Towards a multifunctional rurality by Cambridge Design Research Studio

Towards a multifunctional rurality: Agricultural change and the development of Englandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s smaller rural settlements. THOMAS POWELL

‘Everyone knows more than half of mankind lives in cities and everybody is moving to the city so at some point I became interested in simply the question what did they leave behind… I’ve been working on this thing, and I call it countryside. And I am discovering that the countryside now is a totally undescribed field. Nobody thinks about it. And that in spite of that it’s changing incredibly fast and the countryside is no longer a kind of idyllic environment. It is where genetic engineering happens, where immigration happens, where religious warfare happens. It is much more agitated and changing than people typically recognize.’ (Transcript of Rem Koolhaas in conversation with Charlie Rose at OMA Progress, The Barbican Centre 2012)

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY; THE CASE STUDY AREA & BURROUGH GREEN

PART 1 - WHY DO WE NEED TO RETHINK RURAL HINTERLANDS?

I. THE STATE OF RURAL SOCIETY II. RURAL SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY & CHANGING PLANNING POLICY III. AGRICULTURAL & LANDSCAPE CHANGE

PART 2 - PROPOSING A NEW RURAL STRATEGY: THE PROJECT OF A MULTIFUNCTIONAL RURALITY

PREFACE; DEFINING MULTIFUNCTIONAL AGRICULTURE I. A NEED’S BASED AND LOCALLY SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IN WHICH MULTIFUNCTIONAL FARMSTEADS PROVIDE A KEY ROLE II. ASSESSING THE EVIDENCE; WHAT RURAL DEVELOPMENT IS NEEDED? III. HOW COULD WE ENABLE SUCH A STRATEGY?

PART 3 - HOW COULD A MULTIFUNCTIONAL FARMSTEAD DELIVER A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE FOR VILLAGE, LANDSCAPE AND FARM?

I. SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE & THE MULTIFUNCTIONAL LANDSCAPE II. DEVELOPING THE VILLAGE; AN AGRICULTURALLY INTEGRATED MASTERPLAN FOR BURROUGH GREEN III. THE FARMSTEAD; A GATEWAY TO THE LANDSCAPE IV. THE FARM HUB; MULTIFUNCTIONAL SPACE FOR FARM AND COMMUNITY V. LIVING & WORKING, RURAL EMPLOYMENT & BUSINESS VI. ADDING VALUE; ON FARM FOOD PROCESSING VII. LOW ENERGY FARM BUILDINGS; PASSIVE STORAGE AND DRYING.

CONCLUSION & FURTHER RESEARCH

Acknowledgements

I would like to express my thanks and gratitude to my supervisors and tutors for their huge commitment to the programme and their invaluable advice, critiscism and support for my project; Professor Alan Short Joris Fach Kevin Fellingham Ingrid Schroder

This dissertation is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except where specifically indicated in the text. 8

Abstract

Towards a multifunctional rurality: Agricultural change and rural development in England’s smaller villages. Danny Boyle’s 2012 Olympic opening ceremony chose to present to the world a romantic caricature of pre-industrial Britain, affirming the great cultural importance of the British pastoral tradition. Industrialisation and post-war agricultural modernisation transformed Britain into an urban nation, but the territory urbanisation left behind is significant and complex. What is happening in the contemporary countryside? The foot and mouth crisis of 2001 saw tourism’s loss to the economy greater than agriculture’s, signifying a shift in the countryside’s role from the productivist to the post-productivist. In the decade or so since, the countryside has changed dramatically. Examination reveals a countryside of expensive barn conversions, priced-out locals, NIMBYism, nostalgia and constrictive planning policy, alongside failing services and car-centric lifestyles. This ‘commodified countryside’ sits in conflict with an industrial scale agriculture of huge subsidy, ecological degradation and significant greenhouse gas emissions. This thesis takes a pragmatic and holistic look at rural development, examining how a small village could be planned to develop sustainably towards a new multifunctional rural paradigm where agriculture, ecology and low density inhabitation of landscape form an integrated and complimentary symbiosis.

figure 1; London 2012 Olympic Opening Ceremony

Visual Abstract

Figure 2; Proposal overview

Figure 3; View of farmstead proposal

INTRODUCTION Eighty-three percent of the UK is rural landscape; (Foresight 2010, p53) farmland and woodland interspersed with thousands of villages and hamlets. Although a minority of the population inhabit this space, its political, social, economic and cultural impact is far-reaching. It has been largely ignored by architectural thinkers, yet today this territory is complex, significant and undergoing rapid change. It presents pragmatic challenges; to find new modes of sustainable rural living and to deliver an increased yet sustainable agricultural output. However its positioning within a late capitalist society so dominated by urban considerations also presents theoretical problems. Whilst urban space entertains complexity and contradiction, affording architects freedom to invent in the city’s multiplicity, this cannot be said of rural areas where politicians, geographers and anthropologists wrestle with traditionalism, restrictive planning policy and massive public subisidy. Huge change over the past decades has seen the countryside redefined within rural studies, from a place of monolithic agro-industrial production to a post-productivist ‘consumption countryside,’(Mather et al, 2006, p452) (Halfacre, 2007, p130) where its environmental and aesthetic value equals or outweighs its productive function. As policy shifted to post-productivist aims, the concept of multifunctionalism emerged in academic and political discourse, as spatial theorists and geographers sought to integrate rural development, ecological conservation and the management of landscapes with agricultural production. (Marsden & Sonnino, 2008, p422) However, following timid government intervention coupled with a slow change in attitudes, the last decade has left a ‘differentiated countryside’ (Halfacre, 2007, p130) where the old paradigm of agro-industrial productivism is held in tension with remnants of a post productivist consumption countryside, which acheives only a partial and weak multifunctionalism. (Wilson 2007, p113) Today rural Britain is outwardly successful, with strong communities, thriving economies and a high quality of life drawing more people to the countryside than the city, with a net migration into rural areas. (CRC, 2010, p17) However, many smaller villages have been developmentally frozen to the detriment of equity, economy and sustainability, a condition which promulgates pastiche, self-parody and conservatism. This has resulted in buildings and spaces which stymy authentic rural living and settlements which are disconnected from the landscape. Recent changes to planning policy and the pressing need to rethink agriculture along sustainable lines provides the impetus to look again at rural space, to capitalise on its assets and address its problems, both pragmatic and theoretical. The thesis proposes an engagement with a fresh conceptualisation of rural multifuctionality which ties agricultural, ecological and social development together in a new sustainable rural development paradigm, with the aim of creating authentic, living, working settlements and landscapes that accommodate human habitation, ecosytem services and sustainable agricultural production. It is posited that this multifunctional paradigm could be realised through a re-imagining of the village farmstead as a hub for farm business pluri-activity, landscape management and leisure and tourism; providing spaces for social functions, services and rural economic activity. Through this proposition the thesis explores the achitectural implications of building in the rural context, examining the commodifed vernacular, the aesthetic of agricultural landcape, and the implications of modifying historic low density settlement structures.

Figure 4; UK land cover

Why is now a pertinent time to re-examine the rural? 1. THE STATE OF RURAL SOCIETY There is much evidence to suggest that rural communities are facing significant social and economic challenges. The Taylor Review (2009) and the Commision for Rural Communites’ 2010 State of the countryside report identify serious barriers to sustainability in local services, housing, social equity and the rural economy. If the carbon reduction targets set in law are to be met, then every settlement type in the UK, even the smallest will have to significantly reduce their energy use. 2. CHANGING PLANNING POLICY AND SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY The growth limiting policies of the last decade are reported to have exacerbated social and economic problems whilst failing to reduce transport distances and energy use. With the recent shake-up of the planning system there is the opportunity to orchestrate a new approach to rural development and spatial strategies, particularly for smaller rural settlements. 3. AGRICULTURE & LANDSCAPE CHANGE There is a broad consensus that UK agriculture faces massive change as it needs to produce more in a sustainable manner. Several key reports including Foresight’s The Future of Food and Farming (2011) and The Royal Society’s Reaping the benefits; Science and the sustainable intensification of global agriculture (2009) have recently called for a renewed focus on domestic production with a ‘sustainable intensification’ of UK agriculture.

These three drivers for change suggest the countryside is at a turning point, and to consolidate these complex and competing issues there is now a strong case for intervention by designers in a space traditionally ignored. To understand how this could happen this thesis examines the small villages which inhabit sparsely populated farmland regions and which local authorities have deliberately excluded from local development plans as these places are the most acute representation of rural issues. (CRC, 2010, p2)

Figure 5; Land at the back of Wyck Farm, Burrough Green

METHODOLOGY; THE CASE STUDY AREA & BURROUGH GREEN The role of design as a mode of research is the subject of considerable debate. However there is much that designers can contribute to knowledge and understanding, through the invention that comes in design, through spatialising and integrating the research contributions of different disciplines and by addressing issues at a range of scales. This research project explores how to use architectural thinking and design to conduct research which can contribute new ways of solving issues and improving human environments through a propositional research methodology. Over the duration of the research project, five papers have been submitted which build an understanding of the topic, from design studies to papers on policy. This thesis summarises this supporting work and a final design exploration as a comprehensive research report. The proposition of this thesis is to promote a new multifunctional agricultural paradigm through the re-alignment of agricultural practice along sustainable lines, fostering a re-activation of rural settlements through the re-imagination of the farmstead as a hub of multifunctional social, agricultural and touristic activity. This argument is made through a broad and multi-disciplinary understanding of current research, policy and reportage alongside original analysis of geospatial data. In the construction of this proposal it becomes apparent that although the concept

CAMBRIDGE

Highlights the location of the village & study area through the document

of multifunctionality is widely discussed in research and that multifunctional traits have become established in contemporary agriculture, where agricultural pluri-activity is found it is typically partial and piecemeal, with multifunctional activity often divorced from productive objectives. (Marsden & Sonnino, 2008, p422) This thesis explores the full potential of rural multifunctionality and its conciliation with sustainable intensification by examining what could be realised through an architectural and spatial intervention. This is achieved through a propositional research where a case study design explores the symbiotic development of a farm, settlement and its locale. The process of designing within a context and giving physical form to research concepts gives rise to new insights and possibilities. It is intended that this view will present a unique contribution to the wider debate in rural studies, planning policy, agricultural development, economics and sociology. The vehicle for an exploration of these issues is the small village of Burrough Green in East Cambridgeshire, the farm and farmstead which adjoin it, and its spatial context, the rural hinterland between Cambridge, Newmarket and Haverhill.

NEWMARKET

Figure 6; Case study area

Burrough Green and the Dullingham villages ward sit in â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;the accessible countrysideâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, where the commodification of rural space, commuting culture and problems of inequality are high. It falls within the area of East Anglian arable production where the most monolithic and industrial UK farming occurs. To understand how the proposed development of farm and village might work, first considered are the overarching influences on the rural environment; the challenges facing rural society, the relationship of the countryside to urban centres and the impetus for agricultural change. Through a description of the broader issues for rurality and how they relate to what is happening in the study area, this part of the thesis sets out the evidence for why it is important to rethink rural hinterlands.

Figure 7; Burrough Green in relation to neighbouring villages

Radi

LB TCB

o Mas

Wr T

TCB

Shel ter

Tank

Wr T

Foot Bridge

Foot Bridge Shelter

TCB

Pumps

Raynor's Bridge

Stone

Pump

Shelte

TCB

War

Meml

Figure 8; Aerial photo of Burrough Green 23

PART 1 WHY DO WE NEED TO RE-THINK RURAL HINTERLANDS? As designers of built environments, why is now a pressing time to engage with the rural? Why do we need to reconsider rural space and rural settlements, and why is a new positioning of rural space necessary? Examining Burrough Green and its locale, we explore the issues facing rural hinterlands.

25 Figure 9; Panorama across green, Burrough Green

I. THE STATE OF RURAL SOCIETY The state of the countryside report (SOTC 2010) is published periodically by the Commission for Rural Communities. The latest report published in 2010 gives us a comprehensive and up to date summary of statistical data on UK rural communities. Along with the major 2008 report to government; Living Working Countryside: The Taylor Review of Rural Economy and Affordable Housing, there is a substantial contemporary evidence base to help understand the shape of rural communities and the challenges for rural development. Drawing heavily from these reports and other key papers in the field of rural studies, this chapter aims to summarise the key issues for rural communities.

Figure 10; Traditional agricultural workers cottages demolished in Burrough Green, 1960

The Dear Old Village ….In the bad times of old feudality, The villagers were ruled by masters three – Squire, Parson, schoolmaster. Of these, the last Knew best the village present and it’s past. Now, I am glad to say, the man is dead, The children have a motor bus instead, And in town eleven miles away, We train them to be ‘Citizens of Today’. And many a cultivated hour they pass In a fine school with walls of vita-glass. Civics, eurythmics, economics, Marx, How–to-respect-wild-life-in-national-parks; Plastics, Gymnastics – thus they learn to scorn The old thatch’d cottages where they were born. The girls, ambitious to begin their lives Serving in WOOLWORTH’s rather than as wives; The boys, who cannot yet escape the land, At driving tractors lend a clumsy hand. An eight-hour day for all, and more than three, Of these are occupied in making tea….. Betjeman, J, 1970

Figure 11; Cosy Cottage, Burrough Green, 1925

The gentrification of the countryside The change Betjeman described in The Dear Old Village aptly captures the sense of a rural way of life being left behind by post-war Britain, as traditional agricultural communities disappeared in a period of radical change, driven by the industrialisation of agriculture. This saw the traditional employment base destroyed, whilst the immigration of wealthier urban incomers began in earnest following Government expansion of the road network, which opened up rural backwaters as desirable commuting fields. (Howkins, 2003 143 -159) Throughout the late twentieth and early twenty-first century the trend of inmigration and falling agricultural employment and services continued, leaving a modern countryside far removed from the close knit and wholly agricultural communities which existed pre-war. Today there are some bastions of traditional working community in remote areas, but the majority of the ‘post-productivist’ countryside is socially and demographically similar to urban society, a small minority working directly in agriculture. (Taylor, 2007, p123) However it differs in some key aspects. It is now predominantly a middle-class territory, as rural gentrification has brought in a majority ‘petite bourgeoisie’ of small employers and own account workers, predominantly traditional in their cultural values. (Philips, 2007, p293) A mix of the new service class and professionals make up the remainder of the middle class, with higher proportions in the ‘accessible countryside,’ where they can easily commute to urban conurbations. (Philips, 2007, p293) Much of the class conflict which once troubled rural communities in the early days of in-migration has now disappeared. The Place Survey (2009) found rural areas to report higher satisfaction with community integration than urban and suburban areas, possibly as the incomers essentially ‘won out.’ Rural areas are reported to have greater wellbeing, community spirit and volunteerism than urban areas. (CRC, 2010, p76) However there still exists large disparities in mean wages. Those who work in rural areas typically earn £4,655 less than the national average, creating an economic divide between those who live in rural communities and work in small businesses, which are predominantly land based, property or business services, and those who live in rural areas and commute to cities to work in higher paying, larger firms, consequently able to price out those working in rural areas. (CRC, 2010, p135)

THE AGRARIAN COUNTRYSIDE

Figure 12; Burrough Green. Families outside their homes at Town Yard situated near Walnut Tree Row, 1920

THE AGRARIAN COUNTRYSIDE

Figure 13; Brinkley - Chalk Pit Farm. A stack on raised hobbles. The farm worker is thatching the top to prevent rain getting in. 1932 to 1934

THE PRODUCTIVIST COUNTRYSIDE figure 14; Burrough Green, new car, 1964

THE PRODUCTIVIST COUNTRYSIDE figure 15; Burrough Green, combine harvester, 1960’s

THE POST PRODUCTIVIST OR COMMODIFIED COUNTRYSIDE figure 16; Burrough Green, the restored Hart Farm and Barn conversion, 2012 The hedge still has labels on.

THE POST PRODUCTIVIST OR COMMODIFIED COUNTRYSIDE figure 17; Burrough Green, chemical agriculture; spraying crops with pesticides, 2012 .

Housing A lack of government support for affordable housing in smaller rural settlements has led to a severe shortage, with the right to buy policies of the 1980s eradicating much available housing. Only 13% of housing in rural areas is affordable, compared with 21 percent in urban areas, and provision in the smallest settlements is far lower. (CRC, 2010, p48) The Affordable Rural Housing Commission and the Commission for Rural Communities have independently estimated the need to more than double the current rate of affordable home provision, with 10,000-15,000 new homes required in rural settlements of less than 3000 people in the next five years. (Taylor, 2008, p87) Such exclusion of the poorest undermines the sustainability of rural places, socially and environmentally, and conflicts with the principles of social cohesion and equity set out in the aims of national planning policy. The lack of affordable housing is partly to do with spatial planning strategy, which is examined in the subsequent section. Yet it also has roots in the societal attitudes of the post-productivist countryside, where dominant middle class values put great value on the small scale and traditional environment which they have invested in and wish to protect. Furthermore the low quality, sprawling development of the 1970s has created a negative view of new development and resistance to new building. (Howkins, 2003, p170) Dubbed NIMBYism by contemporary commentators, this opposition to development has derailed many housing projects and deterred landowners from developing land. (Taylor 2008, p108) (IPPR, 2006, p122) Designing new pieces of rural built environment in a manner which appeases the desire of the community to preserve the character and form of rural space is essential to seeing projects accepted. (DCLG, 2011, P16) This suggests the need for the careful editing of village settlements rather than the introduction of comprehensive new forms. However an engagement by designers with the commodification of rural vernaculars and romantic societal ideals promises to have interesting implications, with opportunities to revive a vernacular tradition which has been lost in pastiche and historicism.

figure 18; Average house prices 2012, Cambridgeshire

Average price (ÂŁ) 93,363.6 - 162,603.7 162,603.8 - 208,235.6 208,235.6 - 258,052.5 258,052.6 - 337, 304.1 337, 304.2 - 566,352.7

figure 19; Barriers to housing & services, 2010, Cambridgeshire

Ranking of wards 1 (highest) - 23 (lowest) 99.3 - 123.0 75.5 - 99.2 49.7 - 74.4 24.9 - 49.6 1.0 -24.8

Services To maintain viability services need a certain threshold of users to sustain them. This is hard to deliver in small rural settlements, and therefore UK service strategies have followed a service hub strategy, where services are confined to larger towns and villages. (Taylor 2008, p30) The lack of services to smaller settlements is a key barrier to their sustainability, their residents incurring high travel distances in commuting to service centres and excluding the 32% of the population who donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t drive, being too old, young or poor. (Banister 2005, p4) A potentially more sustainable approach is the outreach service strategy, where traditional services, such as the permanent post office, are replaced with more flexible alternatives. Mobile services are already provided by the postal delivery service, which are linked with online pre-booking enabling the regular postman to pick up mail, sell stamps and change currency. Similarly innovative are hosted service strategies, for example where a postal worker practices from within existing community centres or shops at set times. (The Post Office, 2012) Health services could also follow outreach strategies, taking advantage of universal rural broadband to become far more ICT based, with online GP appointments by videophone, remote monitoring of patients, and outreach clinics being hosted in community spaces. (NHS Sustainable development unit, 2009) Delivery of services to rural places has long been considered a spatial problem, concerned with locating services in a geographically efficient manner. However in light of the longstanding failure of this strategy, with the new technologies inherent in universal broadband access, there is an opportunity to redefine rural service provision to become more inclusive and sustainable through innovative delivery of services, rather than through spatial distribution. As a significant complex within the village the farm has potential to become a hub for a range of such innovatively delivered services. The location of Burrough Green at the centre of a web of small villages with good pedestrian links would make it an ideal host.

Rural & farmstead employment hubs Primary school Village hall Pub Church Post office

35 figure 20; Existing services in Burrough Green and surrounding villages

Economy, Premises & Employment. The rural economy is significant, contributing 14% to the national economy. It is diverse, stable and growing faster than urban economies, although it is now compositionally very similar. Once largely agrarian, now only 7.5% of people are employed in agriculture, with the most rural areas seeing levels of entrepreneurial activity rivalled only by inner London. (Taylor, 2008, p123) More micro businesses employing less than 10 people are registered in rural than urban areas and since 2005 firms employing 1-10 people in villages and hamlets saw the largest growth of any area. (CRC, 2010, p135) A positive trend is in growing knowledge-intensive ICT businesses, which increased 46% in rural areas between 1998 and 2005, compared to 21% in urban areas, as the perceived quality of rural life attracts those businesses which are geographically mobile. (Taylor 2008, 123) ICT may also account for the increase in home working in hamlets and isolated dwellings, currently practiced by 17% of rural workers. (Lowe & Ward, 2009, p1332) Competition with more profitable residential development for rural sites and protectionist planning policies limit the availability of working premises. In a survey for The Taylor Review 74% of home-based businesses cited a shortage of premises as a barrier to growth. (Taylor 2008, p120) The Taylor Review calls for the development of live/work units and for planning policy to prioritise business usage in conversions, with flexibility towards green-field and farmstead development. With the barrier of limited premises removed, the potential of the strong rural economy to make more sustainable communities, with people both working and living locally could be realized, whilst allowing businesses to grow and provide higher levels of income. Farmsteads offer an ideal base for small businesses to cluster, providing a hub for business activity, sharing resources and services. In the study area there are already several examples of redundant agricultural buildings let as business premises, though these are usually outside of settlement boundaries. Bringing a working population into the village could reinforce local services and businesses, making thriving village environments.

Care to Learn TRAINING SERVICES John Wilson Carpenter

Teevan Consulting BUSINESS CONSULTANTS

Angela Brewer COUNCILLING Waverley Air AIRCONDITIONING

Hope Hall Stud Ltd Stables

Anderton & Bush FLOORING

Julia Smith-Pearse Chiropractor

Smith Owen Associates TECHNICAL WRITERS/EDITIORS

Harrington Brown Consulting Ltd BUSINESS CONSULTANTS

MJ Read & Son ELECTRICIAN

J G S Fresh Produce Ltd FRUIT &VEGETABLE WHOLESALER

M J Pepper Electrical Contractor ELECTRICIAN

Stetchworth Conservatories CONSERVATORIES

Robert Grass Carpentry CARPENTER

Newcampe Medical Ltd FIRST AID SUPPLIES

Old school house day nursery CHILDCARE NURSERY

J & D Taylor TREE SERVICES

Sunbaba Systems Ltd BANNERS & MARKETING

Kookaburra Fencing FENCING SUPPLIER

The Independent Mortgage Bureau MORTGAGE BROKER

DWS Photo’s PHOTOGRAPHER

Dan Curtis Architecture ARCHITECT

AGRICULTURAL CONSULTANTS

Stables

Fire & Safety Control Associates FIRE SAFETY

Ash House Stables Stables

Napier Garden Planning GARDEN DESIGN Andrew Manning Ltd CABINET MAKERS

Prestige Vehicle Sales & Consultancy Ltd CAR SALES

McCulloughs AIR CONDITIONING SALES

Almath Crucibles crucible makers

Yu Tiger Ltd CHILDRENS TOYS Brinkley Rd. Stud STABLES

Ascot CLASSIC CAR STORAGE Elite Caravans LtdLtd CARAVAN SALES

Rosyground Stud Stables

Wright Mechanical Ltd CENTRAL HEATING ENGINEERS

L F Field AGRICULTURAL CONSULTANT

Imagemaker ltd Printing & Graphics

The Bull PUB Saphire Cusine CATERING

Executive stud STABLES

John Robinson Pianos PIANO REPAIR & TUNING Jaggard COAL SUPPLIER

R.E & G.B Way RARE BOOKS

Sarah Davison CHIROPODIST

Seymour Bloodstock (UK) Ltd LIVESTOCK DEALER

figure 21; Mapping of Businesses in Burrough Green and surrounding villages, AM2PM Discos DISCO

showing the great range and number of small businesses in the area.

Mayhew Construction BUILDER Jeremy Compton TRAILER SUPPLIER

Admin 4 All RECEPTIONIST Suffolk Oil Solutions TANK SUPPLIER

Keymer Cavendish PLANNING CONSULTANT

HR CONSULTANT

Conclusions on the State of Rural Society Looking at the countryside nationally alongside snapshots of Burrough Green, it appears the countryside is a good place to live for many. It has thriving communities, with high levels of volunteerism and good social cohesion. Furthermore there is a strong economy of entrepeneurial small businesses. However limited development in the post-productive countryside also equates to inequality for the communities of smaller settlements, with high desirability and little intervention from government leaving them as increasingly the preserve of a wealthy middle class, as populations are ageing and becoming more gentrified. This undermines social diversity whilst putting further strain on services, as well as keeping businesses small and wages low. There is a growing separation between this commuting middle class, and an underclass composed of those with small rural businesses who often canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t afford to live in the same area they work. This situation is undesirable in social and economic terms, but it is also contributing to higher transport distances. So what are the problems with planning and development policy which have contributed to this situation, and what needs to change? The next section looks at changing spatial development strategy and the opportunities for farmstead and village development which this presents.

figure 22; Burrough Green, An old phone box has become a makeshift lending library for the residents

II. RURAL SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY & CHANGING PLANNING POLICY

Previous to the new National Planning Policy Framework published in March 2012, (DCLG, 2012) rural development policy was designed to reinforce a hierarchial settlement strategy, where larger village settlements with a good level of services are allowed some small scale development. However within those smaller villages with limited services, development was largely prohibited. The hierarchial strategy stemmed from an understanding that development in small settlements fundamentally contradicted the aims set out in previous planning policy guidance to reduce dependence on cars and reduce the need to travel. In its report Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities: A New Agenda, the Commision for Rural Communities challenged the presumption that small settlements are fundamentally unsustainable, arguing instead that, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;the key settlement approach is based on a mythical hierarchy of villages and towns...which fails to recognize the complexity and diversity of functions and networks that have developed in recent decades in rural Englandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; CRC, 2007, p6 This view is supported by a now well-developed body of research into commuting and travel patterns based on census data. As the commute is largely combined with use of other services such as shopping, (Findlay et al, 2001) it gives an accurate indicator of peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s movement in rural space. Concurrently the new National Planning Policy Framework has abolished the hierarchial settlement strategy and freed up local authorities to determine their own polcies on rural spatial development, allowing rural spatial strategy to be re-adressed. (DCLG, 2012) With counter-urbanisation increasing, rural commuting needs to be tackled to ensure a sustainable future. Prominent reports such as The Taylor Review (Taylor 2008) have called for a place specific response to rural issues based on evidence and public consultation. Examining rural commuting through 2001 census data in an analysis of the case study area, we attempt to understand commuting in a specific place, and how this might inform strategies for reducing travel.

figure 23; Figure ground demonstrates the dispersed pattern of small settlements on the Cambridgeshire Suffolk Border.

The car-centric countryside Travel to work in rural areas has been instrumental in the changing nature of rural settlements over the last 40 years. Growing numbers of people live in the countryside attracted by the perceived higher quality of life alongside increased accessibility to commute to work in cities. In many places this influx of newcomers into rural communities led to tensions, loss of social cohesion, and a steady decline in rural services. (Howkins, 2003) Rural inhabitants seem to travel further than those in urban areas, and as low density habitation makes cost-effective public transport difficult to implement, they travel more by car. Unsustainable in terms of emissions, this is also problematic for non-drivers. There is little to suggest that rural travel distances have been reduced by the hierarchial settlement model, with travel distances to services and work having remained the same over the past 10 years. (CRC 2010 p123) There is evidence to suggest that spatial development strategy is anyway unlikely to impact directly on travel behaviour. Findlay et al describe a ‘culture of mobility,’ identifying rural ‘hypermobility’ as an embedded cultural trait likely unaffected by spatial planning. The dispersed nature of jobs in rural areas coupled with cheap car-based transport and uncongested rural roads has led in many areas to an increasingly dispersed and far-reaching spatial economy, with little friction of distance; rural dwellers choosing to live and work with little consideration for how far they travel. This is coupled with a growing ‘two way’ pattern of commuting, the traditional model of rural residents commuting into towns and cities being replaced by ‘commuting fields’ in which people are increasingly mobile, with increasingly powerful labour market connections which cut across simple categorisations of settlement type and urban/rural status. (Findlay et al 2001, p13) This suggests more place specific study is required, specifically of strategies for transport and commuting, towards targeted interventions that reduce excessive travel behaviour This section summarises a supporting study on rural travel which examines the commuting patterns of Burrough Green and the surrounding area. It identifies three distinct rural commuting traits; long distance urban/ peri-urban commuting, rural containment and reverse commuting; before proposing some ways that negative traits could be changed, and positive traits capitalised on. This informs us as to how a multifunctional agriculture might combine with new rural development strategies.

figure 24; Burrough Green, Cars parked two deep outside elderly residents homes

COMMUTING IN THE EAST CAMBRIDGESHIRE RURAL HINTERLAND.

Long distance urban & peri-urban commuting. Long distance commuting to urban conurbations is one of the most entrenched traits of rural travel. The national average commute in these rural areas is 14.6km, nearly 50% further than a large urban area. (Champion, 2009, p175) figs. 25-28 shows output area mapping of census origin destination data which illustrates the commuting habits of several villages, including Burrough Green, within the Dullingham villages ward. The average commute within the ward is higher than the national average, at 18.9km. (ONS 2001) The mapping shows extensive long distance commuting to Cambridge and Newmarket, as well as to further employment centres such as Ely. This describes an extremely far-reaching and emission-heavy commuting field. It also shows little commuting between these villages and nearby adjacent settlements or service centre villages. This is problematic for local services, as there is much evidence to suggest the commute is often combined with use of services, so it is likely local shops, post offices and leisure facilities are often bypassed for those in nearby towns. How could long distance commuting be reduced? Addressing the regional housing balance A shortage of housing near Cambridge is likely the cause of much long distance commuting in the rural regions. Although the study wards are expensive, the scarcity and high cost of spacious detached housing in the city make them attractive to city workers. (CCC, 2009) The provision of spacious new housing closer to Cambridge could lower the desirability of these wards to long distance commuters and return them to more localised economic activity. However there is a great inertia to the spatial economy. As demonstrated by The Martin Centreâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Solutions scenario modelling, new development has limited and only very long term influence on the shape of regional spatial economies. (Echenique et al, 2009)

OA 12UCFZ007 (SAXON ST/DITTON GREEN)

Figure 18.

figure 25; Mapping of commuting pattern from Burrough Green

figure 26; Mapping of commuting pattern from Brinkley OA 12UCFZ004 (STRETCHWORTH) Figure 19.

Electric cars The introduction of electric cars could reduce the emissions produced by rural hyper-commuting.They are five times as energy efficient as fossil fuel cars (Mackay, 2008, p127) and the extra space afforded rural settlements provides opportunities for the renewable self-generation of power to charge them. However this wouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t address problems of providing transport for non-drivers, or the social implications of a hyper-commuting countryside, such as reduced patronage of local facilities and services. Despite this electric vehicles could prove to be a significant part of the solution. However with optimistic estimates predicting no more than a 30% electric fleet by 2030, (COCC, 2010, p217) rural car fleets being typically older, (CRC, 2010, p38) and with electric cars set to be more expensive than conventional vehicles, there is a danger of rural areas being left behind. There does seem to be considerable opportunity for car sharing and car pool schemes, which could be particularly effective when used alongside part-time homeworking. Home-working. Encouraging more self-employed to work from home or within their community rather than rent premises in faraway urban areas could reduce long distance commuting. Additionally, with the widespread adoption and continuing advancement of ICT, large employers could introduce flexitime schemes, where rural employees could work from home some days of the week. The provision of dedicated space to work is a potential function of the proposed multifunctional farmstead with a call for new rural live-work development, (CRC 2007b) whilst rural business hubs have been proven as effectual means to provide space and resources for effective homeworking, (Taylor, 2008)

OA 12UCFU002 (LODE)

Figure 16.

figure 27; Mapping of commuting pattern from Stretchworth

OA 12UCFZ001 (DULLINGHAM VILLAGES) Figure 17.

figure 28; Mapping of commuting pattern from Dullingham

Containment Although the proportion of jobs to residence is lower in rural areas, there are high levels of selfcontainment in rural settlements, with people both living and working in the same place. This is a positive rural trait, reducing emissions from transport and building stronger communities. Rural areas see more homeworking nationally, (CRC 2007b) and this trend is evident in the study area, which shows higher percentages of homeworking than nearby town/urban wards. (fig. 29) How can this potentially sustainable characteristic of rural working be capitalised on? The Taylor Review suggests that development restrictions limit the extent of the rural economy, and proposes that premises should be permitted to be expanded and businesses allowed to flourish. (Taylor 2008) The high containment found suggests if rural businesses and premises were allowed to expand and the number of jobs located in rural areas increase, people would continue to live near their work, particularly if the expansion was modest. A 2009 public consultation carried out by East Cambridgeshire ACRE and East Cambridgeshireâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strategic partnership Rural Cambridgeshire: Ensuring a Vibrant Future, Consultation on a new Rural Strategy for Cambridgeshire 2009, identified a need for affordable business space and opportunities for homeworking, with a recent consultation specifically identifying a lack of small premises as a barrier. (CCRG, 2006, p10) In response to high levels of out-commuting, East Cambridgeshire Council developed â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;E spacesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; for small businesses in Ely and Newmarket, with low rents and flexible leases. These units increased regional containment, with 30% of respondents saying they would have located outside East Cambridgeshire without the E spaces. It seems a similar strategy could work in the more rural areas. .

figure 29; Workplace containment

% of people working in the area who also live there

70% and over 50% to 69% 35% to 49% 20% to 34% less than 20%

Reverse commuting Reverse commuting is the phenomenon of incomers moving into rural settlements, causing house prices to soar, leaving lower paid local workers unable to afford local houses. Instead they live on the cheaper peripheries of nearby market towns or urban areas and commute back into the countryside to work. Around 13.5% of the workforce in the Dullingham Villages ward reverse commute, with the majority of flows from Newmarket. (fig. 31 & 32) Commuting flows by industry show that it is employees in lower income industries such as farming, forestry and fishing who commute from the town wards back into the rural wards. (fig. 33) Examining average houses prices across the wards demonstrates a considerable gap in affordability. (fig. 30)

Reducing reverse commuting The obvious solution is to provide more affordable local housing. This raises significant problems. How can policy ensure that those who buy or let the new housing are working locally? Indeed a 2009 study by Champion found new arrivals to smaller rural settlements were more likely to exhibit long distance commuting behaviour. (Champion et al, 2009) The development of market housing would do little to reduce the problem. The desirability of these areas would demand large volumes of housing before prices dropped enough to make it affordable for local workers. Such development would be detrimental to the pastoral quality of these settlements, and would not guarantee less travel. Another solution would be to allow the development of housing with special conditions, such as on evidence of being a local worker with an income below a set threshold. This could be either developed by the local authority through non-subsidised models, such as community land trusts where land or property is held in perpetuity for the benefit of the community, or through the encouragement of private affordable homes by developers or through social landlord models. Under such schemes landowners are permitted to develop land for affordable local housing, under condition that the rents are set at an agreed amount below market value. (Taylor 2008, p111) The right to buy policies of the 1980s dramatically decreased the stock of social housing in rural areas, and waiting lists for affordable housing are growing. (Taylor 2008) Low cost rented housing kept in perpuity for local workers could reduce reverse commuting, however where and how this new housing would be provided is of interest to the wider proposition of farmstead development to aid in rural development.

figure 30; Barriers to housing & services, 2010, Cambridgeshire

Ranking of wards 1 (highest) - 23 (lowest) 99.3 - 123.0 75.5 - 99.2 49.7 - 74.4 24.9 - 49.6

Number of commutes

1.0 -24.8

10-14 6-9

figures 31-33; Reverse commuting

Workers Origns, Dullingham viillages SOA

Workers Origins, Bottisham SOA

15 -19

20-29 30+

Travel to work in Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing,

Conclusions on the car-centric countryside The generic policies of servicing and developing smaller rural settlements have for a long time been based on an outdated hierarchial model, which has been applied to large geographical areas and across broad area classifications. The resultant frozen development has caused housing pressures, social inequality, a constrained economy and weakened rural services. A contemporary understanding of rural commuting shows us a diverse, complex and locally specific spatial economy. Rather than writing off small settlements as inherently unsustainable and freezing development, by understanding the economic pressures and development needs of individual rural settlements, specific interventions could be made to reduce unsustainable travel behaviour. This analysis has speculated on how the unsustainable commuting practices identified might be altered and how more sustainable trends could be encouraged. Through an evidence-based understanding of peoplesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; commuting habits and needs, both through analysis of census datasets such as those examined here and through public surveys and consultation, positive strategies which lessen the negative impacts of rural commuting habits could be applied on a case by case basis, through changing working behaviour, addressing housing pressures and easing premises restraints on rural business. In doing so there is the opportunity to reduce transport related emissions and tackle the issues surrounding wider socio-economic sustainability. This raises the question of how the farmstead and the development of a multifunctional agriculture could be integrated with these aims.

III. AGRICULTURAL & LANDSCAPE CHANGE Small villages such as Burrough Green are dominated by the agricultural landscape they inhabit.This chapter examines how agriculture needs to change, in the ambition to construct a more accessible and diverse natural environment, and in the need to secure a sustainable low energy future for agriculture, through â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;sustainable intensification.â&#x20AC;&#x2122; This chapter describes the scale of the challenge, and the strategies available to secure a positive transformation.

figure 34; Burrough Green, looking towards Wyck Farm 55

Introduction After the wholesale commitment to the modernization of agriculture post war, production soared and efficiencies increased. By the late 20th century the ‘green revolution’ became a victim of its own success, with ‘set aside’ schemes introduced by the government, effectively paying farmers to reduce production as a means to stabilise saturated markets. Concurrently a growing public outcry at the huge cost to the environment and animal welfare of monolithic agricultural modernisation was becoming steadily more vocal. (Howkins 2003 220 -225) In 2001 the aftermath of the foot and mouth crisis showed greater loss to the economy in tourism than in agriculture (Howkins 2003 231 -232) The CAP reform of 2001 for the first time seriously recognised environmental concerns, regarding subsidy as linked to environmental stewardship; encouraging the reinstatement of hedgerows, field boundaries and other important habitats. This reflected a paradigm shift from a productivist to a post-productivist role for the countryside. (Marsden & Sonnino, 2008, p422) The reform of the CAP demonstrated that Government had acknowledged the countryside was no longer solely for the production of food and fibre, and that its worth as an environmental asset was equal to its productive value. (Foresight, 2010, p71-72) Additionally diversification from agricultural activities was promoted, helping to make agri-businesses more resilient by providing alternative incomes. (DEFRA, 2009) These changes have had positive impacts, yet signify a reduced commitment to out and out food production. Successive governments have stressed that food security should be seen as a global issue, with policy directed at securing and protecting international trade routes rather than through supporting self sufficiency. (Soil Association, 2008, p3) This has reduced domestic share of food production from 71% in 1988 to 60% in 2008 (Barling et al, 2008 p14) However food price spikes in 2008 brought home the UK’s exposure to fluctuating global markets, and has refocused attention on national sufficiency. (Barling et al, 2008, p5) The second decade of the 21st century has seen a re-evaluation of food systems and food security. Foresight ‘s report to government on food and farming futures is a major research report drawing on over a hundred commissioned peer reviewed papers. It concludes that a sustainable intensification of agriculture is now urgently needed. (Foresight 2012) Sustainable agricultural intensification is defined as ‘producing more output from the same area of land while reducing the negative environmental

impacts and at the same time increasing contributions to natural capital and the flow of environmental servicesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; (Pretty, 2012) With a reported 70% increase in food production needed to 2050, and with the worlds biggest food producing countries likely to be worse affected by climate change, the impetus for Northern European countries to increase their own output is great. (FAO, 2011, p3) In light of this the current position of the countryside as a post productivist space needs to be challenged and a new way of thinking about rurality will need to be found. This chapter looks at how agriculture will have to change to achieve sustainable intensification and what this will mean for the relationship between agriculture and rural development.

Producing more food The UK will need to increase domestic food production. To do so sustainably, where will increases come from? Biological improvements. Agriculture has managed an average of 2% increase in yield each year since WWII in improved crops, whilst livestock has advanced at a similar pace. (Pollock 2011, p4) This could continue with investment in research and development of new breeds and varieties, however it seems likely that some productive advantages will be redirected into making crops resilient to a water depleted future and in coping with greater climate instability. (Pollock 2011, p9) Furthermore the necessity to reduce inputs such as fertilizer and pesticides in crops and to reduce outputs in livestock, such as methane, will see scientific advancement pre-occupied with more than just increasing yields. (Royal Society, 2009, p4) (Sassenrath et al, 2008, p291)) Changing what is produced. Production could be increased by a structural shift towards more efficient produce, for instance using more land for arable and horticultural production rather than livestock. Beef cattle, for example, are extremely inefficient, with large areas of productive land used for growing animal feed which could be producing human food. (Barling et al, 2008, p40) Climate change could open up opportunities for land traditionally only viable for grazing to arable and horticultural use (Pollock 2011, p17) whilst novel foods such as the protein rich warm water fish Talapia boast extremely efficient conversion rates. (Little et al, 2008) How consumer demand and societal attitudes will change is hard to predict, and unless the market leads shifts in what is produced, it seems likely that demand for less productive outputs such as beef would simply be offset abroad. Improving farm efficiency There are significant opportunities to increase national production by improving the performance of the agricultural sector. (Pollock 2011, p17) The industry needs training and investment to optimise underperforming farms, with latest practice in management and technology needing to be disseminated across the industry. For example precision farming, involving the precise placement of inputs such as water and nutrients, aided by technologies such as infrared imaging ensure best possible yields. (Foresight 2010 p13)

figure 35; Infra red images depict water stress in crops, aiding precise irrigation.

Reducing energy use and emmissions The biggest challenge is to implement these efficiencies whilst reducing emissions. Agriculture will have a major role in the UK meeting its emissions targets under the Climate Change Act 2008, with a required GHG reduction of 80% by 2050. (Warwick HRI, 2007, p4) Livestock Agriculture currently emits 8% of UK GHG, largely in Methane and Nitrous Oxide through ruminant livestock. (Foresight, 2011b, p8) There are strong health and environmental arguments to reduce meat production. However unless public attitudes lead such a shift, then it is likely that a policy of structural reduction of meat and dairy production would just offset demand to other countries where emissions may be entirely unregulated. (Audsley et al, 2009, p68) Another option is to capture these emissions at source. There is much potential in slurry management and processing manure on farm. With livestock kept for large parts of the year in large sheds where slurry is easily captured, the opportunity to process this through anaerobic digestion is a viable way to reduce emissions and create energy. (Defra 2007, p8&9) External inputs. External inputs such as chemical fertilizers and pesticides account for a large amount of agricultureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s energy consumption and C02 production. There is potential to breed livestock and crops which need less inputs, (Sassenrath et al, 2008) but there is more potential to mitigate external inputs through agroecological and closed loop farming systems, where nutrients are cycled on farm. This includes using manures from livestock as fertilizer and novel crop rotations such as cover crops and nitrogen fixing legumes. (Pretty, 2001) Efficiencies gained through no till farming methods, creating field barriers to reduce nutrient runoff and targeted application through precision farming could further reduce farming inputs. (UN, 2009, p16)

figure 36; On farm anaerobic digestors produce energy from waste such as manure and crop residue, and is combinable with domestic wastes.

Managing soil and carbon sequestration. The top 30cm of soil contains approximately the same amount of carbon as is in the whole atmosphere as c02. (Foresight 2011, p135) With agriculture covering 74% of the UK and directly affecting the proportion of carbon in the soil, agricultural soil management has huge potential to either store or release carbon. (Foresight, 2010, p133 ) An annual 13 million tons of carbon is lost from UK soil each year, principally from arable production and intensive grazing. To put this in perspective it equates to 8% of UK carbon emissions from fuels. (Warwick HRI, 2007, p4) Any truly sustainable intensification of agriculture will need to halt or even reverse this trend towards storing carbon as part of carbon capture and sequestration strategies. Zero till practices; where legumes or cover crops are planted instead of conventional ploughing, keeps carbon in the soil. These crops also fix nitrogen for increased soil fertility. (Pretty & Ball, 2001) Likewise novel practices in grassland management including increased planting of perennial fodders and herd management strategies such as â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;mob grazingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; can work to keep higher carbon content in the land. The strategic planting of biomass crops such as coppiced hazel, willow and reeds can create substantial carbon sinks whilst acting as buffers for soil erosion and leaching of carbon and nitrogen through surface runoff. (Natural England, 2008, p43-48) Farmland could deliver financial reward in carbon credits if proper systems of pricing and management were established. (Pretty & Ball, 2001)

figure 37; Ploughed arable land north of Burrough Green is susceptible to erosion and leaching of carbon through surface runoff.

Fostering ecology and providing environmental services The race to increase production in the post-war period had huge environmental consequences. Hedgerows were removed destroying important habitats to make way for larger mechanised cereal production. Widespread use of chemical pesticides and monucultures decreased biodiversity dramatically, with key indicators such as farmland bird populations halved between 1977 and 1993 (Foresight 2010, p124) Increased awareness of environmental issues and growing public concern has seen ecology prioritised in the post productivist countryside, as agri-environmental schemes linked to subsidy payments have encouraged farmers to persue ecologically sound practice. This includes reducing the use of pesticides and chemical fertilizers, replanting hedgerows and leaving unmown field margins as wild areas. With 66% of land now under agri-environmental schemes, the last decade has seen marked improvements. (Natural England, 2009) However, continued decline of key landscape features such as hedgerows and falling bird populations indicate biodiversity and wildlife is still in net decline. (CRC 2010 p164) If a sustainable balance between agricultural production and maintaining biodiversity is to be found, ubiquitous & holistic landscape management will be essential. How this is accommodated in the structure of the farmscape is an interesting challenge. Natural landscape has a huge value as a human environment, which is translated into financial worth via tourism and leisure activities. Green space has been found to be extremely important to wellbeing, with several studies finding â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;green exerciseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and engaging with rural environments greatly beneficial to physiological and psychological health. (Barton & Pretty, 2010) The cultural and aesthetic value of the countryside as historic artefact comprises key landscape features, traditional boundaries such as hedgerows and stone walls, juxtaposed with openness and enclosure derived from mixed farming methods and contrasted with more natural features such as woodland, streams and rivers. (Natural England, 2009b, p72) Preserving traditional features and making efforts to cultivate the aesthetic of the countryside as a manmade landscape and human environment will be an important calling for any future agricultural model. Further to this the farming landscape will need to accommodate new functions, such as the provision of flooding buffers as climate change delivers more extreme weather events. Foresight, (2010, p162) As this affects water supply, provision of reservoirs and water storage on the land for irrigation will become essential, particularly for horticulture in the eastern counties. (Environment Agency, 2010, p5) There will also be pressure to accommodate renewables, particularly wind turbines on farmland. (Foresight, 2010, p173) A sustainable intensive farming will have to integrate aesthetic and cultural consideration of landscape, biodiversity and wildlife habitats with access and spaces for human interaction, green infrastructure and renewables. There is currently a lack of investigation into how these multiple functions would be brought together in practice.

figure 38; Polite notice, outside conservation area East of Burrough Green

figures 39 & 40; Loss of hedges as fields get larger from 1945 - 2008

1945

2008

figure 6841; Mapping of agricultural land use shows extent of monocultural grain production on arable land, shown in yellow

Creating a robust and sustainable economic model of agriculture For Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform in 2013, the European Parliament is tabling three options; a business as usual light reforming of the cap, with the fundamental strategy remaining the same, a reform of the CAP which focuses on sustainable reform of agriculture through public subsidy and support, or a reform of the CAP which focuses on sustainable reform of agriculture through freeing up to the market and reduced income from subsidy. (EC, 2011, p41-45) With pressured european governments looking to further their programmes of austerity, it does seem likely there will be a move to increasingly free european agriculture up to global markets. (DEFRA 2011. p6-10) With more exposure to world markets and fluctuating prices, farming businesses will continue to experience increasing risk to market volatility and spikes in price or demand. (EC, 2011, p17) Growing several crops or a mixture of livestock and arable and horticulture outputs could reduce exposure to sudden price crashes. Another means to attain economic robustness is through secondary income streams through diversification from agricultural production. Rural agencies have promoted diversification since the Pillar I & II CAP was introduced, with over 3000 grants awarded between 200006. (DEFRA, 2009) If the trend toward market led agriculture continues, and with a potentially volatile transition to low carbon farming, other incomes alongside traditional production will become increasingly important. Currently half of farmers have an income from diversification; principally property letting, equine services and on-farm food processing. However planning restrictions and lack of knowledge amongst farmers are significant barriers to further diversification, which is a largely positive trend with strong community benefits in employment and wealth. (DEFRA 2007b, p3) With better information, support and funding it could continue to expand. (Turner et al, 2006) Inputs such as chemical fertilizer and fuel for field operations are major overheads for farmers, and with volatile world energy markets leaving prices unstable, self sufficiency in energy and fuel can make farming business more robust. Onfarm energy production and closed loop farming systems can reduce the need for expensive external inputs, with potential to make farm business more resilient. (Wilkins, 2007)

figure 42; British farmers protest at low milk prices, July 2012

figure 43; Land ownership showing the size of contemporary farms around Cambridge

Conclusions to Agriculture and the Post Productivist Countryside

Government has been advised to pursue the sustainable intensification of farming. To produce more sustainably agriculture will have to accommodate a range of competing pressures, whilst establishing a means to remain economically robust and viable. This will make the farmer of the future a landscape manager as well as a food producer and businessman. To achieve the complex aims of sustainable intensive farming, it seems there is acute need to actively design land use strategies which achieve an efficient and integrated consolidation of the multiple landscape functions required.

figure 44; Beef cattle in stocking sheds, Wyck Farm, Burrough Green

PART 2 PROPOSING A NEW RURAL STRATEGY; the project of a multifunctional rurality. In part 1 a description of Burrough Green exposes the manifold problems facing the countryside. The evidence suggests there is a strong case for a strategy of needs-based and locally specific development to rebalance smaller rural communities. Meanwhile farming faces huge change as it stands to undergo sustainable intensification. This thesis proposes that rather than deal with these issues separately, the rethinking of our agricultural systems and the development of rural settlements could be united in a strongly multifunctional agricultural model. This section describes broadly how such a strategy could work, outlining a theoretical positioning of multifunctional agriculture allied with the aims of sustainable intensification. It then examines the process of how we can build a bottom up understanding of development need for a settlement, before speculating on how we could use the mechanisms of the new planning policy to enable such development.

figure 45; Burrough Green awaits change. 77

Defining multifunctional agriculture Whilst the conceptualization of agriculture as multifunctional has been a part of political and academic discourse for decades, the definition of multifunctional agriculture has remained contested. (Wilson, 2007, 185-212) Since the term was adopted by policy makers in Europe to describe the changing objectives of agriculture as its productivist aims faltered, the term has been appropriated by spatial theorists and rural scholars to describe several aspects of contemporary rurality, mainly but not wholly related to agriculture. (Wilson, 2007 182-184) Perhaps the clearest summation is Marsden & Sonnino’s 2008 description of three main competing interpretations. First they describe ‘multifunctional agriculture as a palliative to the productivist ‘cost-price’ squeeze’, (Marsden & Sonnino, 2008, p423) wherein multifunctionality describes farm-based pluri-activity - alternative income streams and diversification as a response to difficult market conditions. Second, they suggest ‘Multifunctional agriculture as a spatial regulation of the consumption countryside’ (ibid) wherein multifunctional describes the multiple objectives of agricultural land use in the post productivist rural paradigm - the diversification of land use away from solely producing food and fibre. This conception would neatly describe government agri-environmental schemes, under which land is divided into ‘specific and functional parcels’ (ibid) for amenity, conservation and production. With 66% of UK agricultural land under agri-environmental schemes and with half of all farms diversified, it would seem currently UK agriculture is largely multifunctional to some degree under these first two definitions. However Marsden and Sonnino propose a new third and more comprehensive conceptualisation of ‘Multifunctional agriculture as sustainable rural development,’ (ibid) which positions multifunctional agriculture within a new sustainable development paradigm wherein agriculture ‘redefines nature by re-emphasizing food production and agro-ecology whilst it re-asserts the socioenvironmental role of agriculture as a major agent in sustaining rural economies and cultures’. (ibid) In such a definition they posit a multifunctionality of both land and farm, interconnected with wider rural space. What makes this definition of ‘multifunctional agriculture as rural development’ particularly interesting is its re-emphasis of food production. This allies it with the productive aims of sustainable intensification. In more conventional theorizations of multifunctional agriculture, it has been held largely as something

opposite to and conflicting with productivist values. Wilson’s scale of weak and strong multifunctionality for example, identifies productivist goals as synonymous with ‘weak multifunctionality.’ (Wilson, 2007, p231) This thesis proposes that as agriculture is called to sustainably intensify, we should embrace a new multifunctional paradigm, wherein productivist action is a significant and complimentary function amongst other multiple functions. There is huge potential in ‘multifunctional farming as part of sustainable rural development’, and as a ‘development tool to promote more sustainable economies of scope and synergy’ (Marsden, 2003: cited in Wilson, 2007 p 185), yet we also need to promote an agriculture which retains the goal of production, albeit recognising that ‘current approaches to maximizing production within agricultural systems are unsustainable,’ instead ensuring that ‘yields are increased without adverse environmental impact and without the cultivation of more land.’ (Royal Society, 2009, p9) To achieve a consolidation of productive objectives and multifunctional objectives, we need to further refine our definition of multifunctional agriculture to mean multifunctional through synergy, that rather than acting independently of each other, there is a true integration of these multiple objectives where the fulfilment of one objective is aided or improved by the fullfiment of others. In the post-productivist paradigm, a farm can be farming most of its land in a conventional industrial high input manner, yet fence off an area for conservation and wildlife. Outwardly this is engaging in multifunctional action, yet its multiple functions are competing, i.e. the land given over to wildlife reduces its productive function. To meet the challenges of sustainable intensification, we need to theorise a true multifunctional agriculture whose objectives are not solely multiple, but also synergic. In such a reconfiguration of multifunctional agriculture through synergy and its conciliation with sustainable intensification we can conceptualise a new paradigm for the countryside as a multifunctional, sustainable and productive, though not ‘productivist,’ space. In doing so we can take the countryside’s theorisation beyond the productivist/post productivist dichotomy. It is such a radical new definition of multifunctional agriculture which this thesis explores.

I. A needs based & locally evidenced development strategy, in which multifunctional farmsteads play a key role. To achieve this new rural paradigm, it is proposed that village farmsteads would form the backbone of a broader drive towards rural multifunctionality. By focusing on the development of those farmsteads within or adjacent to small villlages, there is a greater opportunity for synergy between community and farming. The provision of access and transport networks connected to settlements allow for possibilities of reconnection between the landscape and wider society, with the village and farmstead acting as a gateway to the landscape. Nationally areas of predominantly dispersed farmstead settlement are apparent in areas of western and some parts of eastern and south-eastern england, whilst the rest of the UK sees a pattern of nucleated and dispersed settlement to varying degrees. However even in areas where farmstead settlement is largely dispersed and isolated, the small villages that have developed in these areas usually have some sort of historic farmstead in adjacency. (English Heritage, 2006, p6) The wider region of the study area is strongly characterized by nucleated settlement where historically most small villages evolved out of a cluster of farmsteads, a pattern surviving from periods of common cultivation within open field systems of early agriculture. (Brunskill 1987, p147). Whilst historically composed almost entirely of nucleated farms and supporting accommodation for workers, today within these villages many farmsteads have disappeared or no longer function as working farms, having been converted long since to private houses or demolished to make way for new housing. However a mapping of working farmsteads or farms still pursuing some kind of agricultural and land based activity is shown in fig. 46. This shows most villages in the study area have at least one remaining farmstead working in some capacity. As historically these small settlements emerged out of a symbiosis with agriculture, the legacy of that past in a remnant proximity to contemporary functioning farmsteads gives us the device for a re-engagement with agricultural and settlement symbiosis.

Tank

Shelter

Bason Bridge

Wooton/Ditton Green

TCB

Mast

Tank

TCB

Wr T

TCB

Dullingham

FB FB FB

DeerďŹ eld Farm

Stetchworth Ley

Stones

Dullingham Ley

Brinkley Stud Radio

LB TCB

Mast

Foot Bridge

Wr T

Tank

TCB

Westley Waterless FB

Burrough Green

Burrough End

TCB

Shelter

Tank

Brinkley

Wr T

Foot Bridge

Foot Bridge Shelter

TCB

Tank

Pumps

Willingham Green

Sipsey Bridge

Carlton Hill

Raynor's Bridge

Stone

FB Stone

Pump

Shelter

TCB

G Br

Weston Colville

Carlton

TCB

War

Meml

Silos

Weston Green FB

TCB

FB LB

Water

Tank

FB FB

TCB

C ar lt o n G re ne LB

N u srr e y LB

FB LB

War Meml

Hopper El Sub Sta

e m pT e El n d

Temple End

Tanks

figure 46; Sites of farmsteads in adjacency to settlements

Foot Bridge

West Wickham

II. ASSESSING THE EVIDENCE; WHAT RURAL DEVELOPMENT IS NEEDED? Evidenced rural need and bottom up rural development. The first section of this thesis describes the socio-economic issues the countryside faces and a changing understanding of the rural spatial economy through commuting behaviour. This suggests a new spatial development strategy of needs based and locally specific development to rebalance communities. Before we can understand the potential to combine this development within and alongside a multifunctional agriculture, we need to understand what settlements such as Burrough Green need, and what constitutes evidence for rural development. There are two means to understand these rural settlements; through statistical evidence, and through community led consultation and surveys. The ONS Census creates datasets at Super Output Area, which allows us to roughly isolate the characteristics of individual small settlements. (ONS, 2001) These allow us to understand quite accurately how aspects of demography such as age, social group, deprivation and as previously shown, commuting behaviour, vary between these settlements. A neat summarisation of these statistics has been developed by the Rural Community Action Network (RCAN), whose Rural Place Profiles compile data from the census and other ONS datasets. (ACRE, 2011, p3) However it is community consultation and surveys which give us the best means to understand what is happening in these places. A movement towards localism and community led planning in small settlements has been growing over the last decade with many adopting a parish plan, which sets out issues and goals for communities. These have been found to be highly successful as an inclusive means to gauge need in terms of housing, amenity and services, with RCAN reporting a 70% community respondency in some communities where surveys come out of community engagement, led by parish councils or other community groups. ACRE (2009, p1) In contrast top down and local authority based survey is often unsuccessful, as highlighted by the 2010 village visions survey conducted by East Cambridgeshire District council, covering Burrough Green and the study area. (ECDC, 2011) A respondency of less than 3% in some villages, with only five villages seeing respondency over 20% demonstrates the ineffectiveness of the top down approach. (ECDC, 2011, p9) These two means of understanding rural settlements give us the basis to suggest what sort of allocation of development is needed. Through a review of existing housing need surveys, RCAN rural place profiles and Parrish Plan documents, fig. 47 begins to suggest what this new distribution of needs based rebalancing development might look like across the study area. It is partly the success of community led planning in these rural areas which has culminated in the new localism and the introduction of the new neighbourhood planning tier, Neighbourhood Development plans. (NDPâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s) (Gallent et al, 2008, p7) This thesis argues that if engaged with in the right manner, this new planning mechanism could be a highly succesful means to enable the sort of development pattern shown opposite. 82

Little Ditton

FS Tank

Stetchworth

Tank

Shelter

Bason Bridge

Wooton/Ditton Green

TCB

Mast

Tank

TCB

Wr T

TCB

Dullingham

Foot Bridge

FB FB FB

Foot Bridge

DeerďŹ eld Farm

Stetchworth Ley

Stones

Foot Bridge

Dullingham Ley

Brinkley Stud Radio

LB TCB

Mast

Foot Bridge

Wr T

Tank

TCB

Westley Waterless FB

Burrough Green

Burrough End

TCB

Shelter

Tank

Brinkley

Wr T

Foot Bridge

Foot Bridge Shelter

TCB

Tank

Pumps

Willingham Green

Carlton Hill

Raynor's Bridge

Stone

Sipsey Bridge

Stone

Carlton Hill

Raynor's Bridge

Stone

Pump

Shelter

TCB

FB Stone

Carlton Hill FB

Weston Colville Raynor's Bridge

Stone

LB TCB

Stone

Silos

Carlton War

Meml

Pump

FB Stone

Carlton Hill LB

Raynor's Bridge

Stone

Weston Green

Stone

She

lter

TCB

Pump

Live work unit FB

Stone Shelter

LB TCB

FB LB

Water Tank

FB FB

Shelt

TCB

West Wratting

TCB Pump

C a r lt o n G re e n LB

N u r s e yr

She

lter

TCB

Carlton

War

housing unit

business unit

Mem

FB LB

War Meml

Hopper El Sub Sta

Tanks

Meml War

War

Foot Bridge

Carlton

e m pT e El n d

Temple End

Carlton

Mem

West Wickham

figure 47; new development proposed across the villages

III. HOW COULD WE ENABLE SUCH A STRATEGY? One of the key components of the new planning regime introduced by government in 2012, NDPs aim to target resistance to housing and economic development from communities by handing them new powers. The hope is that more involvement from communities about the design and location of development will reduce public resistance to new building. (DCLG, 2011, p16) The NDP will form a new local tier to the planning system, and though it must adhere to the strategic policies of the LDF and accord with the NPPF, it delivers a statutory planning tier which can express the aspirations and needs of local communities at the level of parish or village councils. (CPRE, 2011, p8) Furthermore NDP’s are intended to be based on a rigorous community consultation, alongside statistical evidence and local housing needs surveys. (EHDC, 2011) An outline of the way NDPs are proposed to work is given in fig. 48. As such the neighbourhood development plan is a promising new planning tool which could allow us to build a thorough understanding of local issues, towards making carefully planned interventions to rural settlements, whilst ensuring greater community support through consultation and involvement. The editing of settlement form and environment, such as roads, paths, green space, the planning of new housing, work premises and the integration of settlement with farmstead and landscape could all be achieved through a long term masterplan for a settlement, set in statutory planning law through the NDP. However to realize the potential of NDPs to improve rural environments, there are several aspects which ask to be addressed. Summarizing the key points of the supporting essay; Changing planning policy and rural development: Towards a design-led community planning? This chapter briefly outlines these aspects and proposes that the NDP becomes a design led process. Proposing a design-led Neighbourhood Planning Whilst Parish plans have been a succesful form of community planning, they rarely if ever dealt with design decisions on allocating land use and scale of development as proposed for NDP’s. (Bishop, 2010, p620) There is concern that communities will deliver spatial plans that show inexpert understanding of planning issues, and communities may choose sites that are impractical, an issue the government recognizes itself: ‘Where neighbourhood plans have directed development to less favourable sites but the developer’s incentive nevertheless remains high, the normal business model operated by developers may not apply, leading to narrower profit margins.’ (EHDC, 2011, p20) Furthermore, typically community plans have historically been made reactively, against a perceived threat such as imminent development. (CPRE, 2011, p8) Looking at another form of community planning, Village Design Statements, where community planning did begin to reflect spatial and design

figure 48; How the Neighbourhood Planning system is proposed to work

PARISH COUNCIL initiates plan and informs Local Authority either on own initiative, or on behest of residents or other interested parties. Meeting is called to determine whether there is community support for a plan.

INITIATION

If yes, PC Appoints the NEIGHBOURHOOD FORUM A steering group drawing from; Residents, Elected representatives, Community groups, Businesses, Landowners & Developers The forum then; • • •

Defines the ‘neighbourhood area’ Produces a programme for developing the plan Develops a communications strategy

NEIGHBOURHOOD FORUM Gathers together or commisions relevant evidence such as community & housing needs surveys, sustainability appraisal etc. • • • •

appoints relevant consultants where necessary Identifies the area’s strengths and weaknesses Drafts the visions & objectives Checking of draft vision and objectives with the community and for conformity with the strategic policies in the LDF

NEIGHBOURHOOD FORUM Develops policies; including drawn location maps of scale & types of development. • • • •

VISIONS & OBJECTIVES

MAKING THE PLAN

Develops an implementation plan Finalises draft of the Neighbourhood Plan Checks for conformity with the strategic policies in the development plan Checks draft neighbourhood plan with community and other stakeholders

INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION (validation by external examiner if plan and plan making process is considered approproate and legal)

VALIDATION

REFERENDUM (50% Community suport needed to pass) ADOPTION (Plan becomes statutory planning policy) 85

issues, the result is largely defensive and overwhelmingly conservative with emphasis on continuity and maintaining the status quo, with preference for protecting the historic core and moving development as far to the peripheries of settlements as possible, even if this might not be the best design option. (ibid) This was a view broadly supported by local authority planners in CPRE’s 2011 consultation study who felt that many plans wouldn’t show a sufficiently rigorous or evidenced methodology to be robust against legal challenge: ‘The general feeling is that any successful NDP can only be produced through a genuinely collaborative process between a community and planning professionals.’ (ibid) However as Galent et al suggest, the involvement of local authority planners in this process could undermine the independence and community feeling behind NDPs. (Galent et al, 2008, p12) Architects and urban designers, as planning professionals adept in liasing with local authorities, but independent of the formal planning system, could translate the ideas of the community into realistic and practicable land use proposals, put forward new possibilities and challenge preconceptions. As the RIBA proposes in its paper on neighbourhood planning: ‘Exploring the history of a place, its topography and identity (visual, social, environmental and economic); what works about it and why; what needs to be changed or improved – these are all issues that architects seek to understand when they commence design strategies. They are also issues on which local people have strong views and vital perspectives to contribute. This is the basic starting point for neighbourhood planning.’ (RIBA, 2011, p9) A description of this new best practice is outlined in fig. 49. As well as design concerns there are also issues with how the proposed NDP will make wider connection between plans. Having an independent community planning professional employed directly by the neighbourhood forum could ensure there is an expert coordinator versed in dealing with a range of consultants, service providers and infrastructural issues, capable of embedding any plan within a wider development context. The aim of the needs based rebalancing strategy which this thesis argues for, is that although development comes from what each settlement needs individually, there is still a process of co-ordination between settlements, in which a certain distribution of development and services is brokered between adjacent communities. Since its conception the government’s open source planning was based on an ambition that planning authorities would still be co-ordinating the bottom up planning approach, ‘brokering a rational and coherent plan for the area as a whole, on the basis of negotiation with each of the neighbourhoods and with all the relevant public agencies’ (Conservative Party, 2010, p8) However there is no proposed extra funding for this role. In consequence there is concern that there will not be necessary support available to guide communities in formulating a plan of the necessary quality

figure 49; A proposal for a design led ciommunity planning

INITIATION

A steering group drawing from; Residents, Elected representatives, Community groups, Businesses, Landowners & Developers The forum then; • • •

Defines the ‘neighbourhood area’ Produces a programme for developing the plan Develops a communications strategy

NEIGHBOURHOOD FORUM Gathers together or commisions relevant evidence such as community & housing need surveys, sustainability appraisals etc. •

Appoints INDEPENDENT COMMUNITY LED DESIGN PLANNER (Planner, urban designer or architect)

•

CLD PLANNER conducts analysis of settlement, architectural qualities, movement and use through studies and through community workshop sessions

•

CLD PLANNER explores visions for village development through design workshops.

•

Draft of the visions & objectives developed by neighbourhood forum from community surveys, Housing Needs Surveys & design workshops. Summary draft document including all evidencing and research compiled by CLD PLANNER

•

Checking of draft vision and objectives with the community and for conformity with the strategic policies in the LDF

ICP DEVELOPS A LONG TERM MASTERPLAN DOCUMENT FOR VILLAGE including drawn location maps of scale & types of development, MODELS, DRAWINGS AND VISUALISATIONS, WORKING CLOSELY WITH NEIGHBOURHOOD FORUM & COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS. •

DRAWN MASTERPLAN FORMS THE BASIS OF WRITTEN POLICIES.

•

Neighbourhood forum develops an implementation plan

•

Finalised draft of the Neighbourhood Plan compiled by CLD PLANNER

•

Check for conformity with the strategic policies in the development plan

•

Check draft neighbourhood plan with community and other stakeholders

INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION (validation by external examiner if plan and plan making process is considered approproate and legal)

VISIONS & OBJECTIVES

MAKING THE PLAN

VALIDATION

REFERENDUM (50% Community suport needed to pass) ADOPTION (Plan becomes statutory planning policy) 87

with regard to wider connectivity to pass into statutory guidance. (CPRE, 2011, p23) Slow uptake could further hinder hopes of a joined up localism. With an estimated cost of £17,000 it is likely uptake of NDP’s could be slow and unevenly distributed. (DCLG, 2011) If plans have no neighbours to work with, there is little opportunity for interconnection. The experience of parish plans shows community planning to be largely inward looking, with little understanding of wider regional issues. (Bishop, 2010, p617) If developed in isolation and with the low levels of uptake expected, the relationships between adjacent communities could be under-represented in NDPs. Whilst the uptake of plans is more an issue for policy and funding, It does seem that putting a professional actor such as an architect or urbanist in the centre of the process who could help the community understand wider issues would be prudent. With potentially broader challenges of engaging with sustainable infrastructure, agricultural and landscape planning, there is a strong case for ensuring professional, holistic and strategic thinking behind NDPs, whilst keeping the process fundamentally community led. To properly simulate the extensive process of making such a design led neighbourhood plan for Burrough Green is beyond the scope of this study, and would have no validity without real community engagement. However the following design proposal aims to demonstrate what could be achieved through a neighbourhood development plan. It imagines a scenario where a designer and co-ordinator has been appointed by the parish council and neighbourhood forum, on which sit representatives of the village including various landowners, the farmer and the regional housing association or social landlord. This proposal aims to demonstrate the kind of proposition for Burrough Green which a designer could make within a community plan. Such a plan would reflect the interests represented by the forum members, and spell out a sustainable future for the settlement, within an understanding of it’s wider context and how it interacts with neighbouring communities. Without the extensive detail and evidence of community consultation, the evidence used for this case study is partial. However it is based on some key evidence already prepared for the village, such as a recent housing needs survey, notes from recent parish council meetings, RCAN’s Rural Place Profile for Burrough Green, alongside an understanding of the use and function of existing services. Beyond this it introduces new ideas about rural living and rural development, alongside urban analysis and a critique of the existing conditions of the village. In practice the process would become a dialogue between designer and community, however this proposal attempts to demonstrate the principals of this approach as far as is possible in a desk based study.

figure 50; Burrough Green village sign

PART 3 HOW COULD A MULTIFUNCTIONAL FARMSTEAD DELIVER A SUSTAINABLE MULTIFUNCTIONAL RURALITY FOR VILLAGE, LANDSCAPE AND FARM?

With a broad understanding of the wider issues for the countryside and of how the new neighbourhood planning tier could be used to deliver rural development, this section sets out how a farmstead in Burrough Green could deliver a new multifunctional rural development paradigm. It firstly describes change to landscape and agricultural practice and how this relates to the settlement, before moving into the village structure and how it could accommodate new development. Finally the thesis looks at how the farmstead and its individual buildings function as a mediator between landscape and village.

figure 51; A new configuration of the village

I. Sustainable agriculture and a multifunctional landscape

The design study supposes a scenario where planning policy, rural development funding and CAP subsidy are mobilized to support the concept of multifunctional farming as part of the sustainable intensification of UK agriculture. With financial incentives such as the end of all direct payments and the transfer of more CAP funding to agro-ecological aims, the farmer at Wyck farm in Burrough Green begins the transition to agro-ecological and multifunctional farming. This chapter explores how this could be realised, looking at how farming practice would change and how the landscape would accommodate this, before the thesis goes on to describe how the farm and farmsteads development could catalyse rural development for the village.

figure 52, Scheme overview

Wyck Farm

figure 53, The extent of Wyck Farm

figure 54; View across the farmland

The existing farm covers approximately 400 hectares, predominantly wheat arable land, with some pasture. (fig. 60) The farm is currently a livestock operation which raises beef stock for slaughter. From the top of the hill on which farmstead and village sit, the land fans out to the south and east, falling away to a gentle gradient. (fig. 58) The land is suitable for a range of agricultural produce. Historically the land has been used for livestock, cereals and horticulture, at one time a fruit farm. (fig. 55) It has good quality, highly fertile soil, classified as slightly acidic clay, although it has some drainage issues. (fig. 59) It is typical of the wider character of clay and chalk downland in which it sits, with a rolling landscape of large arable fields and small woods or coppices, some of them ancient woodland. To the north it is bordered by the small cellular fields of stud farms which become more frequent towards Newmarket. To the south there is more of the same large scale cereal production on rolling downland.

figure 55; Orchards in Burrough green, 1960

figure 56; View of the farmstead, Wyck Farm

figure 57; View of the farmyard, Wyck Farm

figure 58; Existing topography of the farmland

figure 59; Soils on the farm.

figure 60; Exis

Slowly permeable seasonally wet slightly acid but base-rich loamy and clayey soils Lime-rich loamy and clayey soils with impeded drainage Slightly acid loamy and clayey soils with impeded drainage Freely draining lime-rich loamy soils

figure 60; Existing land use

sting land use

Arable wheat production

Temporary pasture

Woodland

A new agro-ecological farm at Burrough Green. The current livestock enterprise would be replaced with a mixed agro-ecological farm, which uses the nutrient cycling between a dairy herd and a rotation of cereals, legumes and field vegetables to create a closed loop farming system, with little or no external inputs. Around 80 hectares are converted to permanent pasture to support a dairy herd of 100 cows. The remaining land remains arable, with the exact crops grown depending on season and profitabillity. A secondary horticultural enterprise of around 20 hectares is also established near the village, producing soft and top fruit such as rasberries, strawberries and pears as a diversification activity. Concurrently the farm enters higher level stewardship management, securing subsidy for maintaining the landscape for ecology and as a human environment, whilst delivering green infrastructure in water management and carbon sinks, becoming a node for the provision of landscape services, supporting neighbouring farms. Landscape organisiation To accommodate this new agriculture a reconfiguration of the farming landscape is proposed which amalgamates the demands of a productive agriculture with ecology and human inhabitation. In current agro-environmental schemes and agro-ecological practice, hedgerows and unmanaged wild field margins are encouraged to foster ecology. (Natural England, 2009) However this practice reduces the area of farmed land, whilst re-establishing traditional hedgerows limits the flexibility of the farmer to alter growing practices and field areas dynamically from year to year. Furthermore, whilst these managements might improve the aesthetic value of the countryside it doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t inherently make it more accesible to the public or encourage human interaction with the landscape. The thesis proposes a new structure to the landscape based on multifunctional corridors, establishing a new ordering principal, which provides for ecology and biodiversity, agricultural function, public access and green infrastructures. (fig. 62) Whilst organising the land at the farm level, the placement of corridors would also be orchestrated to join up with the wider geographical context, crossing farm borders and linking pieces of woodland, established footpaths and river courses. (fig. 63) Particularly suited to the Eastern arable areas where few ancient hegerow boundaries are left, multifunctional corridors can be threaded through the countryside, adapting to existing field patterns and geographical features. The corridors provide access and service spines to the landscape, dividing the land into flexible bands within which the farmer can easily adapt the size of fields and type of crop grown to suit climatic and economic conditions. Establishing permanent bands of hedgerow, meadow and woodland along the corridors prevents soil erosion and runoff from the fields, whilst allowing ecosystems to join up across large areas. Their geometry is driven by research which demonstrates meandering, organic ecology corridors to be more successful at fostering ecological spread and wildlife distribution. (Holland & Hastings, 2008) The corridors are formed around a track, which provides public walking and riding

100

figure 61; Proposed landscape plan NTS

101

Landscape Overview figure 62; Proposed landscape overview

Magenn floating wind turbines harness high altitude wind

hedges create wind breaks, protecting crops and preventing soil erosion.

tourist camping lodges seasonally inhabit the corridors.

Stands of hazel coppice for biomass harvesting wildflower habitat encourages pollinating insects.

rasberry orchard

root vegetables and legumes grown in rotation.

pear orchards

Strawberries and sof fruit managed permanent pasture of perennial grassland, using mob grazing practices

102

trees in pasture provide shade for cows swathes of unmanaged land run along tracks creating ecology corridors

reservoirs store water on farm and feed drip irrigation systems figure 63; Wider corridor connections

reed bed sewage and waste water processing wetland habitat

103

figure 64; Landscape plan detail NTS

routes as well as access for farm machinery and moving cattle. A band of land each side of the track is removed from agricultural production and provides multiple functions. Drainage ditches run alongside the track way, draining the clay soil and managing nutrient and fertiliser runoff from the land. With the likelihood of increasingly unsettled weather patterns through the 21st century, irrigation will become an increasing aspect of British farming. (Environment Agency, 2010, p5) Long narrow reservoirs along the corridors are shaded by trees to prevent evaporation. These feed arteries of drip irrigation which run alongside the track before fanning out into the fields. The corridors might also act as spines for renewable energy infrastructure such as Magenn turbines. (Magenn, 2012) These high altitude helium balloons harvest the reliable winds at high level and are less visually intrusive than conventional turbines. They could provide energy for the farm, whilst feeding energy to the grid. Hedges and trees along the corridors become habitats but also substanital carbon sinks, along with sustainable stands of hazel coppice which provide biomass. The unmanaged land along the corridors provides a range of habitats, from wild grassland to scrub and woodland, allowing species of flaura and fauna to fluorish. 104

figure 65; Mixed farming crop zoning

HORTICULTURAL ZONE FIELD VEGETABLES (ROTATIONAL CROPPING) WOODLAND

ZERO TILL CEREALS/ LEGUMES

105

Drip irrigation delivers water directly to the roots of the crop, minimising wastage and evaporation. In tandem with infra red imaging of the crops and computer automated systems, the farmer can ensure precise irrigation and focus on water stresssed areas.

Magenn turbines are helium filled balloon turbines which catch high altitude winds, rotating on a dynamo and sending electricity through the cable to the ground. Soon to reach production, aerial turbines are ideal for farms, needing less set up cost and infrastructure to install and with less visual impact on the ground plane.

A grazing corridor runs through the farmland. A permanent pasture of biodiverse meadow grasses and perennials providing a greater biomas in rootstock than conventional pasture. As such the pasture acts as a significant carbon sink. Mob grazing practice, where cows are contained within electric fences and grazed intensely for one day before being moved on down the corridor are highly efficient, reducing fodder trampled under foot and retaining greater carbon content in biomass.

Between corridors crops are grown on nitrogen fixing rotations, with legumes replenishing the soil. No-till methods replace conventional plughing to prevent soil erosion. Shifting field boundaries allow the farmer to adapt what is grown to climatic conditions and market demand.

Currently promoted by agricultural policy, on farm reservoirs secure water supply for field operations during times of drought and could provide a financial return if water was supplied to neighbouring farms in times of need.

106

Stands of trees and biodiverse unmanaged land running along the corridors act as carbon sinks and environments for wildlife, allowing species to travel unhindered across the country. They also shelter the fields from high winds and reduce soil erosion.

figure 66; Multifunctional corridors

107

figure 67; crop spraying

Landscape meeting village

The existing boundary between landscape and settlement is defensive, the chemical spraying of crops and use of heavy machinery near the back of gardens drive villagers to erect tall fences and hedges between gardens and agricultural land. (fig. 56 - 73) The settlement seems to turn its back on the landscape and itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s far reaching views, creating an impermeable fortress of hedges and fences. As the corridor configuration meets the settlement it permeates the village, as fingers of landscape and ecological corridors filter through the village fabric to the green. (fig. 74) Orchards, soft fruit and horticultural crops are grown directly adjacent to the village which require less mechanical operations, softening the impact of agricultural practice as the farm meets the settlement. (fig 65)

108 figures 68-73; Settlement boundaries and corresponding views out towards the landscape

109 figure 74; Proposed design of landscape meeting settlement NTS

II. DEVELOPING THE VILLAGE; SHOWING IRRIGATION AN AGRICULTURALLY SHOWING CROP PROPORTIONS INTEGRATED MASTERPLAN SHOWING CONNECTIONS TO FOOTPATHS AND WIDER ECOLOGY FOR BURROUGH GREEN. .

ROUTES

SHOWING HOW DEALS WITH NEXT VILLAGE

As the landscape is reconfigured through changing farming practice, the village form and structure is reconfigured to make way for new development which rebalances the community and sustains it for the future. As well as these new developments the village environment is carefully edited following an analysis of the village structure.

110

figure 75; proposed village overview

111

Burrough Green Village Hall

Primary School Hall Farm Stud

Burrough Green Parish Church

Sheltered Elderly housing Cricket Clubhouse

112

figure 76; Existing village overview

The Bull, Village Pub

WYCK FARM

Wyck Farm farmhouse

113

What does Burrough Green need and want?

Housing The most significant issue for Burrough Green is housing. A recent housing needs survey identified there was currently housing need for eight new affordable homes in Burrough Green. (ACRE, 2009b, p22) Beyond this immediate requirement however, there is a broader need to rebalance the village’s variety of tenures and housing stock with Burrough Green having a shortage of smaller homes and terraced properties. (ACRE, 2011) The housing need survey found demand for subsidised market housing models. (ACRE, 2009b, p20) This study aims to make a longer term design which provides a masterplan for how more housing could be provided in the future. Recreational space. The existing community hall, whilst well used, is small, costly to run and isn’t designed for modern community activities, originally a library or reading room. (fig.78) A new sustainable community space is proposed which could serve Burrough Green and the adjacent villages, given their proximity and good pedestrian links. It has been an issue with the parish council for some while that with the school expanded in the village a children’s play area should be provided (Burough Green Parish Council, 2012) Business Space Without consultation it is impossible to understand the exact demand for business premises and space, but the number of small businesses located in the area, alongside a lack of premises in the village itself supposes there would be some demand for premises in the area. With the wider strategy of encouraging workplace containment discussed in Part 1 of the thesis, and a walkable relationship to neighbouring villages, (fig. 77) several small business units and live work units are proposed. Bearing in mind these considerations and the wider objectives of creating sustainable village communites, the thesis identifies the major urbanistic issues for the settlement’s structure.

114

Rad

LB io

TCB

Mas

Wr T

TCB

She lter

Tank

Wr T

Foot Bridge

Foot Bridge Shelter

TCB

figure 77; Pedestrian connections to neighbouring villages

Pumps

Raynor's Bridge

Stone

Pump

Shelt

TCB

War

Meml

115 figure 78; The Reading Room, current village hall for Burrough Green

figure 79; Study model showing overview of existing village

116

117

The lost north green Having grown up around the road that runs through its centre, the road has become a major issue for the village, with heavier modern traffic making it a significant intrusion and hazard on the otherwise peaceful village. The speed limit on the main road is regularly brought up at Parish council meetings. (Burrough Green Parish Council, 2012) This is a typical condition for such small villages. The reaction to this issue is naturally defensive as the community turns away from its centre, growing tall hedges and erecting fences against noise and intrusion. (fig. 80 & 81) However the issue isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t aided by the poorly placed development of the 1960s, where council houses were built over what was once a north side to the green. Historic maps and photos suggest how the green used to provide a buffer zone between road and settlement. (fig. 83) The nearby Village of Barrington which has a similar structure has retained its historic form, with the low hedges and open frontages of the cottages a testament to the success of this separation in relation to modern traffic. (fig 87 & 88)

118

figure 80; Hedges built up against road

figure 81; The lost north green

119

figure 82; Historic map showing building line set well back from the road

120

figure 83; View across the green in 1910

figures 84 & 85; Poorly placed 20th century development destroys the historic set back of the building line to the road

121

figure 86; Boundary conditions along the road show even a slight set back encourages people to keep hedges lower.

122

figure 87 & 88; Nearby Barrington in South West Cambridgeshire has a very similar structure to Burrough Green but the original line of the green has been retained, with green space either side of the road. The pleasant frontages of the cottages and the low hedges testify to its sucess

123

The Leaky Green Another issue for the village again typical for rural settlements is the loss of terraced forms and higher density pieces of built environment. Although typically low density and detached, these places historically had very dense moments of more urban grain. (fig. 91) Their disappearance partly explains the issues of housing affordability which plague these places. With a move to large gardens and larger detached bungalow homes, today there is a lack of the different house types such as flats and terraced houses which are cheaper, smaller and more suitable to younger and older people. Burrough Green has significantly less of these housing forms than other areas. (ACRE, 2011) Urbanistically, the green is currently ill defined, with sporadic detached houses set in hedged gardens doing little to hold the space. (fig. 88, 89 & 90) In developing the design a key strategy has been to prioritize a reintroduction of denser forms to redefine the green.

figure 88 & 89; Panoramas of the green show how the settlement fails to â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;holdâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; the space.

124

figure 90; figure ground shows the ill-defined edge of the green

Sh elte r LB

Tank

Foot Bridge

125

126

figure 91; Location and images of lost terrace forms within the village

127

A reconfiguration of the village

allotments for residents of new housing on old sewage works

4 affordable houses and 6 intermediate houses are built on the farmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s land farmstead provides community hall space, shop, cafe and hosted service support

land brought by community as play area

road markings, pavements and signage removed as part of shared surface strategy

8 new market houses

Bearing in mind the broad needs of the settlement and problems with its existing structure, this chapter demonstrates how the requirements for new development could be integrated as part of a holistic vision for the settlement, exploring issues of housing, recreation space and village environment.

128

figure 92; overview of village masterplan

on-farm anaerobic digestion plant processes organic waste from the village and surrounding villages, as well as farm waste

A reed bed managed by the farmstead and on the farmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s land processes waste from farm and village sewage

cattle grids and gates give psychological impetus for driers to slow down, marking formal start of settlement wasteland brought by community to make allotments for residents

new lightweight pavilion provides changing facilities for village sports

parking and charging point for electric carshare scheme

affordable houses built on existing plot of cricket pavilion

new sheltered elderly housing development replaces existing with 50% more capacity and improved communal facilities

129

A masterplan for Burrough Green The main move driving the reconfiguration of the village is a redefinition of the north side of the green, with the new development completing and reinforcing the historic set-back building line. The farmstead is brought into the settlement, with new buildings completing the north east corner of the villageâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s encirclement of the green. (fig. 93) Setting back the buildings from the road and creating a buffering green space gives the new buildings respite from the highway. This works in tandem with a new treatment of road surface and traffic calming to reduce the dominance and disruption of the road within the village. Firstly cattle grids and gateposts define the end of the main road and the start of the residential area, which is marked as a twenty zone. Within the village, the road becomes a shared surface, with a change of surface material, and with no road markings or pavements, slowing drivers speed and increasing awareness. Cars can park on the wider areas of road, giving easy access to the farm centre and activities on the green, and creating further obstacles to slow traffic. New housing reintroduces denser pieces of terraced form into the grain of the village, with two terraces, one of affordable and one of market housing facing directly onto the green and further defining the space. (fig. 94) Locals only affordable housing is positioned right in the centre of the village, putting the financially less well off, or younger less established residents at the heart of the community rather than the peripheries. As this housing displaces the existing pavilion, a new lightweight pavilion is proposed to sit in the centre of the green, which can be removed out of season or for events. A third terrace of housing is proposed on greenfield farmland adjacent to the old sewage works site, along the beginning of one of the landscape corridors. This mix of affordable and intermediate housing overlooks a new community space, with a childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s play area, and allotments on the old sewage works. If the land could be obtained, further allotments are proposed for land in the south east corner of the village, which was historically village allotments. To the east of the village the land alongside the road is converted into a new sustainable sewage works, with reed beds to treat runoff. This is run by the farm business which uses it to process waste water from anaerobic digestion and dairy operations. The farm hub, live work units and business units of the farmstead form a new corner to the green, with activity from the farm and cafe spilling onto the green itself. With a new community hall within the farm hub, the existing reading room building could be converted to a community homeworking centre, allowing commuters to larger firms in Cambridge to remote work several days a week.

130

figure 94; New forms in the village and their relationship to the re-established setback settlement line

figure 93; view of village with new development131

existing hall used as space for remote working and study

8 new open market houses

new lightweight pavilion

new sheltered elderly housing development replaces existing.

4 new affordable houses

132

figure 95; Plan of proposed masterplan NTS

border between village and farmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s land

community play space and orchard

4 affordable and 6 intermediate houses developed by farm

village & farm parking electric car share and charging farm hub

live work units

reed bed sewage system

133

Housing Development PHASE 1 - Affordable housing Dealing with the initial needs of the village, 4 affordable houses are proposed on the site of the existing cricket pavilion. (fig.96) A compact terrace of 1 x 1 bedroom 2 x 2 bedroom and 1x 3 bedroom cottages are built, and a new lightweight pavilion is erected on the green itself. As the land on which the housing is built already belongs to the council, it can quickly be enabled, either through the local housing association, or perhaps through a community land trust, where the community finance and build the houses themselves. In either case the houses would be affordable rental properties, kept in perpetuity for local people, with rents fixed below market rates.

PHASE 2 - Affordable & intermediate housing Built on Wyck farmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s land a terrace of 4 affordable houses and 6 intermediate houses meet the affordable requirement found in the Housing Need Survey, (ACRE, 2009b, p22) but also provide intermediate housing as a means to bridge the gap between subsidised rental properties and the expensive open market housing in the village. Intermediate houses are like market houses and can be brought and sold freehold, but they have a planning covenant on them which fixes their price at a set amount below market value, for example 70-80%. (Taylor, 2008, p111) As the farm owns the land, which outside of such an agreement has little value, there is potentially substantial financial incentive for the farm developing the land, even with the reduced market rate. The farm could either develop the housing itself to sell in collaboration with developers and housing associations, or it could just sell the land with the planning permission.using

associations, or sell the land with the permission for a substantially greater value. This capital could be used to enable the development of the farmstead itself.

PHASE 3 - Market housing Although it is not desirable for the village to grow substantially, permitting some market development in carefully planned ways could improve the village structure and encourage redevelopment of substandard and insensitive buildings. Furthermore it could broaden the types and tenures of housing on the market, such as providing more small terraced starter homes and flats. If demolished the four ex-council houses at the centre of the green could provide a terrace of eight to ten new homes, restoring the historic line of development to the north of the green. Whilst the land is currently in private and separate ownerships, by speculatively including such a proposition within the long term plan there is incentive for developers to try and acquire the land.

PHASE 4 - Sheltered housing for the elderly With an ageing population nationally and particularly in rural areas. Elderly housing for rural communities is a key issue. It is proposed that in negotiation with the current affordable housing provider Sanctuary Hareward, the current buildings would be replaced with a larger scheme with a 50% larger capacity. The current sheltered housing dates from the 1960â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and is of poor quality design and construction. As demand in the future increases and the buildings come to the end of their life, a more engaging scheme is proposed which addresses the pond and green, and acts as a gateway to a green corridor which runs from the green through the development and out along the footpath to neighbouring Brinkley.

134

figure 96; Position of initial housing development on green

figure 97; housing development

135

figures 98 - 101; Study model images of proposal for village

model photos

136

137

III. THE MULTIFUNCTIONAL FARMSTEAD; A gateway to the landscape

Within the wider plan for the village, the farmstead plays an integral role in the sustainable future of Burrough Green. It creates a valve between the village and farmland, assimilating the grain of the landscape and the fabric of the village. The buildings of the farmstead provide multiple functions, supporting the farm business, providing a base for agricultural activity, managing the farm and hosting diversified activities such as tourism, care farming and on-farm food processing. Beyond this it fulfils a wider social role, providing community functions, services and premises for economic development. This chapter explains the organisation of the 138

farmstead and how the design mediates between village and landscape

figure 102; Farmstead overview in context

139

Architectural language and the farmstead. In designing the farmstead the issue of rural architectural language and form is closely examined. To realise the proposal made in this thesis, design and aesthetic becomes a crucial component, as conservative attitudes and the great value given to the historic environment often result in opposition to development and change. (Taylor, 2008, 88-89) Engaging with this issue, the design of the farmstead has tried to find an architecture which resonates with the values of the commodified countryside, whilst avoiding pastiche. Careful massing and consideration of scale in the form and placement of buildings and their relation to the historic fabric drive the planning of the scheme. In the articulation and materiality of the buildings, a flirtation with nostalgic forms and vernacular materials determines an architectural treatment which aims to satisfy the tastes of rural society whilst making buildings which are contemporary, pragmatic and spatially innovative. In such a strategy the architecture hopes to sidestep theoretical discourses surrounding regionalism with an irreverent approach, which treats the vernacular as an eclectic source of inspiration and reference. In this aim the architecture draws influence form Tonobu fujimoriâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rustic Japanese buildings which playfully appropriate and exaggerate historic forms and the early Swiss works of Peter Zumthor, which demonstrate a pared down vernacular-modern tradition of simple and elegant buildings.

140105; Thatched roof; Cosy Cottage, Burrough Green, 1929 figure

figure 103; House near Chur, Peter Zumthor

figure 104; Private House, Teronobu Fujimori, Japan

https://www.japlusu.com

141

Overview The buildings of the farmstead are organised along the radial landscape corridors which fan out from the south east of the green. (fig.107) This organisation serves all the buildings with pedestrian and vehicular access, but also ensures permeability between settlement and landscape. As the more public and multifunctional buildings, the farm centre and business cluster are pulled into the village, completing the settlementâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s encirclement of the green. The positioning of the farmstead on the corner of the green puts it in conversation with the other public nodes of the village; the school, pub and elderly housing centre, integrating it as a key institution of the settlement. (fig. 106) The larger agricultural buildings are positioned further out from the village, with a notion of functionally and figuratively moving produce inwards from the landscape, from milking and drying, to storage and processing, to packaging and selling as the farmstead meets settlement. (fig. 108)

anaerobic digestor plant

142

machinery & storage barn

business cluster

dairy processing and cheesemaking building

farm centre

farm workers accommodation or b&b accommodation

figure 106; Farmstead as node around green

figure 107; Massing of buildings along landscape corridors

PUB

SCHOOL

FARMSTEAD

ELDERLY SHELTERED HOUSING

dairy & cowhouse

vegetable and grain storage barn

passive grain dryers

figure 108; Farmstead layout and overview

143

figure 109; Farmstead plan NTS

III. general overview and diagrams

PADDOCK

farm centre

short stay and business parking

short stay parking and electric car charging

business cluster

GREEN

ENTRANCE

144

existing farmhouse

grain & vegetable store

production building cow house & milking parlour

staff and overflow parking

anaerobic digestor

GOODS ENTRANCE machinery and storage barn

145

figure 110; Aspect of farmstead from village green.

A valve to the landscape

Approaching the farmstead from the village green the farm centre and business cluster form a gateway to the landscape, defining the wedge of pasture which sweeps out into the farmland. 146

147

figure 111; Aspect of village from farmstead

A valve to the village

148

149

IV. THE FARM CENTRE, DIVERSIFICATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

The farm centre is the core of multifunctional activity within the farmstead, a loose-fit series of spaces which can accommodate everything from the everyday running of the farm, to the farmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s diversification 150

and tourism activities, to community events and community services.

figure 112; Farmstead overview in context

151

The Farm Centre The farm centre caters for and benefits three overlapping sets of users, the agricultural farm business, the community, and visitors or tourists coming to the farm. Overlapping these programmes keep the building well used and thus financially viable, which is often an issue with serving low density populations, where community buildings can become a financial burden. The farm organises this overlap, taking bookings and programming a calendar for the farm centre. The farm rents the hall and meeting rooms to community groups, delivering affordable spaces for the community, as a playgroup, theatre or yoga space, or for larger community meetings, parties and events. Having the farm cafe and shop adjacent to the hall allows the farm to glean passing trade from local people using the facilities, with the presence of these services encouraging people to socialise and shop locally before or after their leisure activities, rather than use far off conurbations. Further to this the building hosts essential services, such as a post office within the farm shop, whilst the meeting room can be set up as an outreach doctors clinic. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s principal income however comes from renting the hall out as conference

Approached from the parking area the entrance is defined by the space between the hall building and the supporting barn. The lightweight transparent wrap of support space allows the archetypal form of the hall to be clearly read, with the delicate language of the timber rainscreen relating to stands of trees beyond in the landscape. 152

or events space, making it viable and subsidising its community use. It might for example be used for business conferences, walking or outdoor activity groups, weddings or academic retreats from Cambridge. The possibility of accommodation and catering on the farm as well as the attractions of the landscape would make it an appealing destination. Alongside this the farm runs a care farming programme which would use the facilities of the centre for orientation and briefings. Care farming is a growing phenomenon where disadvantaged groups or those with disabilities are brought to farms to engage with basic farming activities such as habitat maintenance or fruit picking, and is an increasingly common form of farm diversification. (Care farming UK, 2012) With recent research evidencing the significant health benefits of green exercise and green environments, the building serves as a node for landscape activity, bringing people from further afield out to engage with the countryside.

figure 113; Approaching the farm centre

153

figure 114; Massing & articulation

The main hall lean-to

accommodation block

supporting barn

The buiding is composed of four elements. This articulation addresses the issue of massing a larger building with a loose fit and freely planned relationship of spaces in a sensitive rural context. Borrowing from the agglomerative language of vernacular farmsteads the form of the building breaks down the scale and depth of floor plan whilst maintaining programmatic adjacency and flexibility. Firstly the hall, which takes a vernacular barn like pitched form, is raised up to the first floor to look over the green, a gestural archetypal village hall. The plinth on which the hall sits contains service spaces such as toilets, changing and kitchen facilities. The hall is then wrapped in a lightweight lean-to of supporting spaces, which accommodates a shop and cafe on the ground floor, breakout space, kitchen/bar and stage/ meeting room on the upper floor. figure 116; Long section A- Aâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; NTS

meeting room/stage

hall space

activity space

154

farm office

figure 115; Perspective section B - Bâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; NTS

Kitchen diner for seasonal workers

Accommodation units

155

Section B-B’

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

Section B-B’

GROUND FLOOR PLAN 156

figures 117, 118; Farm centre plans, NTS

Section A-A

Section A-Aâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

157

figure 119; Elevational render

The supporting barn sits slightly apart from the hall, with the lean-to element forming a covered walkway between the buildings.This building contains a secondary multifunctional space for meetings, activities and hosted services. The central bays of the building contains the farm office for everyday running of the farm, whilst the east end of the barn contains a large kitchen dining and living area for seasonal farm workers in season and tourists at other times of year, who sleep in the adjacent accommodation block. The long overhanging porch of the supporting barn makes an exterior space for outdoor activities, events and orientations.

figure 121; A deep covered space allows the activities of the farm centre to inhabit the outdoors, with vegetable stalls spilling out of the shop, or orientation briefings for care farming.

158

figure 120; sketch model explores floating hall concept

Figure 123; Faceted contemporary thatching give the hall a playful vernacular expression

Figure 122; The space between the two buildings defines a small courtyard which acts as a lobby to the various spaces of the farm centre.

159

On entering this courtyard, to the right large double doors open into a multi-purpose space, which the farm could use for care farming orientation and seminars, or where the community might run a youth club, or outreach clinics. (fig. 125) To the left the shop and cafe stretch along the side of the hall. (fig. 124) An external circulation between the glass facade and the rain screen widens at the front of the building to provide shaded outdoor seating overlooking the green. The cafe has a larger separate dining room which can be shut down in winter when there is less activity, divided off for functions or as a dining room for farm workers. (fig. 126)

Figure 124; View of the shop & cafe

160

ENTRANCE

expandable secondary dining space

Figure 126; Hall plan detail, NTS

Figure 125; The activity room hosts an outreach clinic

161

Entering the hall itself, doors open into the lower level where a foyer opens onto changing spaces and toilets. (fig. 126) From the foyer a stair dog legs up into the hall. A playful appropriation of the vernacular half hipped roof form illuminates the space with a large asymetrical north facing roof-light. (fig. 127) Open at one end, the hall has a panoramic view out over the green across the stage. Sliding timber screens divide the hall itself from the meeting room and kitchen, allowing for numerous configurations. (fig. 128)

sliding partitions

Figure 126; Section of hall

162 Figure 127; View of hall

Figure 128; Different configurations of the hall

Separate spaces The hall is divided into three separate spaces with sliding acoustic insulating partitions between. This allows for simultaneous activities, such as a playgroup in the stage/meeting room whilst a coffee morning for parents is held in the main hall. Alternatively some spaces can be shut down completely, saving heating the whole building when only lightly used, for example for a parish coucil meeting.

performance For lectures, performances or conferences the hall reconfigures as a small auditorium, with a curtain defining a runaround and making a small back of house area. The kitchen area forms a foyer space and bar for refreshments and drinks.

open plan For activites and events the hall can be opened up as an open plan series of spaces.

163

Figure 128; Plan of accommodation block and communal areas

The accommodation block provides on farm accommodation for seasonal farm workers. Fruit picking and harvesting field vegetable crops is labour intensive and requires extra workers to be brought in for several weeks at a time. Portable accommodation pods slot into an open fronted timber framed building, providing a simple room with a small stove. A permanent laundry, shower and W.C block is provided at one end of the building. Opposite the shower block there is a communal kitchen and dining area within the farm centre. Out of season the accommodation can be run as bed and breakfast stays and can be moved by tractor to other parts of the farm, inhabiting the landscape as tourist camping lodges. (fig. 129)

Figure 130; The accommodation block

164

Figure 129; Accomodation pod demounted in landscape

165

V. LIVING & WORKING; RURAL EMPLOYMENT AND BUSINESS

The business cluster sits at the edge of the green, providing live work housing and office space for small businesses to expand and flourish whilst encouraging sustainable lifestyles, with more people both working and living within rural hinterlands. 166

Figure 131; Business cluster overview in context

167

Cottage Industry. Three live work cottages suggest a new mode of rural living, where small ICT based, land based and rural service businesses can be run from rural residential premises. The units proposed are generous three bedroom family houses with a flexible split level work space, which would accommodate several employees alongside its residents. The elevation to the green takes on a domestic language, with an entrance and porch directly to the kitchen. The rear elevation faces onto the farmyard, with shop fronts, parking and access for delivery. A shared stair core and W.C saves on circulation and ties the function of living and working together, discouraging the partition or separate rental of the workshop space, ensuring the cottage remains in a genuine live work use. However there is potential to adapt how the space is shared between residential and business functions, with options to expand and contract as businesses grow and shrink, or to accommodate very different types of business. (fig. 135) Developed by the farmstead, the cottages would provide a rental income for the farm, whilst providing rural entrepreneurs an affordable means to start a business. A higher ceiling height for machinery and ducting in the workshop creates a stepped section between the house and workshop, with the mezzanine workshop level accessed off the intermediate landing of the stair. The ground floor of the house has a kitchen, utility and W.C. Above on the first floor, a large living room faces south across the green, with a small bedroom to the rear. Two further bedrooms and a bathroom inhabit the roof space, with a large top lit dormer making headroom for the bathroom. The exterior is wrapped in a corten mesh rain-screen which disguises the large openings in the roof, maintaining the integrity of the vernacular pitched roof form, and shading the roof-lights. To the rear large polycarbonate facades allow light to spill into the workshop, with rain-screen mesh shutters folding across for security. Adjoining the cottages there is a further business unit and larger office space, which provides spaces for a larger local business to expand, or space for one of the live work enterprises to grow. Whilst a small economic intervention in urban terms, with perhaps ten people employed in the cluster, if such a strategy of small farmstead based live work and business clusters was spread through the villages, it could significantly increase workplace containment and thus reduce the transport emissions of rural populations, whilst the benefits of increasing day time population of the village, with support to services and a more dynamic environment would be significant. Figure 132; Business cluster rear elevation and shop fronts

168

Figure 133; Split level circulation

A central circulation core serves both residential and business levels

Figure 134; Interior layout

office on mezzanine

bedrooms in roof

living room

family kitchen diner

carpentry workshop 169

Figure 135; Adaptability and reconfiguration

Small business Workshop/office on ground floor, office above. Carpenter, bakery, small shop etc. Employing several people with accounts and office above.

Sole practitioner To suit sole practitioner or couple, accountant, editor etc. Ground floor becomes sitting room, mezzanine office above

Large family with workshop Workshop on ground floor, mezzanine converted to master bedroom suits small machine shop, mechanic etc.

Figure 136; The elevation to the green is more domestic

170

Figure 137; Plans of the business centre NTS

FIRST FLOOR NTS

she

r/d

r ye

SECOND FLOOR NTS

washe

GROUND FLOOR NTS

r/dr ye

171

VI. ADDING VALUE; ON FARM FOOD PROCESSING

The production building demonstrates how a farm business can diversify into food processing and packaging on farm, adding value and profit to the outputs of the farm. 172

Figure 138; Production building overview in context

173

Adding Value The production building creates an adaptable space for diversified activities on the farm. Small scale diversification enterprises supplement the income of the farm and turn unprofitable outputs such as farm gate milk into higher value items, whilst also generating rural employment. (DEFRA 2007b, p3) This scheme proposes a cheesemaking enterprise and a farm box packing and delivery scheme, both of which are established diversification activities. The cheesemaking enterprise produces artisan cheeses made and matured on farm from the milk the dairy produces, which buys in milk from other local farms when needed. The cheeses can be sold locally in the farm shop or further afield in Cambridge or Newmarket, reinforcing local networks and connections. Description A simple portal frame in small diameter timber built off a clay block wall forms a basic structural and weather-tight envelope which can then be inhabited in a number of ways and remain readily adaptable to future needs. A rain-screen of glass pantiles forms a large north facing facade which brightly

Figure 139; Production building, interior of cheesemaking space

174

illuminates the floors, creating a functional working environment and allowing visitors to the farm centre and the farm to see and sense activity. The eastern five bays of the shed remain an uninsulated shell, creating a packing and washing space for running a vegetables farm box scheme, with a loading bay for deliveries. The central five bays are internally insulated and fitted out to make a large conditioned space for cheesemaking processing and machinery. A double glazed curtain wall set back from the facade leaves a semi external circulation zone. The four westernmost bays are uninsuated, with a passive cheese maturing room or cheesecave built freestanding within the building. Gabion walls give thermal inertia and stability, whilst a bath of cool water at the base of the wall humidifies air as it is brought in to the space. (fig. 140)

cheese maturation â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;cheese caveâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

cheese making space

farm box packing and washing

Figure 140; Production building schematic overview

175

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

cheese maturation ‘cheese cave’

cheese packaging area

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

cheese maturation ‘cheese cave’

cargo lift

176

Figure 141; Production building plans NTS

milk storage tank and pasteuriser further farm box packing and administration space section A - Aâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

vegetable washing section A - Aâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

vegetable washing

top swing doors

cargo lift

delivery site office

177

Formally the building aims to reveal the process of food production and the symbolic flow of produce from the field to the village. The transparent facade allows visitors to the farm and those moving through the landscape to read the activity of the processes inside. However the introduction of typical transparent facade treatments such as curtain walling to the rural context is inappropriate at this scale. Borrowing from the vernacular, a unitised rain-screen of glass pantiles disrupts the homogeneity of the glass facade and add an impression of tactility and nostalgia for vernacular form.

Figure 142; Production building section NTS

glass pantile rainscreen facade unheated circulation space double glazed curtain walling service and storage zone

178

conditioned production space

Figure 143; Pantiles on an outbuilding roof, Burrough Green 1965

Figure 144; Glass pantiles

Figure 145; View of facade

179

VII. LOW ENERGY FARMING; PASSIVE BUILDINGS FOR PRODUCTION AND STORAGE 180

A summary of the pilot study to this thesis, these design explorations add a further facet to our understanding of the multifunctional farmstead, as we touch on how the agricultural buildings of the farmstead might work in a sustainable intensive agriculture.

Figure 146; Overview in context of passive farm buildings

181

Vegetable Store The vegetable store alows the farm to keep a stock of vegetables for sale beyond their growing season, for wholesale, farm boxes, or to supply the cafe. It seems energy efficiencies would be possible through a passive conditioned space which provides this environment for root vegetables. Mechanically conditioned cold stores could then be situated within the passive space to lower cooling loads. Diurnal and seasonal variation in humidity needs to be controlled to preserve the vegetables. The store relies on thermal mass and the ability to insulate the building against daytime gains, whilst being able to chill the structure very effectively at night. Air movement is wind driven with electric backup fans. The louvres and groundwater cooling system would be linked to a building management system to ensure the conditioning of the space would be automatically adjusted to suit external conditions. Use of rammed earth and clay materials inside temper the humidity within the space, creating a diurnal â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;moisture flywheel.â&#x20AC;&#x2122; Figure 147; Vegetable store section Zinc capping protects thatch and takes skylight and ventilation 400mm straw thatch on roundwood timber rafters, with straw insulation beneath creates a lightweight superinsulating skin Brick vault with geotextile membrane creates a strong and thermally massive inner skin

Cavity thermally separates the inner skin and creates a ventilation space which allows cool night air to chill the vault.

Electronically controlled louvres can seal the space on hot days or fully open for night time cooling

Groundwater earth pipes use the inertia of groundwater temperature to give extra summer coling.

182

Figure 148 Storage buidlng render

Figure 149; Storage buidlng plan

Figure 150; Storage buildlng, form in the landscape

183

Figure 151; Passive grain dryer

Passive Grain Dryer The conceptual low energy grain dryer (Fig.152) works on a passive wind driven stack principle. Grain is top loaded by a combine escalator feeder and stored in vertical mesh cylinders of 0.8m diameter by 15m height. Nozzle forms in a brick plinth accelerate air into the dryer, where it is pulled up its height by the pressure difference of the wind cowl. There would be a small solar fan to create airflow on windless days. Each cylinder contains 7.5 cubic metres of grain, and has a surface area of 38m2. This gives a large area to allow air passing the surface to evaporate off, pulling more moisture to the edges with a wicking effect. Once the grain is sufficiently dry, the cylinders open at the bottom and the grain can flow into a trailer for transport to storage.

184

Figure 152; Passive grain dryer plan & section diagram

Figure 153; Grain dryer in context 185

CONCLUSION This piece of research begins by setting out to broadly define and describe the major issues facing the societies of englandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s smaller villages and the practice of agriculture with which these places are intrinsically linked. It reports on three drivers of change which will likely determine the future of rural England; the lack of equity and unsustainable lifestyles of contemporary rural society, the changing planning context and the failure of recent rural spatial planning, and the pressing need to sustainably intensify agriculture. From this briefing the thesis argues that the current problems the countryside faces stem from the underlying productivist/post productivist dichotomy of contemporary rural space, and that a new conceptualization of the countryside as a multifunctional and synergic territory is needed to achieve a sustainable future for rurality; as a place of sustainable habitation and as a space of productive and sustainable agricultural practice. Through this understanding the thesis proposes that the farm itself is, as it has been historically, the key to establishing any new paradigm for the countryside, proposing a rural strategy where multifunctional village farmsteads are promoted as a means to reconfigure farming practice, landscape management and its integration with rural settlement. To understand how this proposition might be realized, a design case study of Burrough green attempts to spatialize this theoretical concept through a design scheme which explores the realities of how the integration of agriculture and sustainable rural development might work. The design marshalls an understanding of established and emerging research concepts, precedents and novel inventions made in the process of designing into a holistic vision for a multifunctional rurality, bringing together ideas about the countryside across multiple disciplines and scales in a physical and spatial proposition. The study is intended as a scoping exercise, the limitations of a desk based study and the broadness of investigation mean it is not feasible to test or attempt to prove in detail all the concepts put forward, beyond the evidence of the drawn design and its supporting evidence. As such it stands as an elucidation of what could be achieved in an ideal scenario. Without extensive engagement with community, landowners and other stakeholders we can only speculate on how the complex social dynamics and behaviors which the scheme aims to alter would be affected. However there is great worth in making bold suggestions and asking what could be achieved within carefully defined arguments and well considered research frameworks. By asking â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;what if we did thisâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; within a research context we can re-orientate the debate surrounding an issue through the novel lens of a propositional research, offering up a conceptual vision to the wider scholarly community for critique and dissection. As a construct for understanding the potential, limitation and issues surrounding the argument for a multifunctional farmstead, the process of designing proves a useful means of testing the general concept and finding out its practical and spatial implications. The design demonstrates that there are many opportunities for multifunctionality within the farmstead, finding several possibilities for how

186

reciprocal relationships between farm and village could be established. The success of the design as a demonstration of multifunctional ideas suggests there is great potential in farmsteads to play a vital role in rural development, with the exercise producing promising new concepts worthy of further investigation. The act of proposition brings to light some interesting new opportunities and highlights some issues to consider. Land dynamics Firstly the design highlighted the opportunities of land swaps and relationships between farm and village. The farm owns much of the land close to the village and as such potential plots for new development. Currently with little worth, planning has the potential to give this land massively increased value, stimulating development of affordable housing and providing the capital to catalyze the development of the farmstead. As a piece of land near to the centre of the village, the potential of the farmstead itself as a site for developing is shown to have great potential as a means to significantly expand settlements without sprawl. The potential of planning to instantly create capital by encouraging development on agricultural and farmstead land in these areas of constricted development has huge potential, and understanding the dynamics and economics of these issues is of great interest. Landscape and leisure One of the difficulties of ensuring sustainable land management is how to link economic value to things like ecology, landscape aesthetic and maintaining soil quality. Currently the only means to encourage good landscape management is subsidy. Whilst this will undoubtedly continue to play a part, the design demonstrates how a vital reciprocity between sustainable land management and rural economy could be established. By encouraging a human interaction with the landscape, the management of environment is directly linked to tourism and leisure activities which bring income to the farm. Demonstrating how the farm could foster this relationship is a key finding of the proposal. Low density overlap and increasing use. A second important reciprocity is in the potential role that the farm could play in providing community and social spaces. In low density environments maintaining viable and sustainable services such as village halls, shops and post offices is problematic, however through the integration of a farms diversified touristic activity and village functions, village communities could benefit from access to sustained services. This principal has great potential in an integration of community with agricultural practice and as a robust economic means to provide community functions in the village.

187

Outstanding issues In consultation over the early concept with research manager Ben Lang at Cambridge Universitiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Department of Land Economy, it was raised that the sort of diversification proposed would be a challenge to manage for farm business. His experience in authoring The Farm Business Survey suggested that farmers donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have the skills or resources to run complex and multi-stranded businesses. This suggests that if a farmstead was to take on the scale and range of activities proposed in this thesis then significant help in education, advice and guidance will need to be made available to farmers. Another option discussed was the franchising of some aspects of the farmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s diversification. i.e the farm shop for instance might be managed by a small local chain rather than the farm itself. Further investigation and consultation is needed to understand the pragmatics and realities of how the farm might operate as a business entity. Only superficially addressed in this thesis, how the precise economics of such an operation would be made to work would be essential to proving the concept. Whilst precedent suggests farms do manage to finance diversification, and grants have been made available in the past, exactly how the economics of development investment and income might work for the multifunctional farmstead demands consideration.

This thesis has shown one vision of what a sustainable future for agriculture and small scale rural society could become. It stands as a collection of concepts and ideas established through an extensive, holistic and interdisciplinary understanding of current thinking on rurality, alongside the discoveries made in the application of this understanding in designing. Whilst a case study of one site and condition, the structuring of the research delivers generic implications, with the strategies and principals of the design applicable to many small villages and farms across the country. As a prototype model the design proposal demonstrates a strong argument for the broad concept of the multifunctional village farmstead becoming a keystone to future sustainable rural development. However as a scoping study its main worth is as a stepping off point for further research. Each aspect covered in this study, from architectural language, passive farm building design to landscape design only offers schematic concepts and all aspects demands closer examination, testing and consultation. Furthermore the proposition raises new questions, such as how policy, planning practice and rural agencies could be directed to support such a multifunctional model. Perhaps the most important lesson of the thesis is the exciting potential for designers to re-engage with rural space, which is currently largely outside the remit of urbanists and masterplanners. It is evident from this investigation that the complex needs of the countryside demand joined up and holistic thinking. The countryside as an environment is a man made artifact as much as the city, with the same complex interrelation of economic social and physical features. As such the potential of design in optimizing and improving this environment is shown to be great.

188

189

REFERENCES ACRE, 2009, Community Led Planning Position Paper, Gloucestershire ACRE, 2009b, Housing needs survey results report for Burrough Green Parish, ACRE ACRE, 2011, Parish profile for Burrough Green (Parish) Final report v1.1, Audsley et al, 2009, How low can we go? An assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from Banister, D, 2005, What are sustainable rural communities, Thinkpiece for the Commission for Rural Communities, The Bartlett School of Planning, University College London Barling, D et al, 2008 Rethinking Britain’s Food Security, Centre for Food Policy, London Barton M & Pretty J, 2010, What is the Best Dose of Nature and Green Exercise for Improving Mental Health? A MultiStudy Analysis, Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 3947–3955 Bishop, J, 2010, Parish Plans to Localism in England: Straight Track or Long and Winding Road?, Planning Practice and Research, 25:5 Brunskill, R, 1987, Illustrated handbook of vernacular architecture, Faber & Faber, London Burough Green Parish Council, 2012, www.burroughgreen.com Burrough Green & District community archive www.ccan.co.uk Cambrideshire Country Council. 2009, Cambridge Strategic Housing Market Assessment: CONSULTATION DRAFT Cambridgeshire County Council Research Group, 2006, Economic Development Strategy 2006-2011, Cambridge, p10 Cambridgeshire Together, 2009, Rural Cambridgeshire: Ensuring a Vibrant Future Care farming UK, 2012, www.carefarminguk.org CCRG,(Cambridgeshire County Council Research Group), 2006, Economic Development Strategy 2006-2011, Cambridge Champion, T et al. 2009 , Migration and Longer-Distance Commuting in Rural England’, Regional Studies, 43: 10, 1245 — 1259 Champion, T, 2009 ‘Urban-Rural Differences in Commuting in England: A Challenge to the Rural COCC, 2010,The Fourth Carbon Budget 2010, (2010) Committee on Climate Change, London,p217 Consultation on a new Rural Strategy for Cambridgeshire, Cambridgeshire county council. CPRE, 2011, How to shape where you live: a guide to neighbourhood planning, Gloucestershire. CRC, 2007 Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities: A New Agenda, Cheltenham CRC, 2007b, Under the Radar; tracking and supporting home based businesses, Cheltenham CRC, 2010, State of the countryside, 2010, Commission for Rural Communities, Cheltenham DCLG (Department of Communities & Local government) 2011, Localism Bill: neighbourhood plans and community right to build: Impact assessment, London Defra 2007, SID 5 research Project, Final report, Institute of grassland and environmental research. DEFRA, 2007b, Barriers to Farm Diversification; Report of the Joint Industry-Government DEFRA, 2009, The Rural enterprise scheme DEFRA, 2011, CAP Reform post 2013; Defra discussion paper on the impact in England of 190

EU Commission regulatory proposals for Common Agricultural Policy reform, post 2013, DEFRA Department of Communities & Local Government, 2012, National Planning Policy Framework, London Department of Communities & Local Government, 2012, National Planning Policy Framework, London East of England Region, University of Gloucestershire in association with English Heritage and the Countryside Agency. Gloucestershire EC (European Commision) 2011, Impact Assesmsnt; Common Agricultural Policy towards 2020, European Commision, Brussel ECDC (East Cambs District Council), 2011, Village Visions – consultation responses (available online 2012 http:// www.eastcambs.gov.uk/local-development-framework/consultation-villagetown-visions) Echenique, M et al, 2009, London and the Wider South East Regions Case Study, Sustainability of land use and transport in outer neighbourhoods, Solutions, Cambridge EHDC, (East Herts District Council), 2011, Interim Neighbourhood Planning Guidance Note, (online 2012 at www. eastherts.gov.uk) English Heritage, 2006, Historic Farmsteads. Preliminary Character Statement: FAO, 2011, Energy-smart food for people and climate Issue paper, FAO Findlay et Al, 2001, Mobility as a Driver of Change in Rural Britain: An Analysis of the Links between Migration, Commuting and Travel to Shop Patterns, International Journal of Population Geography Int. J. Popul. Geogr. 7, P 1-15, Foresight, 2010, Land Use Futures Final Project Report, The Government Office for Science, London. Foresight, 2011 ,The Future of Food and Farming Final Project Report. The Government Office for Science, London. Foresight, 2011b, Synthesis Report C12: Meeting the challenges of a low-emissions world; The Future of Food and Farming, The Government Office for Science, London. Gallent, N et al, 2008, Parish plans and the spatial planning approach in England, Town Planning Review, 79 (1) P 7 Halfacre, K, 2007, Trial by space for a ‘radical rural’ : Introducing alternative localities, representations and lives, Journal of Rural Studies (23) 125-141 Holland M, & Hastings, A, 2008, Strong effect of dispersal network structure on ecological dynamics, Nature 456, 792794 (11 December 2008 Howkins, A, 2003, The Death of Rural England; A Social history of the Countryside since 1900, Routledge, London http://www.defra.gov.uk/rural/rdpe/erdp/schemes/project-based Little, D et al, 2008, Warm water Fish Production as a Niche Production and Market Diversification Strategy for Organic Arable Farmers: Full Research Report, ESRC, Swindon Lowe, P, & N Ward, 2009, England’s Rural Futures: A Socio-Geographical Approach to Scenarios Analysis, Regional Studies, Vol. 43.10, Centre for Rural Economy, Newcastle upon Tyne University. M Taylor, Living working, countryside, 2008, Department for Communities and Local Government, London 2008, MacKay, D, 2008, Sustainable Energy – without the hot air. UIT Cambridge, online www.withouthotair.com.127 Magenn, 2012, www.magenn.com Marsden T, Sonnino S, 2008, Rural development and the regional state: Denying multifunctional agriculture in the UK, Journal of rural studies (24) 422-431 Mather, A et al, 2006, Post productivism and rural land use: cul de sac or challenge for theorization? Journal of rural studies (22) 441-455 Natural England, 2008, Research report NERR026, Carbon Management by Land and Marine Management, Natural 191

England, Cheltenham Natural England, 2009, Agri-environment schemes in England 2009, a review of results and effectiveness, Natural England, Cheltenham. Natural England, 2009b, Experiencing Landscapes: capturing the cultural services and experiential qualities of landscape, Natural England, Cheltenham. NHS Sustainable development unit, 2009, Fit for the Future; Scenarios for low-carbon healthcare 2030, online as of 2010 at (http://www.sdu.nhs.uk/publications-resources) ONS 2001, super output area travel to work dataset, Office for national statistics, London. Oxford Consultants for Social Inclusion (OCSI), Brighton Pollock C, 2011, Food for thought, Options for sustainable increases in agricultural Pretty J & Ball A, 2001, Agricultural Influences on Carbon Emissions and Sequestration: A Review of Evidence and the Emerging Trading Options, Centre for Environment and Society, Department of Biological Sciences University of Essex, UK. Pretty, J, 2012, http://www.julespretty.com/Sustainable_Ecological_Agri.html production, Government office for science, London. RIBA 2011, Guide to Localism Opportunities for Architects Part One: Neighbourhood Planning, London Royal Society 2009, Reaping the benefits; Science and the sustainable intensification of global agriculture, London Sassenrath et al, 2008, Technology, complexity and change in agricultural production systems, Journal of renewable agriculutre and food systems, 23(4) 285-295) Soil association, 2008, An inconvenient truth about food, Soil Association, Bristol Sustainability Agenda?’, Planning Practice and Research, 24: 2, P 161 — 183 The Post Office, 2012, outreach services, available online as of 2012 at (www.postoffice.co.uk) the UK food system and the scope to reduce them by 2050. FCRN-WWF-UK. Turner M et al, 2006,The effects of Funding on Farmer’s Attitudes to Farm Diversification, Centre for Rural Research Exeter University (for DEFRA) Exeter. UN(Uniterd Nations), 2009, Low Greenhouse Gas Agriculture; Mitigation and adaptation potential of sustainable farming systems, Food and Agriculture Organizations of the United Nations, Rome, Warwick HRI, 2007, Direct energy use in agriculture: opportunities for reducing fossil fuel inputs, University of Warwick, Wilkins, R, 2008, Eco-efficient approaches to land management: a case for increased integration of crop and animal production systems, Philosophical transactions of the royal society, (363) 517–525 Wilson, G, 2007, multifunctional agriculture, a transition theory perspective, CABI, Oxford Working Group, DEFRA, London, p3.

192

193

LIST OF FIGURES

figure 1; London 2012 Olypmic opening Ceromony Figure 2; Proposal overview, illustration by author Figure 3; view of farmstead proposal. illustration by author Figure 4; UK land use, DEFRA 2007 Figure 5; Land at the back of Wyck Farm, Burrough Green (photograph by author) Figure 6; Case study area (illustration by author) Figure 7; Burrough Green in relation to neighbouring villages (illustration by author) Figure 8; Aerial photo of Burrough Green (www.bingmaps.com Figure 9; Panorama of the Green, Burrough Green (photograph by author) Figure 10, Traditional agricultural workers cottages demolished in Burrough Green, 1960. Burrough Green & district community archive (www.ccan.co.uk) Figure 11; Cosy Cottage, Burrough Green, 1925, Burrough Green & district community archive (www.ccan.co.uk) Figure 12; Burrough Green. Families outside their homes at Town Yard situated near Walnut Tree Row, 1920, Burrough Green & district community archive (www.ccan.co.uk) FIgure 13; Brinkley - Chalk Pit Farm. A stack on raised hobbles. The farm worker is thatching the top to prevent rain getting in. 1932 to 1934 Burrough Green & district community archive (www.ccan.co.uk) figure 14; Burrough Green, new car, 1964, Burrough Green & district community archive (www.ccan.co.uk) figure 15; Burrough Green, combine harvester, 1960â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, Burrough Green & district community archive (www.ccan.co.uk) figure 16; Burrough Green, the restored Hart Farm and Barn conversion, 2012 The hedge still has labels on. (photograph by author) figure 17; Burrough Green, chemical agriculture; spraying crops with pesticides, 2012 (photograph by author) figure 18; average house prices 2012, Cambridgeshire (http://atlas.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/Profiles/WardProfiles/atlas.html) figure 19; Barriers to housing & services, 2010, Cambridgeshire (http://atlas.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/Profiles/WardProfiles/atlas.html) figure 20; Existing services in Burrough Green and surrounding villages (original mapping by author) figure 21; Mapping of Businesses in Burrough Green and surrounding villages, showing the great range and number of small businesses in the area. (original mapping by author) figure 22; Burrough Green, An old phone box has become a makeshift lending library for the residents (photograph by author) figure 23; Figure ground demonstrates the dispersed pattern of small settlements on the Cambridgeshire Suffolk Border. (illustration by author) figure 24; Burrough Green, Cars parked two deep outside elderly residents homes (photograph by author) figure 25; Mapping of commuting patterns from Burrough Green (original mapping by author derived from 2001 Super ouput area travel to work datasets, ONS 2001) figure 26; Mapping of commuting pattern from Brinkley (original mapping by author derived from 2001 Super ouput area travel to work datasets, ONS 2001) figure 27; Mapping of commuting patterns from Stretchworth (original mapping by author derived from 2001 Super ouput area travel to work datasets, ONS 2001) igure 28; Mapping of commuting pattern from Dullingham (original mapping by author derived from 2001 Super ouput area travel to work datasets, ONS 2001)

194

figure 29; Workplace containment, (http://atlas.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/Profiles/WardProfiles/atlas.html) figure 30; Barriers to housing & services, 2010, Cambridgeshire (http://atlas.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/Profiles/WardProfiles/atlas.html) (http://atlas.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/Profiles/WardProfiles/atlas.html) obtained from commuterview software program, available from ONS. figure 34; Burrough Green, looking towards Wyck Farm (photograph by author) figure 35; Infra red images depict water stress in crops aiding precise irrigation. figure 36; On farm anaerobic digestor produces energy from waste such as manure, crop residue, and is combinable with domestic wastes. figure 37; Ploughed arable land North of Burrough Green is susceptible to erosion and leaching of carbon through surface runoff. (photograph by author) figure 38; Polite notice, outside conservation area East of Burrough Green. (photograph by author) figures 39 & 40; Loss of hedges as fields get larger from 1945 - 2008 (Google earth) figure 41; Mapping of agricultural land use shows extent of monocultural grain production on arable land, shown in yellow (original GIS mapping by author based on data attained from the Single Payments Agency) figure 42; British farmers protest at low milk prices, July 2012 (www.edp24.co.uk) figure 43; Land ownership showing the size of contemporary farms (original GIS mapping by author based on data attained from the Single Payments Agency) figure 44; Beef cattle in stocking sheds, Wyck Farm, Burrough Green (photograph by author) figure 45; Burrough Green awaits change. (photograph by author) figure 46; Sites of farmsteads in adjacency to settlements (original mapping by author) figure 47; new development proposed across the villages (original mapping by author) figure 48; How the Neighbourhood planning system is proposed to work (derived from East Herts District Council, 2011, Interim Neighbourhood Planning Guidance Note, (online March 2012 at www.eastherts.gov.uk) figure 49; A proposal for a design led community planning (by author) figure 50; Burrough Green village sign, (photograph by author) figure 51; A new configuration of the village (illustration by author) figure 52, Scheme overview (illustration by author) figure 53, The extent of Wyck Farm (illustration by author) figure 54; View across the farmland (photograph by author) figure 55; Orchards in Burrough green, 1960 (Burrough Green & district community archive (www.ccan.co.uk) figure 56; View of the farmstead, Wyck Farm (photograph by author) figure 57; View of the farmyard, Wyck Farm (photograph by author) figure 58; Existing topography of the farmland (illustration by author) figure 59; Soils on the farm. (illustration by author, derived from Cranfield University Soilscapes http://www.landis.org.uk/soilscapes/) figure 60; Existing land use (illustration by author) figure 61; Proposed landscape plan NTS (illustration by author) figure 62; Proposed landscape overview (illustration by author) figure 63; wider corridor connections (illustration by author)

195

figure 65; Mixed farming crop zoning (illustration by author) figure 64; Landscape plan detail NTS (illustration by author) figure 66; Multifunctional corridors (illustration by author, images, google images) figure 67; crop spraying (photograph by author) figures 68-73; Settlement boundaries and corresponding views out towards the landscape (photographs by author) figure 74; Proposed design of landscape meeting settlement NTS (illustration by author) figure 75; proposed village overview (illustration by author) figure 76; existing village overview (google maps) figure 77; pedestrian connections to neighbouring villages (illustration by author) figure 78; The Reading Room, current village hall for Burrough Green (photograph by author) figure 79; Study model showing overview of existing village (model and photograph by author) figure 80; Hedges built up against road (photograph by author) figure 81; The lost north green (model and photograph by author) figure 82; Historic map showing building line set well back from the road (1880 ordanance survey, historic digimaps) figure 83; View across the green in 1910 (Burrough Green & district community archive (www.ccan.co.uk) figures 84 & 85; poorly placed 20th century development destroys the historic set back of the building line to the road (model and photograph by author) figure 86; Boundary conditions along the road show even a slight set back encourages people to keep hedges lower. (model and photographs by author) figure 87 & 88; Nearby Barrington in South West Cambridgeshire has a very similar structure to Burrough Green but the original line of the green has been retained, with green space either side of the road. The pleasant frontages of the cottages and the low hedges testify to its sucess (google maps) figure 88 & 89; Panoramas of the green show how the settlement fails to â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;holdâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; the space. (photograph by author) figure 90; figure ground shows the ill-defined edge of the green (illustration by author) figure 91; Location and images of lost terrace forms within the village (photos from Burrough Green & district community archive (www. ccan.co.uk) map from 1880 ordanance survey, historic digimaps) figure 92; overview of village masterplan (illustration by author) figure 94; New forms in the village and their relationship to the re-established set back settlement line. (illustration by author) figure 93; view of village with new development (illustration by author) figure 95; Plan of proposed masterplan NTS( illustration by author) figure 96; Position of initial housing development on green ( illustration by author) figure 97; housing development (illustration by author) figures 98 - 101; Study model images of proposal for village, photographs and models by author figure 102; Farmstead overview in context (illustration by author) figure 103; House near Chur, Peter Zumthor (google images) figure 104; Private House, Teronobu Fujimori, Japan, (google images) figure 106; Farmstead as node around green (illustration by author) figure 107; Massing of buildings along landscape coridors (illustration by author) figure 108; Farmstead layout and overview (illustration by author) figure 109; Farmstead plan NTS (illustration by author) figure 110; Aspect of farmstead from village green. (illustration by author) figure 111; Aspect of village from farmstead (illustration by author) figure 112; Farmstead overview in context (illustration by author)

196

figure 113; Approaching the farm centre (illustration by author) figure 114; Massing & articulation (illustration by author) figure 115; Perspective section B - Bâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; NTS (illustration by author) figure 116; Long section A- Aâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; NTS (illustration by author) figure 117 & 118; Farm centre plans, NTS (illustration by author) figure 119; Elevational render (illustration by author) figure 121; a deep covered space allows the activities of the farm centre to inhabit the outdoors, with vegetable stalls spilling out (illustration by author) Figure 122; The space between the two buildings defines a small courtyard which acts as a lobby to the various spaces of the farm centre. (illustration by author) Figure 123; faceted Contemporary thatching give the hall a playful vernacular expression (googlle images) Figure 124; view of the shop & cafe (illustration by author) Figure 125; the activity room hosts an outreach clinic (illustration by author) Figure 126; section of hall (illustration by author) Figure 127; view of halll (illustration by author) Figure 128; Different configurations of the hall (illustration by author) Figure 128; plan of Accommodation block and communal areas (illustration by author) Figure 129; accomodation pod demounted in landscape (illustration by author) Figure 130; The accommodation block (illustration by author) Figure 131; Business cluster overview in context (illustration by author) Figure 132; Business cluster rear elevation and shop fronts (illustration by author) Figure 133; split level circulationi (illustration by author) gur Figure 134; interior layout (illustration by author) Figure 135; Adaptability and reconfiguration (illustration by author) e 131 Figure 136; The elevation to the green is more domestic (illustration by author) Figure 137; plans of the Business centre NTS; (illustration by author) Bu Figure 138; Production building overview in context (illustration by author) ne Figure 139; Production building, interior of cheesemaking space (illustration by author) Figure 140; Production building schematic overview (illustration by author) Figure 141; Production building plans NTS (illustration by author) Figure 142; Production building section NTS (illustration by author) Figure 143; Pantiles on an outbuilding roof, (Burrough Green 1965 Burrough Green & district community archive (www.ccan.co.uk) Figure 144; Glass pantiles (google images) Figure 145; view of facade (illustration by author) Figure 148; overview in context of passive farm buildings (illustration by author) Figure 147; Vegetable store section (illustration by author) Figure 148 Storage buidlng render (illustration by author) Figure 149; Storage buidlng plan (illustration by author) Figure 150; Storage buidlng. form in the landscape (illustration by author) Figure 151; Passive grain dryer (illustration by author) Figure 152; Passive grain dryer plan & section diagram (illustration by author) Figure 153; Grain dryer in context (illustration by author)

197