All plans should ideally be on an Ordnance Survey base and clearly titled, numbered and dated: 1. Location Plan:- Normally on a scale of 1:50,000, but no larger than 1:10,000.

2. Site Plans:- Normally on a scale not smaller than 1:2500. These may need to show the following information: - The land to which the application relates should be edged in red. The access route from the public road, any landscaping works and any other works to be undertaken must be included within the area; - Any adjoining land under your control not included in the application should also be shown. This should usually be edged in blue; - Any existing buildings, roads, structures, underground services, overhead power or telephone lines and public rights of way on or adjacent to the site; - The positions of any existing walls, hedges and trees within and adjacent to the site; - Existing contours at appropriate intervals, within and normally for a short distance beyond the boundaries of the area of extraction, to illustrate the relationship of the site to the surrounding topography; and, - The position of any watercourses, culverts, drainage ditches or ponds within or bounding the site, showing the direction of flow (where appropriate). 3. Working Plans:- These should be at the same scale as the site plan(s) and include the following information: - any areas of land to be excavated and any areas to be filled. These may be shown by use of a coloured edge or hatching. The boundaries to these areas should allow a sufficient safety margin to protect public rights of way, railway lines, water courses, services, buildings and trees etc. which are to remain undisturbed; - proposals for the storage of topsoil, subsoil and overburden (other than bunds (earth mounds or banks) built to screen the site); - proposals for screening and landscaping the operations, including details of screening bunds and tree planting; - the location of any processing plant or equipment, buildings, offices etc; - the method, direction and phasing of working/landfilling; - the position of any diverted watercourses, lagoons, sources of water, means of drainage and the position of any water discharges going to existing watercourses; - the vehicular access route from the site to the public road. The detailed design of the access junction with the public road (if works to this are required). This should be submitted on a separate plan at a much smaller scale, e.g. 1:100. It should show the width of the road, its means of construction, the turning radius and sightlines in each direction; - if required, details of proposed measures to divert, remove or avoid overhead lines and other services or stop up, remove or divert public rights of way. 4. Restoration, Aftercare and After-use Plans: - These should be at the same scale as the site plan(s) and show how the site will be restored during and/or following the completion of extraction. They should include the following: - the final contours of land (with typical gradients indicated). The contours should normally be extended for a distance beyond the boundaries of the area of extraction to illustrate the relationship of the restored land to the surrounding topography; continued page 22

Countryside Building 19


Construction Group

RDBA

Construction Group The Main aims of the Construction Group are to promote good safe working practices within the industry, to raise the profile of agricultural building manufacture and construction as a skilled industry, to discuss and exchange views and information within the industry, to ensure that clients realise their responsibilities under the Construction Health & Safety Regulations, to promote a Safety & Quality Scheme to the highest standards within the industry and to liaise with the Government and other bodies, including suppliers. Membership is open to all agricultural builders and their suppliers who have the same aims.

It is the responsibility of anyone employing a contractor to ensure that the contractor is competent in health and safety matters, because RDBA Construction Group Members sign up to the above aims you can be confident of their competence.

1. Steel frame 2. Timber frame 3. Concrete frame

Geographical area

Categories

Classification

A. All types B. Cattle buildings C. Sheep buildings D. Vegtable stores E. Vegtable processing

F. Grain stores G. Machinery stores H. Repairs I. Renovations J. Barn conversions

UK. All UK W. West Country SE. South East EA. East Anglia M. Midlands WS. Wales South

M D Anthony Ltd Unit 20, The Dock Business Park, Angek Drove, Ely, Cambs, CB7 4DT Phone 01353 666201 Fax 01353 662999 1 BCDEFGHI EA

Deville & Lear Ltd Mill lane Works, Rosten, Ashbourne, Derbyshire, DE6 2EE Phone 01335 324302 Fax 01335 324568 1, A, UK

A C Bacon Enginerring Ltd Norwich Rd, Hingham, Norwich Norfolk, NR9 4LS Phone01953 850611 Fax 01953 851445 1, B D E F G I, EA

Divine IAC Ltd The Farthings, i Ripplesmore, Sandhurst. Berks GU47 8PE Phone 020 86410071 Fax 01344 777696 1, 2 & 3 A W SE EA M WS WN

Balsham Buildings Ltd 7 High street, Balsham, Cambs, CB1 6DJ Phone 01223 894404, Fax 01223 892818 1 A EA

Peter Dowsland Stone Bank Farm, Rosedale Abbey Pickering, North Yorkshire, YO18 8RB Phone & fax 01751 417887 1 BCDEFGHI UK

Browns of Wem Ltd Four Lane Ends, Wem Shropshire, SY4 5UQ phone 01939 232382 Fax 01939 234032 1 2, A B C D E F G H I, UK Curtis Engineering Ltd Marston Trading Estate, Frome Somerset, BA11 4BH Phone 01373 462126 Fax 01373 451981 1 BCDEFGHI W Countryside Building 20

Duraframe Structures Ltd 84 Mile Barn Road, Wrexham, LL13 9JY Phone 01978 356164 Fax 01978 362499 1&3 A UK G & T Evans Dulas Mill, Ffordd Mochdre Newtown, Powys, SY16 4JD Phone 01686 622100 Fax 01686 622220 1&2 BCDEFGHI UK

WN. Wales North NW. North West NE. North East SL. Scotland Lowlands SH. Scotland Highlands

Farmplus Constructions Ltd Shay Lane, Longridge Preston, PR3 3BT Phone 01772 785252 Fax 01772 782944 2 BCG UK Farmstead Engineering Acorn Farm, Nether Whitacre, Coleshill Birmingham, West Midlands, B46 2DT Phone 01675 481314 Fax 01675 481314 1, 2, 3, A B C D E F G H M D A Green & Sons Ltd Whaplode, Spalding, Lincs, PE12 6TKL Phone 01406 370585 Fax 01406 370766 1 BCDEFGHI EA & M A J Griffiths Greenacre, Suckley, Worcs, WR6 5EH Phone 01886 884294 Fax 01886 884294 1 BCDEFGHI M Knapp Farm Buildings QuarryKnowe, Inchture Perthshire, PH14 9SW Phone 01828 686265 Fax 01828 686265 2 A SL & SH

Continued on next page


RDBA

Construction Group

Construction Group Members Ernest Leng & Son Friars Hill Farm, Friars Hill, Sinnington York, YO62 6SL Phone 01751 431774 Fax 01751 431774 1 BCDEFGHI NE A J Lowther & Son Ltd The Factory, Whitchurch, Ross On Wye, Herefordshire, HR6 6DF Phone 01600 890482 Fax 01600890930 1, A, W SE M WS S A Mogg Fox Pits Farm, Blazie Lane, HuntEnd, Redditch, Worcs B96 6QA Phone 01527 892570 Fax 01527 892712 1, B C F G, M Phillips Contractors 4 Westside, Tillington, Petworth Surrey, GU28 9AL Phone 01798 343392 Fax 01798 342899 1 2, A, W SE EA M

Melvin Rose Engineering Ltd Paradise Farm, Bagber Sturminster Newton, Dorset, DT10 2HB Phone 01258 472866 FAX 01258 472866 1, A, W Shufflebottom Ltd Cross Hands Business Park, Cross Hands, Carmarthenshire, SA14 6RS Phone 01269 831831 Fax 01269 831031 1, A, UK Simpson & Allinson Ltd Harmire Enterprise Park, Barnard Castle, Co Durham, DL12 8EH Phone 01833 690379 Fax 01833 690040 1 B C D E F G H I, NW NE SL Supercraft Structures Ltd Shobden Airfield, Shobden, Nr Leominster, Herefordshire, HR6 9NR Phone: 01568 708456 Fax: 01568 708212 1 A UK

R E Buildings Ltd Sutcliffe Construction Ltd Spout House, Bay Horse Goal Farm, Hellifield, Skipton Lancaster, Lancs, LA2 9DE Phone 01524 792247 Fax 01524 791890 North Yorkshire, BD23 4JR 1 ABCDEFGH UK Phone 01729 850817 Fax 01729 850323 1, BCDFG NW & NE William Ramsay (Engineers) Tucket Farm Services Townfoot, Elsrickle, By Biggar 15 Schorne Lane, North Marston, Lanarkshire, ML12 6QZ Buckingham, MK18 3PJ Phone 01899 810200 Fax01899 810301 1 A, NW NE SL SH Phone 01296 670646 Fax 01296 670606 1, A SE Red Alce Steelwork Barcombe, Lewis, J Wareing & Son Ltd East Sussex, BN8 5ED Wrea Green, Preston Phone 01273 400780 Fax 01273 400744 Lancashire, PR4 2NB 1 BCDEFGH SE Phone 01772 682159 Fax 01772 671071 1 2, B C D E F G H, UK Redwing Structures (Marlow) Ltd 1 The Square, Church Road Lane End, Bucks, HP14 3JE Associate Members Phone01494 880857 1, A, SE EA M ADAS Redwing Structures Ltd Mamhead Castle, Mamhead Barons Keep, The Mount, Highclere Exeter, EX6 8HD Newbury, Berks. RE20 9PS Phone 01626 779635 Fax Phone01635 255299 Fax 01635 255302 A full design and consultancy service 1 A SE S Robinson & Sons (Engineers) Ltd Wincanton Cls, Ascot Drive Ind Estate Derby, Derbyshire, DE24 8NJ Phone 01332 574711Fax 01332 861401 1. ABCDEFGH UK Melvin Rose Engineering Ltd Paradise Farm, Bagber Sturminster Newton, Dorset, DT10 2HB Phone 01258 472866 FAX 01258 472866 1, A, W

Brett Martin Roofing Products Ltd Langley Road, Burscough Ind Estate Burscough, Lancs, L40 8JB Phone01704 895345 FAX 01704 894229 Supplier of rooflights Briarwood Products Ltd Unit 10, Weston Europark, Winterstoke Rd, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 3YT Phone 01934 641446 Fax 01934 641214 Fibre cement sheets & fittings supplier

Ellard Ltd Dallimore Road, Roundthorn Ind Est Wythenshawe, Manchester, M23 9NX Phone 0161 9454561Fax 0161 9454566 Manufacture sliding door gear Eternit (UK) Ltd Meldreth, Nr Royston, Herts, SG8 5RL Phone 01763 260421 Fax 01763 262531 Fibre cement sheets & fittings manufacturer Fibre Cement Manufacturers Association Ltd ATSS House, Station Road East, Stowmarket, Suffolk, IP14 1RQ Phone 01449 676053 Fax 01449 770028 Association of fibre cement manufacturers Filon Products Ltd Aldridge Rd, Streetly, Sutton Coldfield, West Midlands, B74 2DZ Phone 0121 3530814 fax 0121 352 0886 Supplier of rooflights Health and Safety Executive The Pearson Building, 55 Upper Parliament street, Nottingham, NG1 6AU Phone 0115 971 2400 Fax 0115 971 2802 Contact David Gould Milbury Systems Ltd The Long Barn, Clevedon Road Tickenham, Bristol, Avon, BS21 6RY Phone 01275 857799, Fax 01275 853123 Pre-stressed concrete, silos, walling, etc. MJC Lower Stones, Bar Lane, Rippondon, Sowerby Bridge, W Yorkshire, HX6 4EY Phone & Fax 01422 825992 Health and Safety Consultant Polypipe Civils Ltd Bishop Meadow Road, Loughborough, LE11 5RE Phone 01509 615100 Fax 01509 236726 Ducting, drainage and environmental systems Rombull UK Ltd Unit 3, Independant Business Park, Mill Rd Stokenchurch, Buckinghamshire, HP14 3TP Phone 01494 485558 Fax 01494 485585 Safety net manufacturers United Roofing Products Ltd 1 Scotts Yard, Haslingfield, Cambridge, CB3 7NB Phone 01223 871135 Fax 01223 874443 Suppliers of Composite and built up metal systems, slates and tiles.

Countryside Building 21


Technical continued from page 19 - the replacement depths of soils and their sources; - proposals for the drainage of the land, if known, including the position of any field drains, ditches and watercourses; - the position of existing trees, shrubs and hedges to be retained on site following the completion of extraction and details of trees etc. to be planted. 5. Sections and Profiles: - These should include the following: - representative sections showing existing and final restoration surface levels, and the maximum depth of excavation in areas of extraction; - representative sections which differentiate between topsoil, subsoil overburden, the stone to be extracted and any interbedded waste materials which need to be removed, the underlying geology and if necessary the position of the water table. This should include a description of characteristics and thickness of each. 6. Plans for Buildings Plant and Equipment: - Although small stoneslate quarries are unlikely to require substantial buildings, plant and equipment, detailed plans of any these must be included. These should be at a scale of 1:100 and include ground plans, elevations, and the type and colour of external materials to be used on any new buildings. 7. Other Information you may be asked to provide details of any existing Planning Permissions for the site or any previous Planning Permissions which have been granted. If so, give reference numbers, details and dates. 8. Details of anyone else who is an owner or who has an interest in the land or mineral rights 9. Geological, geo-technical and hydrological information, including details of: - the geology; - the total quantity of saleable material to be extracted (in metric tonnes); - the type of products to be produced - it may be that you intend to produce more than just stone slate in which case you should state what other products there will be; - the area of excavation (in hectares); - the duration of operations, including start and end dates (if extraction is not going to be continuous, state this); - the end use of the site; - the geographical area within which the extracted material will be used; - the wastes arising, including quantities; - the proportion of wastes to be retained on site; - the depth of the workings; - details of the position of the local water table; - the quantities of top soil, sub-soil and other overburden that are to be excavated; Countryside Building 22

- the agricultural land classification of the site. 10. Details of any processing to be undertaken on and off the site, including details of the type and quantities of material to be processed, the working capacity of the plant, annual figures for the production of processed products, and the type, quantity and methods of disposal of any processed wastes (such as water). 11. Details of any ancillary buildings, plant or other structures to be erected on the site in association with the development. If you intend to process your excavated material on site, you will almost certainly require some kind of building within which to cut, dress, store and pallet finished slates. You may also need an office and additional workshop space. If you intend to use an existing building, this should be included in your application. If the building is remote from the quarry, you may need to make a separate application for its use. 12. Transport and Access Arrangements: You will need to include details of the access to the site, the method of transporting slates and any other products or materials from the site and the number, size of vehicles and the frequency of journeys. The MPA must be satisfied that the access proposed, whether new or existing, is adequate for the purpose and that junctions with the public road are safe. The MPA will also need to assess whether the local public road network is capable of handling the volumes of traffic and the size of vehicles involved. Fissile rock suitable for stone-slate production is often found in rural areas where the road network comprises small lanes and single track roads. If this is the case in your area, the MPA must be sure that the size of vehicles and volume of traffic does not create unacceptable danger, disturbance or damage to the roads. 14. The Environmental Effects of your Proposal: The MPA will need to assess the environmental affects of your proposal. Large parts of the country are covered by statutory designated landscape and nature conservation areas, archaeological sites, Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas. Public rights of way and Tree Preservation Orders may also be important considerations. More generally, the effect of noise, dust, traffic movements, hours of working, visual considerations, and the impact on any nearby water courses and land stability may also be relevant. These are concerns even in areas not covered by statutory designations. In practice, most of these are unlikely to be major issues for very small stone-slate quarries, but the MPA will still have to assess them and you will need to provide all the necessary information. So when assessing a site, you should investigate any statutory designations in the area and potential environmental problems. Such matters are worth raising in initial pre-application discussions: this will demonstrate that you take such issues seriously and want the MPA’s advice on them. In some cases, these issues may need to be considered by submitting an Environmental Statement, although this is unusual for very small quarries.

Appendix 4 - Environmental Assessment In some areas, MPA planning policies will only permit proposals for mineral workings if the likely environmental impact is acceptable regarding local communities, agriculture, water supplies, landscape, topography, wildlife, geology, the built environment, rights of way, recreation, visual effect and transport. Although formidable, this list does not require special pleading on behalf of stone-slate production. Applications to develop a quarry must usually be accompanied by an Environmental Assessment (EA) to ensure that the likely effects on the environment are fully understood and taken into account, although one may not be required for a small stone-slate delph. The full details are set out in the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (SI 1999 No. 293) and the Town and Country


Technical Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 1999 (SSI 1999 No. 1) - (available from the HMSO). These implement European Council Directives 85/337/EEC and 97/11/EC. General guidance on preparing environmental statements can be found in the HMSO publication “Preparation of Environmental Statements for Planning Projects that require Environmental Impact Assessment: A Good Practice Guide” [ISBN 0-11-753207-X]. It should be read in conjunction with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (SI 1999 No. 293) and the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 1999 (SSI 1999 No. 1), since the guidance predates these revised requirements. The regulations apply to two separate lists of projects: Schedule 1, for which an EA is required in every case, and Schedule 2 for which an EA is required only if the particular project is judged likely to give rise to significant environmental effects. The quarrying of stone slates falls within Schedule 2. For Schedule 2, the significance of a development will essentially be assessed on the following criteria; (i) whether the project is of more than local significance, principally in terms of physical scale; (ii) whether the project is intended for a particularly sensitive location, for example, a national park or a site of special scientific interest (SSSI), and for that reason may have significant effects on the area’s environment even though the project is not on a major scale; (iii) whether the project is thought likely to give rise to particularly complex or adverse effects, for example, in terms of the discharge of pollutants. For a stone-slate quarry, criteria 1 and 3 are unlikely to be significant but criterion 2 may well apply, given the location of many old quarries. For Schedule 2 projects in the extractive industry, specific reference is made to “extracting minerals ... such as marble”. These will require an EA if they are likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue of factors such as their nature, size or location. If you do need to undertake an Environmental Assessment, this will need to be presented in the form of an Environmental Statement. It must include a description of the likely effects (direct and indirect) on the development’s environment, explained by reference to its possible impact on human beings, flora, fauna, soil, water, air, climate, the landscape, the inter-action between any of the foregoing, material assets and the cultural heritage. Recent changes in the law mean that the MPA must now screen or assess your application on the need for an EA. Even if it is only a small-scale proposal, they may require you to submit an EA. If you are required to do so, then you are likely to have to employ a specialist consultant to undertake this for you. If you do not agree with the MPA that an EA should be submitted, you may apply to the Secretary of State for a direction to consider the matter. Whether or not you think you are likely to need an EA, you should try to establish at an early stage, in your pre-application discussions with the MPA, whether they are likely to require one. The final part of this series will be published in the next issue of Countryside building.

Dore Abbey Delve Offers Lifeline to Rural Economy On Thursday 18 April, Sir Neil Cossons, Chairman of English Heritage, visited Dore Abbey in Herefordshire to support the resurgence of traditional British stone slate production and local ancient skills in an area still recovering from Foot and Mouth. An English Heritage grant of £278,100 to save Dore Abbey, one of Europe’s most ancient and magnificent ecclesiastical buildings, now a village parish church, has enabled a new local stone slate enterprise that will provide over 17,000 stone slates for repairs to the chancel and transept roof and expand to help other historic buildings in the area. The grant offer covers 80% of repair costs to the Abbey and brings the total amount given by English Heritage to £361,041. Sir Neil Cossons said: “We are delighted to be supporting this project with both grant aid and specialist advice. It is essential that buildings such as this internationally renowned Grade 1 listed church, which still encompasses the original 12th century Cistercian monastery, are repaired using high quality local materials that match those of the originals. The use of natural stone from local delves (small quarries) is a vital part of the character of our towns, villages and farmsteads. We have long championed the preservation of stone roofing - one of the greatest traditional crafts. Local people are being trained in traditional techniques that date back hundreds of years, to extract and dress the stones for roofing. This enterprise provides alternative employment for a rural community rocked by the repercussions of Foot and Mouth. Following restoration of the Abbey, many hundreds of other buildings in Herefordshire that need re-roofing and repairing with traditional stone will also benefit. It is a wonderful example of how building conservation and local smallscale industry can be a positive force for local development. “The future of Dore Abbey was in jeopardy. The costs of urgently needed re-roofing works were well beyond the reach of this small but determined community. Without these repairs this splendid historic building, that has seen 850 years of uninterrupted worship, could close and fall into ruin. It is testament to the organisation and committed fundraising of local people that we have been able to support this excellent scheme. We applaud the hard work and dedication of The Friends of Dore Abbey and the Parish of Abbey Dore and the outstanding success of the Herefordshire Stone Tile Project and the support it has received from Herefordshire District Council, local farmers and volunteers.” It was during previous English Heritage funded repair work to the Abbey that the extent of roof damage was discovered. Roof tiles crumbled to the touch and it was estimated that only a third of tiles covering the huge 900m2 roof could be re-used. Stonework on parapets was leaking, coping and facings were badly decayed and a 13th century sacristy wall needed stabilising. Repairs to secure the fabric of the church are now under way and further work on the chancel, ambulatory range, transept and aisles and urgent masonry repairs to the monastic ruins will follow. Following support from local farmers and landowners, two new conservation quarries or delves have been re-opened in Coed Major and Grigland near the Welsh border. Quarrying for stone slates or tiles has always been a small-scale industry with extremely low visual and environmental impact. Each village would traditionally lift stone by hand from its own local delves. The threat to Britain’s rich heritage of stone roofing was challenged by English Heritage’s Our Roofs of England campaign launched in 1997. The campaign has already seen the re-opening of a number of conservation quarries and the best supply of stone slates available for 50 years. I find this particularly heartening because in the past English Heritage have tended to ignore local materials, particularly in regard to roofs, having the fixed idea that all slate used in the UK was of Welsh origin Countryside Building 23


Technical and ignoring the many different local slating traditions. This is particularly noticeable in the West Country where on large listed buildings, with local slate quarries that were in production within 10 miles of the site at the time of the original construction, English Heritage still insisted that a dark Welsh slate should be used rather than the light gray indigenous slate.

Bats and Construction: Ignorance is no defence ” Construction professionals must always assume bats are present and act accordingly, or face prosecution - so says a new report published by the RICS Foundation. The paper, written by Peter Fenn, from the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology (UMIST), investigates the problems caused to the construction industry in the UK by bats. He concludes that construction professionals are putting themselves in danger of prosecution by not checking for bats before work commences. There are several species of bat in the UK, some of which are extremely rare, while the most common species have been estimated to number in the millions. Because bats roost in small spaces, including bridge soffits and lofts, there is great potential for construction work to cause damage to their habitats. Several pieces of legislation, outlined by Fenn in his report, protect bats and their roosts, adding the possibility of prosecution to the potential for causing ecological damage. The research includes a survey of construction professionals, which reveals that, whilst 92% of respondents were aware that bats are protected by law, in general, “awareness of bat-related issues is low within the construction industry.” Fenn argues that this must change if both bats and the construction industry are to be protected, concluding that, “ignorance is no defence.” He acknowledges that, in such circumstances, the ability to detect bat presence becomes crucial, and tests a number of detection techniques, suggesting several improvements. Amy Coyte, Joint Chief Executive of the Bat Conservation Trust, was quick to offer her support for the paper. “We are pleased to see bats featured in the Foundation’s research, and encouraged by results indicating that 92% of questionnaire respondents know that bats are protected. Our own evidence bears this out, and most of our callers are positive about bats and want to help conserve them. Bats found roosting in buildings are often no longer considered a problem, but an asset. We are keen to work with the construction industry and can provide guidance and leaflets of relevance to the profession.” Stephen Brown, the Foundation’s Director of Research, has also emphasised the importance of the research. “Our built environment is becoming increasingly important in maintaining biodiversity. This research is another step towards enhancing and protecting this trend – and protecting the construction industry in the process”

The full report, “An investigation of the issues raised for the construction industry in the UK by bats” is available to download at:- www.rics-foundation.org/pdf/paperseries4-11.pdf

material. Retailers and processors have been making greater profits from raw materials than the producers over recent years. This is a strange phenomenon, one which must be understood to be tackled. There are two obvious uses for this extra production and both have important development needs:· ·

Building and construction - Sawn timber, Engineered wood Bio-Energy - Variable Quality timber,

The UK is well behind other countries in the use of timber for structures so the potential is enormous. Even to supply that proportionately small demand, 80% is imported. This is partly because our timber is faster growing, resulting in lower permissible stresses in bending and shear. However the section properties of a given size are the same and compressive stresses are rarely a problem therefore if we can modify the weakness in a piece of timber we can make poorer quality timber good enough. This is basically the work of Innovative Timber Engineering in the Countryside (InTeC), a collaboration of producers, processors and researchers to find solutions. Representatives of the group will show what can be done. An important event in this arena is the funding by Scottish Enterprise of a centre of excellence at a Scottish University. This is aimed at producing graduates who feel at home designing in timber. The faculty will liase with the InTeC initiatives to ensure the new graduates are fully informed of the most recent industry developments. The other potential large market is wood for fuel. This use is as old as time itself but how do we match modern day efficiencies and compete with the oil and gas? It is about calorific values, subsidies, bundlers and so on but the transport is key in the UK. There is no point in using more fuel, thus energy, to deliver the timber than the timber could be used to produce. It is all a balance of enough, dispersed, small power producing plants to reduce transport and about pelletisers to permit unmanned feeds to boilers. These aspects will be discussed in detail to show the way towards developing the biggest market that timber can ever hope to supply. This use is the ultimate sustainable solution and the normal qualities demanded by the traditional markets are not critical. To complete the day there will be an update on the transport issues as they affect the industry. Much work is being done at present with issues such as road pavement failures, red diesel use, 60 tonne vehicles, gravel roads for public roads, forestry road specialist vehicles etc. To register advance interest please contact

Modern Markets for UK Softwood One Day Symposium on 5th September 2002 Over the next 10 years the production of harvested softwood from plantation timber the Scotland will double in volume: GB production will increase by 50%. The traditional markets of pulp, chips and pallets are saturated so the increase in production will need new markets. Further it is desirable that these markets allow significant value to be added to the raw Countryside Building 24

Reader Enquiry 19


Reader Enquiry 30

Reader Enquiry 31

Reader Enquiry 29 Reader Enquiry 32

Countryside Building 25


Reader Enquiry 33

Reader Enquiry 36

Reader Enquiry 34

Countryside Building 26

Reader Enquiry 37

Reader Enquiry 35

Reader Enquiry 38

Reader Enquiry 39


Technical Criteria are therefore required for selecting which buildings should be Sustainability in conserved, and how we should treat different buildings. Currently no standard criteria exist. For example, in Wales statutory agencies make rural their decisions about historic buildings according to at least three different sets of criteria: statutory legislation for Listed Buildings, the development: therequirements of the Tyr Gofal (agri-environment) scheme, and conditions imposed by the Welsh Tourist Board (when granting role of historicsubsidies for conversion to tourist facilities). If sustainability is to be defined not merely in technical and economic building terms but also in social and cultural terms it is evident that for building conservation to engender sustainable rural development these criteria conservation.

By Dr. Judi Loach of the Welsh school of Architecture This is a topical issue, in the light of forthcoming policy changes, due to changes in CAP, the move from MAF to DEFRA, and so on. This article is concerned with extracting historic building fabric from the categories and contexts in which it is usually looked at, and bringing it into the specific context of rural development. Reusing existing buildings is more sustainable than new build on several levels: 1)

Technical:

a) re-use (/recycling) of materials b) less energy used, on & off site c) reduces waste produced 2) Economic: Currently conservation is more economic than new build in real cost terms, but not necessarily in current price terms, due to artificial distortions, notably the differential imposition of VAT (which mitigates against sustainable practices by favouring the use of new build over conservation). 3)

Social & cultural:

These will actually decide more than either of the preceding factors whether the project works in reality. Therefore historic building conservation should become an option always considered within sustainable development. Within the specific context of rural development, which buildings should be conserved, for what purposes should they be used, and, when this entails conversion, how can this best be effected? In the context of rural development “historic buildings” means vernacular architecture, cottages and farm buildings rather than country houses. Perhaps ‘traditional building’ is a more helpful term than ‘historic building’ here. Not only does it convey a less elitest sense of what is being defined here; it also suggests a certain continuity from past to present, since true tradition is not separated from the present but a living means of linking past with present. We are currently seeing a higher priority being accorded to such hitherto overlooked buildings. This is reflected in current policies; for example, the National Trust (which has always owned many such buildings, on its estates) has recently moved from opening additional stately homes to the public and instead has opened up terraced or semi-detached houses. This is because these buildings are now appreciated as examples of the essential fabric of working people’s lives; buildings such as cottages and barns are viewed today as the major surviving evidence for the life of rural communities. Evidently not every historic building can, or indeed should, be conserved. We need to identify key buildings, which deserve to be conserved in as near as possible their original state, if possible retaining their original function. A more flexible approach can then be taken towards lesser buildings, which might be converted to radically different functions. Other buildings, not deemed worth necessarily conserving per se should be carefully dismantled so that their materials are reclaimed and recycled.

will need to take account of social and cultural factors.

Deciding what is a traditional building, and what is locally specific depends on studying local building stock, and then on defining local building types and their particular characteristics. Only after doing this can one identify the buildings, and features within them, which should be prioritised for conservation. Standard guidelines are needed in order to identify specific buildings and features. [*NADFAS style check sheet?]. Architectural character needs to be appreciated as an economic asset, particularly in rural areas. Tourists are drawn to an area which is different from others, and especially from the norm. This depends largely upon the existing buildings there retaining their local specificity, and upon new development added being designed so as to increase the place’s sense of identity. Whilst pastiche repetition of the traditional buildings there is not advocated, designers should be encouraged to incorporate principles inherent in the local vernacular. The architecture of any given place should reflect the specificity of both that place and the time of its own creation. A fruitful example here is that of Italian Rationalism, the stream of Modernism dominant in North Italy from the late 1920s through to at least the 1960s. It was precisely as Functionalists, that the Italian Rationalists believed Modernist architects should study the vernacular building tradition in their own region, because it had evolved in direct response to local physical conditions, notably those of climate and indigenous materials. Consequently they adopted principles from their own (Lombard) vernacular tradition which enabled them, for instance, to achieve advanced comfort conditions without recourse to artificial ventilation (by designing in cross draughts, together with oversailing roofs for shading, and wide loggias with external walls in waffle brick construction serving as mediating zones). The economic policies imposed in the late 1930s prevented importation of construction materials, thereby forcing these architects to execute their strictly Modernist designs exclusively in locally available materials, notably brick, now largely used, however, within the context of concrete frame structures. The results were unmistakably of their time, but simultaneously specific to their place. The ubiquitous treatment of buildings in their conversion to new uses should be resisted, not only in order to preserve local identity but also because vernacular architecture embodies a pragmatic response to the environmental conditions specific to its locality. Such buildings (at least the small minority of them which have proved adequately - even exceptionally - well adapted to survive until our own time) therefore fit into their specific contexts functionally, rather than just aesthetically. Yet the aesthetic aspect is important in its own right. Discerning tourists object to what has aptly been called the “Laura Ashleyisation” of traditional buildings, their conversion to a ubiquitous “rural style” regardless of whether they stand in the stone uplands of central Wales, the timber frame belt of the West Midlands or the brick dependent fens of East Anglia. Ian Constantinides, director of the conservation construction company St. Blaise, recounts the horror story of his walk across Wales, visiting six of the traditional houses recorded by J.T. Smith only a couple of decades earlier; although all six are still standing, only two are now recognisable, the other four having been “restored” to non-native models. Sustainable rural development must take account, and advantage, of appropriate tourism, that which will do least damage to the rural Countryside Building 27


Technical environment whilst most helping the sustainability of rural communities and their economies. This will inevitably mean targeting the upper end of the market, as such tourists are able and willing to spend more on accommodation and eating out, and to buy groceries etc. locally, thus contributing more to the local economy. This means focusing on cultural tourism and rural recreation; in both cases customers appreciate, even demand, local specificity. Cultural tourism has lower negative impact than mass tourism, due to the lower quantity of visitors, yet generates greater income. It is therefore more sustainable. Examples in Wales include the industrial archaeology trail currently being set up across South Wales, from the newly designated World Heritage Site at Blaenafon; this will involve restoring certain key buildings as closely as possible to their original state, and conserving others so as to convert them to facilities supporting the trail, such as visitors centres. Likewise church trails have also been proposed, following long established pilgrimage routes, with the hope that this would attract funding towards the conservation and maintenance of buildings concerned. Further trails could be arranged linking sites where local crafts are practised, including agricultural ones, notably food making; in this latter case demonstration of the manufacturing process, tastings and sale of the products can be linked with cafe or restaurant facilities and even accommodation. To this end a variety of lesser vernacular buildings could be conserved, converted and extended as appropriate. The possibility of combining a variety of such cultural activities is more likely to attract tourists, and to keep them in the area for longer. One example of a successful initiative doing this was launched in the French Alps (Savoy) at the time of the Albertville Winter Olympics, and initially benefited from considerable EU funding, since it aimed to create summer employment in this region economically reliant on winter sports, and thus marked by seasonal unemployment. Now directed by FACIM (the Foundation for Cultural Activity in the Mountain Internationally) and with input from the Ministry of Culture, this combines visits to fortresses and baroque chapels, with demonstrations of local crafts and agricultural production. The initial funding underwrote the conservation of key buildings and extensive training of those local inhabitants who present them to visitors. The project’s success has led to the programme expanding year by year, with increasing space being allocated to explaining the way in which the alpine landscape has generated a particular agricultural economy, and in turn a certain social life and cultural heritage. As more time is progressively given to presenting agricultural practices and related crafts (at village forges, woodworking and papermaking workshops, as well as in farms and vineyards themselves) vernacular buildings are inevitably playing a larger part; this has led to the restoration of such buildings, and notably to that of the communal ovens and lavoirs (laundries) typical of these villages. Some tours are now arranged to individual villages specifically in order to look at the vernacular architecture of the region - buildings made of pise (unbaked earth) in one village, and of stone and shingles in another. Given contemporary expectations of comfort, rural recreation is an upmarket activity in Great Britain, due to the demands imposed by the climate, namely high performance warm and waterproof clothing, which is far from inexpensive. In other words, the majority of those undertaking walking or cycling holidays in Britain can afford a high outlay on equipment. Moreover walkers/cyclists cannot carry more than a day’s supplies on them, and therefore are obliged to use local shops, etc. By contrast the lower end of the tourist market - notably campers and caravanners - tends to carry in groceries from superstores outside, thus bringing little if any benefit to the local economy. Furthermore walkers and cyclists are also more likely to use public transport, thereby contributing to its economic viability, whilst introducing less private vehicles into an area where road provision is often already inadequate. This importance of local specificity applies to all buildings. It is no use just applying such policies to those buildings converted to specifically tourist uses (such as B&B). It must include entire villages and landscapes. It thus includes business premises and housing. Forthcoming policy changes (at European level due to changes in Countryside Building 28

CAP, and at national level due to the shift from MAF to DEFRA) seem likely to encourage a more wholistic approach towards rural economies, by altering where subsidies are directed. Consequently there is a need to develop mechanisms for maintaining affordable housing for local people. This is essential not only on social but also economic grounds, in order to retain local workforce. Strategies developed to this end need to include the retention of traditional building stock for this market, and to do so in places appropriate for those unable to afford private transport, in other words in villages, along public transport network. An Irish example worth looking into is provided by the Mourne Heritage Trust; here vernacular buildings have been converted to fulfil such local housing needs, financial viability and targeted users being assured long term through the mechanism of local, community ownership of the properties. Traditional, or vernacular, architecture derives its local character to its use of local materials, such as stone, timber, slate, bricks and tiles. The use of such materials is inherently sustainable, for several reasons: First, such materials are intrinsically sustainable, because they have lower embodied energy than more processed materials. Second, using locally sourced materials minimises usage of freight transport, a matter of particular concern in areas - including most rural ones - where roads have not been designed for, and are not suited to, heavy freight. Third, the sustainability of local economies depends upon retaining the moneys spent there within that area, rather than spending it outside. Policies promoting such sustainability must therefore include minimising importation of goods from outside the area. Given their relatively high cost, building materials must be included in this. When viewed in such wholistic terms, local production of materials becomes the preferred option even when economies of scale offer lower prices; for local, smaller scale production outweighs these immediately apparent advantages in terms of real costs. The use of such local materials can and should lead to the development of a locally based body of skills in the building crafts specific to these materials, and thus to the place. The availability of such skills will in turn underwrite both ongoing maintenance of existing buildings and construction of new ones within a truly vernacular tradition, that is respecting principles underlying that tradition rather than pastiche copying of motifs culled from it. This will in turn ensure ongoing local employment, thus helping to make the local economy sustainable, thereby regenerating communities. The National Trust is currently adopting such policies on certain of its estates. DEFRA policies are likely to be oriented in such, more wholistic directions. Traditional building materials are mainly organic, and therefore sustainable per se. The buildings constructed from them need to be conserved using organic materials, because these are permeable, in order to avoid creating new problems. Ideally these should be locally sourced, for the reasons already indicated. Nevertheless where traditional building products cannot be used (due to difficulty of obtaining them, finding skilled craftsmen to use them, etc.), use of inorganic alternatives can be avoided by employing industrially produced, organic equivalents, many of which have been recently developed for the contemporary, sustainable market. Industrially produced, organic materials include organic paints and stains; gypsum-free alternatives, to plasters, such as clay-sand skim coats (NB Tierrafino range); gypsum-free alternatives to plasterboard for nonloadbearing partitions, such as clay building boards (made from unbaked clay, reed and hessian) and unbaked clay bricks (either of compressed clay or clay/straw mix); insulation materials such as processed flax or wool, or recycled cellulose (newspaper); flooring in traditional cork or a new jute and linseed oil product. Like the traditional materials for which they can be used as substitutes, they tend to have high mass, and therefore be energy efficient and form effective acoustic barriers. The best one-stop source of information for all such products is probably Construction Resources in London, which acts effectively as an ecologically minded version of the Building Centre, in other words a


Technical warehouse and display centre bringing together relevant products from a wide range of companies. The displays mix materials samples with sample constructions, demonstrating how and where products can be used, where possible building these into the fabric of the warehouse building, so as to provide live demonstrations. These are supplemented by advice counters staffed by specialists, and spaces designated for training and demonstration, through both seminars and hands-on courses. Further support is available through a computer database and specialist software. Building products, printed literature, videos and computer software are all sold on site. There are certain advantages in using such products instead of traditional ones, at least for those lacking experience in using traditional equivalents. First they have usually been produced in accordance with current BS standards, and often carry agrement certificates. Second, the companies producing them tend to provide free advice on how to use them. Although using such products will obviously neither help the local economy, nor alleviate problems arising from freight transport, widespread usage of them can eventually lead to their production locally. For instance, wool processed for use in insulation initially had to be imported from Germany; subsequently the demand generated for this product led to its processing in Britain, at Penrith, thus avoiding the need for its importation, and recently a pilot project has been set up for producing it in mid Wales. Since traditional construction uses organic materials it creates buildings which are permeable, breathing envelopes, reliant upon air movement for moisture transfer. By contrast, contemporary construction creates quasi hermetically sealed envelopes. It is essential to understand that these two models do not, and cannot, mix. A traditional stone barn is an example of the permeable model. The combination of Weathershield plus double glazing plus high insulation plus a DPC and/or DPM produces the hermetic model. Applying the features of the hermetic model to a building on the permeable model will not cure your problems in the latter, for instance get rid of its damp. On the contrary, whilst applying waterproof membranes to floor and external wall will prevent external moisture from entering, these measures will equally prevent internal moisture from escaping, as may the insulation added; meanwhile the introduction of double glazing will cut out the air movement on which moisture transfer traditionally depended. Consequently after undertaking such works the damp previously due to water ingress is simply replaced by damp from condensation, so that there is no net improvement; within a few months of the works being completed internal plasterwork and paintwork displays visible signs of deterioration. Instead what is needed is an approach which, recognising the permeable nature of the building envelope, works with this rather than against it. A permeable, breathable rainscreen (in the form of either traditional or industrially produced organic materials, as described above) should therefore be applied to the external surface of walls, and a partly permeable membrane to the inner surface; in such a low vapour resistant construction a good rule of thumb is to use an internal membrane with five times the resistance of the outer membrane. Careful detailing will also contribute to avoidance of interstitial condensation.

wearing outdoor clothing; although modern technology can enable the changes in humidity, temperature and air movement entailed, forcing such changes through may be far from sustainable. It is worth asking oneself what a given building can reasonably be expected to support, whether a building designed to meet animals’ comfort standards should be expected to meet those of officeworkers. Modern expectations of comfort standards imply degrees of servicing so high that they are rarely sustainable in ecological terms. We cannot reasonably expect buildings to shoulder all the burden here, and must be prepared to change lifestyles accordingly, for instance by wearing an extra layer of clothing whilst in sedentary work. If the consumer wants to have a sustainable building they should face the obligation of making sustainable choices about their own lifestyle. Some buildings can be conserved with retention of original use but others will require conversion to new uses, such as B1. Maintaining original use is to be preferred not only for the reasons cited above but also because this is likely to retain more of the material fabric and through it the building’s social and cultural associations. In Wales the Tyr Gofal (agri-environment) scheme includes a mechanism for conserving farm buildings whilst maintaining their agricultural use. This consists of making grants towards capital works on traditional farm buildings in agricultural use, these grants being available on a match funding basis, up to a maximum of £10,000 per farm; the complementary advisory service is provided by CADW, Welsh Historic Buildings. Other developments pioneered specifically for sustainable market are also appropriate for developments in rural areas Energy generation from natural forces (solar, wind), biomass avoids dependence upon mains services, which in rural areas are often situated at a distance from the property concerned. Sustainable rural development will entail adopting an approach towards buildings which goes deeper than facadism. This may entail higher capital costs but it will result in lower revenue costs and higher added value, such as identity, employment, revival of practical craft

Unfortunately parallel attempts at improving the property are liable to further contribute to its deterioration. For it is likely that such attempts at improving internal comfort conditions will also include raising the median air temperature. The additional heat introduced will then serve to release moisture inherent in the building fabric, thus increasing rather than reducing internal humidity, particularly if the building is now effectively sealed, thus preventing egress of such moisture. Such simultaneous increase in humidity and heat is most likely to manifest itself in the form of mould. In converting traditional buildings it is therefore advisable to try and find new uses which are comparable with the old ones in comfort terms in terms of heating levels and human activity. One should try, for instance, to avoid putting shirtsleeved desk workers in building designed for workers continually moving around whilst Reader Enquiry 51

Countryside Building 29


Reader Enquiry 20

Reader Enquiry 21

Countryside Building 30

Reader Enquiry 22


Technical of legislation that work with or complement the above: Preparation for Change: Other pieces Protection of Badgers Act 1992 Regulations 1997 Environmental Legislation, Hedgerow Tree Preservation Orders How it may affect you? Anyone developing on or building on a site must be aware of all the By David Pollard AIEEM, Ecologist, Landmark Environmental Ltd The environment of today presents farmers and landowners with many challenges and a greater need to expand or find ways for successful diversification. There are approximately 240,000 agricultural holdings in the UK, but with the downturn in the farming industry the general trend is towards fewer but larger farms. Also prompted by the Regional Rural Recovery Action Plans there is a desire and need to relocate businesses into rural areas thus opening up new opportunities for industry and employment. To achieve any form of enlargement or diversification will require development, all be it to existing buildings or the construction of new purpose built premises. With all developments there is a potential impact on the environment and this is what government legislation aims to regulate. Impacts of development The impacts of development in general terms usually entail: 1. Direct loss of habitat, if only the footprint of the development 2. Severance, this is where the development forms a barrier and possibly divides existing habitats. This leads to fragmentation 3. Disruption to the local hydrology and other watercourse damage i.e. polluted run-off, sedimentation, erosion 4. Disturbance of particular notable species e.g. Bats, Badgers or Barn Owls Legislation affecting development The main two pieces of legislation affecting rural development are: Town and Country Planning regulations 1988 Town and Country Planning Order 1995 [Countryside Building Volume 2 issue 1; there is an excellent flow chart and run down of whether or not planning permission is actually required] Linked to these and working in conjunction with them are: Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 1999 as part of the Town & Country Planning Regulations Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 2002 with respect to uncultivated land and semi-natural areas Alongside the above there is other legislation concerning the natural world that developers must be aware of, these include: Two main pieces of legislation with respect to Protected Species 1. Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora Regulations 1994 from the EU Directive Conservation 1994 [Natural Habitats &c.] commonly called Habitats and Species Directive. 2. Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 and amendments through the Countryside and Rights Of Way [CROW] Act 2000Schedule 1, Schedule 5 [section 9] and Schedule 8 [Plants]

above When developing a particular site it is far better to be aware of what is present on site and subsequently plan around it. Ascertaining the impacts that development may have at the planning stage is far better than trying to incorporate it in as an afterthought. How is this achieved? Usually through an Environmental Assessment; this is a broad-based term used to describe the process of assessing or surveying land and then what impacts any development may have. This takes many forms from a simple presence or absence ecological survey looking for a particular protected species to a “full-blown� Environmental Impact Assessment Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) An EIA is a procedure that must be followed for certain types of project before they can be given development consent. It is an assessment of the potential impacts of an action, such as a new building being erected. It looks at the present situation and predicts what change the development may cause on the surrounding environment, it also provides an umbrella approach to facilitate the formulation of environmental statements and subsequent management strategies. The necessity for a full EIA is dependent on the size and type of the project and the relevant planning authority involved. There are two benchmarks with regards to the necessity of an EIA: Annex 1 projects that must have an EIA include: Oil refineries Incinerators Thermal power stations Chemical works Dams Nuclear reprocessing plants Pipeline work Quarries Iron and Steel works Groundwater abstraction Large Pig/Poultry farms Motorways or express roads Annex 2 projects are judged on a case by case basis, within the remit of the Rural and Agricultural Industries these include: a. Projects for re-structuring of rural land holdings, buildings etc b. Water management for Agriculture, irrigation and land drainage c. Afforestation and deforestation d. Intensive fish farming e. Reclamation of land from sea In the diversification field can include as well a) Quarries and Peat extraction b) Caravan and camping sites c) Marinas d) Leisure projects i.e. Golf Courses, Fisheries etc Annex 2 is where there may be some involvement with the rural construction industry, it may involve the erection of new farm buildings with respect to planning permission, or the erection of buildings linked with any of the diversification projects listed above. Countryside Building 31


Technical If the relevant planning authority deem an impact assessment is required then an environmental statement must be produced and this should contain the following information. 1) Information describing the project, including raw materials, land use requirements, proposed access etc 2) Information about the site and it’s surroundings, including human population, flora and fauna, soil,water, air, landscape both topography and architectural/historical value 3) Assessment of effects, including direct and indirect, short medium and long term, positive and negative Within this assessment all aspects are taken into consideration: Human, Land, Flora/Fauna, water/air, 4) Mitigating measures/alternative proposals When carrying out this assessment it may come to light that there are protected species on site. These will have to be incorporated into the statement but may require work carried out under a licence (If a European Protected Species). Species Concerned Most commonly found species with regards to rural development l l l l l l l l

Bats - re-development of farm buildings, also mature trees* Badger - usually in woodland Barn Owls - re-development of farm buildings* Water Vole – watercourses ditches dykes etc Great Crested Newts - around ponds* Dormouse – developments in or near deciduous woodlands predominately in Southern Britain* Sand Lizard – again predominately in South Britain concerning heath lands and sand dunes* Otter – around larger waterways throughout Britain*

[* indicates European Protected Species Licence may be required from DEFRA for any work] If any of these species are present there may be a requirement for some mitigation or compensatory work to be carried out. This could entail: 1. Finding somewhere else to build [worst case scenario] 2. Translocation of the particular species or habitat 3. Assimilating the needs of the species in the design of the construction. By temporary exclusion and mitigation works [Water voles], incorporation into the design i. e. For Bats /Barn Owls in buildings or planning a project to take into account the individual species i.e. protection of runs, conservation of hydrology around certain areas [Setts], tunnels and green-ways particularly for Badgers There is always new environmental legislation on the horizon, the latest of which came into force on 1st February 2002 this is: EIA regulations 2002 for the use on uncultivated land and semi-natural areas These are predominantly aimed at projects for changing the use of the land into intensive agricultural use although the regulations define a “Project” as: “The execution of construction works or of other installations or schemes or other interventions in the natural surroundings or landscape…. which are for the use of uncultivated land or seminatural areas for intensive agricultural purposes” The new regulations do not apply to the following: l Projects that require planning permission (including those projects normally exempt under the Town and Country Planning [General Permitted Development] Order 1995) l Land Drainage improvement works Countryside Building 32

l Forestry Projects It is important to note that these regulations do not replace other statutory requirements such as Hedgerow Regulations 1997, or any consent or licence from the Environment Agency or English Nature. The land it applies to includes: Unimproved grassland, moorland, upland grazing Scrubland Wetlands such as ditches, ponds and marshland How will EIA Regs. 2002 apply to The Rural Building Industry? At the moment the only time that this new series of regulations will affect the Rural Building Industry is in respect of development that is incorporated into an intensive agricultural scheme {e.g. Grain Silo}. There are moves afoot at DEFRA to look at all erections of Farm Buildings and their impacts with revised regulations If the area is near to or within lands subject to an environmental designation for example SSSI, National Park, AONB, there may be a requirement for an environmental statement and would be brought about under existing regulations EIA 1999 with the relevant authority as consultee In order to comply with these particular regulations, there is a series of guidelines, which are to be completed and forwarded to DEFRA, who will endeavour to tell the applicant within 35 days whether or not an environmental statement is required. The environmental statement will follow the format as described earlier. Other terms that may be used include Ecological Impact Assessment and Land Quality Assessment Ecological Impact Assessment This is a new term with guidelines that are being written at the moment. This will not replace the EIA but become an essential part of it. In some cases the ecological impacts of a project will far outweigh any other and this is where the Ecological Impact Assessment [Ecol. I. A.] will fit in. It is not primarily aimed at protected species but all species and habitats present on site then an assessment is made to their overall importance i.e. locally scarce, nationally scarce etc. Land Quality Assessment This is also a relatively new term that might be seen. Moreover it is being used in the urban construction field but will be spreading outward into the rural environment. It relates to a complete package of landscape assessment from Soil Quality through Land and Contamination issues and includes all ecological aspects. When put together this will support any planning application as an Environmental Statement it will also provide a baseline assessment for the formulation of a Land Management Plan or Strategy To Conclude Legislation is at the forefront of all government strategy and new and revised guidelines are being issued regularly. It is vitally important for anyone impacting on the land through development or construction is aware of the implications their actions may have. Landmark Environmental Ltd. is an Ecological and Environmental Management Consultancy based in Preston, Lancashire. We employ a variety of fully qualified personnel who can assist you with a wide range of ecological and environmental issues. For further information please contact Simon Jones, Business Development Assistant on 01772 713555


Reader Enquiry 1

Reader Enquiry 2

Reader Enquiry 3

Countryside Building 33


Reader Enquiry 40

Reader Enquiry 42

Reader Enquiry 43

Reader Enquiry 41

Countryside Building 34

Reader Enquiry 44


Technical The design and construction of a large timber framed farmhouse by Richard G.R. Mumford, FRICS, FAAV Photographs by Nigel Rigden There are relatively few chartered surveyors who have the opportunity to design and see built a substantial and prize winning new dairy farmstead, together with a substantial and unusual traditional farmhouse, that you could be forgiven for mistaking for a recently renovated 17th century half-timbered farmhouse, in a parkland setting and green field site. From this first contact with Mr. & Mrs. Prince, has developed one of the

double silage clamps for 1500 tonnes and a three bay workshop and special chemical grease and fuel store. The three-bay workshop, which lay across the concrete yard from the main livestock buildings, was in fact to turn out to be a useful and important adjunct in the building of the farmhouse. When we had applied for planning permission for the farm buildings, the planning authority were quite difficult and refused to give any definite assurance that permission for the farmhouse would be forthcoming, but they did grant temporary planning permission for a mobile home on the site. On completion of the farm buildings, which as it turned out, caused considerable local consternation by their size, although the scheme included a substantial new planting of trees and the building were set against a background of mature woodland; we then submitted a planning application for the farmhouse. Early on in the construction of the farm buildings, Mrs. Prince had seen a newly built house in Leicestershire built of traditional oak timber construction. The builder was Simon Cooper of Wavell Cooper and Mrs. Prince, particularly, was set on having a new farmhouse of similar construction. The Leicestershire house was built in a village and although full of attractive oak beams, both internally and externally, the traditional jetting, or in fact the jutting of the first floor, extending over the wall beyond the ground floor wall was only along a single frontage and was, in fact, only half the width of the wall so that the inner leaf of the upper storey rested on the external leaf of the ground floor wall, thus the weight of the roof was taken directly down a load

View of the front of Deer Park most interesting building projects that I have been involved in during my professional career. A long-standing family estate was being divided up into lots for sale, the substantial manor house already being sold off. The last of some 700 acres were being offered for sale by tender and my bid on behalf of the Princes secured a successful combination of two lots. The Old Deer Park had a very old set of deer buildings, with a considerable area of woodland and a slightly larger area, which was mainly arable land. A total of approximately 220 acres was purchased and my clients were able to secure a further field that was purchased from a neighbor and joined these two lots together. The two lots lay in a ring fence bounded on all sides by Council roads. Mr & Mrs. Prince and their son Charles are now farming approximately 420 acres (170 hectares). The purchase was completed in the autumn of 1994 and I was asked to start preparing plans for a new farmstead to include housing for dairy cattle of 160 cows, together with all the necessary calving boxes, silage clamps, workshops and tractor shed and straw storage. After looking at many new farmsteads, a design was settled and submitted for planning with planning permission granted in February 1996 and work commenced on the silage barns in early March 1996. The farm buildings covered approximately 3/4 of an acre and included cubicle housing for 160 cows and indoor, slatted topped, slurry store and 8/10 Fulwood 50째 herringbone parlour with space to enlarge this to a 10/20 parlour. All the livestock housing was in a single roofed block with virtually no outside dirty water so that one was not storing dirty rainwater. The farm buildings included calf pens for 40 calves, calving boxes, young stock pens, a handling unit with crush, A.I. stalls, veterinary room, mess room, offices and bull box. There were covered

The rear of Deer Park bearing wall and not like a traditional medieval house. The final design was for a five bay farmhouse with extending wing and the design did allow for an additional wing to be built in the future if required. The design incorporated an oriel window to the main bedroom, reproduced from a Manor House in Worcestershire, a two-storey porch, which in medieval times was unusual, and came as an idea from a two-storey porch on a medieval farmhouse near Bridgenorth in Shropshire. The heart of the house was to be the kitchen with oil fired Aga and for the kitchen to extend out into an oak framed tiled, roofed conservatory. One of the early problems encountered was where to put the central heating boiler as there would not be room for it in the kitchen by the Aga, but we wanted it to have a traditional chimney to the boiler incorporated into one of the two massive Elizabethan style chimneys. The solution was to provide for a cellar where the boiler could be located and it would form a useful drying and storage area. The site chosen for the farmhouse was more than 100 meters from the farm buildings and enjoyed an outstanding and magnificent view with barely another building in sight and overlooking the parkland with its many groups of trees. Fearing that the planners would not want such a large house, which was over 330 square metres and nearly double the standard size of a new farm dwelling, we had drawn the plans for the planning application at a scale of 1/200. The location of the farmhouse site could hardly be considered to be a grouping with the farm Countryside Building 35


Technical master carpenter, Richard Russell. Richard Russell used these joints on the side purlins on the roof of Kings College chapel at Cambridge in 1510. It is the tenon with diminishing haunch in which the sole object of the tenon is to prevent the end float. Industrial stress tests were conducted on a half sized model of this joint in modem times and observations upon its behavior. The tests proved this joint behaved more favorably than any of the other three tested, in that there was virtually no rotational movement of the joint up to failure. Towards the end of the test it appeared that the beam would fail before the joint. In the end, however, the tenon broke across the weakest section. Over 40 tons of green oak was ordered from Henry Venables Ltd Sawmills at Stafford and their representative had considerable experience of providing timber for this purpose, although this was one of the largest orders that they had had to deal with in recent years for a new private house. They had supplied oak to York Minster and Windsor Castle.

A plan of Deer Park buildings. A study of timber framed houses will always indicate the system of bays, not unlike a modem steel building with main and thicker weight bearing studs which are taken up through the external walls and on which is located the roof trusses, which form, as it were, the stanchions always being of larger section than the intermediate studs. My design had also provided for a jetting along the front and around three sides of the wing with a jetting of 450mm, extending the first floor over the ground floor external wall. There are a number of theories as to why the medieval houses had this jetting, one theory being that it enabled the house to be a bigger size on a small plot. This may well be the reason in a town where the houses overhung the street, but clearly this would not be the case with a farmhouse in open countryside. My preferred reason, is that it was not possible to get sufficient long oak studs to run the full height of the house and, therefore, the studs had to be joined and the jetting covered the joint which otherwise was difficult to waterproof. The result, of course, is that the floor is cantilevered out with the weight of the external first floor extending out beyond the ground floor wall and, therefore, placing an upward thrust on the floor beams.

The structural engineer had suggested that the back wall, which was a straight wall without jetting, should be stiffened by a steel stanchion which was incorporated into a pier and this steel stanchion was used to support the largest of the oak bridging beams, a massive 350mm x 300mm x over 5.5m. This had to be lifted into position by a forklift truck running on the oversite concrete slab and was joined with a flat dovetail on the girding or jetty plate which ran along the ground floor vertical studs and extending out over the jetting with the jetty bressummer on top of this beam with the studs of the upper wall extending upwards off the bressummer. The bressummer beam was 175 x 150 at the front, intermediate studs being 150 x 150, but this was increased to 275 x 250 in the ground floor wall under the main bridging beams. A number of the posts were built out with a jowl or heavier bit at the top of the post, particularly under the dragon beam on the corners. Whilst, of course, all the timber work was fully exposed externally, the ground floor was built up with cavity wall insulation and an internal leaf of insulation blocks with only the main supporting studs being exposed internally, but with all the floor joists of course and ceiling beams exposed and one

Eventually, in the design of this house, much of the roof was carried on conventional load bearing rafters with only part of the roof being carried on traditional oak trusses. The continuous jetting around three sides of the wing entails a dragon beam which extends from the two comers diagonally across the ceiling of the ground floor room with ceiling joists radiating from this. Very few modem timber framed construction has attempted this as far as I know. This part of the construction involves a number of highly complicated timber joints. The whole of the timber construction depends upon the various members locking into each other and being secured by oak doweling. A standard mortise and tenon is not strong enough for joining of main bridging beams and in medieval times, the selection and development of a suitable joint for these beams was pursued with many variations. The type of joint employed can often be used to date a medieval house, but the ultimate joist end joint believed to afford the maximum possible mechanical efficiency in cases where the neutral axis of the main joist is level with the tenon soffit, was developed by a Countryside Building 36

A view of the lovely staircase complete wall of exposed timber by the stairs and with exposed oak rafters and oak roof trusses above the stairwell. The staircase had a bull nosed bottom step, was built-entirely in oak and turned at the top for the top three or four steps. With turned oak balusters, the design of the newel and balusters was taken from Castle House at Deddington in Oxfordshire from a 17th century design. The doors throughout were oak beaded and butt jointed planks with four ledges and wrought iron, hand forged Suffolk latches and hinges by Hemsley Forge. All the exposed oak internally was treated with a matt Ronseal and wax polished to give a lovely honey coloured appearance.


Technical The windows were of oak frames made by Wavell Cooper, fitted with galvanized steel windows and leaded glazing, using hand blown cylinder glass type NR. The catches for the windows were based on a design in a Worcestershire Manor House and were hand wrought with hand wrought stays. The roof design was amended during construction to provide additional attic space, which could be used for bedrooms or playrooms for grandchildren. Three oak trusses were used with oak purlins, though much of the roof was a traditional softwood rafter, which spread the weight along the length of the wall. The chimneys were always designed to be a feature of the property with substantial Elizabethan style brick chimneys rising high above the roof. One of the fireplaces in the dining hall had been bought at a reclamation yard at auction and the other, was made locally, by Manor Stone Ltd. The Aga, boiler, and snug all having individual flues up A Gable detail through the central brick chimney and the dining hall was into a double chimney which could take an additional chimney should the additional wing be built. The brick infill between the oak studs was 2” reclaimed bricks, which were bought straight from the demolition contractor at a group of farm buildings in Staffordshire and laid to partly stretcher course and partly herringbone pattern. Expamet expanded metal was used to tie the brickwork to the oak frame. The drainage from the house is to a WPL sewage treatment plant, which interestingly works on the same principle as the slurry lagoon in the farm buildings and has a small compressor pumping air into the sludge. This has the advantage over other sewage treatment plants that there is no mechanical part in the liquid. The effluent from the septic tank can drain directly into the ditch as it is of sufficient high standard and a Discharge License was obtained. However, it can be diverted into a large underground storage tank and used for irrigation of the garden and there is an underground pipe around the garden which waters the trees and can be used to water beds, controlled by a pump with a time clock in the cellar. The storm water from the roof also drains into this underground storage tank. I looked carefully at the use of grey water for flushing lavatories, but at the time that I was looking at this there was no apparatus available. Schemes for grey water storage and use in lavatories and garden irrigation are becoming more available now. The heating in the house is with underfloor heating on the ground floor, located under the stone flags in the dining hall and passage, traditional old quarry tiles in the kitchen and conservatory, and Welsh slate tiles in the rear porch, utility and office. This works well with individual controls in each room. Originally it was planned to have underfloor heating in the first floor, but this was rejected due to cost and ease of fitting, particularly with exposed joists, traditional radiators were fitted.

The kitchen plywood screwed to the timbers to stabilise the structure, although in the end less of this was required than the engineer had originally thought due to the very substantial strength of the timbers and joints. Some of the oak used, particularly on the oak floor boarding on the landing, was from oak felled on the farm. Although it is highly unlikely that Mr. & Mrs. Prince will ever sell the farmhouse and obviously, it could only be sold with the farm, or certainly with the agricultural occupancy tie on the planning permission, they did take the precaution of instructing a completely independent architect to provide a building certificate, since the builder was not NHBC registered, and any mortgagee in the future may require such certificate. This was a wise precaution and carried out completely independently of me as designer and supervisor. I have continued to act for Mr. & Mrs. Prince, both in the landscaping and other farming matters, and with their agreement submitted all the forms, photographs and plans to a competition of the Daily Telegraph Home Building & Renovating Awards 2001, and was fortunate to win first prize in the best traditional category. There were 8 categories and over 100 entries. The project was extremely interesting the clients most cooperative and enthusiastic and the builder and his team of workmen, were extremely skilled producing a superb and fitting family farmhouse. The judges summary in the competition was “no building style could be more appropriate in it’s setting in rural Staffordshire than Roy and Paddy Prince’s new half timbered farmhouse. The carefully proportioned oak framed building continues a local tradition that goes back almost five centuries and together with the combination of reclaimed materials, period details and high quality traditional craftsmanship, already looks a long established part of the landscape. The layout functions extremely well for the families needs, one end serving as the farm office, the remainder as a comfortable and elegant home, the large traditional farmhouse kitchen serving as a buffer zone between the two”. Facts Designer: Richard Mumford, FRICS, at Griffiths Mumford, Evesham, Worcestershire (now Timothy L Lea & Griffiths, Evesham). Contractor: Simon Cooper of Wavell Cooper, Kings Bromley, Staffordshire. Engineer: H.S. Dosanjh of ASP Consulting (Melbourne) Ltd., Melbourne, Derbyshire.

Some of the floors and some of the partitions were lined with Countryside Building 37


Reader Enquiry 45

Countryside Building 38

Reader Enquiry 46

Reader Enquiry 47


Branch News Report on Yorkshire Branch Study Day Visits on

› Tourist Accomodation in Nidderdale

Tuesday 12th March 2002: in relation to:

This event, postponed twice because of the foot & mouth outbreak, looked at three very different approaches to the provision of tourist accommodation within a sensitive rural area. The purpose was to show examples of very good farm and countryside diversification into tourism within the strict planning constraints of the Nidderdale Moors Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The sites are all within walking distance of the National Trust Brimham Rocks Estate.

Warren Forest Caravan Park, Warsill. The visit was enabled by the kind permission of Mr & Mrs. R. Stanley and Mr L Stanley. The 33 acres of land; which they acquired in 1994; is mostly hillside woodland with a small amount of upland grazing. Some various caravans had been on site from the 1960’s, later additions were influenced by the stricter regulations introduced in 1974; but the significant development of the site has been during the seven years of the Stanley’s ownership. During which time they have won several awards including: - David Bellamy Gold Award for Environmental Aspects. Calor Gas Awards for; in 1998 Most Improved Caravan Park in England; in 2001 both the Best Caravan Park in England and also the Best Caravan Park in Britain. Also the Yorkshire Caravan Holiday Park of the Year Award. These awards go with an English Tourist Board 5 Star Rating There are now 120 static green caravans with brown wooden verandahs and 10 chalets with similar countryside approved hues. These are laid out in small groups and singles in among the trees up and down the fairly steep slopes; accessed by single vehicle width hard surfaced tracks, which zigzag to take advantage of the easiest natural gradients. The trees are a mixture of species as found in the area; with laurel being used where a quick growing wind break / screen is essential. The management policy is individual owner occupation of the accommodation, to be used by adults only, (special dispensations may be made occasionally for grandchildren). Therefore there is no provision for youngsters play equipment or games areas. Each unit is essentially selfcontained and independent with all services internally provided. On the way round with the group Mr Stanley was pleased to discuss many management aspects. He indicated that the probable limit would be about 150 units. With reference to the impact on the local economy he said the estimated contribution to the district, of each static unit, was not less than £5000 per year, in some cases as much as £7000 to £8000.

Brimham Rocks Cottages, High North Farm, Fellbeck. The visit was enabled by the kind permission of Mr & Mrs. R. Martin. This is an example of the conversion of

traditional farm buildings to provide high quality holiday cottages. Mr & Mrs. Martin acquired the farm in 1997 and entered into dialogue with the planning authority regarding alternative options for the setting up of a holiday complex based on conversion of the existing farm buildings. Conversion into ordinary dwellings (for possible sale in the future) was not acceptable. The project was therefore put into a ‘rural business aspect’ with the planning authority; with no long term or permanent residents. The adjacent fields are let to neighbouring farms for grazing; which ensures that the visitors can see the ‘livestock in the fields’ scenery that they seek. When the Martins took over, the existing cottages were very run down with leaking roofs (insecure tiles frequently blown off) and accommodation too crowded. The farm buildings were essentially robust and capable of conversion. So the process began. With the emphasis on comfort and cleanliness and avoidance of over crowding. Disabled access has been introduced in recent extensions and alterations. Family accommodation for up to ten or eleven months of the year is the basis of the business; full year lets are not permitted. Occupants accept that there are certain reasonable ground rules, which facilitate good neighbourly relations. Children, supervised as necessary by their parents, have the use of a fully enclosed barn with badminton, table tennis and play equipment. The overall outside appearance is neat and attractive and the interiors very conveniently laid out and well furnished. The English Tourist Board ratings at the beginning were up to Two Star, they are now well on the way to Four Star overall. The Martin’s feel that Four Star achieves a suitable level or objective for their enterprise. The development stage, with all profit being ploughed back into improvements is approaching completion and some increasing return on investment is anticipated. (A stone over the door of the farmhouse records “H B 1882”, which gives an interesting link with the development of those day and of our own time.)

Old Springs Wood Lodges, Hartwith Bank, Summerbridge. The visit was enabled by the kind permission of Mrs R. Helme. The 36 acre farm was acquired by Mrs Helme in 1960. Most of the land is mature oak woodland on a hillside. In the early 1980’s the first chalet was imported from Denmark and attractively sited in the woodland it became a showhouse for the Danish company. At the beginning, this initiative was by way of an experiment; when its potential was proved, two more, and then two more were acquired from Denmark. Then five from an English firm. They are all of the ‘traditional’ Scandinavian design with extended roofs over floor level verandahs; in dark shaded timber and similar colour roofing. All are supported by short pillars as necessary to offset the sloping sites. They are linked by hard surfaced single track access paths, with wide well kept grass verges. They mostly sleep 5 or 6 people, any above that is charged extra per head. One type can take 10 people, but can be subdivided into two ‘semidetached’ sleeping 5 each. Two more of this type were added recently. The majority of bookings Countryside Building 39


Branch News now are ‘short breaks’ of 2-3 days; earlier on it was a standard week or two weeks. All contain full facilities, utilising electricity only, with separate meters on a pay as you go basis. There are no gas or open fires. Hirers are required to be responsible for cleaning on a ‘leave it as you find it’ basis; cleaning service is available as an extra. (The provision of cleaning staff is the main requirement for having employees in this enterprise). The occupancy rate varies over the year but is rarely below 80%. Throughout the development the emphasis has been on quality; which is borne out by the attractively furnished interiors and the well placed sites on the slopes among the trees. This aspect was cited as an important factor in achieving a rapport with the planning authority, which helped to overcome their initial reluctance to allow the development to take place.

Footnotes. During the visits there were various discussion with the proprietors about rental charging rates and management policy relating to occupation and significant financial data was mentioned. This material was very interesting but it is felt to be inappropriate to relate it in this report, where it would be out of context and possibly misleading. The party was very much indebted to Mr Mike Warden; Planning Officer with Harrogate Borough Council who accompanied them throughout and very usefully supplemented the information given by the owners. Edward H. B. Joce. RDBA member. (ADAS Retd.)

with an intumescent coating; the slats are spaced apart Sutton Hoo Visitor Centreslats and backed with acoustic insulation to allow sound to be absorbed. Insulation to the building has been provided by A Success for the U K recycled newspaper, allegedly the East Anglian Daily Times who first broke the news of the discovery of the Sutton Hoo Timber Industry treasure in 1939. On March 14th the exciting new timber framed buildings for the newly completed Visitor Centre at Sutton Hoo, a windswept site overlooking the Deben estuary, was officially opened. In keeping with the Anglo-Saxon heritage of the site, architects Birkin Haward and Van Heyningen designed the buildings to be constructed in wood, which was sourced entirely from the UK and was in keeping with the philosophy of The National Trust to use a sustainable resource and be in keeping with their surroundings. The two buildings, a Visitors Centre and the Exhibition building and Treasury, are framed with Douglas Fir and clad with softwood weatherboarding, a traditional construction method common to the region and one which reflects the material of the Anglo-Saxon burial ship. The cladding and frame are both treated with environmentally non-polluting preservatives. The specially designed pitched roof structures, clad in zinc, each contain 150 x 150mm squared Douglas fir columns, which in turn support Douglas fir rafters and purlins. The frame is braced using exposed metal rods and brackets, echoing the use of metal rivets that were used to connect the timbers of the Anglo-Saxon ship. The ceiling is clad with softwood boarding Countryside Building 40

This was very much an East Anglian project; Birkin Haward the principal architect is the son of an Ipswich Architect of the same name. The principal contractors were Haymills of Stowmarket, whose team of 16 carpenters and 4 apprentice carpenters were responsible for the construction and timberwork of the two main buildings. The installation of the reconstructed burial ship proved quite a challenge. The burial ship, crafted in English oak from a single tree elsewhere, had to be lowered by crane into its “pit” and the exhibition centre was then built around it. I was fortunate enough to attend the press preview, when the design and proportions of the buildings impressed me both inside and out. Having returned to visit the site two months later, it is still proving to be a very popular attraction and I still have the same opinion. The National trust has made available a site of archaeological importance to a large number of people without the facilities seeming overcrowded – except for the ladies loos! The centre is a great credit to the National Trust and all those involved in the project.

Volume 2 Issue 4  

Trade Journal of the Ridba

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you