Private equestrian facilities at Paunt House Barn Castle Tump, Newent

What was proposed

The application sought equestrian use of agricultural land, a stable building, paddocks, fencing, a septic tank and associated works.

“Change of use of agricultural land to equestrian and erection of high stable building, fencing to create paddocks and installation of septic tank and associated works.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The site is agricultural land outside a settlement boundary, surrounded by fields, farmsteads and homes, with access from an existing private entrance.

“SITE DESCRIPTION The application site comprises a parcel of agricultural land associated with Paunt House Barn, situated within a rural area outside any defined settlement boundary. The surrounding area is characterised by open agricultural fields, scattered farmsteads, and residential properties.”

“Existing development on the site includes Paunt House Barn and its associated agricultural land, with the application site forming part of the wider countryside setting.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier applications included a withdrawn dwelling conversion proposal, a granted barn-to-dwelling permission and later approval of several conditions.

“PLANNING HISTORY P0842/23/PQ3PA - Prior approval for the change of use of agricultural building to 1 dwelling and for building operations reasonably necessary for the conversion – Application withdrawn July 2023”

“P1414/23/FUL - Conversion of barn to form dwelling with associated works including partial change of use of surrounding agricultural fields to residential to create access track and external amenity space – Granted permission May 2024”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended delegated approval because the private countryside use was acceptable and identified impacts could be mitigated through conditions and a legal agreement.

“The principle of private equestrian development in a countryside location is considered acceptable, given that such uses are inherently rural in nature and are supported by national planning policy. Subject to conditions restricting the use to private equestrian purposes associated with the occupiers of Paunt House Barn, the proposal is not considered to represent inappropriate development in the open countryside.”

“RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that DELEGATED AUTHORITY be given to the Development Manager to Grant Permission subject to the conditions below, and completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the payment of Biodiversity Net Gain monitoring fees £4,489 associated with the monitoring and enforcement of the 30-year habitat creation, enhancement and management obligations required to deliver the approved Biodiversity Net Gain and a fee £540 for registering the S106…”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

The parish council and neighbours raised concerns about landscape, scale, access, disturbance, manure and possible commercial use, while most consultees raised no objection subject to safeguards.

“CONSULTATIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS Parish Council The following concerns have been raised: • Visual impact on the environment and landscape given the large scale; • Potential for commercial use; and • There are number of on-site cabins, caravans, converted shipping containers on site not shown on the block plan. Sustainability (GCN) Further information required.”

“Impact on the existing private access route and its potential damage; • Impact on noise, odour and general disturbance; • The development is large and will impact on the character of the area and landscape; • The stable will be situated on a slope; • Potential to become commercial; • Number of restrictive covenants at Paunt House Barn, including any manure must be stored at a distance of at least 50m from the retained land of Paunt House and Paunt House Farm.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A local resident and the parish council spoke against the application, while no supporter spoke and a ward member’s statement sought deferral for a landscape appraisal.

The vote

Nine councillors voted for approval, two abstained and none voted against.

“The Chair summed up what was to be voted on. That the motion is for the Officers recommendation which is Delegated Authority be given to the Development Manager to grant planning permission subject to the conditions and completion of a Section 106 Agreement as sat out on page 28 of the Schedule along with the additional condition thirteen detailed below with the additional informative.”

“For (9) Councillors David Wheeler, Richard Burton, Sid Phelps, Beth Llewellyn, Andrew McDermid, Jonathan Beeston, Simon Phelps, John Francis, Patrick Kyne Abstain (2) Councillors Stuart Graham, Gill Moseley Against (0) Councillors Total (11)”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee granted delegated authority to approve the application subject to the listed conditions, an additional condition, an informative and a Section 106 agreement.

“That the motion is for the Officers recommendation which is Delegated Authority be given to the Development Manager to grant planning permission subject to the conditions and completion of a Section 106 agreement as sat out on page 28 of the Schedule along with the additional condition thirteen detailed below with the additional informative.”

Minutes