Agenda item

There was a 10 minute break and the meeting resumed at 17:30.

Public Participation

Lesley Magnus spoke in objection to the application.

Andrew Mead spoke in objection to the application.

Verity Giles-Franklin, as planning officer, introduced the report which recommended that approval be granted for the regularisation of an area of hardstanding and formation of access as well as the change of use of agricultural land to equestrian use and proposed erection of a timber loose box / stable building.

A site visit had been undertaken by committee members ahead of the meeting in accordance with the deferment resolution made at the previous meeting on 25 June 2018. Officers referenced additional reported details contained within the published reports in their presentation.

The committee was also informed about an email from a local resident that had been sent to members on 24 July expressing concerns about the size and impact of the proposed development.  The committee was informed that the email did not raise any new information or representation that was not already addressed within report.

The key issues were identified as; the principle of development, the impact on the green belt and special landscape area as well as the impacts on neighbouring amenity, flood risk and highway safety.

Following the officer presentation, Kenny Green, outlined the relevant NPPF changes and the implications for this application which comprised:

•           The Impact on the Green Belt Appraisal: The committee was informed that the referenced NPPF paragraphs 87-89 within the published report had now been replaced by paragraphs 143-147.  However the same policy direction was in place pursuant to what comprised inappropriate development in the green belt and the exceptions set out within paragraph 145.

•           Paragraphs 133 and 134 of the new Framework set out the Green Belt objectives and para 133 and 145 set out the importance attached to preserving the openness of the green belt.

•           Highways interests: The committee was again advised on the policy direction set out within paragraph 109 of the new Framework in relation to highway interests and safety.

•           The committee was advised that the officers had re-appraised the application against the revised framework and that the published recommendation remained unchanged.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. Details were sought on: the purpose of the stables, whether any planning permission has been secured for the changes that had taken place on the site and about the increase of traffic.

Officers in response advised the committee that the stables were being proposed for personal horse use and that no permission had been sought previously for the unauthorised area of hardstanding or for the siting of the caravan and field shelters. Members were informed that with the exception of the area of hardstanding, no permission was required for the siting of the tourer caravan and the field shelters after they had been the subject of an enforcement investigation, they were considered to be chattels and exempt from requiring planning permission.  The committee was informed that the highways authority had been asked about the level of traffic likely to be associated to the proposed private horse stabling compared to the existing use of the land as a smallholding used presently for grazing sheep; and the response given by the highway team was that there would be only a nominal increase in traffic volume.

Members of the public, as detailed above, then had the opportunity to speak on the application.

Local Member Councillor Johnny Kidney spoke in objection to the application highlighting key concerns about the inappropriate scale of the proposed stabling, the consequential impact it would have on the green belt and the development equating to a form of urban sprawl.

A motion to refuse application was moved by Councillor Edward Kirk and seconded by Councillor Phil Alford.

A debate followed where the key points focused on: the extent of the unauthorised development; and, the impacts on the green belt and its openness.

At the end of the debate it was;

Resolved

To unanimously refuse planning permission for the following reasons:

1.         The proposed loose box/stable by reason of its size, bulk and siting in an isolated location detached from any permanent built form of development is found to be harmful to the Green Belt which would not preserve the openness of the Green Belt contrary to Paragraphs 144 and 145(b) of the 2018 National Planning Policy Framework.  Furthermore, the proposed development would have a harmful impact on the special landscape area contrary to Saved Policy C3 and CP51 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy by virtue of introducing an isolated form of equestrian development in the open countryside which would conflict with saved Policy E10 of the West Wiltshire District Plan, 1st Alteration.

2.         The proposal, which in part comprises an area of hardstanding extending to some 555 square metres and finished in loose stone material is considered disproportionate and unjustified for the purposes of keeping a small flock of sheep on the 0.88 hectare site and it represents harmful intentional unauthorised development which diminishes the openness of the greenbelt and falls foul of the Written Ministerial Statement released by the Government on 31 August 2015, published as a planning policy statement on green belt protection and intentional unauthorised development (thus making it a material planning consideration).

In addition to the refusal and mindful of the unauthorised development that formed part of the application, members instructed officers to inform the planning enforcement team to commence with enforcement proceedings.

Absences

Councillor Trevor Carbin left the meeting at 17:30.