Track laying and planning permission

Could someone please enlighten me ??!.
I am currently making enquiries on behalf of an embryonic heritage railway. We have ben offered a lease on an old station site, which has never been redeveloped or had a change of use since closure of the line. The question is do 'we' need planning permission to relay some track panels ?. I have made enquiries with the local authority but they cannot answer this question without recourse to applying for a lawful development cert, about which they seemed a little uncertain about its suitability on this matter.

 

Does the track to be laid cross any highways either by bridge (under/over) or by level crossing? If it does, I understand that a TWAO would be needed. I'm afraid I'm not sure about planning permission.

 

The best people to ask might be the owners of similar properties so developed such as Rowden Mill or Fencote to name two.

 

If you intend to run trains (as opposed to a length of track for display purposes) then a TWAO is required if the railway crosses any public right of way (over, under or level). Footpaths, Bridleways, RUPPS, BOATS, Unclassified county roads, highways of any description.

 

This is never going to be straightforward. A view has to be taken in relation to the time that the solum has been trackless and the intention of those who removed the track. If it has been taken up very recently and it can be shown that your group was at that time actively preparing to take over the site and relay the track then the process could be treated as a continuous one and no permission would be required. I rather suspect that that is not the case and if the track was removed by the previous railway operator it was probably removed on the basis that the railway was being abandoned and would never be re-used. In this case track laying would be treated as development (as an engineering operation) and planning permission would be required.

From a position where planning permission is needed one needs to consider whether use can be made of "permitted development" rights. A railway operator (basically anyone holding a TWA Order or its predecessors) can lay track and do most development "required for the movement of traffic by rail" under the rights under Class A of Part 17 of Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 but you are not yet in that position. An alternative is available under Part 11 of the said Order, relating to development authorised by any private Act or Order. Use of this power is hazardous and requires specialist advice from a planning lawyer.

 

Within the boundaries of the site there are no public rights of way. I am well aware of the consequencies of rights of way being crossed.

 

If the station has ceased to be used as such, i.e rail services have ceased and the track has been removed, then reinstatement of the track, it's use to store rolling stock, use of the buildings and surrounding land for purposes other than it's most recent use, all constitute a change of use and planning permission is required.
If it is intended to operate trains, this also requires planning permission and if passengers are to be carried, ORR approval is required. A formal Transport and Works Order is only required if the railway crosses a public right of way (anything from a public footpath to a motorway), whether on the level or by an under or over bridge.

 

At what scale does this kick in? If I have a large private garden and decide to put a (say) 7.5 inch railway in it (and carry friends as passengers), would that need planning permission as it would be a change of use? Does it only matter if charges are made to ride?

 

In the favourite phrase of judges and planning inspectors, it is a matter of fact and degree. The number of people coming to the site, the scale of operation and any commercial arrangements are all part of the picture, as are the scale of building, trackworks, earthworks etc.

 

That's right. Up to a few years ago, the minimum gauge at which the Railway Inspectorate took an interest was, I think, 15 inches. However, in more recent years there has been a growth in smaller passenger-carrying lines, down to 7 1/4 inches, used as public and/or commercial operations. As there are obvious health and safety issues here, the regulator has taken an interest in these also, but this would not normally apply to small, private operations.
Strictly speaking, any change of use requires planning permission and this includes garden railways, but, as with many other small domestic changes, most councils have bigger fish to fry and tend to turn a blind eye. However, they are likely to take an interest if the neighbours complain!

Whilst on this subject, mention was made in an earlier post of "permitted development rights". As was said, in strict legal terms these apply only to lines which are subject to an Act of Parliament, Light Railway Order or Transport & Works Order. However, there is a grey area! Our line, 1 mile long, crosses no rights of way and therefore only needed a license from the Ministry of Transport in order to carry passengers. When we built a second station and a signalbox without applying for planning permission, we soon received a visit from the council's enforcement officer. I told him that as we had a license to carry passengers and as, in the opinion of HMRI, we were a statuary railway with the same liabilities and obligations as any other statuary railway, we should enjoy the same privileges. He still thought that we should apply for retrospective planning permission, I refused and suggested that, if the council wished to take action, we should let the courts decide. He retreated and we have never had a problem with this matter since!
It should be noted, though, that the permitted developments are restricted to structures and works necessary for the operation of the existing railway, i.e. station buildings, signalboxes and signalling equipment, engine sheds, workshops and sidings and so forth.

 

Beat me to it! All the Broadway structures have been approved after planning permission was submitted even though it wasn't necessary. I'd be interested as to whether this would be the case for a car park serving the station though. AFAIK, planning permission will be sought for it when the time comes, but do we need to?

 

The legislation is a bit vague but unless the car park is "wholly within" the railway station (eg within the footprint of the existing station covered by the statutory rights) then planning permission would be needed for a car park. We had a similar situation on Gwili when applying for planning permission for a car park at Abergwili Jtn; as the car park was on adjacent land to the trackbed the statutory rights could not apply and permission had to be sought.

Where statutory rights do exist you can still submit an application - perhaps without paying the planning fee- I recall that there was an argument on the P and D a few years ago regarding an office block in the shape of a signal box- it qualified for permitted rights but an application was submitted in the end due to local comment!

 

Er, well, in the case of Broadway, that may be true, but it wasn't always the case at the GWSR! I seem to remember a great ho-ha some years ago when the railway obtained a building, local village hall, I think, and erected it at Toddington for use as a tea room, assuming permitted development rights. The problem was that it was not deemed necessary for the operation of the railway, the planning authority objected, a planning inquiry ensued, but the inspector found in favour of the railway. There was a sting in the tail, however, as the railway were obliged to accept the planner's stipulations as to the final design and finish of the building, which cost them dearly!
But that's all history- before FS123 was born!

 

A good few years back as the story went we put a box up, the council were non too impressed and quoted planning permission , our boss told them to go have words with Hmri who we'd already spoke too , a short while later the same council gave us an award for said same box and nowt was heard again,

Some things I was told don't need permission like operational infrastructure such as signals and water towers but others do such as stations and footbridges , best check with all the sources of info for the clearer all round picture including ORR as many things have changed in the years since

That said I wouldn't want to be putting a large signalling gantry up anywhere overlooking someone's gardens on a built up estate in case it offended locals views etc. so worth asking around too to get locals fears allayed that you're not trying to build a mainline next to someone's house. Well not yet anyway

 

I'd forgotten about that, I did know about it! I hadn't appreciated it was quite so long ago though.

I'd have thought station buildings and footbridges would all be classed as exempt, that was my understanding as with Broadway, although as I said, planning permission was sought there anyway so difficult to be sure. Perhaps @Breva could help...

 

It seems mighty strange that the Planners are happy to see the development of Broadway Station proceed without provision having already been included for car parking.

 

Station buildings and footbridges are not necessary for the operation of the railway, unlike platforms. You can operate your railway without them. There were/are plenty of stations devoid of such luxuries. Mention has also been made in another post of workshops. I don't think that these are permitted as a stand alone unlike engine and carriage sheds, which are, because, again, they are not necessary for the operation of the railway. They are a nice to have and are regarded as factories.

 

From experience I am aware of, the original "foot-print" of railway operations seems important to local planners, in so far as they will agree the extent and limit of this. A long break in operations will remove these rights.

I believe it is not unusual to provide details to planners "as a courtesy", but not, you understand, a planning application. However, as many original buildings are listed, there is not a railway operations exemption from listed building consent for alterations.

Steven