“Within the rural context, planning policy requires local authorities to support sustainable rural tourism and leisure developments that benefit rural businesses and communities. In this instance it is accepted that the Welland Steam and Country Rally is a long established local event. However, whilst it is accepted that the building has the appearance of an agricultural building it is considered that by virtue of its isolated location, scale, height, massing and prominence the building results in a significantly harmful encroachment into the open countryside that would be detrimental to the landscape character and visual amenity of the area. Furthermore, whilst the storage of the railway crane on site may be convenient to the operators of the event, it is considered that the applicants have failed to successfully demonstrate why the railway crane should be stored on site all year round and not simply brought to site for the duration of the steam rally. Further to this, insufficient justification has been provided to demonstrate that there is a clear functional agricultural need for the building to justify development in the open countryside to comply with Policy SWDP3c. The proposal is therefore contrary to the provisions of Policies SWDP2, SWDP 21, SWDP 25 and SWDP34 of the South Worcestershire Development Plan and paragraphs 83, 124 and 127 of the Framework.”
“3.13 During the year 2000 a section of track was laid immediately to the west of the current location of the building, subject of the EN, and in 2004 the [Society] (which runs the Welland Steam and Country Rally) purchased [the steam crane] from British Rail and brought it to Woodside Farm, where it was placed on the section of track. 3.14 … planning permissions were granted for a separate, longer length of track, to the west of the appeal site upon which the Welland Steam Rally operates a steam train during the yearly event. This use of the section of track was limited to the display and operation of trains and other rolling stock for not more than 28 days in a calendar year… 3.15 The building, subject of this appeal was erected in July 2018 to the east of the short section of track (some 60m) upon which the steam crane] has been stored and then displayed during the yearly Rally. Given the scale of the Crane and the significant challenges in moving the object it has not left this section of track since being brought to site in 2004. …”
“3.30 The [steam crane] is a heritage asset whose condition has deteriorated since being brought onto site, prior to 2005. The machine requires specialised haulage as it is track-mounted, and long-term dry secure storage if the asset is to be preserved. Suitable arrangements will need to be in place prior to the removal of the building which will result in the continued deterioration of the heritage asset. 3.31 3 months is not long enough to secure appropriate alternative storage of the steam crane and therefore a period of 12 months to remove the building, in compliance with the EN, is requested in the event that planning permission is not granted under Ground A of this appeal.”
“II. CONCLUSION The crane that is the subject of this report is an object of considerable engineering and historic interest. Whereas once steam cranes had a dominant role ranging from railway breakdowns and accidents and bridge work to unloading goods, they have now been totally superceded by modern hydraulic cranes. Just as goods were once mostly carried by rail, now most are carried by truck, many of which carry their own cranes. Thus it represents the final development of steam technology: it may indeed be the last of such cranes built in Britain to survive, as we have been unable to find another of more recent date. Thus it is undoubtedly worthy of preservation in its own right. The nature of such equipment, which is almost entirely steel, requires it to be kept indoors if it is to be preserved. Although in continuous use the heat and oil largely protected them against decay, when out of use they are subject to rust, damage and even vandalism, and thus if they are to be preserved must be housed indoors. … V. HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE & REQUIREMENT FOR STORAGE This may be the last-built steam crane surviving in Britain of a type that once numbered hundreds in this country and thousands world-wide, and of which perhaps a dozen still exist here. … This example has survived over 60 years in the open, but its continued existence is threatened if it is not housed under cover. When it was in daily use the warmth of the boiler and daily attentions of the crew would ensure it could resist the elements, but decades of exposure have already damaged the external cladding and threaten the rest. If it is not kept indoors there is little prospect of its long-term survival: the basic structure is strong enough to resist corrosion but who is going to care about a rusty hulk? … This is the final version of a machine that arose from and contributed to the industrial revolution that helped form the Britain that we know. If it is to be preserved it must be kept under cover. … [The steam crane is] undoubtedly of engineering and historic interest. While not ‘famous’ like Flying Scotsman it is emblematic of the day-to-day role that steam power played in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. Just as history is less and less about Kings and Queens and more about the common man, the same applies to engineering artefacts. Unsung objects like this literally did the ‘heavy lifting’.”
“4.1 The Steam and Country Rally event has run annually from the 50 hectares at Woodside Farm Welland for 26 years, having run for the previous 7 years at Upton on Severn. Average annual attendance is 30,000 people excluding exhibitors who come to stay in the area during the event. Local businesses see a dramatic increase in footfall and bookings, and some local enterprises operate stalls within the event site. … 4.2 The event is only made possible by the enthusiasm and hard work of the event organisers, who now make this application. It is their personal enthusiasm for vintage machinery that led to the crane (currently stored within the building) being saved from decomposition in a scrap yard in the Forest of Dean. Having been brought to the site they were unable to house the crane and so the decision was taken to construct a shelter to protect the machine from further decay. It goes to the heart of the Steam Rally ethic that they have sought to preserve this remnant of the Forest’s mining heritage for future generations to enjoy as part of the annual rally where it is displayed working alongside the steam powered sawmill.”
“5.3.7 It is not uncommon for steam locomotives to be transported by road to sites around the country when required. Furthermore, carriage by road transporter is regularly used by the owners of traction engines when visiting fairs and rallies. Whilst the storage of the railway crane on site may be convenient to the operators of the event, the appellants have failed to demonstrate why the railway crane cannot be stored off site (as would be the case for other rolling stock used during the rally) and brought to site for the duration of the steam rally.”
“5.4.1 The definitive line of Welland footpath WD-507 is affected by this proposal, and passes through the building. This would require a diversion should planning permission be granted. 5.4.2 Notwithstanding the Council’s view that the development is wholly unacceptable, should the inspector be mindful to grant the Ground A appeal it understands that as it is retrospective a condition cannot be imposed requiring an application to be made to divert the PROW. 5.4.3 Worcestershire County Council have advised that they would object to the appellants being granted planning permission for the alleged breach due to the building having been constructed across the definitive legal line of Welland footpath WD-507.”
“4.4 The previous submissions raised objections to the PRoW whose route is conflicted by the building; the revised scheme demonstrates that the users of the footpath can be provided with an equally convenient alternative route, which will form the basis of a footpath diversion order should planning permission be granted.”
“9. Therefore, the building has not caused unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding countryside. It follows that the building accords with criterion in Policy SWDP 2 of the South Worcestershire Development Plan (LP), as the open countryside is safeguarded. The building also accords with LP Policy SWDP 21, as it integrates effectively with the surroundings in terms of form and function, reflects the site characteristics and complements the character of the area. There is also accordance with criteria in LP Policy SWDP 25, as the LCA and its guidelines have been taken into account and the building is appropriate to and integrates with the character of the landscape setting. Additionally, the building accords with criterion in Policy SWDP 34, as it is compatible with the physical character of the area. 10. There is no requirement in LP Policy SWDP 34 or the other LP policies referred to above for tourism development to be justified . In any event, at paragraph 83 the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) supports sustainable rural tourism and leisure development where, as in this case, the character of the countryside is respected. I am given to understand that the crane was built in the mid-1950s and might well be the last surviving example of its type in existence. Therefore, this crane is of considerable heritage interest. Also, I understand that whilst the crane is currently in working order, it has deteriorated significantly due to being kept in the open over many years and unless stored undercover, the prospects for its long-term survival are limited. It might be possible for the crane to be transported to the site for the duration of the rally, in a similar manner to a locomotive or traction engine. However, given the crane’s significant size this might well pose the owners, who are most likely volunteers, considerable difficulties in terms of transport, not least the probable associated costs. Moreover, as railway heritage sites invariably keep most rolling stock in the open, I am not convinced that there would be covered storage readily available elsewhere. 11. Therefore, erection of the building has assisted, albeit to a modest degree, in sustaining the tourism and leisure benefit afforded by the rally to the surrounding area and is consistent with the Framework paragraph 83. Furthermore, as a welldesigned place has been achieved there is no inconsistency with the Framework paragraphs 124 and 127. Other matters 12. The building has been erected across the route of the public footpath Welland WD 507. Worcestershire County Council have therefore objected to planning permission being granted. However, that is not a material factor in considering the planning merits of the building. Granting planning permission does not of itself authorise the obstruction of a public right of way. The procedures in theHighways Act 1980 should be followed to determine whether the footpath can be diverted.”
“Planning policies and decisions should protect and enhance public rights of way and access, including taking opportunities to provide better facilities for users, for example by adding links to existing rights of way networks including National Trails.”
“Proposals for the expansion and development of the tourism potential of south Worcestershire (excluding visitor accommodation – see SWDP 35) will be permitted where the following criteria are met: i. The development is compatible with the physical character of the area. ii. The significance of heritage assts and their setting is conserved and, where appropriate, enhanced. iii. The public enjoyment and understanding of the historic and natural environment is promoted. iv. Where schemes are proposed on greenfield land, consideration has been given to the availability of alternative brownfield sites. v. Appropriate provision is made for access and vehicular parking facilities (including coach parks, where appropriate). vi. The site is readily and safely accessible by means of transport other than the private car.”