4. Policies to include in your local plan

1. Contribution to sustainable development, supporting rural economies and diversification

Example policies

1.1 Sustainable farming: Agricultural developments will be supported where they contribute positively to economically, socially and environmentally sustainable food production. This includes reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, land footprint, supporting nature recovery in a holistic way, and reducing air and water pollution. Developments should support a localised food system and benefit SMEs and good jobs.

A more detailed definition can be found above.

1.2 Food resilience: Agricultural developments will be supported where the proposal:

a) Contributes positively to local and regional food supply (for example via direct sales, local wholesale or public procurement, farmers’ markets, community-supported agriculture, or regional processors).

b) Enhances crop or livestock diversity and reduces vulnerability to pests, disease, pathogens and market shocks.
c) Uses less resource-intensive production methods (including agroecological or regenerative practices not overly reliant on inputs of grain, feed, and fossil fuels).
d) Improves local food infrastructure for example local processing, storage, distribution, or retail facilities that strengthen short supply chains.
e) Reduces environmental risks to food resilience, including maintaining or improving water availability and quality, avoiding soil degradation, and preventing climate change.

1.3 Rural diversification: Proposals for diversification of agricultural rural businesses, including enterprise stacking, will be supported when they meet the following criteria:

a) The proposal scale is appropriate to its location and setting.

b) The proposal won’t cause unacceptable adverse impacts to the amenity of nearby communities including design, size, pollution, traffic, noise, dust, lighting and smell.

c) The traffic generated must be safely accommodated within the local road network.

d) The proposals do not adversely affect water quality, wildlife habitats or the character and quality of local landscapes. 

1.4 Conversion of buildings: The conversion of intensive livestock buildings to alternative uses will be supported, including affordable housing, business premises, community facilities, or other appropriate uses where contamination risks have been remedied and the proposal meets the climate, economic and social aims of this plan. 

1.5 Animal welfare: Animal welfare shall be recognised as a material planning consideration, particularly in proposals involving livestock facilities, animal-intensive operations, or development in or near habitats supporting significant populations of wild or domestic animals.

a) Applications must include an Animal Welfare Impact Statement when relevant, assessing impacts on sentient animals (both domesticated and wild) and mitigation measures to avoid adverse welfare outcomes.

b) Planning permission may be refused where animal welfare impacts are significant, unmitigated, or where cumulative harm is demonstrated.

Recommended policy explanation

Sustainable farming, rural diversification, and food resilience policies directly support the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) aims for sustainable development (NPPF 7), building a strong, competitive rural economy (NPPF 85), promoting healthy, inclusive communities (NPPF 96), and promoting a sustainable pattern of development that seeks to meet the development needs of their area (NPPF 11).

The food system provides employment opportunities, shapes our landscape and affects our health and wellbeing. Food drives our culture and communities, sits at the centre of our celebrations and nourishes us. Some food production methods contribute clearly to the aims of sustainable development while others don’t. It’s therefore important to differentiate for the purposes of planning.

• Rural economies – Diversified, nature-friendly farming enterprises such as horticulture, local dairies with on-farm processing, and rewilding enterprises have been shown to generate many more jobs per hectare, create skilled employment, and retain economic value locally. Examples include a 600-hectare organic farm in Essex supporting over 45 staff across farming and retail, and Coleshill Farm in Oxfordshire employing 18 people on just 12 hectares of diverse crops. By contrast, intensive livestock units (ILUs) create very few jobs (often just 1–2 per new development), typically low-paid and low-skill, with profits concentrated in multinational supply chains outside the local area. It is estimated that intensive livestock production has led to the loss of 14,000 jobs in farming as larger, consolidated and automated units replace smaller operations.
• Resilient local food systems – Supporting local production, processing, storage, and distribution builds necessary resilience against supply chain shocks, global market volatility, and disease outbreaks. Agroecological and regenerative farming approaches increase crop and livestock diversity, reduce dependency on imported feed and fertiliser, and help maintain continuity of supply during market or climate disruptions.
• Food security and public health – At present, over half the UK’s most productive farmland is used to grow feed for animals, reducing our capacity to produce healthy, affordable food domestically. Shifting support to crops such as fruit, vegetables, legumes, and pulses increases nutritional security, reduces reliance on imports, and aligns with national dietary guidelines for improved public health. The Eatwell Guide recommends eating seven portions of fruit and veg a day. This equates to 15 million megatonnes of fruit and veg. Currently, we only eat 9.3 million megatonnes, of which 5.5 million megatonnes are imported (much from climate vulnerable countries). Localised food economies also shorten supply chains, improve freshness, and keep more value within communities.

Animal welfare

The NPPF (paragraphs 8, 88, 96) emphasises sustainable, healthy communities and thriving rural economies. While animal welfare is not explicitly detailed in the text, planning decisions allow for consideration of any factor related to land use which impacts the public interest, and animal welfare is therefore clearly within scope.

Animal welfare concerns and issues are well documented for intensive factory farms and fish farming. Planning authorities are able to recognise animal welfare as a material planning consideration as per THE KING (on the application of ANIMAL EQUALITY UK)  v NORTH EAST LINCOLNSHIRE BOROUGH COUNCIL and ASL NEW CLEE LIMITED [2025]

Recommended monitoring

• Number of submitted, accepted and rejected proposals for sustainable farming developments.
• The number of SME farm enterprises.
• Number of sustainable farms no longer trading .
• Number of submitted, approved and rejected proposals for diversification of agricultural businesses.
• Number of intensive livestock unit proposals or on-land fish farms that materially consider animal welfare.
• Number of submitted, accepted and rejected proposals for conversion of intensive livestock unit buildings to other uses.
• Numbers of submitted, approved and rejected community food spaces proposals.
• Number of submitted, approved and rejected proposals for infrastructure for sustainable farming.
• Number of food growing and food production proposals incorporating climate adaptation measures.
• Water supply network limitations.
• Water quality of rivers [insert rivers within local catchment].

Case studies

Case Study: Lewes District Local Plan Part 1 Joint Core Strategy 2010­-2030 May 2016

Core Policy 5 – The Visitor Economy Opportunities for the sustainable development of the visitor economy will be supported where they are of a scale, type and appearance appropriate to the locality and provide local employment, through the following measures:

6. Encourage local crafts, food and produce and appropriate tourism development that supports rural business and farm diversification.

Case study: Lewes District Local Plan Part 2 Site Allocations and Development Management Policies February 2020

Policy DM9: Farm Diversification

Development which forms part of a farm diversification scheme or otherwise helps maintain the viability of farm businesses engaged in sustainable land management will be permitted where the following criteria are met:

(1) the proposed development will stimulate new economic activity with a use appropriate to its rural location;

(2) wherever possible, new or replacement buildings are located within or adjoining an existing group of buildings;

(3) any new building responds sensitively to its rural setting, in terms of its scale, layout, design and use of materials;

(4) the proposed development would not create an unacceptable impact on the local road network or require highway improvements that would harm the landscape or ecological value of rural roads in the area.

2. Climate change

Example policies

2.1 Greenhouse gas assessments: Agricultural livestock developments must submit a comprehensive greenhouse gas assessment that includes direct and indirect (upstream and downstream) emissions, i.e. Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions through a recognised whole life-cycle methodology, and demonstrate alignment with local and national climate policies, including the UK’s statutory carbon budgets.

2.2 Agricultural developments must demonstrate how they are consistent with national targets and recommendations to deliver the UK’s net zero targets. Proposals must demonstrate how they will align with reductions in emissions as set out in the Seventh Carbon Budget (and subsequent budgets).  

2.3 Where appropriate, the use of climate adaptation measures including water retention, flood alleviation, use of waste streams and urban cooling in all food growing and food production developments will be supported.

Recommended policy explanation

Food production is a major driver of climate change, accounting for around one-third of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Animal-sourced foods are disproportionately responsible: cows and sheep produce large quantities of methane, while chickens and pigs rely heavily on imported feed that is often linked to deforestation and grown using high-emission fertilisers. Climate change is already impacting UK agriculture through extreme weather events including flooding, drought, and heat stress, which affects yields, livestock health, and supply chain reliability. Without rapid emissions reductions, these risks will intensify, threatening the viability of farming businesses and the stability of local food systems.

Climate change is a material consideration in planning decisions. Local plans must be aligned with national climate targets, the Net Zero Strategy, and relevant local climate action plans to ensure compliance and reduce exposure to legal and reputational risks.

Climate change is a key strategic objective in the NPPF, and local authorities are legally obliged to set out plans to prevent climate change in local development plans (paragraph 20 and footnote 12). The planning system should support the transition to a low-carbon future (Paragraph 161), with policies to support ‘radical’ reductions in carbon dioxide emissions.

Local planning authorities are expected to adopt proactive strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change in line with the Climate Change Act 2008 (a 100% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050) (Paragraph 162, footnote 61).

Planning policy is a key tool for ensuring agricultural development is consistent with resilience goals in local climate strategies and Local Nature Recovery Strategies.

Assessing GHG emissions: Requiring a full lifecycle (Scope 1, 2, and 3) GHG assessment ensures that planning decisions are based on transparent evidence, enabling planning authorities to demonstrate compliance with local and national climate targets. The Finch v Surrey County Council [2024] UKSC 30 ruling confirms that both direct and indirect emissions are material to Environmental Impact Assessments and planning decisions.

National climate policy: The Climate Change Committee (CCC) set out that a 20–50% reduction in meat and dairy production and consumption is required by 2050 to achieve legally-binding net zero targets. The committee recommends shifting food production and consumption towards more plant-based foods such as pulses, legumes, fruit, and vegetables, as well as production methods that minimise emissions on-farm. This policy ensures that agricultural development contributes to statutory climate policy.

Recommended monitoring

• Number of approved and rejected intensive livestock unit proposals with an approved greenhouse gas assessment including direct and indirect emissions.
• Number of food growing and food production proposals incorporating climate adaptation measures.

Case studies

Case Study: Norfolk Planning Application Rejection

The planning application for an intensive livestock unit in Norfolk was rejected because it lacked information on direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions. Planning officers advised that direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions needed to be considered, due to the “Finch” ruling. The “Finch” ruling was a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that blocked planning approval for a Surrey oil well because it lacked a greenhouse gas assessment for direct and indirect emissions. Council officers and legal advocates made the assessment that the implications of the “Finch” ruling were applicable to the intensive livestock application in Norfolk.

Case Study: THE LONDON PLAN. THE SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR GREATER LONDON MARCH 2021

Policy SI 2 Minimising greenhouse gas emissions 

Major development proposals should calculate and minimise carbon emissions from any other part of the development, including plant or equipment, that are not covered by Building Regulations, i.e. unregulated emissions.

3. Protection of water resources

Example policies

3.1 Protect water resource availability: Applications which involve significant water use – such as agriculture development - will be required to demonstrate the sufficiency of the water supply infrastructure network, and the impacts on other water demands. Applications which do not demonstrate sufficient available water will not be supported.

Recommended policy explanation

Water is a critical resource for both communities and agriculture, and its sustainable management is an explicit priority under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF paragraphs 162 and 187). Agricultural development (particularly intensive livestock and irrigation-heavy horticulture) can place significant demands on local water supplies, affecting availability for other users, ecosystems, and public services.

In many catchments, water resources are already under pressure. The Environment Agency has identified numerous English catchments as at or near “unsustainable abstraction” levels, where further withdrawals would damage rivers, wetlands, and aquifers.

Recommended monitoring

• Water supply network limitations.
• Water quality of rivers [insert rivers within local catchment].

Case studies

Case study: Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan- Part 1 November 2023

LP14 – Intensive Livestock and Poultry Farming

14.14 The limitations for non-domestic water across the Districts’ water resource zones (Anglian Water, and Essex & Suffolk Water [Northumbrian Water] are a key sensitivity in Babergh and Mid Suffolk, as identified in policies SP08 and LP26. Accordingly, the availability of sufficient water resource to supply proposed intensive livestock and proposed intensive livestock and poultry units should be considered at an early stage.

Policy LP14 – Intensive Livestock and Poultry Farming

c) consider and address the impact on water resources and the capacity of the water supply infrastructure network, taking account of the limitation particularly on the Hartismere supply network;

4. Biodiversity and protecting the natural environment, including rivers

Example policies

4.1 Recovering nature and reducing pollution from agricultural development:

Intensive agricultural developments and anaerobic digestion facilities will only be permitted where:

a) The application is accompanied by an ecological statement, describing the nature and extent of any direct or indirect impacts on nature, soils, air and water, including modelling of the effects on sensitive environmental receptors.

b) An assessment of the cumulative (i.e. in-combination) impacts of this development and existing developments has been conducted, and it is demonstrated that pollutant thresholds are not exceeded.

c) A waste strategy has been provided to the planning authority, demonstrating how waste will be managed both onsite and offsite. The strategy will include the destination for waste and any digestate, as well as demonstrating that there is a nutrient deficiency at the destination where waste will be spread.

d) Holdings located within river catchments that are in unfavourable condition are required to demonstrate at least nutrient neutrality, through physical works and/or changes to farming methods within the unit.

[Where pollution is an identified issue – consider developing a specific waste strategy, see below]

Recommended policy explanation

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF paragraphs 187, 192-195) requires planning decisions to protect and enhance biodiversity, prevent unacceptable pollution, and secure measurable net gains for nature. Local Nature Recovery Strategies (LNRS) reinforce this by identifying priority habitats and species at risk, many of which are vulnerable to nutrient loading and habitat change from intensive agriculture.

Agriculture is a leading cause of biodiversity decline in the UK. The intensification of farming poses multiple, cumulative threats to nature including:

• Habitat loss from land conversion and monoculture feed production (particularly for livestock feed).
• Nutrient pollution (mainly nitrates, phosphates, and ammonia) from manure, slurry, and fertilisers, which damages rivers, wetlands, and sensitive habitats. Intensive livestock units (ILUs) produce thousands of tonnes of manure daily, which is highly concentrated in nitrates and phosphates.
• Air pollution from ammonia emissions, which harms sensitive habitats like grasslands and ancient woodlands.
• Biodiversity impacts overseas, because imported feed crops such as soy are linked to deforestation and ecosystem destruction.

Agriculture and rural land management are the main reasons rivers fail to achieve ‘good’ ecological status in England and intensive livestock units are a major driver of river pollution.

Most rivers in England fail to achieve conservation status and, as such, it is rational and necessary for planning measures to be introduced to prevent harm.

Recent case law has confirmed that planning authorities:

1. Must consider cumulative effects of multiple developments (Caffyn v Shropshire 2025), requiring an assessment of all potential developments.
2. Have a duty to prevent environmental harm: The High Court in Herefordshire v NFU (EWHC 536 [2025]) confirmed local plans can and should require detailed waste management plans including for slurry and manure when there is clear evidence that existing regulations fail to protect water quality.
3. Aren’t obliged to assume that other regulatory controls (e.g., Environmental permits or Farming Rules for Water) will prevent pollution when evidence shows they haven’t been effective.
4. Are required to refuse planning permission for developments that would worsen pollution in designated sites unless it can be shown “beyond reasonable scientific doubt” that they will not (as per the Dutch Nitrogen case (Coöperatie Mobilisation v Limburg, C-293/17). The Herefordshire v NFU judgment (EWHC 536 [2025]) upheld the principle that local authorities may lawfully require nutrient neutrality. Many areas of England have been designated as high nitrate pollution areas (Nitrate vulnerable zones) and in which protected areas are at risk (nutrient neutrality zones).

Recommended monitoring

• Condition status of Ramsar Sites, Special Protection Areas, Special Areas of Conservation, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), ancient woodlands, local wildlife sites and irreplaceable habitats.
• Waste management practice(s) records and water quality assessments of the [insert rivers within your local planning authority]. 

Case studies

Case study: Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan- Part 1 November 2023

LP14 – Intensive Livestock and Poultry Farming

14.13 Intensive agricultural units, particularly pig and poultry farms, can affect both sensitive habitats and the local population. This is largely through the release of pollutants, including: ammonia; nutrients from manure; litter and slurry; effluent discharges; dust; odour; and noise. Consequently, there is the need to exercise particular care when considering developments which would bring livestock and poultry units within close proximity to sensitive environments and land uses. Sensitive land uses include buildings, amenity areas, or outdoor spaces where routine or normal activities occurring at reasonably expected times would experience one or more adverse effects from contaminant discharges generated by a nearby major facility. Sensitive land uses may be a part of the natural or built environment. Examples include: residences, day care centres, educational and health facilities, office development or sensitive environmental areas. The modelling of impacts on sensitive receptors must be considered appropriate through consultation with the relevant organisation and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Policy LP14 – Intensive Livestock and Poultry Farming

b) protect sensitive environmental receptors, such as designated protected species, ecological sites and watercourses (including wet and dry ditches, groundwater and ponds) from air quality impacts identified through appropriate emission modelling and interpretation of the modelling results, and water quality impacts, using pollution prevention measures and demonstrable on-site contingency measures;

d) demonstrate that there will be no significant effects upon sensitive environmental receptors from air pollutants, through submission of appropriate emission modelling;

e) demonstrate adequate provision has been made for the management and disposal of waste materials, liquids, litter and manure for each production cycle which will not lead to pollution, particularly of surface and groundwater, by submission of an approved waste management plan;

Case Study: Herefordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan Adopted March 2024

Herefordshire Council adopted a standalone policy for managing waste in 2024. It was developed due to:

1. The quality of Herefordshire's rivers and their tributaries is considered to be of strategic importance, particularly the River Wye. The River Wye, including parts of the River Lugg, is designated as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC)

2. The River Lugg, a tributary within the River Wye SAC, is failing its conservation targets. This pollution originates from point sources such as sewage outlets, and diffuse sources, predominantly run-off from agricultural land, with phosphates and ammonia being the main pollutants.

3. New development connected to the River Wye SAC needs to demonstrate at least nutrient neutrality to obtain planning permission, as per a European Court of Justice judgment (the 'Dutch Case') which held that where sites fail water quality objectives, it is not sufficient to rely on future mitigation measures such as those managed by the Environment Agency as part of the environmental permit process.

4. Pollution is an issue despite the existence of non-planning control measures, meaning a specific plan is required to materially reduce phosphate release.

The policy on agricultural waste (W3) is intentionally non-prescriptive, reflecting the diverse waste management practices within agriculture. Farmers and landowners have access to support networks like FarmHerefordshire for preparing applications. Key aspects include:

1. Waste Management Method Statements are required for proposals involving livestock. For non-EIA applications, these must demonstrate appropriate management of natural and non-natural wastes from the proposed development. For EIA development, the statement must cover all natural and non-natural wastes generated by the entire agricultural unit.

2. Anaerobic Digestion (AD) Support: AD facilities are supported specifically when used to manage only natural wastes generated primarily on the agricultural unit itself (ie to handle local waste at a small scale).

3. Nutrient Neutrality: All proposals for livestock units, anaerobic digestion, and any other waste management proposals on agricultural holdings located within the River Wye SAC or River Clun SAC catchments are required to demonstrate at least nutrient neutrality, through physical works and/or changes to farming methods within the unit.

5. Sustainable traffic, highway safety and promoting active travel

Example policies

5.1 Managing agricultural traffic: Agriculture proposals must include a transport assessment, identifying all vehicular movements over the production cycle of the unit including feed delivery, livestock transport, manure and slurry removal, and construction and decommissioning . The origin, routing and destination of goods must be demonstrated. All proposed access routes must be capable of handling HGVs safely without creating unacceptable hazards for other road users, including pedestrians and cyclists. Electric vehicles must be used wherever possible.

For intensive livestock unit proposals, demonstrate over a production cycle the impact on HGV movements, including the origin, routing and destination of goods. Where there are significant increases in traffic, proposals must incorporate mitigation measures to protect all users in local communities from risks to highway safety, ensuring safe and appropriate access.

Recommended policy explanation

Intensive livestock units often generate substantial HGV traffic for feed delivery, livestock transport, and waste removal. Without careful planning, this can cause road safety risks, environmental harm, and significant disturbance to rural communities. This policy seeks to ensure that traffic impacts are fully understood, mitigated, and managed, supporting the aims of the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraphs 115-118), local air quality strategies, and the Council’s rural transport objectives.

Recommended monitoring

• Number of complaints from local communities relating to unacceptable impacts on traffic or HGV movements outside agreed times.

Case studies

Case study: Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan- Part 1 November 2023

LP14 – Intensive Livestock and Poultry Farming
g) ensure the provision of safe and suitable access for all users, including the proportionate mitigation of any unacceptable impacts on highway safety resulting from a significant increase in traffic movements. Proposals should demonstrate their impact on HGV movements over a production cycle taking account of the origin, destination and routing of goods within the processing chain.

6. Greenbelt and safeguarded land

Example policies

6.1 Protect land most suitable for sustainable farming: To promote sustainable development, [insert rural and peri-urban land most suitable for sustainable farming including land in the green belt] is designated for sustainable farming and [insert land suitable for sustainable horticulture] is designated for sustainable horticulture. Applications for the conversion of this land to intensive livestock units will not be considered for these areas.

6.2 Community food growing: The use of land and buildings as new allotments, orchards and for local food growing spaces and production will be supported, including the temporary use of vacant or derelict land or buildings and the use of incidental open space on housing estates and other open space areas, where this does not conflict with other policy objectives or land use priorities.

Proposals (including conversions, extensions and changes of use) must incorporate space for communal and/or private food growing within the scheme.

Recommended policy explanation

Protecting high-quality and strategically located farmland is fundamental to meeting the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requirement to promote sustainable development (paragraphs 7,161 and 187). This includes safeguarding the best and most versatile (BMV) agricultural land for food production and supporting a resilient, low-carbon food system.

Designating and protecting the most suitable land for sustainable farming and horticulture provides certainty and secures its use for food production, which prevents irreversible land degradation, and supports the local authority’s wider climate, health, and economic objectives.

To facilitate community engagement with farming, which forms part of sustainable farming, this policy supports spaces for community links to farming. Food-growing land for communities also supports food resilience. Sustain’s Planning toolkit contains more information on planning for community food growing spaces: https://www.sustainweb.org/planning/

Recommended monitoring

• Map of agricultural land showing areas designated for sustainable farming and sustainable horticulture.
• Map of agricultural land showing areas designated for community links to farming.
• Numbers of submitted, approved and rejected community food spaces proposals.
• Percentage of development proposing food growing.

Case studies

Case Study: Brighton & Hove City Council Planning Advice Notice 06 Food Growing and Development Updated September 2020

This Planning Advice Note provides guidance and best practice examples for integrating food growing in development proposals.

7. Rural workers dwellings

Example policies

7.1 Support affordable agricultural dwellings: Affordable agricultural dwellings for small scale sustainable farming will be supported, as it is recognised these are required for effective operation of these enterprises.

Recommended policy explanation

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) recognises the essential role of rural housing in supporting a prosperous rural economy and sustaining local communities (paragraphs 82–83, 84). For small-scale, sustainable farms,  including horticulture, mixed farming, and other labour-intensive enterprises — having affordable on-site or nearby accommodation is often critical to operational viability.

These types of farming typically require:

• Close and regular on-site presence for animal welfare, crop management, and security.
• Extended and irregular working hours, making commuting impractical and inefficient.
• Access to seasonal or specialist labour, which can be supported through tied or affordable housing.

Recommended monitoring

• The number of agricultural dwellings listed at affordable prices.

Case studies

Case study: Lewes District Local Plan Part 2 Site Allocations and Development Management Policies February 2020

Policy DM3: Accommodation for Agricultural and Other Rural Workers

Outside the planning boundaries, as defined on the Policies Map, new permanent dwellings will be permitted for those employed in agriculture, forestry or another enterprise requiring a countryside location where it can be demonstrated that the following criteria are met:

(1) there is a clearly established existing functional need;

(2) the functional need relates to a full-time worker;

(3) the unit and the rural enterprise concerned have been established for at least three years, have been profitable for at least one of them, are currently financially sound and have a clear prospect of remaining so;

(4) the functional need cannot be met by another existing dwelling on the unit or other existing accommodation in the area which is suitable and available for occupation by the workers concerned;

(5) the proposed dwelling, and any subsequent extension, is of a size commensurate with the established functional need of the enterprise. Dwellings and any subsequent extensions which are unusually large in relation to the needs of the unit or unusually expensive to construct in relation to the income it can sustain in the long term will not be permitted;

(6) the dwelling is suitably located to meet the identified functional need of the enterprise, is well related to existing buildings wherever possible, and its siting and design is appropriate to the rural character of the locality.

Where the functional need is proven but Criterion 3 is not met, a temporary permission will be granted for a caravan, mobile home or other temporary accommodation where it can be demonstrated that the following criteria are met:

i) Criteria (1) and (4) above;

ii) there is clear evidence of a firm intention and ability to develop the enterprise concerned;

iii) there is clear evidence that the proposed enterprise has been planned on a sound financial basis.

Occupancy conditions will be imposed on dwellings permitted in accordance with this policy and, where appropriate, on other dwellings within the holding. Applications to remove such conditions will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that all the following criteria are met:

(a) the essential need which originally justified the dwelling no longer applies and the dwelling will not be required to meet such need in the longer term;

(b) the property has been actively marketed in specialist and local press and estate agents at least once a month for a minimum of 12 months;

(c) the advertised selling price or rental is realistic given the age, size, condition and location of the property; and

(d) no realistic offers have been made to the vendors for occupation of the dwelling in compliance with the original occupancy condition.

In appropriate circumstances, the Council will seek a planning obligation to tie a permanent dwelling to adjacent buildings or to the land forming the holding.

Proposals within 7km of the Ashdown Forest will only be permitted where they comply with Core Policy 10(3) of the Local Plan Part 1.

8. Agricultural buildings, services and facilities within the community

Example policies

8.1 Sustainable Farming Infrastructure: Proposals for infrastructure that supports sustainable farming and strengthens local food systems are encouraged, including (but not limited to) polytunnels, small-scale abattoirs, processing facilities, distribution hubs, farm shops, butchers, local producer markets, and community-supported agriculture facilities, where proposals are appropriately located and designed to minimise environmental impacts. Infrastructure to allow educational visits is also encouraged.

8.2 Protection of Essential Local Food Infrastructure: Proposals involving the change of use or loss of premises that provide essential local and healthy food system infrastructure including bakers, butchers, greengrocers, grocers, and specialist ethnic food shops will be resisted unless it can be demonstrated that they are no longer viable and there is no reasonable prospect of continued food-related use.

Recommended policy explanation

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF paragraphs 8, 83, 88, 96, 98) requires planning to support a prosperous rural economy, enable the retention and development of accessible local services, and promote healthy, inclusive communities.

Local food system infrastructure, from production to retail, is vital for:

• Enabling farmers to process, distribute, and sell food locally, shortening supply chains and reducing transport emissions.
• Increasing access to fresh, affordable, and healthy food.
• Supporting rural employment, skills, and business diversity.
• Building resilience against supply chain shocks and market volatility.
• Building community engagement with farming.

Loss of such infrastructure can undermine local farming viability and public access to healthy and sustainable food. Safeguarding these assets through local planning policy ensures they remain available for future generations and supports local strategies on climate, health, and economic development.

Recommended monitoring

• Number of submitted, approved and rejected proposals for infrastructure for sustainable farming.
• Number of farm buildings for educational and volunteering purposes.
• Numbers and types of local food system infrastructure businesses and length of operation.
• Numbers of submitted, approved and rejected applications for local food system infrastructure.

Case studies

Case study: Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One March 2016

CP18 Healthy City
Planning will support programmes and strategies which aim to reduce health inequalities and promote healthier lifestyles through the following:

5. Recognise, safeguard and encourage the role of allotments; garden plots within developments; small scale agriculture and farmers markets in providing access to healthy, affordable locally produced food options.

Case study: Core Strategy Hackney’s strategic planning policies for 2010-2025 Adopted November 2010

Shops that provide essential day-to-day needs for the local community such as bakers, butchers, greengrocers, grocers, specialist ethnic food shops, post offices, dispensing chemists and primary care facilities, launderettes, newsagents and post offices in the borough’s town, district and local shopping centres as well as shopping parades and corner shops will be protected from changes of use away from retail.