Agenda item

PROPOSAL: Variation or removal of condition 1 of planning permission ref: 08/00827/FUL to allow the existing equestrian yard to be used in association with a horse training and stud enterprise.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Permit

16.1          This application was for the variation or removal of condition 1 of planning permission ref: 08/00827/FUL to allow the existing equestrian yard to be used in association with a horse training and stud enterprise.

16.2          The Planning Officer explained that the application related to a parcel of land of approximately 2.3 hectares, located off Stanway Road on the western outskirts of Stanton village.  The site was currently in established private equestrian use and the existing complex included a building used for stabling, a riding arena and other areas of paddock.  The site was bounded by existing mature boundary hedges and trees, with the Severn Trent Water Treatment Works situated along its western boundary.  The existing gated site access was to the south of the site, fronting Stanway Road, and Liberty Farm lay to the west/north west.  Members were informed that the site was located within the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty but outside of the Stanton Conservation Area and Article 4 boundary.  It was noted that the site was within Flood Zone 1 and a Public Right of Way ran to the north of the site on the opposite side of Stanway Road.  The current proposal sought to vary or remove condition 1 of the previous planning permission dating from 2008, which restricted the use to private equestrian, in order to allow commercial/business equestrian use.  The applicant currently operated a horse training and stud business from Gretton Grange which was located approximately 6.5 miles away from this site; however, the lease for that site was due to come to an end shortly and the applicant was therefore in need of a new site from which to carry on the business.  It was important to note that the applicant and current site owner were not one and the same, although the requisite notice had been served upon the site owner.  It was not intended for the site to be utilised by both the current owner and applicant for both private and business equestrian purposes; should the application be permitted and the site subsequently sold, the site would be used in connection with the applicant’s established commercial enterprise only.

16.3          The Chair invited the applicant’s agent to address the Committee.  The applicant’s agent explained that the site had been used for equestrian purposes since 2008 and was a use that fully integrated into the rural character of the site.  At present, the site was subject to a condition which limited its use to private equestrian only – this dated back to a time when the government’s approach was to only support development in towns and cities and most countryside developments were restricted.  Since the introduction of the National Planning Policy Framework in 2012, the government and local authorities had taken a much more positive approach toward rural industries in recognition of the importance of the rural economy.  As such, the concept of sustainable development had been redefined with much greater emphasis on the economic dimension and support for rural-based industries which could obviously only take place in the countryside.  The applicant’s agent explained that this proposal was simply to remove the outdated restriction on the equestrian yard with a view to allowing it to be used for commercial equestrian purposes such as horse training.  No new built form was proposed as all existing building and outdoor arena facilities would be utilised.  As the Committee had already heard, permitting the proposal would enable the applicant to relocate from Gretton where they had rented premises.  As set out in the Officer’s report, the reason for the condition originally having been imposed no longer applied and this development would assist a rural-based business which would in turn support the borough’s rural economy.  It fit squarely with the new definition of sustainable development and was exactly the type of use the government expected to be supported in countryside locations.  Given there was no built form proposed, there could not be said to be any impact on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and, due to its location, there would also clearly be no impact on neighbouring amenity.  The applicant’s business was run on a relatively small scale basis with only five to six horses on site at any one time.  This was a scale they were comfortable with and it was not intended to grow the business any further.  It followed that vehicle movements and staffing numbers were relatively low and there would be no noticeable impact on the highway network as a result of the proposal – in reality there would be no more than three to four vehicles per day.  Notwithstanding this, the applicant had carried out a speed survey along this stretch of Stanway Road which showed that speeds were relatively low.  The visibility splay requirements had been calculated based on these speeds and County Highways had confirmed that they met the required standard so, even if there was an intensification of the access, there were no safety issues and visibility was adequate.  The applicant’s agent considered there were nothing but positives associated with the application and the opportunity to support a local business and the rural economy was paramount, particularly in the context of their being no harms associated with the application. Therefore, he hoped that Members would feel able to support this well-established rural business and permit the application.

16.4          The Chair indicated that the Officer recommendation was to permit the application and he sought a motion from the floor.  It was proposed and seconded that the application be permitted in accordance with the Officer recommendation.  A Member noted that the Parish Council had objected on highway grounds and he indicated that he often travelled along this road and had noticed it was well-used by pedestrians, cyclists and horse-riders. As such, he sought clarification as to what type of vehicles were taken into account when considering traffic movements, for instance, cars, horse boxes etc.  In response, the County Highways representative explained that the nature of the application meant there would inevitably be horse boxes or horse-drawn trailers akin to the size associated with a private equestrian use but he did not expect the size of vehicles to substantially increase and no safety deficiencies had been identified as a result of the proposal.

16.5          Upon being taken to the vote, it was

RESOLVED          That the application be PERMITTED in accordance with the Officer recommendation.