Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 20 June 2023 by S Harrington MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 3rd July 2023 Appeal Ref: APP/X0415/W/22/3309175 Olde Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St Giles, Buckinghamshire HP8 4DX • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mrs DC Clarke against the decision of Buckinghamshire Council - East Area (Chiltern). • The application Ref PL/22/0792/FA, dated 3 March 2022, was refused by notice dated 24 June 2022. • The development proposed is the demolition of an existing stable, and the erection of a replacement stable with facilities (resubmission of PL/20/3872/FA). Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. The appellant has requested that an amended plan that did not form part of the Council’s decision be taken into consideration within this appeal. The amended plan enlarges the red edge to incorporate a building that was identified to be demolished within the submission. 3. The appeal process should not be used to evolve a scheme.

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision However, I have had regard to the Wheatcroft Principles, the degree of engagement of all parties and the interests of fairness. Noting the original submission clearly identified buildings to be demolished, and the opportunity for the Council to fully respond, I do not consider that any party will be prejudiced if I take the amended plan into account. I have subsequently determined the appeal on the basis of the amended plan. Main Issues 4. The main issues are:- • whether the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework (Framework) and any relevant development plan policies; • the effect of the proposal on the openness of the Green Belt; • the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area; and • whether any harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, be clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the proposal. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/X0415/W/22/3309175 Reasons Whether inappropriate development in the Green Belt 5. Policy GB2 of the Chiltern Local Plan 1997 (including alterations 29 May 2001) Consolidated September 2007 and November 2011 (LP) states that most development in the Green Belt is inappropriate, but sets out development categories which is not inappropriate. However, exceptions outlined within LP Policy GB2 are more restrictive than those described within the Framework. The Framework illustrates the most up to date national policy position on development in the Green Belt and therefore the inconsistency limits the weight I afford to LP Policy GB2. 6. The Framework identifies that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open and that the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence. The Framework continues that inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. 7. The Framework establishes that the construction of new buildings in the Green Belt should be regarded as inappropriate, subject to a number of exceptions as set out in paragraph 149.

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision The appellant submits that the proposal should be assessed against exceptions noted at para 149(g), or in the alternative para 149(b). 8. Paragraph 149(g) sets out an exception for limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed land (PDL), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development. 9. Therefore, in order for the exception to apply, the appeal site in the first instance needs to be PDL. The Framework definition of PDL refers to ‘Land which is, or was, occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land (although it should not be assumed that the whole of the curtilage should be developed) and any associated fixed surface infrastructure. However, this definition excludes land that is or was last occupied by agricultural buildings. 10. The proposal would be sited on part of an area of land which the Council state was the site of a piggery building. The appellant states that there has been no agricultural trade or business at the site for over 25 years, and there is now clearly an equestrian use of all the land at the appeal site.

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision While this may be the case, I have not been provided with any details of previous grants of planning permission for an equine use. The lawfulness of the use of land is not a matter for me to determine in the context of an appeal made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. In this regard, it is open to the appellant to apply to have this matter determined under sections 191 or 192 of the Act, and such an application would be unaffected by my determination of this appeal. 11. While noting the comments of the appellant relating to the period of time the appeal site has been used for an equine purpose, given the Councils comments on the use of land within the Council Officer’s report, I do not have any https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/X0415/W/22/3309175 substantive evidence before me to conclude that the entirety of the appeal site does fall within the definition of PDL. 12. Notwithstanding, paragraph 150(e) of the Framework also states that certain other forms of development are also not inappropriate in the Green Belt including material changes in the use of land (such as changes of use for outdoor sport or recreation). However, even if I were to conclude that the appeal site is either PDL in its entirety, or that paragraph 150(e) is relevant to the proposal, both paragraphs 149(g) and 150(e) requires an assessment as to the effect of the proposal on the openness of the Green Belt, which I address in the next main issue. 13. Paragraph 149(b) sets out an exception for the provision of appropriate facilities (in connection with the existing use of land or a change of use) for, amongst others, outdoor sport and outdoor recreation. This exception essentially requires five tests to be satisfied before such a new proposal can be regarded as not inappropriate.

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision These are that the proposal must: be a building; be for either outdoor sport, outdoor recreation, cemeteries and burial grounds or allotments; be ‘appropriate’ for the intended purpose; preserve the openness of the Green Belt; and not conflict with the purpose of including land in the Green Belt. 14. The Council have concerns that the proposal is not an appropriate facility for outdoor sport and recreation, and that it would not preserve the openness of the Green Belt. 15. The appellant has outlined that the existing facility is set over approximately 3.24Ha and that the existing buildings at the site do not provide appropriate space for the sheltering of animals as well as other elements required for their care and are in poor condition. While the appellant states that the proposal is of a proportionate size for the size of the equestrian unit, I also note the appellants comments in relation to the storage of tractors at the appeal site. 16. The proposal seeks demolition of two existing buildings, and the erection of one new building that would provide two stable areas, replacing two stables lost through the demolition.

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision Further facilities would be provided including a wash bay, tack room, rug room, hay store, and storage for equipment, feed and bedding. It is put to me that the existing buildings to be removed have a footprint of around 140sq.m, why the proposal would have a footprint of around 213sq.m, with an increase in volume. While there is in increase in size from the buildings to be demolished, the increase in size would in my view, appear reasonable and therefore ‘appropriate’ for the intended purpose given the size of the existing surrounding facility. 17. However, paragraph 149(b), also requires that the proposal preserves the openness of the Green Belt, to which I now turn. Openness 18. Paragraph 137 of the Framework advises that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. Openness is the absence of development and has both spatial and visual dimensions. 19. The proposal would be located in a similar position to the existing ‘building 1’ which would be demolished, and the north of the existing ‘building 2’ which https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/X0415/W/22/3309175 would also be demolished. I observed that although there is a hedge boundary along the highway to the west, the existing buildings, and location of the proposal are visible, particularly through gateways. 20. Given ‘building 1’ is directly adjacent a further building that will be retained, the siting of the new building would be in close proximity to the retained building to the north. Furthermore, while the demolition of ‘building 2’ would contribute to consolidating the building group, the existing gap between ‘building 1’ and ‘building 2’, combined with the modest scale of ‘building 2’ currently provides visibility through built form. 21. However, although it is stated it would be lower than ‘building 1’, the proposed building would have a larger footprint and volume than the existing buildings to be demolished in combination. Furthermore, the increased size, scale and bulky design, together with its proximity to the retained existing building would lead to an increased physical presence and prominence compared to the existing buildings 1 & 2, notwithstanding that the proposal would be subordinate to ‘Olde Chelsea’ in terms of height.

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision Moreover, although the appeal site does benefit from screening from the nearby highway and public bridleway, the proposal would be seen from gateways, surrounding countryside and from within the appeal site itself. Therefore, in both spatial and visual terms the proposal would have a greater impact on openness than the existing development. 22. The proposal would provide an appropriate facility for outdoor sport and recreation, but for the reasons set out above, it would fail to preserve openness. Although the scale of the development, location and surrounding context would limit any conflict with the purposes of including land within the Green Belt, it would not preserve openness as required within exceptions (b) of paragraph 149 and (e) of paragraph 150 of the Framework and would have a greater impact on openness therefore not according with exception (g) of paragraph 149. As such, the proposal would constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt. It would conflict with the aims of the Framework and LP Policy GB2, both of which seek to protect the Green Belt. Character and appearance 23.

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision The Council have not identified any direct harm within their reason for refusal in terms of character and appearance, although have raised some concern within the Officer’s report and appeal statement. The Council have however stated that the proposal is contrary to LP Policy R13 within their reason for refusal. Policy R13 relates to the impact of equestrian facilities on amongst other matters the visual amenity of the locality. The Policy also requires compliance with Policy GB28, which I am informed, and is not refuted by the Council, is not saved, thus limiting the weight to be afforded to the Policy. 24. Nonetheless, I observed that the character of the surrounding area includes a mix of agricultural, equine and residential development. The proposal, while of a greater footprint and volume than those buildings to be demolished, would be sited in a location that both already features built form, and would be adjacent a retained building, thus contributing to its partial visual integration in the facility.

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision The proposal’s utilitarian appearance is not unusual within the countryside and the distance from the highway and other public viewpoints such as the nearby bridleway, would lessen its prominence within the landscape. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision The proposal’s utilitarian appearance is not unusual within the countryside and the distance from the highway and other public viewpoints such as the nearby bridleway, would lessen its prominence within the landscape. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/X0415/W/22/3309175 25. Accordingly, any resultant harm to visual amenity and the character and appearance of the area is to a limited degree, and I find that the proposal is not in material conflict with LP Policy R13, in so far as this Policy relates to the visual amenity of the area. Other considerations 26. The Framework is clear that inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. Very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations. 27. The proposal would result in economic benefits through the creation of jobs associated with its construction and the secondary supply chain, provide for the welfare of horses and it has been put to me that the proposal would provide a net gain in biodiversity. While these are important benefits, given the scale of the proposal I afford these limited weight. 28. The Council has not raised any concerns regarding matters relating to residential living conditions, or highway safety and I see no reason to disagree.

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — Appeal Decision A lack of harm in these matters is an ordinary requirement for new development, and they do not represent a positive benefit that weighs in favour of the proposal. Balance and Conclusion 29. The proposal would fail to preserve the openness of the Green Belt and so would constitute inappropriate development. Even though the extent of the harm would be modest, the Framework establishes that substantial weight should be given to the harm. 30. I find that the other considerations in this case, either individually or cumulatively, do not clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt openness that I have identified. Consequently, I find that the very special circumstances necessary to justify granting planning permission in the Green Belt do not exist. 31. The appellant refers to LP policies being out of date but even if paragraph 11d of the Framework was engaged, there are no very special circumstances. The application of policies in the Framework that protect areas of particular importance therefore provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed. As such the proposal would not be sustainable development. 32. For the above reasons, and taking into account all other matters raised, the appeal is dismissed.

Old Chelsea , Narcot Lane, Chalfont St. Giles, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4DX — Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area * — S Harrington MA MRTPI INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5