Agenda item

PL/2021/03928 - Poppy House, Barnes Green, Brinkworth.

Formation of arena: erection of stables: vehicular access and parking area: change of use of land to equestrian use.

Minutes:

Public Participation

Martin Evans spoke in objection to the application.

Felicity Barnett spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Alison Parsons spoke on behalf of Brinkworth Parish Council.

 

Development Management Team Leader, Lee Burman presented a report which outlined the formation of an arena; erection of stables; vehicular access and parking area and change of use of land to equestrian use.

 

Details were provided of the site and issues raised by the proposals, including the principle of development, design and landscape impact, ecology, arboriculture, highways safety, public rights of way, drainage and impact on residential amenities.

 

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions regarding the application. Details were sought on, but not limited to, whether floodlighting issues were a general problem elsewhere, whether it was normal to have Perspex panels for natural light and the up keep of the woodland which would have to be replaced as part of the proposal.

 

Additional technical questions were received in relation to whether there was a standard amount of land required to keep horses, whether the application should have been described as retrospective, whether the application could be conditioned to limit family member use and whether it would be possible to condition tying the land to the property.

 

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee as detailed above.

 

The Local Unitary Member, Councillor Elizabeth Threlfall then spoke regarding the application. Cllr Threlfall raised the following points that this would be a large development within the countryside and that though there was concern, if granted it would be tucked behind trees with more to be planted. A situation could however arise in the future where the land could be overgrazed with other potential issues including pollution. Cllr Threlfall stressed the importance of tying the house to the land and that issues with outside lighting, the footpath and flood risk had been resolved and that though the proposal was not in line with the character of the village or building line it would be difficult to find a basis to object.

 

At the start of the debate a motion to accept the officer’s recommendation was moved by Councillor Nic Puntis and seconded by Councillor  Steve Bucknell. This motion included an additional conditional requirement to tie the proposed development to the applicant’s adjacent residence. A further friendly amendment was suggested by Councillor Bucknell that the number of horses should be limited to 1 horse, 1 pony and 1 Shetland pony, however this was not accepted by Councillor Puntis and Councillor Bucknell therefore opted to withdraw support for the motion.

 

A new motion was then moved by Councillor Nic Puntis to accept the officer’s recommendation, which was seconded by Councillor Howard Greenman. This motion included an additional conditional requirement to tie the proposed development to the applicant’s adjacent residence and to limit the number of horses to be stabled on site to 4 in accord with the number of stables proposed.

 

During the debate, issues were raised, but not limited to, that in other communities a lot of stables and facilities had been established which had been overbearing to the countryside. Further support was added with the example of Dauntsey Vale, where it was suggested that land had been ruined by hobby horse riders and that it would be positive for policy makers and the local plan to control such developments. Additionally, that it could be worth including a track under the road in order to allow for Great Crested Newt migration.

 

At the conclusion of the debate, it was, 

 

Resolved:

 

To approve in accord with the officer recommendation but subject to two additional conditional requirements tying the proposed development to the applicant’s adjacent residence and limiting the number of horses to be stabled on site to 4 in accord with the number of stables proposed.

Supporting documents: