Agenda item

Change of use from field to construct a riding arena 22 metres x 40 metres for private use

Land North West Of Hulwane, U6003 Ulgham To Ulgham Park Junction, Ulgham, Northumberland

Change of use from field to construct a riding arena 22 metres x 40 metres for private use 

Land North West Of Hulwane, U6003 Ulgham To Ulgham Park Junction, Ulgham, Northumberland 

W Laing, Planning Officer provided an introduction to the report with the aid of a power point presentation.  He advised that there was a slight amendment to condition 3 in that …. the access shall be retained and maintained in perpetuity and condition 6 …. Clear and public access to the public right of way No 1 Footpath Ulgham ….

D Moore addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the application.  Her comments included the following:-

·       She owned the wood directly north of the application site and had right of access through the proposed site of the arena.  She was a horse owner and competitor and had never come across an arena so disassociated with its buildings and involved crossing a public right of way.

·       She questioned why the online report did not state which policies the application had been judged against stating that other arena applications seemed to be judged against the emerging Northumberland Local Plan and all fell within the curtilage of associated steadings, unlike this application.

·       She could not understand why the Officer stated that the application site was not within the Green Belt when a previous application 21010204 was and also application 1903885/FUL for the stabling stated it was within Green Belt and also map 3.2 key diagram in the Northumberland Local Plan. 

·       She highlighted and quoted from Polices ENV2 3(a); ENV3 1 (3) (iii) (v) and (vi) in the Northumberland Local Plan which had been used in other applications.  The application did not contribute positively and in fact detracted.

·       It created a stand-alone feature in a separate field abounded by an ancient hedgerow and woodland and altered the topography of the landscape in a rural environment with its rubber surface as viewed from the public footpath.

·       It would create additional pressure on the edge of Ulgham where a landowner is trying to create a caravan park. 

·       In relation to QOP1, the application did not make a positive contribution as it would alter the landform and topography and was a considerable distance from existing buildings.

·       In relation to Policy QOP2 it would result in an adverse impact on neighbours as the arena would be clearly visible from the surrounding area and from the public footpath where it dissects the site.

·       The site of the arena would be hazardous to the right of way users, footpath users and the applicant.

·       Currently there were 8 horses kept as a herd by one person and to take one away created anxiety amongst the rest.  The arena would be 100m from the stables, passing through four gates, across the vehicular right of access for her and the public footpath, both of which were entered as separate entities on her deeds.

·       An agitated 400kg horse could cause a lot of damage, and some users of the footpath have been trapped by these horses when their curiosity is attracted by walkers and dog walkers and this was when accidents happened.

·       The officer put great store by the fact that this was for personal use, as was also stated in the stable application, however additional horses have been kept their as liveries.

·       The land had covenants stipulating the location of any new fencing which had been ignored, displacing the original footpath route without consultation to NCC or herself.

·       If it was to be for private use, why, after the land purchase in 2019 was a hardstanding with additional fencing and gates across the footpath added and why was the arena so far away from the buildings.

·       Why should the residents of Ulgham have to negotiate those additional hazards when using the public footpath.

·       This was a stand alone development in a Green Belt which created hazards for other users.

In response to questions from Members of the Committee in relation to the possibility of the application site being in the Green Belt, advice was provided that all constraints on the site would have been brought up when the application had been validated.  However Officers would give an undertaking to look again at the application as if it was in the Green Belt.  Some uses were acceptable within the Green Belt including an exception for appropriate uses for outdoor sport or recreation, however this application had not been considered against Green Belt tests. 

Councillor Sanderson left the meeting at 6.09 pm.

As clarification on the question of the application site being within the Green Belt was an important consideration, Councillor Bawn proposed deferment of the application for a definite answer and this was seconded by Councillor Wearmouth.  A vote was taken as follows: FOR 7; AGAINST 0; ABSTENTION 1.

RESOLVED that the application be DEFERRED for clarification as to whether the application site was within the Green Belt.