Agenda item

19.The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2) concerning Planning Applications 23/02941/RESMAJ, 23/02942/RESMAJ, 23/02944/RESMAJ, 23/02945/RESMAJ in respect of Reserved Matters following Outline Approval 19/03161/OUTMAJ - Outline application for two racehorse training yards. Matters to be considered: Access, Landscaping and Scale. Matters to be considered appearance and layout.

20.   Standing orders were suspended to allow speakers ten minutes to deliver their presentations.

21.   It was requested that the representative from Lambourn Parish Council was allowed to speak at the meeting despite missing the deadline to register. Members voted to reject this proposal.

22.   Cheyanne Kirby introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was acceptable in planning terms and officers recommended approval, subject to the schedule of conditions (Appendix A of the report), comments from Natural England with regard to the Habitats Regulation Assessment and the completion of a Section 106 legal agreement to secure the Habitats Regulation Assessment recommendations. Or if the legal agreement was not completed by the 19th May 2025 (three months of the Committee meeting), or such other date as agreed in writing by the Development Manager in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee, to delegate to the Development Manager to refuse planning permission, for the reasons set out in Section 11 of the report.

23.   The Chairman asked Paul Goddard if he had any observations relating to the application. He advised that he had no objections.

24.   In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Peter Francis, objector, Tom Fillery, supporter, Will Riggle and Meghan Bonner, applicant/agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Objector Representation

25.   Peter Francis addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here:

Western Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 19 February 2025 (1:23:46)

Member Questions to the Objector

26.   Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Supporter Representation

27.   Tom Fillery addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here:

Western Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 19 February 2025 (1:32:24)

Member Questions to the Supporter

28.   Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Applicant/Agent Representation

29.   Will Riggle and Meghan Bonner addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here:

Western Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 19 February 2025 (1:35:24)

Member Questions to the Applicant/Agent

30.   Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       There was capacity for more horses. However, the purpose of the outline consent was for future proofing against future developments in the local area.

·       A variety of training yards of different sizes were required. There were facilities that were continually under threat from applications seeking to remove legal obligations to uses related to horse racing.

·       Modern yards had significantly improved facilities and the way they operated was completely different to how they operated historically. These yards were going to raise the standard in the area.

·       There was a business guide that provided detailed information on all equine businesses. These determined the number of bedrooms required for the site.

Ward Member Representation

31.   Councillor Howard Woollaston addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here:

Western Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 19 February 2025 (1:49:34)

Member Questions to the Ward Member

32.   Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       Thames Water had lined all of their sewers through Upper Lambourn down into Lambourn. He hoped therefore that the problems with flooding had been resolved. It was also noted that most of the water on this site was contained and unlikely to be affected by this.

33.   Members reinstated standing orders.

Member Questions to Officers

34.   Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       Cheyanne Kirby advised that the only change from the site visit was that the muck heap had moved from phase b to reflect the other plans that were submitted.

·       Cheyanne Kirby highlighted that the original application had conditions related to surface water drainage. Thames Water had a duty to provide supply for new developments.

·       Cheyanne Kirby noted that a flood risk assessment was submitted with the outline application and further drainage information was to be secured with the conditions.

·       Debra Inston advised that she needed to find out why the New Homes Bonus was not applicable to this site.

·       Paul Goddard advised that highways and access conditions were resolved at outline and that Councillor Woollaston was working with traffic management and road safety with the aim to have the speed limit along the road reduced.

Debate

35.   Councillor Phil Barnett opened the debate by reminding Members that a separate proposal and vote was required for each of the four applications.

36.   Councillor Adrian Abbs noted that the proposal was very limited and that there was no possible reason for this application to be rejected.

37.   Councillor Paul Dick highlighted it was good to debate and discuss for the benefit of residents but agreed with Councillor Abbs’ view. He noted that American style barns were better for horses and people.

38.   Councillor Antony Amirtharaj was supportive of the application and noted the site visit highlighted the positive impacts that the proposal would have.

39.   Councillor Nigel Foot agreed with Councillor Dick’s view and highlighted the importance of providing residents with the reassuring news regarding flooding in the area. He noted that it was going to have a positive effect on the horse racing industry in the area.

40.   Councillor Martin Colston felt that this proposal was in line with the Council’s strategy to support its villages and noted the importance of this industry to West Berkshire’s economy.

41.   Councillor Abbs proposed to accept the Officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission for planning 23/02941/RESMAJ, subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report. This was seconded by Councillor Dick.

42.   The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Abbs, seconded by Councillor Dick, to grant planning permission. At the vote the motion was carried.

43.   Councillor Abbs proposed to accept the Officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission for planning 23/02942/RESMAJ, subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report. This was seconded by Councillor Dick.

44.   The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Abbs, seconded by Councillor Dick, to grant planning permission. At the vote the motion was carried.

45.   Councillor Abbs proposed to accept the Officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission for planning 23/02944/RESMAJ, subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report. This was seconded by Councillor Dick.

46.   The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Abbs, seconded by Councillor Dick, to grant planning permission. At the vote the motion was carried.

47.   Councillor Abbs proposed to accept the Officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission for planning 23/02945/RESMAJ, subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report. This was seconded by Councillor Dick.

48.   The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Abbs, seconded by Councillor Dick, to grant planning permission. At the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that the Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the schedule of conditions (Appendix A of the report), comments from Natural England with regard to the Habitats Regulation Assessment and the completion of a Section 106 legal agreement to secure the Habitats Regulation Assessment recommendations. Or if the legal agreement was not completed by the 19th May 2025 (3 months of the Committee meeting), or such other date as agreed in writing by the Development Manager in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee, to delegate to the Development Manager to refuse planning permission, for the reasons set out in Section 11 of the report.