PART B

South Bucks District Council Planning Committee

Date of Meeting: 11 March 2009 Parish: Burnham

Reference No: 08/01953/FUL Full Application Proposal: Re-contouring works to existing field to provide a level horse training area. Construction of pond. Location: Kilnwood, Wood Road, Burnham, , SL1 8PZ Applicant: Mr Thilo Sautter Agent: Mr Paul Dickinson Date Valid Appl Recd: 22nd January 2009 Case Officer: JOOB Recommendation: PER

LOCATION PLAN – This plan is supplied only to identify the location of the site and for no other purpose whatsoever.

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey District Council Mapping with the permission of the Licence Number LA 100025874 Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown Copying. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and NOT TO SCALE may lead to prosecution or Civil proceedings.

Page 1

Proposal:

Re-contouring works to existing field to provide a level horse training area. Construction of pond.

Location and Description of Site:

The application site consists of an open field used in conjunction with the property Kilnwood in the Metropolitan Green Belt of Burnham. A footpath dissects the site to the north. The application site is largely surrounded by woodland and the property, Kilnwood, lies to the south.

Relevant Planning History

ER/209/72: Erection of stables, hay store and double garage. Conditional Permission.

96/00266/FUL: Demolition of existing stable and dwellinghouse and erection of detached dwelling with integral garages. Conditional Permission.

98/00660/FUL: Erection of stable block comprising 7 stables, tack room and feed store. Conditional Permission.

99/00086/FUL: Erection of stable block comprising 7 stables, tack room, feed store & Dutch barn. (Amendment to Planning Permission 98/00660/FUL). Conditional Permission. Implemented.

04/01390/FUL: Construction of detached double garage. Conditional Permission.

Parish Council Comments:

‘The Parish Council OBJECTS as it considers this proposal is contrary to Policy R5 sections (e), (k) and possibly (i). The Parish Council is concerned for members of the public using the public footpath that runs across the northern part of the site. It is also concerned that the horse related activities could turn into commercial activity that may not be conducive to this particular site.’

Representations:

Two letters of representation have been received from neighbouring occupiers, which express the following concerns:

- Increase in traffic and noise due to increase in intensity of site; - Impact on nature and wildlife; - The land has been used only as a stud farm and for the breeding of race horses, rather than the exercise of mature horses by riders; - A flat level field would be out of keeping with character of the surrounding area and have an adverse impact on the landscape; - The works would result in heavy vehicles using Dorney Wood Road causing safety risks and disruption to traffic; - It is doubtful that no importation of topsoil would be required; - If the field is to be used for Polo then it is of inadequate size and would result in safety implications for users of the footpath; - Contrary to planning polices; - The proposal involves a material change of use; - Impact on trees; - The land is visible to neighbouring properties.

Page 2

Internal Specialist Advice

Landscape Officer:

‘In general, I would resist any changes in the Green Belt and in an Area of Attractive Landscape, especially with a public footpath running through the site. However, given suitable mitigation in the form of new planting and meadow wildflower seed mix, as proposed in the planning application documents, this proposal may be acceptable.

However, should these proposals be granted permission, I would require further details as follows:

- Further detail about the proposed pond and landforms and levels surrounding it (the drawings show slightly different pond layouts.) - Further details about the remodelled area - the plan is misleading as it seems to show a formally laid out 'football pitch' area rather than a natural contoured field. Clarification is required about the proposed surfacing (the plan at the end of the Environmental Statement Appendices shows 'Proposed Play Surface'-what is this?) and any boundary treatment of the levelled area - will this be fenced at all? - I would definitely require new landscaping along the footpath, within the site and near the proposed pond. Further details would be required about the planting, with details of planting species, sizes and densities/numbers.’

Amended plans:

‘In general, I would resist any changes such as this in the Green Belt and in an Area of Attractive Landscape, especially with a public footpath running through the site. However, given suitable mitigation in the form of new planting and meadow wildflower seed mix, as proposed in the planning application documents, I consider that this proposal would be acceptable in landscape terms.

However, should these proposals be granted permission, I would require further details as follows:

- Further detail about the proposed pond, landforms and levels surrounding it and proposed planting near the pond. - I would definitely require new landscaping along the footpath, within the site and near the proposed pond, as outlined in the 'Environmental Statement' document. The drawing PRI 16785 08B shows some tree specifications but it is not clear exactly where these trees would be located, or how many of them there would be. Further details are required about the tree planting densities/ numbers.’

Arboriculturalist:

‘The proposed scheme is acceptable as long as recommendations of the Arboriculturalist are adhered to. The only significant trees are along the boundary of the site and they should be retained and protected - as such changes in grade must be excluded from within the RPAs of the trees, and this is what is proposed. The imposed conditions are not precedent and are intended to back up the submitted Arb report.’

Page 3

Consultations

County Council:

(i) Rights of Way Officer:

‘At present I have no objection to this planning application but a public footpath crosses the site area as shown in the amended site location plan. The applicant is fully aware of its presence as I have met him and his agent. They are aware that there is the option to divert the footpath if the development requires this. The developer also needs to take the following into consideration:

- The granting of planning consent by the District Council (The Planning Authority) does not confer the right to stop up, disturb, extinguish, divert or otherwise obstruct a public right of way during the course of, or as a result of the works. Please be advised that it is a criminal offence to obstruct or otherwise interfere with a public right of way, regardless of any planning permission.

- Any conditions imposed by the Planning Authority with regard to public rights of way must be adhered to.

Please be aware of the following requirements:

- It is the responsibility of the applicant to make an application under The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to the County Council (The Highway Authority) to extinguish or divert public rights of way to allow the development to take place. Applications should be made to the County Council at the time when the planning application is submitted to the District Council, or at the latest, as soon as planning consent is granted. Ideally, applications should be made following advice and discussions with the County Council's Rights of Way Team beforehand.

- NOTE - All costs associated with the making and confirming of the order are to be met by the applicant.

- Under the Highways Act 1980 is an offence to obstruct, or disturb the surface of any public right of way during the course of the works, unless the path is the subject of a confirmed Diversion or Extinguishment Order and an approved, certificated alternative route is available to the public. This includes; reducing the normally available width of the path, the erection of misleading or intimidating notices on the path, the erection of any new structure across the path, excavation of the path surface and the depositing of any material on the path, other than with the express consent of the County Council.

- Please be aware that completion of the development, resulting in the obstruction of a public right of way, will constitute an offence under the Highways Act 1980, and could result in the County Council taking legal action. This may include enforcing the removal of the obstruction.’

(ii) Archaeological Service:

‘This application is of interest as the site lies within an Archaeological Notification Area where numerous Lower and Middle Palaeolithic handaxes and flint tools have been recovered (Historic Environment Record Number 1294). The lithic collection from this area includes some fine examples of handaxes and the presence of other tools suggests flint-working and tool manufacture may have Page 4

been taking place here. It is considered likely that such artefacts will survive in the development area. The Buckinghamshire Historic Landscape Characterisation Project has identified the development area as a Co-axial Enclosure, a rapidly declining landscape type thought to be prehistoric or medieval in origin.

As you will be aware, PPG16 states that the desirability of preserving important archaeological remains is a material planning consideration and that, where physical preservation is not feasible, planning authorities need to satisfy themselves that the developer has made appropriate and satisfactory arrangements for their excavation, recording and subsequent publication. This advice is reflected in the Buckinghamshire County Structure Plan and the Local Plan. In this case, bearing in mind the nature of the archaeological remains, we would request that, in line with the advice in PPG16 paragraph 30, any consent granted for this development should be subject to the standard condition.

The archaeological investigation should take the form of an archaeological watching brief with appropriate contingency, particularly within areas of soil extraction where the gravel deposits will be penetrated, such as the proposed pond. The work should be undertaken by a professionally qualified archaeologist working to a brief issued by ourselves.’

(iii) Highways Officer:

‘This application is for the regrading of a field to make it level for horse training purposes. I have no objection to the proposal as long as the horse training is for the personal use of the applicant - I note that the applicant already has consent for 7 stables so he already has several horses. The Planning statement doesn't appear to contain any reference to commercial use therefore I have no conditions to recommend for inclusion in any consent you may grant.’

Natural :

‘It is Natural England's advice that the SSSI is unlikely to be adversely affected by the above proposal provided conditions to the effect of the following are attached to any permission granted:

- No equipment, materials or machinery to be stored within the SSSI/SAC. - The applicant should carry out operations in such a way as to give rise to as little drainage as reasonably practical to the bordering SSSI. This includes restricting vehicles movements within the SSSI to a minimum. - All those involved with the works should be informed of the status and legal obligations attached to the designation and where the boundary of the protected area is.

I draw your attention to your duty under S28G of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as incorporated by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, to take reasonable steps, consistent with the proper exercise of your functions, to further the conservation and enhancement of the SSSI.

I also draw your attention to the provisions of S281 of the 1981 Act, in particular to the requirement that, should permission be given contrary to Natural England's advice, then you must ensure that:

- Notification is given to Natural England of the date and terms of the permission and how, if at all, you have taken account of Natural England's advice. - The permission does not permit operations to begin before 21 days after details of the permission and a statement of how you have taken account of Natural England's advice, has been given to Natural England.

Page 5

Protected Species Whilst Natural England has not been made aware of any protected species being present on the proposed site of development, PPS9 states that 'the presence of a protected species is a material consideration when a planning authority is considering a development that, if carried out, would be likely to result in harm to the species or its habitat'.

It is therefore the responsibility of the developer to ensure that the proposed works will not have a detrimental effect on any protected species on the development site. Should any protected species be identified as a result of the developer carrying out their legal duty then Natural England would need to be provided with a full report to enable us to make a substantive response and for the provided with a full report to enable us to make a substantive response and for the local planning authority to fully assess the proposal.’

Corporation of London:

‘I understand that the owner wishes to use this field for Polo.’

National Grid:

‘Please note the presence of the high pressure mains crossing the proposed site. Therefore we require the contractor to contact us to discuss all of the proposals, so that we can arrange for any site meetings with our engineers, when they can discuss safe working practices and any restrictions and regulations.’

Statutory Advertisement:

In accordance with the Town and County Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995, this major application was advertised in the local press on the 12 December 2008 and a site notice erected on the 12 December 2008.

Observations:

• The above application needs to be assessed against policies including GB1, R5, L2, EP3, TR5 and TR7 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999).

Description of proposal

• Permission is sought for re-contouring works to the existing field to provide a level horse training area. The proposed re-contouring works seek to create a reasonably level area with dimensions of approximately 260m x 150m. According to the planning statement the land would be used by the applicant for the exercising of horses as a private hobby. The proposals also include the construction of a pond to the north of the site. The main purpose of this pond is to provide material for the levelling works so that no importation of material would be required.

Impact on the character of the Green Belt

• Policy GB1 (Control Over Development in the Green Belt) defines proposals for equestrian use or development as acceptable in principle provided they adhere to the policies within chapter 7 of the Local Plan (namely policy R5) and all other planning considerations.

Page 6

• The application states that the land has been used for the grazing and exercising of horses since before the mid 1990's and that the applicant uses it to exercise family horses including show jumping and polo practice. It therefore confirms that the activity is private and not commercial. As stated within the officer report attached to application 98/00660/FUL, the Council have no evidence to dispute that the land to the north of Kilnwood and the stables have been used for the keeping and exercising of horses. It can therefore be concluded that an equestrian use has existed on the site for some time and that a material change of use would not occur through the implementation of this application.

• The applicant’s agent has confirmed that the levelling of the land is required to make the land more suitable and safer for the training and exercising of horses. Once the work is carried out the applicant can continue to train horses on the land.

• The area to be re-contoured is approximately 39,000m2. The section drawings indicate that alterations to the ground surface would result in a large, predominantly flat area of ground to replace the naturally contoured field. This area of land would be grassed to match the surrounding land.

• Policy R5 advises that the use of land for the keeping of horses will normally maintain the open and undeveloped nature of the Green Belt. In this case the land is to be kept permanently open and the only physical alterations are to the ground levels. As such it is my opinion that the proposals would not compromise the aims of the Green Belt.

Impact on landscape and wildlife

• Policy L2 states that development will not be permitted within an Area of Attractive Landscape (AAL), where there would be an adverse impact on the special character, landscape or amenity of the area. Although a large area of naturally contoured field is to be levelled, it is considered that provided the surface of the re-contoured field appears natural and there is appropriate landscaping around the site, the proposed development would not have an adverse impact on the character, appearance and amenities of the area. In stating this, I am cognisant of the views of the Council’s Landscape Assistant reported above. As such, a full landscaping scheme will be requested via a condition to include details of the new grassed surface,

• The site is adjacent to Burnham Beeches Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Burnham Beeches Special Area of Conservation (SAC). The application includes an ecological assessment which concludes that the proposal would not have a detrimental effect on nature conservation interests and would accord with Local Plan policy C10. Natural England has not raised any objection in this regard.

Impact on neighbouring properties

• Neighbouring residents are concerned about noise from the proposed activity, however bearing in mind the extensive screening around the site and that the intensity of the activity is not to be increased, it is considered that there would not be a harmful impact on neighbouring properties as a result of the proposals.

Flooding

• The sites lies within Flood zone 1 and because the development is greater than 1 hectare in area, the application must be accompanied by a flood risk assessment and the Environment Agency must be consulted. A flood risk assessment was received on 12th February 2009 and therefore comments are yet to be received from the Environment Agency. As such the recommendation will be subject to the approval of the Flood Risk Assessment by the Environment Agency.

Page 7 Highways

• Although the Parish Council and neighbouring occupiers have raised concerns with regard to increased traffic movements associated with the site once the development has been completed, the applicants have confirmed that the use of the site is solely for their own private use and therefore there would be no additional vehicle movements associated with the site. The impact of traffic movements during the construction phase is not normally a planning consideration and in this case the highways officer does not raise any objection. Indeed the purpose of constructing the pond is so minimum importation of soil is required.

• To conclude I am of the opinion that this proposal would be appropriate within the Green Belt and have little impact of the openness of the land. Furthermore, provided suitable landscaping is secured within and around the site, there would be little impact on the character and amenities of this Area of Attractive Landscape.

• I am satisfied that a fair balance would be struck between the interests of the community and the human rights of the individuals in the event of planning permission being granted in this instance.

SUBJECT TO THE FINAL VIEWS OF THE ENVIRONMENT AGENCY REGARDING THE SUBMITTED FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT

Recommendation

Full Planning Permission

Conditions & Reasons:

1. NS01 Standard Time Limit - Full Application

2. The development to which this planning permission relates shall be undertaken solely in accordance with the drawings referred to in informative number 1 below.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development and to accord with the terms of the submitted application. (Policy EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers.)

3. Notwithstanding any indications illustrated on drawings already submitted, no development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved by the District Planning Authority in writing a scheme of landscaping which shall include indications of all existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows on the site and details, including crown spreads, of those to be retained. The landscaping scheme shall also include details of the proposed grassed surface including species and density, and details of the proposed landscaping around the pond and public footpath. None of the trees, shrubs or hedgerows shown for retention shall be removed or felled, lopped or topped, without the prior written permission of the District Planning Authority. (NT01)

Reason: To ensure satisfactory landscaping of the site in the interests of visual amenity. (Policies EP3 and EP4 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refer.)

4. NT02 First Planting Season 5. NMS07 Areas Of Archaeological Interest – C14

Page 8

6. No equipment, materials or machinery shall be stored within the adjoining Sites of Special Scientific Interest /Special Areas of Conservation.

Reason: To conserve and protect the character of the Sites of Special Scientific Interest /Special Areas of Conservation. (Policy C10 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refers.)

7. NT04 Soil Levels Maintained 8. NT06 Retention of Existing Landscaping Features – S7.078-PO11 9. NT18 Complete In Accordance With Method Statement

10. The development hereby permitted shall be used solely for purposes entirely ancillary to the private equestrian use of the site by the occupier of Kilnwood and shall not be used for any commercial purposes whatsoever.

Reason: To ensure that no separate use commences or that the use of the site is not intensified without prior consideration of the planning issues by the District Planning Authority. (Policies GB1 and EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refer.)

11. There shall be no vehicular movements associated with the transportation of soil or other material on to or off of the site without the prior written consent of the District Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the terms of the submitted application and to restrict vehicular movements. (Policies TR5 and EP3 of the South Bucks District Local Plan (adopted March 1999) refer.)

Informative(s):

1. This decision relates to drawing(s) S7-078-P011(A) and S7-078-P011(B) received by the District Planning Authority on 3rd December 2008, the landscape mitigation strategy plan received by the District Planning Authority on 22nd January 2009 and to the ordinance survey plan received by the District Planning Authority on 27th January 2009. (IN01)

2. I34 Policies

Local Plan policies: GB1 (Green Belt Boundaries and the Control over Development in the Green Belt), R5 (Horse Related Facilities), L2 (Areas of Attractive Landscape), EP3 (The Use, Design and Layout of Development), TR5 (Accesses, Highway Works and Traffic Generation) and TR7 (Parking Provision).

3. The applicant’s attention is drawn to the letter dated 7th January 2009 and the attached documents from the National Grid which are enclosed with this decision letter.

4. IH14 Obstruction Of Footpath Bridleway 5. I02 Details Required Pursuant To Conditions – 3 and 5

6. The applicant's attention is drawn to the letter and attachments from Natural England dated 5 January 2009, which are enclosed with this decision.

Page 9