2

AL1 S16/2515 Target Decision Date:3rd January 2017Committee Date:4th April 2017

Applicant Mr Neil Gray Field Gate House Fir Tree Lane Sudbrook NG32 3RX

Agent Mr Stephen Kemp Open Plan Consultants Ltd Sparkhouse Studios Ropewalk Lincoln

Proposal Alterations to an existing access track comprising of surfacing of a section of the track in grass crete and erection of stable / store for use in connection with agricultural use of the site for horse grazing/paddock.

Location Field Gate House Fir Tree Lane Sudbrook NG32 3RX Application Type Full Planning PermissionParish(es) Ancaster Parish Council

Reason for Referral to Committee

At the request of Cllr. R. Kaberry-Brown for reasons relating to loss of privacy and overlooking.

Recommendation That the application is:- Approved conditionally

Key Issues

Impact on the character of the area Impact on amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties

Enquires about this report to: Abiola Labisi Area Planning Officer 6632 a.labisi@southkesteven.gov.uk

3

4

1.0 Introduction

1.1 The application was presented at the February 2017 Committee Meeting and decision was deferred to allow for the submission of a revised scheme that would have a more appropriate visual appearance given the site's location within the countryside.

1.2 The applicant has submitted revised plans showing the existing length of the track that runs

across the field to be surfaced in grass crete and a new turning head provided adjacent the proposed stable block. The applicant has also submitted a statement in support of their application. The statement states that there will be no more than 12 vehicle movements to access the paddock per year and the vehicles that are likely to be used in the operation would be agricultural tractors, a ride-on mower and a horse box. The applicant also submitted an addendum to their statement of support referring to the range of agricultural uses that could take place without planning permission.

1.3 Comments received from Environmental Protection, Highways Authority and Network Rail following a re-consultation exercise remained the same as their original comments.

1.4 The Parish Council disputed the use of the access prior to 2010, requested that the impact on the amenity of neighbours be considered and that the application be referred to the Highways Authority for assessment. The Parish Council also noted that any permission should include a condition that the track should not be used for more than 12 times per year.

1.5 A letter of objection was also received during the re-consultation period. The main issues raised include impact on residential amenities, status of access and lack of clarity regarding the use of the field. In their response to the addendum to the applicant's statement of support, the objector noted that the applicant had been using the track for domestic purposes.

1.6 The impact on residential amenity had been assessed in the original report and remains the same. With regard to the access, it should be noted that the assessment of the proposal has included its impact on highway safety and capacity, irrespective of when the access was formed. With regard to the use of the site, it is considered that the Council has been provided with sufficient information to determine the nature and scale of the proposal and any permission would therefore be limited to the approved use.

1.7 Having regard to the scale and nature of the proposed development, it is not considered necessary in this instance to include a condition restricting number of vehicle movements on the track as the proposal is considered to be unlikely to generate a volume of movement that would be likely to cause undue adverse impact on neighbours' amenities.

1.8 The revised scheme would reduce the impact on the landscape and visual amenity of the area. The relocation of the turning head would also reduce any potential adverse impact on the amenities of the occupiers of Fir Tree Lodge. It is therefore considered that the proposal would be in accordance with Core Strategy Policy EN1.

1.9 It is proposed that Condition 1 be amended to reflect the revised drawing number on the site plan, that Condition 3 be amended to ensure that the access track is surfaced in grass crete and that a new condition be added to prevent any parking or storing of vehicles on the access track.

1.10 The remainder of this report comprises the text of the original report put to the Committee in February 2017 with an updated schedule of conditions to reflect the amended proposals.

2.0 Description of site and application

2.1 The site is located to the rear of Field Gate House at the eastern edge of the village. The site is stated to be approx. 0.5 ha in size, relatively flat and roughly rectangular in shape. To the south of the site is a railway line while the northern boundary is defined by two dwelling houses. The

5

site was a formerly used for landfill and the immediate area within which the site is located is characterised by detached dwellings and land in agricultural use.

2.2 The proposal relates to the retention of a section of an existing access track and the erection of a stable block. The access track has been formed using road planings and runs from Fir Tree Lane across the entire width of the site. The stable block is to provide shelter for horses as well as storage for equipment.

2.3 The stable building would be constructed of timber with dark green profiled sheeting over and would cover an area of approx. 10m x 5m with a ridge height of approx. 3.6m. It would be sited at the north western corner of the site. The stables would take up just over 60% of the floor area with the remaining 35% used for storage purposes.

3.0 Relevant History

Reference Proposal Decision DateS01/1215 Use of land for equine centre and

associated buildingsApproved Conditionally

26/11/2001

S08/1144 Change of use of agricultural land to equine centre and associated buildings

Approved Conditionally

24/12/2008

S16/0644 Retention of access track and erection of a single storey timber storage building

Refused 22/08/2016

4.0 Policy Considerations

4.1 South Kesteven District Council Core StrategyPolicy EN1 - Protection and EnhancementPolicy SP1 - Spatial Strategy

5.0 Representations Received

Heritage Lincolnshire No objection

Environmental Protection Services

Final comments being awaited but they have advised that they have no objection subject to conditions.

LCC Highways & SuDS Support

No objection subject to condition

Network Rail - Civil Engineering

No objection subject to compliance with acceptable boundary treatment

Parish Council The council is concerned about the lack of enforcement following refusal of planning permission. There is a loss of privacy and loss of residential amenity to the property affected. We can find no evidence that this is an existing entrance and in fact google earth photos from 2001 dispute this, whilst 2005 support this.

6

6.0 Representations as a Result of Publicity

6.1 This application has been advertised in accordance with the Council's Statement of Community Involvement and 1 letter of representation has been received. The issues raised in the representation can be summarised as follows:

1. Inaccuracies in the application - misleading information

2. Adverse effect on the residential amenity due to noise and overlooking/loss of privacy

3. Size and scale not appropriate for rural location

4. Loss of View: The loss of green undeveloped land space and an adverse change to the open aspect of the site

5. Road Safety issues

6. Loss of hedgerow

7.0 Evaluation

7.1 Sudbrook is not identified as a Local Service Centre within Core Strategy Policy SP2 (Sustainable Communities). Core Strategy Policy SP1 (Spatial Strategy) provides a framework guiding the location of new development within the district and with regard to development in the countryside, the policy provides that:

7.1.1 'In all other villages and the countryside development will be restricted. Proposals will only be considered acceptable if they are sites for:

A. affordable housing (rural exception or allocated sites)B. agriculture, forestry or equine developmentC. rural diversification projectsD. local services and facilitiesE. replacement buildings (on a like for like basis); orF. conversions of buildings.'

7.1.2 With regard to the impact of development on the character of an area, Core Strategy Policy EN1(protection and enhancement of the character of the district) provides that:

7.1.3 'Development must be appropriate to the character and significant natural, historic and cultural attributes and features of the landscape within which it is situated, and contribute to its conservation, enhancement or restoration'.

7.1.4 Similarly, para 58 of the NPPF requires that planning policies and decisions should aim to ensure that developments respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation.

7.1.5 Keeping of horses on a field in agricultural use solely for the purpose of grazing does not constitute a change of use in this instance. The proposed stable block is to provide shelter for the horses and for the storage of equipment stated to be required in connection with the keeping of the horses on the field.

7.1.6 Core Strategy Policy SP1 (Spatial Strategy) provides that consideration should be given to agricultural development in the countryside and accordingly, the proposal is considered to be acceptable in principle.

7

7.2 Impact of the use on the character of the area

7.2.1 The site is located in the open countryside, in an area that falls within the Southern Lincolnshire Edge Landscape Character Area. The area is described as 'relatively open, landscape, with a simple pattern of fields and lanes' within the South Kesteven Landscape Character Assessment (2007). In terms of sensitivity, the assessment provides that the area's sensitivity to new employment and residential proposals is likely to be medium to high.

7.2.2 Having regard to the scale of the existing access, it is considered that the access constitutes a significant and unacceptable intrusion into the open landscape to the detriment of the character of the area. As part of this application, however, the access track would be downgraded to run from the edge of the public road to the entrance into the field, terminating in a turning head. It would be approx. 3.5m wide and approx. 50m in length. It is considered that the proposed reduction in the scale of the track would significantly reduce the impact on the landscape.

7.2.3 The proposed stable block would be constructed of materials that are in keeping with the rural character of the area. The scale is not considered to be such that would lead to a significant adverse impact on the character of the area. Furthermore, the building would be positioned where it would not be very visible from public positions.

7.2.4 Having regard to the foregoing, it is considered that the proposal would not lead to a significant and unacceptable adverse impact on the character of the area.

7.3 Impact on the neighbouring properties

7.3.1 The proposed stable block would be approx. 20m from the nearest property not in the applicant's ownership. It would be approx 3.6m in height and set back approx. 3.5m from the western boundary. Having regard to the separation distance between the building and neighbouring properties, as well as its scale, it is considered that the building would not lead to any significant adverse impacts on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties.

7.3.2 The access runs parallel to the eastern boundary of the adjoining property north of the site. However, having regard to the nature and scale of the use which the access serves, it is not considered that the proposal would lead to the generation of a high volume of vehicular movements as to cause a significant adverse impact on the amenities of the occupiers of the adjoining property to the north either by way of noise or light pollution. Unlike the previous refused proposals, the access would not extend across the width of rear garden to the adjoining property.

7.4 Highway issues

7.4.1 The issue of visibility at the access has been considered and having regard to its nature and scale, it is not considered that the proposal would lead to severe detrimental highway issues. Importantly, the local Highways Authority has raised no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions.

7.5 Response to issues raised in the letter of objection

7.5.1 1. Inaccuracies in the application - misleading information

2. Adverse effect on the residential amenity due to noise and overlooking/loss of privacy

3. Size and scale not appropriate for rural location

4. Loss of View: The loss of green undeveloped land space and an adverse change to the open aspect of the site

5. Road Safety issues

8

6. Loss of hedgerow

7.5.2 In response to the issues raised in the letter of objection, it should be noted that the fundamental details contained in the planning application are not considered to be misleading and sufficient for the Planning Authority to assess the proposal appropriately.

7.5.3 With regards to impact on amenities, whilst it is appreciated that vehicle movements along the track in close proximity to the adjoining dwelling house would cause some level of disturbance, it is however not considered that given the nature and scale of the proposal, such level of disturbance would be sufficient to warrant a refusal. The issue of potential noise and light pollution has been discussed with the Environmental Health Unit and they have raised no objection to the proposal.

7.5.4 Similarly, it is appreciated that the proposal, like any other development, would lead to some impact in the character of the area. However, the extent of the access as proposed, as well as the scale of the building is not considered to be such that would lead to a significant detrimental impact on the character of the area. The impact on views and hedgerows would also not be considered to be significant.

7.5.5 With regards to highway safety issues, the Local Highways Authority has raised no objection to the scheme and accordingly, it is considered that the proposal would not lead to unacceptable level of highway issues, subject to conditions.

7.6 Other matters

7.6.1 The proposal has been discussed with the Environmental Protection Unit and no objection has been raised in principle. However, given the previous use of the site, they have advised that they would want a condition requiring that ventilation details be submitted prior to the erection of the stable block. A formal response is still being awaited from the Environmental Protection Unit. A review of the recommendation/conditions will be undertaken when final comments are received from the Environmental Protection Unit.

7.7 Conclusion

7.7.1 Having regard to its nature and scale, it is considered that the proposed retention of a section of the access track and the erection of a stable block would not lead to an unacceptable detrimental impact on the character of the area and would also not lead to significant adverse impacts on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with Core Strategy Policy EN1 and therefore, it is recommended that permission be granted, subject to conditions.

8.0 Section 106 Heads of Terms

8.1 Not applicable.

9.0 Crime and Disorder

9.1 It is considered that the proposal would not result in any significant crime and disorder implications.

10.0 Human Rights Implications

9

10.1 Articles 6 (Rights to fair decision making) and Article 8 (Right to private family life and home) of the Human Rights Act have been taken into account in making this recommendation.

10.2 It is considered that no relevant Article of that act will be breached.

11.0 RECOMMENDATION: that the development is Approved subject to the following conditions

Approved Plans

1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following list of approved plans:

i. Drawing No. 1001_E (Proposed Site Plan) received 20/02/2017ii. Drawing No. 1002_A (Proposed outbuilding plan) received 20/02/2017iii. Drawing No. 2001_A (Proposed outbuilding elevations) received 20/02/2017

Unless otherwise required by another condition of this permission.

Reason: To define the permission and for the avoidance of doubt.

Before the Development is Commenced

2 Before the development hereby permitted commences, details of a boundary treatment proposal shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for written approval. The details shall include a plan indicating the heights, positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected.

Reason: To provide a satisfactory appearance in accordance with Policy EN1 of the adopted South Kesteven Core Strategy (July 2010) and in order to protect railway infrastructure.

Before the Development is Occupied

3 Prior to the building hereby approved being brought into first use, the length of the access track that runs across the field shall have been surfaced in grass crete with suitable grass seeding treatment to accord with the approved layout plan (Drawing No. 1001_E) and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and to protect the character of the area in accordance with Core Strategy Policy EN1.

Ongoing Conditions

4 The building hereby approved shall be used only for the purpose hereby approved and shall not be used for domestic or any other purpose.

Reason: In order to define the permission and in the interest of protecting the character of the area.

5 There shall be no parking/storing of vehicles on the track other than within the turning area.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and in order to protect the amenity of the occupiers of the neighbouring property (Fir Tree Lodge)

6 The boundary treatment shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter.

10

Reason: To provide a satisfactory appearance in accordance with Policy EN1 of the adopted South Kesteven Core Strategy (July 2010) and in order to protect railway infrastructure.

Standard Note(s) to Applicant:

1 In reaching the decision the Council has worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner by determining the application without undue delay. As such it is considered that the decision is in accordance with paras 186 - 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

2 Your attention is however called to the following comments from Network Rail.

A. Security of Mutual Boundary:Security of the railway boundary will need to be maintained at all times. If the works require temporary or permanent alterations to the mutual boundary the applicant must contact Network Rail's Asset Protection Project Manager.

B. Livestock Fencing:The security of the mutual boundary needs to be maintained at all times. Given the nature of the proposal and the increase in livestock movement we would advise that any fencing to be installed should be of a suitable stock proof type to prevent livestock getting onto the railway.

Network Rail is required to recover all reasonable costs associated with facilitating these works.

I would advise that in particular the livestock fencing should be the subject of conditions, the reasons for which can include the safety, operational needs and integrity of the railway. For the other matters we would be pleased if an informative could be attached to the decision notice.

3 The local Highways Authority has raised no objection to the proposal. However, your attention is drawn to the comments below from the Highways Authority:

A. As visibility from the existing access track is limited, these comments are subject to the access being used for private and personal use only, for the detailed 2 horses and agricultural tractor / ride-on mower. The access/store would not be supported for road going vehicles without further works to the site.

B. Prior to the submission of details for any access works within the public highway you must contact the Divisional Highways Manager on 01522 782070 for application, specification and construction information.

11

Site Location Plan

Block Plan

12

Elevations

Floor Plan