Agenda item

            That temporary planning permission be granted subject to the additional highway conditions detailed in the late observations sheet, condition four being amended to include “unless otherwise agreed in advance by the Local Planning Authority” and subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Head of Planning.

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Planning in respect of this application.  The usual consultations had been undertaken and the responses received detailed in the report.  Additional comments received since the preparation of the report were circulated at the meeting.

            The officer detailed the background to the report explaining that determination of the application had been deferred at the meeting held on 20 June 2012 to allow officers to look at conditions including one requiring management of the development site to avoid conflict with the use of the bridleway.  Conditions had now been looked at and a management plan submitted.  He drew Members’ attention to the late observations which included additional comments from the British Horse Society and where permission for 12 months was recommended by the Rights of Way Section; two additional highway conditions were also reported.  The officer explained that it was recommended that condition four be amended to include “unless otherwise agreed in advance by the Local Planning Authority”.  Discussions had taken place with the applicant and the hours of operation had been amended and a management plan had been put in place.  Monitoring was to be put in place to ensure the operation of the ball ceased when the bridleway was in use and signage was also to be put up on the bridleway.  The officer added that enforcement action could be taken if the conditions were breached.

            Mrs. A. Chamberlain spoke against the application and said that she had no objection in principle to the application.  She said that the operation of the bridleway had been closed down at weekends and that a material consideration in refusing the application was the bridleway could not be moved but the application site could be relocated elsewhere.  Mrs. Chamberlain said that there were no management conditions in place to make the bridleway safe to use.  She also felt that the activity would not bring tourism to the area as she did not feel that those who attended the site would stay in the local vicinity. 

            Mr. R. Wotton, the applicant, spoke in support of the application.  He asked that if permission was granted, it be for five years and not three years as was proposed in the report in order to provide greater security for the 10 staff and to allow site improvements. He also asked that the hours of opening on a Friday be either 10am to 4pm or 4pm to 8.30pm. as they never operated within both slots.  Detailed meetings had been held with the planning officer to try and alleviate all of the concerns raised by the British Horse Society and he had also spoken with Mrs. Chamberlain.  Mr. Wotton felt that horse riders and those undertaking sphereing could co-exist. 

            Councillor B. Hughes from Whitford Community Council spoke in support of the application and explained that there had been no objection from Whitford Community Council.  He said that he felt that there were other bridleways in the area which were located near to schools and were noisier than this one.    

            Councillor J. Falshaw proposed the recommendation for approval which was duly seconded.  He was in agreement with the application and felt that it would be good for the county and would bring in business to the area.  Councillor R.C. Bithell concurred that the two activities could co-exist and he felt that this could be accomplished by the plan that had been put in place.  Councillor W.O. Thomas welcomed the submission of the management plan and said that he was sure that agreement could be reached.  Councillor I. Dunbar concurred with the comments made.   

            Councillor A.M. Halford raised concern about the size of the sphereing ball and asked for more information on how the activity would be monitored.  She also queried how many riders had been put off using the bridleway compared to the 1300 who had used the sphereing activity.  In response to concerns raised by Councillor Halford about the request from the applicant to increase permission to five years, the Head of Planning said that the application before Members was to grant permission for three years from the date of the decision notice which officers felt was appropriate.    

            Councillor D. Evans felt that allowing three years was too long and that to allow further monitoring, permission should be granted for 12 or 18 months if the application was approved.  Councillor R.B. Jones queried whether condition 5 (activity should take place in strict accordance with the submitted and agreed management plan) was enforceable.  In response to the comments made, the officer said that the onus was on the developer to implement the activity in accordance with the management plan and conditions and that if they were breached, enforcement action could be taken.  He felt that allowing temporary permission of three years would allow for the activity to be monitored.   

            RESOLVED:

            That temporary planning permission be granted subject to the additional highway conditions detailed in the late observations sheet, condition four being amended to include “unless otherwise agreed in advance by the Local Planning Authority” and subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Head of Planning.