Appeal 6002098

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the use of land as an outdoor archery range at [site address] , [address], Kempston, Bedford [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/00618/S73A, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

An application for costs was made by [name] against the decision of Bedford Borough Council. This application is the subject of a separate Decision.

The address on the planning application form differs from the one used by the Council. The appellant has confirmed that the Council’s address is correct, and I have used this in my decision.

As confirmed on the planning application form and at my site visit, the development has commenced. For clarity, I have based my decision on the submitted plans.

The appeal was made following the failure of the Council to give notice of their decision on the planning application within the statutory timescale. The Council has indicated that had it been in a position to determine the application, it would have granted planning permission. I have taken into account the Council’s Delegated Report and the objections received, and these have informed the main issues.

The main issues in this appeal are therefore: • Whether the principle of the development is acceptable, having regard to the development plan; • The effect on the character and appearance of the area; • Whether the development would meet the tree planting requirements of the development plan; • The effect of the development on protected species; and, • The effect of the development on flood risk.

The appeal site relates to a parcel of land within a wider site that is surrounded by open countryside. The development seeks planning permission to use the site as an outdoor archery range. This results in the loss of farmland; however, no relevant development plan policies that seek to protect this land have been brought to my attention. I therefore conclude that its loss is acceptable.

Policy 97 of the Bedford Borough Council Local Plan 2030 (the Local Plan) sets out the criteria that must be met for planning permission to be granted for new sports/leisure facilities. As set out in the supporting text to Policy 97, the most appropriate location for new sports and leisure facilities will differ depending on the type of facility proposed. The appeal site is in a relatively secluded rural location. As an outdoor archery range requires distance from built‐up areas for safety and operational reasons, the location is appropriate for the facility.

As the facility requires a secluded location, opportunities for access on foot, by bicycle or by public transport are limited, and most users are likely to travel by car. The facility operates only at weekends between 09:00 and 17:00 and accommodates small groups by appointment, resulting in a modest number of vehicle trips that are unlikely to generate a significant increase in traffic. A planning condition could also restrict opening hours to provide further control over any potential highway impacts.

The appeal site contains some on-site parking, shared with other businesses, and no substantive evidence has been provided to show that this cannot adequately accommodate the development. The Council’s Highway Officer raised no objection, and I have no reason to disagree. Parking provision and a suitable turning area could be secured by planning condition, including measures to prevent these spaces from being used for other purposes. This would ensure sufficient parking, allowing vehicles to exit in a forward gear, and unobstructed access for emergency vehicles.

There is no substantive evidence before me to show that customers of the facility are forced to park dangerously. Given the appeal site’s separation from nearby properties, the development does not give rise to harmful noise, light, outlook, or privacy effects. It therefore does not adversely affect either the highway network or the amenity of local residents.

Even though there is a small number of other archery ranges within Bedford, the appellant has satisfactorily demonstrated that the development is meeting an identified need for such facilities. The appellant has provided evidence that the instructors are appropriately qualified and hold the relevant [name] licences issued by the sport’s recognised National Governing Body, and that the facility operates under an activity partnership with [name]. I have not been directed to any [name] technical guidance requiring such facilities to provide toilets, hand‐washing facilities, or to be located in very quiet areas. The shooting area is enclosed by chain‐link fencing with netting, and there is nothing substantive before me to show that this arrangement fails to meet applicable safety standards. Accordingly, there is no clear basis for concluding that the facilities are not fit for purpose.

For the above reasons, I conclude that the principle of development is acceptable, having regard to the development plan. Accordingly, it complies with the relevant criteria set out in Policy 97 of the Local Plan.

Within the appeal site, there is an open‐sided timber building. Although relatively large, its scale is appropriate to the size of the site. Its timber construction, simple form and functional appearance are characteristic of rural outbuildings, allowing it to assimilate comfortably into the surrounding countryside. The use of a chain‐link fence and netting is also typical of rural settings and does not appear out of place. The archery equipment is limited to three targets positioned well back within the site, and this modest amount of equipment does not materially alter the site’s overall rural character.

Concerns have been raised about the condition of the site and the storage of waste. Although this reflects only a snapshot, at my site visit I saw the appeal site to be well maintained, consistent with the Council’s observations in the [name]. The submitted plans show that bin storage will be provided within the site. Waste handling and disposal are governed by separate regulatory regimes, and matters relating to pollution and land contamination fall under dedicated environmental legislation. Any issues concerning land outside the application boundary are for the Council to address and do not form part of this appeal.

For these reasons, I conclude that the development does not cause harm to the character or appearance of the area. Accordingly, the development complies with Policies 7S, 28S, 29 and 30. These policies, amongst other things, require development to integrate well with and respect the context within which it will sit, and to recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside.

Policy 36S of the Local Plan relates to the creation of the Forest of [name]. Amongst other things, it requires development proposals to demonstrate how they will deliver 30% tree cover across the development site. It is recognised that the constraints imposed by the firing of arrows mean that further tree planting within the site is not feasible. However, the submitted plans indicate there are opportunities for tree planting within the wider site, which is also within their ownership. I am therefore satisfied that this matter can be made acceptable by planning condition securing the tree planting within the wider site.

Subject to planning conditions, the development would meet the tree planting requirements of the development plan and would comply with Policy 36S of the Local Plan.

Although the appeal site is within an amber zone for great crested newts, the Council has confirmed that there is a low risk that these protected species would have been impacted by the development. There is no substantive evidence before me to reach a contrary view. I am therefore satisfied that the development does not conflict with Policy 42S of the Local Plan which protects biodiversity.

As the appeal site is within [name] 1 and has a low risk of surface water runoff, the application is not expected to be supported by technical information regarding flood risk. The Council has confirmed that the impact on surface water drainage is acceptable, and there is no technical evidence before me to counteract this. I am therefore satisfied that the development does not give rise to increased flood risk and does not conflict with Policy 92 of the Local Plan which sets out how flood risk must be addressed.

The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) sets out that opportunities for sport and physical activity are important for the health and well-being of communities. It is recognised that access to the appeal site is not optimal for those with mobility or impairment needs. However, the wider benefits associated with the development arising from the provision of a sports facility would outweigh this.

Although the planning application form contained an incorrect address, the Council used the correct address for public consultation on the application, and I am therefore satisfied that the statutory requirements were met. The name on the application form is consistent with that on the appeal form, and any other names the appellant may have used are not relevant to this decision. The appellant has certified ownership of the appeal site, and any disputes over land ownership or tenancy rights are private matters.

Matters relating to whether the site has been assessed by the Health and [name], or whether the appellant holds appropriate liability insurance are non-planning matters and lie outside the scope of my assessment. A public right of way lies to the east of the site. The development does not obstruct this route, and responsibility for ensuring safety rests with the facility operator.

The Council has supplied a list of conditions that it considers would be appropriate. I have considered these in light of the tests within the Framework and Planning Practice Guidance. Where appropriate, I have adjusted the wording of the conditions to improve relevance, precision and enforceability.

In the interests of clarity and precision it is necessary to impose a condition specifying the approved plans [1].

In order to meet the aims of Policy 36S of the Local Plan and contribute to the creation of the Forest of [name], it is necessary to require a scheme of tree planting to achieve an equivalent of 30% tree cover [2]. In the interests of parking and highway safety, it is also necessary to require parking and turning details [3]. These conditions are imposed to ensure that the required details of the scheme are submitted, approved and implemented so as to make the development acceptable in planning terms. There is a strict timetable for compliance because permission is being granted retrospectively, and so it is not possible to use a negatively worded condition to secure the approval and implementation of these before the development takes place.

It is necessary to impose a condition restricting the opening times in the interests of highway safety [4].

A condition requiring the appellant to remove rubbish from the wider site would not relate directly to the development or be necessary to make it acceptable, and it therefore does not meet the relevant tests for planning conditions.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos PR103-[name] 01/10/2025.

Within 3 months of the date of this decision a scheme of tree planting to achieve an equivalent of 30% tree cover when measured against the size of the application site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted details shall include the species, number, density, planting size, and height, together with details of its long-term management and maintenance. All planting shall be carried out in its entirety in the first planting season following approval of the scheme and shall be retained in situ in accordance with the approved management and maintenance details thereafter. Any trees, which within a period of 10 years from the completion of the tree planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of the same size and species. For the purpose of this condition, a planting season shall mean the period from November to February inclusive. Unless the approved scheme is implemented within 11 months of the local planning authority’s approval, the use of the site shall cease and all equipment and materials brought onto the land for the purposes of such use shall be removed until such time as a scheme is approved and implemented. If no scheme in accordance with this condition is approved within 11 months of the date of this decision, the use of the site shall cease and all equipment and materials brought onto the land for the purposes of such use shall be removed until such time as a scheme approved by the Local Planning Authority is implemented. Upon implementation of the approved scheme specified in this condition, that scheme shall thereafter be retained. In the event of a legal challenge to this decision, or to a decision made pursuant to the procedure set out in this condition, the operation of the time limits specified in this condition will be suspended until that legal challenge has been finally determined.

Unless within 3 months of the date of this decision a scheme for parking and turning, is submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority for approval, and unless the approved scheme is implemented within 1 month of the local planning authority’s approval, the use of the site shall cease and all equipment and materials brought onto the land for the purposes of such use shall be removed until such time as a scheme is approved and implemented. If no scheme in accordance with this condition is approved within 6 months of the date of this decision, the use of the site shall cease and all equipment and materials brought onto the land for the purposes of such use shall be removed until such time as a scheme approved by the Local Planning Authority is implemented. Upon implementation of the approved details specified in this condition, that scheme shall thereafter be maintained. The approved turning and car parking areas shall not be used for any other purpose. In the event of a legal challenge to this decision, or to a decision made pursuant to the procedure set out in this condition, the operation of the time limits specified in this condition will be suspended until that legal challenge has been finally determined.

The use hereby permitted shall only take place between the following hours: 09:00 – 17:00 Saturdays and Sundays. END OF SCHEDULE