EHDC Part 1 Section 1 Item 1 Northfield Stables Medstead.D–
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
12 PART 1 EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT OF THE SERVICE MANAGER PLANNING DEVELOPMENT Applications to be determined by the Council as the Local Planning Authority PS.358/2012 19 January 2012 SECTION 1 – SCHEDULE OF APPLICATION RECOMMENDATIONS Item No.: 01 The information, recommendations, and advice contained in this report are correct as at the date of preparation, which is more than one week in advance of the Committee meeting. Because of the time constraints some reports may have been prepared in advance of the final date given for consultee responses or neighbour comments. Any changes or necessary updates to the report will be made orally at the Committee meeting. PROPOSAL SITING OF A TEMPORARY TIMBER DWELLING FOR A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS LOCATION: Northfield Stables, Soldridge Road, Medstead, Alton, GU34 5JF REFERENCE : 39646/017 PARISH: Medstead APPLICANT: MA Sports Horses CONSULTATION EXPIRY : 21 October 2011 APPLICATION EXPIRY : 15 November 2011 COUNCILLOR(S): Cllr M C Johnson MBE/ Cllr P A Seward SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL This application is included on the agenda at the discretion of the Head of Planning Services. 13 Site and Development Northfield Stables is on the north side of Soldridge Road, a short distance to the west of South Town Road. There is a broken hedge line along the western side of the track and the land is adjoined by residential properties on several boundaries. Permission was granted in 2005 under reference 39646/001 for the change of use of the land to equestrian and the erection of stables. This permission did not prevent the site being used for commercial equestrian purposes. Permission was subsequently granted for a schooling arena and an open bay hay barn, under reference 39646/003 (see history below). More recently, permission was granted for additional commercial stables, including a store room and tack room, on the basis that stables granted under an earlier permission, on land to the east of Northfield Stables, were not to be constructed. This proposal follows a recent refusal, which was also dismissed at appeal for a detached occupational dwelling for a temporary period of three years. This scheme is identical in terms of design and siting, but additional information has been submitted to try to address the reasons for refusal regarding the financial viability of the business, the need for on-site supervision and alternative suitable available dwellings within the locality. The dwelling would be a single-storey timber construction approximately 30 metres to the rear of the main stable building. The dwelling would measure 11.5 metres by 8.5 metres with a ridge height of 4 metres and eaves of 2.5 metres. A covered terrace would be constructed on the north-west elevation. Relevant Planning History Planning permission was originally granted for equestrian use of the site in 2005. At that time, the application (39646/001) was considered to comply with the criteria within Policy ENV11 of the Local Plan: First Review (a policy very similar to Policy C12 in the current Local Plan). That policy allowed for equestrian uses in the countryside (commercial or otherwise) subject to certain criteria. It was concluded by officers and the planning committee that the proposal adequately satisfied the criteria within the policy and permission was granted. The site has legitimately operated as commercial stabling and a number of permissions have been subsequently granted that have broadened the range of facilities on the site. 39646 - Block of six stables, feed/tack room and change of use from agricultural land to equestrian use - Refused 2005 39646/001 - Stable block and change of use of land to equestrian use - Permission 2005 39646/003 - Hay barn, schooling area and relief of Condition 15 attached to permission to allow the parking of associated vehicles and trailers on site - Permission 2008 39646/006 - Stable block on equestrian land - Permission 2008 (land to the east of Northfield Stables) 39646/007 - Additional stable, office and horse walking machinery - Refused 2008 14 39646/008 - Variation of Condition 9 (manure storage location) of 39646/001 - Permission 2008. 39646/009 - Installation of a sewage treatment plant - 2009 39646/010 - 36 foot hydraulic four bay horse walker (occupying 105 m²) and variation of conditions 6 and 8 and removal of Condition 7 of 39646/003 - Permission 2009. 39646/013 - Extension to stables to include foaling boxes, tack room, tool store, stable and corner box - Permission 2009 39646/014 - Siting of a temporary timber dwelling for a period of three years - Refused in 2010 for the following reasons; 1) The proposal comprises an intrusion of residential development in this rural area beyond the nucleus of the settlement, for which there is no overriding justification and which, if permitted, would further erode the visual amenity and rural character of the locality contrary to advice contained within PPS7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas) and Policies GS1, GS3 and H14 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: Second Review. 2) The proposal involves the erection of a dwelling in the countryside beyond any area identified in the East Hampshire District Local Plan: Second Review for further development for which no overriding justification has been made on grounds of agricultural/rural enterprise need; the proposal would therefore be contrary to the Policies outlined in the above reason. The subsequent appeal was dismissed. The primary concerns of the Inspector were that the appellant had failed to demonstrate that the functional need could not be fulfilled by other suitable accommodation within the area and that there was functional need to reside on the site. The inspector was also concerned that inadequate information had been submitted to demonstrate the long term future of the business. Development Plan Policies and Proposals East Hampshire District Local Plan: Second Review GS1 - Sustainable Development GS3 - Protecting the Countryside HE1 - Design C12 - Equestrian Uses C13 - Rural Diversification T9 - Highway Issues - Access T12 - Parking Standards H14 - Other Housing Outside Settlement Policy Boundaries E1 - Conservation of Energy E2 - Renewable Energy 15 Planning Policy Constraints and Guidance Village Design Statement - Medstead - A Vision for the Future - non statutory planning guidance that has been the subject of public consultation and therefore is a material planning consideration. Medstead Parish Plan 2008 PPS7 - Sustainable Development in Rural Areas Consultations and Town/Parish Council comments Bruton Knowles - concludes; Taking into account the evidence submitted, it is our opinion that the requirements of the criteria set out in Annex A of PPS7 for a temporary dwelling for an agricultural (equestrian) worker have not all been met by the application as submitted. The County Land Agent - concludes; Taking into account the nature and the scale of the equestrian enterprise carried out and proposed I am of the opinion that there is a functional need to be readily available at most times in order to ensure that essential levels of husbandry, welfare, security and supervision of livestock are provided. I feel that the proposed enterprise has been planned on a sound financial basis now reinforced by the further financial information and Business Plan which have been provided in the current application, but acknowledge that the business is still at a relatively early stage. Principal Landscape Officer - The proposed development lies on a site outside the Settlement boundary but adjacent to existing residential properties. It is well defined by native hedgerows and so the visual impact of the proposed temporary dwelling should be contained. However it should be noted that until relatively recently the site was originally an open pasture which formed an attractive rural backcloth to the adjacent properties. This character has now significantly changed with the progressive development of new equestrian facilities on this site. This latest proposal represents the culmination of this transformation. County Highways Engineer - No objection subject to conditions. Planning Policy - The proposed temporary dwelling lies outside the settlement policy boundary for Medstead. Policy H14 ‘Other Housing Outside Settlement Policy Boundaries’ of the Local Plan is relevant. The proposal will need to satisfy the criteria of the Policy. Paragraph 3.65 of Policy C12 is also relevant. County Ecologist - No objection. Environmental Health (contaminated land) - No objection, subject to conditions. Medstead Parish Council - Objects. Siting of a temporary timber dwelling for a period of 3 years at Northfield Stables, Soldridge Rd. GU345JF (39646/017/21OCT) 16 It was felt that our approach should be in three ways: a) The application is almost identical to the previous one, refused on Appeal, so we ought to consider the reasons for refusal and have they been overcome? The Parish Council is still concerned that the request for a residence is in an area outside the SPB and the risk that any approval would set by precedent. We know precedent is not a planning consideration but are not aware of many instances when it has not been used successfully to obtain permission. The reason the Appeal failed are quoted as: Insufficient detail to demonstrate clearly that the enterprise has been planned on a sound financial basis, specifically (i) how to project increase in recuperation income and (ii) the cost of acquiring and erecting the proposed temporary building. Insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the functionable need for adequate supervision could not be achieved through modern technology Insufficient evidence to demonstrate the functional need could not be fulfilled by other existing accommodation in the vicinity. Whilst the Parish Council do not have fully qualified persons to quantify the documentation submitted regarding turnover, profit and the like the profit to date does not reflect the ability to show this project as viable. That is assuming the figures have been substantiated and submitted to HMRC – not recorded on the paperwork. A member of the public present at our meeting confirmed he did not see evidence of sustainability either.