Hard standing and boundary changes at Hargate Hill Equestrian Centre, Glossop

What was proposed

The application sought a lawful development certificate for hard standing, northern boundary changes and an existing storage use.

“The application as submitted sought a Certificate of Lawful Development for an Existing Use that would confirm that the change of use of the land that has occurred to storage (B8) use, and associated operational development comprising the engineering operations and laying of…”

“However, for the reasons outlined within this report, whilst Officers are content that the operational development (i.e. the engineering operations and laying of hard standing) is lawful, it has been judged that there is insufficient evidence to be able to grant an open ended Certificate for a B8 Use.”

Officer report

The site

The site is a 0.3-hectare parcel within an equestrian centre, accessed from Glossop Road and currently containing hard standing and caravans.

“This application relates to a rectangular parcel of land measuring approximately 0.3ha situated within the Hargate Hill Equestrian Centre, a large complex made up of buildings, riding facilities and hard standing which together makes up the planning unit.”

“The site is accessed off Glossop Road, a short distance north of Charlesworth via a private driveway and sits to the north of the main car park and north-east of the cluster of buildings associated with the Equestrian Centre, beyond a line of trees and natural vegetation.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

An enforcement notice covered the wider equestrian centre, but no breach or previous planning history specifically related to this parcel was identified.

“An Enforcement Notice was served under refence HPE/2017/00002 which covered the entirety of the Hargate Hill Equestrian Centre complex on 22 nd September 2017. This notice related to the unauthorised change of use of land comprising:”

“Whilst the wider Hargate Hill Equestrian Centre has planning history which includes two other current applications (HPK/2025/0339 and HPK/2025/0340) this parcel of land has not been subject to any previous planning history.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended granting a revised certificate because the hard standing and boundary works were proven lawful, but the storage evidence was insufficient.

“The evidence is therefore irrefutable with regards the operational development (engineering operations and hard standing) that is contained within the original description of development and Officers are therefore content to grant a Certificate for this aspect of development.”

“Further to the above analysis, it is recommended that there is insufficient and conflicting evidence to grant a Certificate for the change of use as applied for, but that the evidence is clear with regards the operational development (engineering operations and hard standing) being implemented more than 4 years ago and is therefore lawful.”

Officer report

What people said

The parish council and ward councillor objected over storage, Green Belt effects and changes to the area, while no neighbours commented.

“The use of Green Belt for large scale open storage is inappropriate…”

“The growth of the developed area of Hargate Hill compromises the open Green Belt area between Simmondley and Gamesley, damaging the amenity of the Green Belt and harming the amenity of local residents.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent addressed the committee.

The committee decision

The committee granted the certificate as set out in the report and delegated limited authority to amend its wording before issue.

“That a Certificate of Lawful Development be granted as set out in the report; and…”

“That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions/informatives/planning obligations or reasons for approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.”

Minutes