Construction of a Horse Exercise Track

SCHEDULE “A1” TO THE AGENDA FOR THE SOUTHERN PLANNING COMMITTEE 8TH AUGUST 2012

Applications subject to public speaking.

Background Papers

Background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report are listed under the “Representations” heading for each planning application presented, or may be individually identified under a heading “Background Papers”.

The implications for crime, disorder and community safety have been appraised in the following applications but it is not considered that any consideration of that type arises unless it is specifically referred to in a particular report.

A1 WA/2012/0578 Construction of a horse exercise track at land at Cortium Sports Limited Barfold Farm, Petworth Road, Haslemere (as 18/04/2012 amplified by letter received on 5 July 2012) Committee: Southern Meeting Date: 08/08/2012 Public Notice Was Public Notice required and posted: N/A Grid Reference: E: 492730 N: 132040

Parish/Town : Chiddingfold Ward : Chiddingfold and Dunsfold Case Officer: Gary Stevens

8 Week Expiry Date 13/06/2012 Neighbour Notification Expiry Date 18/05/2012 Neighbour Notification Amended/Additional Expiry Date RECOMMENDATION That, subject to consideration of the comments of the Surrey Wildlife Trust and the submission of an appropriately drafted and signed Unilateral Undertaking requiring the removal of existing horse exercise track granted planning permission under application WA/2010/0825 (appeal ref: APP/R3650/A/10/2135378) and the returning of this land to pasture and to secure the non- implementation of the planning permission granted under application WA/2010/1398, permission be GRANTED

Location Plan

Site Description

The Barfold Farm Estate lies approximately 3km to the south east of the town of Haslemere and to the south of the Petworth Road (B2131) that links the A286 in the west with the A283 to the east. The Estate occupies a very large area, measuring some 87.4 hectares. The application site itself would occupy an area of 0.18 hectares.

The Estate has been formed from two areas of land. The original Barfold Farm largely lies within Chichester District and West Sussex County. The land to the south of the Petworth Road, which historically formed part the Furnace Place estate and includes the application site, is within the Borough of Waverley and Surrey County.

The site benefits from distant views over the western Weald to the South Downs ridge. The Estate comprises pastureland and woodland with an associated stable yard and residential house and curtilage. The land within the Estate is used for a variety of purposes that comprise agriculture, forestry, equestrian and residential uses.

The application site, as defined by the red line on the submitted site location plan, is located in a large open area surrounded by trees and in the northern section of the site. The areas of woodland around this open area are designated as Ancient Woodland. Lythe Hill Copse runs through the site. No public rights of way cross this section of the Estate.

View south taken from northern point of exercise track

View west from eastern side of proposed exercise track

View east taken from the centre of the open field

Proposal

Planning permission is sought for the construction of a horse exercise track.

The exercise track would span 143 metres in an east-west direction and 223 metres in a north-south direction. In order to create the new exercise track approximately 40cm depth of the existing soil would need to be excavated, which would then be replaced hardcore covered by woodchips.

The applicant also proposes to surrender the unimplemented planning permission granted under application WA/2010/1398 and to remove the existing horse exercise track granted at appeal under application WA/2010/0825 and return the land back to pasture.

Relevant Planning History

The Barfold Farm Estate within Waverley Borough has been subject to a number of planning applications. The relevant applications to this proposal have been set out below:

Reference Proposal Decision WA/2012/0582 Erection of 60 demountable stables and Under storage barn consideration WA/2012/0581 Change of Use of building to clubhouse Under together with alterations consideration WA/2012/0580 Retrospective application for the Under erection of a barn with alterations to consideration change the use and convert the barn to 20 equestrian loose boxes WA/2012/0579 Use of polo practice ground to play up to Under 20 competitive polo matches a year consideration WA/2011/1061 Removal of Conditions 3 & 4 of Refused WA/2010/1871 (conditions refer to the 15/08/2011 stationing of vehicles and the holding of Appeal polo practice matches on the site) dismissed 29/12/2011 WA/2011/1060 Variation of Conditions 3 and 4 of Refused WA/2010/1871, (conditions refer to the 12/08/2011 stationing of vehicles and the holding of Appeal allowed polo matches on the site) 29/12/2011 WA/2010/1871 Use of land for mixed use of agriculture, Approved forestry and equestrian (polo) purposes 27/01/2011 WA/2010/1398 Formation of horse exercise track Approved 11/10/2010 WA/2010/1239 Repair of estate track and extension of Refused existing track 17/09/2010 Appeal allowed 10/03/2011 WA/2010/0825 Formation of horse exercise track Refused 15/07/2010 Appeal allowed 04/01/2011

Planning Policy Constraints

Green Belt outside any settlement SPAD Surrey Hills AONB & AGLV Wealden Heaths II SPA 5km Adjacent to an area of Ancient Woodland Adajcent to a Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI)

Development Plan Policies and Proposals

Policies C1, C3, C7, C10, D1, D2, D4, D5, D7, RD8, RD13, M2 and HE15 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002

Policies CS1, CS14, CS15 and CS17 of the Waverley Borough Pre- Submission Core Strategy 2012

The Council is preparing its Core Strategy setting out the key strategic planning policies for the area up to 2028. Between February and April 2012, the Council consulted on the “Local Development Framework Core Strategy – Revised Preferred Options and Draft Policies”. The Council is now in the process of assessing the outcome from that consultation and deciding what further changes need to be made to the Plan, before it is published. The Council agreed the proposed pre-submission version of the Core Strategy at its meeting on 17 July 2012. The intention is that the Pre-Submission Core Strategy will be published for consultation in August. The intention is that the Core Strategy will then be submitted for Examination in December 2012. As it stands only limited weight can be given to the emerging Core Strategy and its proposed policies. However, this will increase as the Core Strategy progresses through Examination.

Policies SP5, CC1, C3 and C4 of the South East Plan 2009 (subject to the letter to Chief Planning Officers from the Secretary of State dated 27/5/10 regarding abolition of Regional Spatial Strategies)

The South East Plan 2009 is the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for the South East region. Although the Localism Act makes provision for the abolition of regional strategies, until they are formally abolished by Order, they remain part of the development plan. It has been held that the Government’s intention to abolish regional plans could be a material consideration in making development control decisions. The amount of weight that can be attached to this intention is a matter of judgment, given that there are still some matters to be resolved before the Government can initiate the formal process of abolition.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012

Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Management Plan 2009-2014

Consultations and Town/Parish Council Comments

County Highway Authority: The County Highway Authority has undertaken an assessment in terms of the likely net additional traffic generation, access arrangements and parking provision and is satisfied that the application would not have a material impact on the safety and operation of the adjoining public highway. The County Highway Authority therefore has no highway requirements.

County Archaeologist: No objection, subject to an archaeological monitoring access condition.

Natural England: No objection in terms of impact of Surrey Hills AONB and recommends reference is made to standing advice in terms of the impact on protected species, local wildlife sites and biodiversity enhancements.

Surrey Wildlife Trust: Provides the following comments on the proposal:

 No ecological information provided in respect of this site (although noted an Ecological Protection Plan was submitted with a previous application) and advises that the Local Authority will find it difficult to adequately assess the impact of the proposal.  Site is immediately adjacent to an area of Ancient Woodland and a Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI). It will be important to ensure that these areas are adequately buffered from adverse impacts arising from either the construction process or the ongoing use of the exercise track.  The applicant should be required to ensure that no tools, materials, equipment, construction vehicles or waste from the site is stored within the SNCI boundaries or activities carried out immediately adjacent which may disturb flora and fauna.  The woodland should also be protected from accidental pollution from, for example, waste water and bonfires.

Environment Agency: Considers the proposal to have a low environmental risk.

South Downs National Park Authority: Having visited the site notes that the application site would not be visible to the national park and would not infringe upon the two statutory purposes and duty of the South Downs National Park.

Surrey Hills AONB Officer: No objection, subject to the removal of the existing exercise track.

Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE): Questions whether the exercise track would cause disturbance to the nearby Site of Nature Conservation Importance.

Chichester District Council: Provides the following comments on the proposal:

 Approximately half the estate lies within Chichester District and the South Downs National Park.  Chichester District Council is currently considering a planning application for the partial use of a storage barn as offices.  Concern the proposal will result in extra activity in terms of players, staff, visitors and general activity in the southern half of the estate within the National Park, which would be detrimental to visual amenity and the tranquil rural character of the area.  Refers to the need to conserve and enhance the natural environment highlighted within the NPPF.  Considers the proposal would result in a high level of activity within the national park, which would conflict with the objectives of the NPPF.

Chiddingfold Parish Council: No objection.

Haslemere Town Council: Objects to the application on the following grounds:

 Site is in a quiet rural area, in the Green Belt, AONB and AGLV.  Considers the B2131 to be unsuitable for the volume of traffic and large equine transport vehicles associated with the proposed development and a danger to residents.  Echo the views of the Planning Inspector who considered an appeal in 2011 and said that the scheme would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area, detracts from the openness of the Green Belt and represents an encroachment into the countryside.  Likely to lead to applications to allow the public to access the site on match days.

Lurgashall Parish Council: Objects to the application on the following grounds:

 Proposal could result in a very substantial development within the Borough of Waverley.  Adverse impact on the visual amenity of the South Downs National Park.  Requests Waverley Borough Council gives due consideration to the development that has taken place on parts of the site within the neighbouring District of Chichester.  Whether the need for the development justifies the substantial adverse impact on the Green Belt, AONB and AGLV.

Council’s Environmental Health Officer (Pollution Control): No objection.

Representations

44 letters of representation, including letters from the Haslemere Society and the Haslemere Educational Museum, have been received objecting and raising concerns in respect of the proposal. A summary of the points raised is as follows:

 Highway safety concerns from additional traffic utilising the sub-standard access onto Petworth Road and surrounding road network.  Increase pressure for on-street parking in the area.  Additional noise and disturbance to people living in the vicinity caused by helicopters arriving and tannoy systems.  History of unauthorised activity on this site.  Significant potential for high numbers of spectators in addition to the people directly associated with the conducting of the polo matches.  Inability to control numbers of spectators and that these will be limited to friends and family only.  Significant increase in the intensity of the use of the site.  Encroachment on the countryside leading to a harmful impact on the openness of the Green Belt and character and tranquillity of the Surrey Hills AONB.  Number of previous proposals rejected on this site.  Insufficient notification of local residents and residents living in Haslemere.  Removal of trees on the site has already occurred.  Unclear who the applicant is.  Reference made to previous comments by Planning Inspector in respect of the impact of the development on the Green Belt and AONB/AGLV.  Potential for vehicles using the site to damage neighbouring property.  Conflict with Local Plan policies C1, C3, C10, D1, RD1, RD7, RD8, RD13 and RD14.  Adverse impact on local wildlife and nearby Site of Nature Conservation Importance.  Cumulative and incremental effect of the five current planning applications needs to be considered.  Lack of detail in respect of associated infrastructure and servicing required in connection with proposed development.  No archaeological survey has been conducted. Proposal has the potential to affect archaeological remains in the area.  Already an adequate horse exercise track in existence.  Exacerbate local flooding problems.  Comparisons with other polo sites unreasonable.  Large quantities of mud likely to be deposited on the highway.  The land should be restored to its former use.

Determining Issues

 Principle of development  Whether the proposal constitutes inappropriate development within the Green Belt  Effect on the natural beauty and landscape character of the Surrey Hills AONB and AGLV and the setting of the South Downs National Park  Effect on neighbouring amenity  Highway safety  Archaeological issues  Biodiversity and compliance with Habitat Regulations 2010  Flooding  Effect on trees  Contaminated land  Other matters

Planning Considerations

Principle of development

On the 27 March 2012, the Government has adopted its National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). This document has superseded the majority of previous national planning policy guidance/statements (with the exception of PPS10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management) and condensed their contents into a single planning document. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, still requires all applications for planning permission to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and the South East Plan 2009 therefore remain the starting point for the assessment of this proposal.

The NPPF is however a material consideration in the determination of this case. Paragraphs 214 and 215 of the NPPF make clear that where a local authority does not possess a development adopted since 2004, due weight may only be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of conformity with the NPPF.

In this case the application site is located in the Green Belt and the Surrey Hills AONB and AGLV. Having regard to the requirements of the Development Plan policies, it is considered that these particular planning policies possess a good degree of conformity with the NPPF and as such can still be afforded significant weight.

It is should be noted that this proposal is one of five current planning applications. While it is important to consider each proposal on its merits, these current applications are material considerations. Consideration has therefore been given to the cumulative overall effect of the decisions made in respect of each of these applications.

Whether the proposal constitutes inappropriate development within the Green Belt

The formation of the proposed horse exercise track requires the excavation of an oval shaped area on the eastern side of the large open area located to the south of Petworth Road within the Barfold Farm Estate.

As confirmed by land use plan referred to in Condition 1 of the planning permission already granted under application WA/2010/1871, the land subject to the application may be lawfully used for the purposes of “mixed agriculture and equestrian”. The proposed development would not therefore conflict with the lawful land use of the site and would not diminish the agricultural functions of the site over and above the already permitted situation. The provision of a horse exercise track would also tie in with the use of the site for the practicing of polo and the holding of practice polo matches, as allowed on appeal under application WA/2011/1060.

The track area would be excavated to a depth of 40cm below the existing ground. A layer of hardcore that would be covered by geotextile membrane and a woodchip surface would then be deposited in the excavated area.

On the basis of the scale and nature of the proposed works, it is considered that the proposal constitutes an engineering operation. The Planning Acts and case law have held that engineering operations constitute development requiring planning permission.

The Government attaches great importance to Green Belts. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. Policy C1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan and the NPPF lists the various forms of development that may be considered in the Green Belt. Development that does not fall within these exception criteria is, however, considered inappropriate development and harmful by definition.

Local Plan Policy C1 and paragraph 90 of the NPPF state that engineering operations are not inappropriate development in the Green Belt provided they preserve the openness of the Green Belt and do not conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. The five purposes of including land within the Green Belt are defined in the Local Plan and the NPPF as:

 To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;  To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;  To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;  To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and  To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

In reaching their decision as part of the recent appeal (Council ref: WA/2010/0825; appeal ref: APP/R3650/A/10/2135378) for another horse exercise track to be constructed on a separate parcel of land to the south of this site, the Planning Inspector stated that “the absence of any structures projecting above ground level means that the engineering operation has not reduced the openness of the Green Belt and the proposal does not conflict with any of the purposes of including land in the Green Belt”1.

The existing horse exercise track is located in a more prominent location on the elevated ground to the south of the site. A public bridleway also bisects the site. The application site is not readily visible to the public domain and is situated on a lower piece of land than the existing track. So as to avoid the proliferation of horse exercise tracks across the site, the applicant has offered to remove the existing exercise track and return the land to pasture. The applicant has also offered to surrender the extant planning permission granted under application WA/2010/1398, which permitted another exercise track in an alternative location to the north of the implemented track. In order to secure the removal of the existing exercise track and agreement to the non- implementation of the extant planning permission, the applicant has drafted a Unilateral Undertaking under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. At the time of writing this report, the agreement had yet to be finalised. An oral report will be made on this matter at the meeting.

While the proposed development constitutes an engineering operation, the exercise track would be used in connection with the established equestrian use of the land. Consideration has therefore been given to paragraph 81 of the NPPF, which states that Local Planning Authorities should positively enhance the beneficial use of the Green Belt and provide opportunities for outdoor sport and recreation.

Having taken these material considerations into account, officers conclude that the proposal would not cause material harm to the openness of the Green Belt, conflict with purposes of including land within it and therefore does not

1 Paragraph 8 of appeal decision APP/R3650/A/10/2135378 amount to inappropriate development. The proposal therefore complies with Local Plan Policy C1 and the NPPF. Officers also agree that the cumulative effect of implementation this proposal in addition to the proposal subject to the other outstanding applications set out above would not result in material harm to the Green Belt.

Effect on the natural beauty and landscape character of the Surrey Hills AONB and AGLV and the setting of the South Downs National Park

The proposed exercise track would follow the contours of the land and would be finished with a woodchip surface. No additional built development or regarding of the land would be required. The exercise track would not be readily apparent to the public domain and would not be visible to the South Downs National Park. What is more, no objection has been raised from the Surrey Hills AONB Officer, subject to the removal of the existing exercise track, which as explained above would be secured through a legal agreement.

The proposal would not therefore appear prominent or intrusive within the landscape and would not harm the AONB/AGLV’s intrinsic natural beauty or character. The proposal therefore accords with Policy C3 of the Local Plan and the NPPF. Officers also agree that the cumulative effect of this proposal combined with the other outstanding applications for this site would not result in unacceptable harm to the natural beauty and landscape character and natural beauty of the AONB/AGLV.

The South Downs National Park Authority considers the site would not be visible from within the Park boundary and therefore raises no objection. Officers agree with this assessment.

Effect on neighbouring amenity

The exercise track is located well away from the residential properties in the area. Its use and any associated activity would not therefore be likely to give rise to any discernible harm to the amenities of local residents over and above the existing situation.

Highway safety

A significant point of local concern has been in relation to the effect of the proposal on traffic generation in an out of the site access on the Petworth Road and concerns over the implications for safety on the local highway network. The County Highway Authority has undertaken an assessment of the proposal and is satisfied that the construction of the horse exercise track would be unlikely to result in a net increase in traffic generation over and above the existing situation. Combined with the removal of the existing exercise track, officers are satisfied that this proposal would not be likely to prejudice highway safety over and above the existing situation.

Archaeological issues

The site not within an Area of High Archaeological Potential. Local archaeological information provided by the Haslemere Educational Museum however, indicates that there may be interest in the general area, with the suggestion that structural remains and pottery of Roman date been noted nearby and that significant quantities of Mesolithic and Neolithic flintwork have also been recovered in the past.

In view of these comments, the County Archaeologist has been consulted. The archaeologist notes that there is no record of such archaeological finds on the County Historic Environment Record. The construction of the horse exercise track would not cause a significant amount of ground disturbance and as such a full programme of archaeological work is not warranted.

However, given there is the possibility that archaeological material could be revealed and/or disturbed during any groundworks, the County Archaeologist has recommended that an archaeological monitoring access condition be imposed. Officers agree that in light of the uncertain nature of archaeology, such a condition is reasonable in this case.

Biodiversity and compliance with Habitat Regulations 2010

The NPPF states that the Planning System should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by minimising impacts upon biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government’s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures.

When determining planning application, local planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by applying the following principles:  If significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigates, or, as a last resort, compensated for then planning permission should be refused.

In addition, Circular 06/2005 states ‘it is essential that the presence or otherwise of protected species and the extent that they may be affected by the proposed development, is established before planning permission is granted.’

The woodland areas immediately to the north and east of the site are designated as Ancient Woodland. The strip of land approximately 80 metres to the north of the site, known as Lythe Hill Copse, is identified as a Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI). In order to ensure these areas are adequately buffered from adverse impacts arising from the construction process or ongoing use and maintenance of the exercise track, the applicant has submitted an ecological survey for the site. At the time of writing, the Surrey Wildlife Trust has yet to confirm whether these measures are appropriate. Officers are, however, satisfied that subject to the views of the Wildlife Trust and the imposition of conditions requiring the recommended mitigation measures to be implemented, the proposal would be unlikely to harm any protected species or their habitats on and around the site.

Flooding

The application site is not located within an area of high flood risk. The Environment Agency considers the proposal to have a low environmental risk. The exercise track would be formed from permeable materials, would not require changes in local topography and would not therefore be likely to contribute towards local flooding issues.

Effect on trees

The area of woodland to the east of the site is designed as an area of Ancient Woodland. However, the scale and position of the exercise track, combined with the lack of need to re-grade the existing land, leaves officers satisfied that the proposal would be unlikely to harm any nearby significant trees.

Contaminated land

The Council’s Environmental Health Officer has confirmed that the Council has no record of potentially contaminated land issues requiring further remediation. No concerns are therefore raised in this regard.

Other matters

Careful consideration has been given to the concerns of local residents and interested third parties. Having reviewed each of these comments, it would appear that many of the points raised in the letters of representation received have either been addressed in the considerations above or have been made in respect of the other proposals currently under consideration. While residents’ concerns in respect of the potential increase in the intensity of the use of the site are noted, officers consider that the provision of a horse exercise track would not amount to a material intensification of the use of the site over and above the use already established on site.

The concern regarding the lack of a name for the individual who owns the site is not a material planning issue. In any event, it is acceptable for a company name to be given as the applicant for the purposes of the validation of a planning application.

Concerns regarding damage to neighbouring property and the depositing of mud on the public highway are not matters that can be resolved through the planning system but are civil matters or the responsibility of the County Highway Authority.

Conclusion

In conclusion, as a result of the proposed horse exercise track’s location, size and the removal/surrendering of permissions for exercise tracks in other parts of the Barfold Farm Estate, officers conclude that the proposal would not cause material harm to the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of land within it. The proposal would not therefore constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

In addition, the formation of the exercise track would not result in material harm to the landscape character or natural beauty of the Surrey Hills AONB and AGLV or the South Downs National Park.

Officers are also satisfied that the cumulative effect of the implementation of this proposal bearing in mind the other planning applications under consideration on the Barfold Farm estate would not produce sufficient justification as to refuse this application.

In terms of the impact of this proposal on highway safety, it is concluded that the proposed exercise track would not be likely to prejudice highway safety to any greater extent than the existing situation.

All other matters considered above, are either not considered to result in material harm or can be satisfactorily resolved through the use of planning conditions. It is therefore concluded that the proposal would not result in any significant material harm that would justify refusal in the public interest.

Recommendation

That, subject to consideration of the comments of the Surrey Wildlife Trust and the submission of an appropriately drafted and signed Unilateral Undertaking requiring the removal of existing horse exercise track granted planning permission under application WA/2010/0825 (appeal ref: APP/R3650/A/10/2135378) and the returning of this land to pasture and to secure the non-implementation of the planning permission granted under application WA/2010/1398, permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Condition The plan numbers to which this permission relates are WAV/218/IE/002, WAV/224/IE/008 and WAV/224/IE/008A. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. No material variation from these plans shall take place unless otherwise first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason In order that the development hereby permitted shall be fully implemented in complete accordance with the approved plans and to accord with Policy D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

2. Condition The horse exercise track hereby permitted shall not at any time be surfaced other than with wooden chippings, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason In the interest of the character and visual amenity of the area in accordance with Policies C1, C3, RD13, D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

3. Condition The developer shall give at least two weeks’ notice to Surrey County Council's Principal Archaeologist of his intention to start work on the site, and shall afford access at all reasonable times to any qualified person nominated by the Planning Authority, so that he or she shall have the opportunity to observe any works involving disturbance of the ground, and record any items of archaeological interest.

Reason It is possible that minor items or features of archaeological interest will be disturbed in the course of development and they should be rescued or recorded before they are lost in accordance with Policy HE15 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

4. Condition The development shall be carried out in accordance with the Conclusions and Recommendations set out in the ecological survey report produced by AA Environmental LLP (ref: 123207/JDT) dated 23July. In the event protected species not anticiapted as part of the ecological survey are discovered, work shall cease until appropriate mitigation has been put in place and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason To ensure that protected species under Schedules 1 and 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and their roosts/setts are not endangered by the development in accordance with Policy D5 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION The development hereby approved has been assessed against the following Development Plan Policies; Policies C1, C3, C7, C10, D1, D2, D4, D5, D7, RD8, RD13, M2 and HE15 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002; Policies CS1, CS14, CS15 and CS17 of the Waverley Borough Local Development Framework pre-submission Core Strategy 2012; Policies SP5, CC1, C3 and C4 of the South East Plan 2009 (subject to the letter to Chief Planning Officers from the Secretary of State dated 27/5/10 regarding abolition of Regional Spatial Strategies); and the National Planning Policy Framework 2012. Specifically, the construction of a horse exercise track would not cause material harm to the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land within it. The proposal does not therefore amount to inappropriate development in the Green Belt. The proposal would not materially harm the intrinsic landscape character and natural beauty of the Surrey Hills AONB and AGLV or the South Downs National Park. The proposal would not detract from the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties and therefore the development would be in accordance with Local Plan Policies D1 and D4. The proposal would not prejudice highway safety conditions. Matters relating to the need to mitigate the impact of the development on protected species in the vicinity of the site and monitor any disturbance to archaeological remains that may exist on the site could be controlled through the imposition of appropriate planning conditions. The proposal would not adversely affect significant trees close to the site, contribute to local flood risk or result in any issues in respect of contaminated land. Other material considerations, including third party representations have been assessed, it has been concluded that the development would not result in any harm that would justify refusal in the public interest.

Informative

1. Attention is drawn to the need to comply with the terms of the Planning Obligations set out in the Unilateral Undertaking that forms part of this permission.

The agreement states that the existing horse exercise track granted planning permission on appeal under application WA/2010/0825 (appeal ref: APP/R3650/A/10/2135378) shall not be implemented or carried out in addition to the exercise track granted permission under this application. Upon the removal of the existing exercise track the land shall be returned to pasture. In addition, the development shall not be implemented in addition to the permission granted under the extant planning permission granted under application WA/2010/1398.