Prior Notification For Shed

[Stephen1]

The 12 acres / 5 hectares only applies to agricultural holdings - not woodland. At the moment there are no regulations about minimum size of holding for woodland, other than that the planners agree the building is reasonably necessary. That is 'necessary' not that the owners of the woodland would quite like one! Obviously the larger the wood the easier it is to make the argument that it is reasonably necessary for 'forestry purposes'. Note also that there are various definitions of 'forestry' that have been applied in these contexts.

Deleted Section.

I'd misread an article in a paper featuring Ben Law - this part of my original post has now been deleted!

[oldclaypaws]

I believe whereas you need 5 hectares+ for agricultural prior notification buildings, there is no minimum required area for forestry, provided it is genuinely a 'tool store and shelter' for forestry rather than other purposes. Once its up, provided you're not taking the mick like turning it into a cafe or nightclub, there is probably a degree of flexibility exactly what you can do there provided you're not upsetting anybody else. Strictly speaking, its not supposed to be for recreation, but there's a grey area between 'shelter' and recreation; who's to say which you are doing, sheltering or enjoying yourself in between maintaining the wood? You can also carry out any reasonable activity 28 days of the year without planning consent, in my case using the wood as a craft exhibition venue, but the same could apply to activities such as workshops, celebrations, camping, naturism, festivals, mountain bike racing, renting out yurts, etc.

Woodlands.co.uk;

Full PD rights also apply to any size of forestry holding, whereas, for agriculture, there are reduced PD rights for holdings less than 5 hectares

Full explanation of forestry and planning;

http://www.woodlands.co.uk/owning-a-wood/woodlands-and-planning-legislation/

[oldclaypaws]

Ben Law has betrayed us all! It would seem he has tried to make a fat profit on the deal;

I suggest you read the Mail article and retract that statement. Ben is one of the good guys and it is a reference not to him, but to someone completely different- Audrey and Eric Viviani, mentioned later in the article in another location.

Because of commitments abroad, Eric - who is chief engineer for an American exploration company - and Audrey have decided to sell.

They have put the house on the market through Strutt & Parker, looking for offers over £365,000.

Not Ben Law 'cashing in' as alleged !!!

[Stephen1]

Oh thank God for that! I'd always liked him, and had worked with him at Keveral Farm long before the prickly Nut days. I was genuinely gutted when I thought it was him trying to sell!I'm gradually losing my faith in humans and getting too quick to believe the worst about folk - perhaps even just starting to expect it....

[oldclaypaws]

You'll find the 'Edit' button on the left at the top of your post. Might be an idea to use it before Ben reads your comment and has a word with his solicitor- it was a pretty inaccurate, libelous and scathing comment, albeit as a mistaken result of failing to read the article fully.

Specsavers time......

(added)....... I see you did, well done, although you've deprived a barrister of a quick buck.

[Stephen1]

I wonder if Ben has seen the article I put the link up for?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/property/art ... y-too.html

Under the second picture it clearly says "Logging Off - Ben Law has put the wooden wonder on the market for £365,000"

Although as you correctly point out the article later goes on to suggest it's a Scottish couple, not Ben, who've put their house on the market for £365,000?

He probably couldn't give a squirrel - but in my in my arrogance I can't believe I'm the only one who may have skim read the article - and like all feckless folk dwelt longer on the pictures and captions - and come away with the wrong idea....

[oldclaypaws]

I wonder if Ben has seen the article I put the link up for?

If he hasn't he will soon, I just mailed him.

[Stephen1]

If he hasn't he will soon, I just mailed him.

Good! It's an old article but still comes up as a top ten result googling for Ben Law.

[Bearwood]

If I remember correctly, Mr Law was part of the working party for 'planning for sustainable woodlands' which was perceived to be under consideration when the Town and Country Planning act was due it's 'reform' nearly fifteen years ago.

It's quite old, but worth a read if you haven't already come across it.
http://www.tlio.org.uk/chapter7/woodland.html

[oldclaypaws]

His supreme coppiceness, Mr Laws has kindly replied to my Daily Mail alert and says "I am going nowhere, too busy coppicing"- that's official !