Skip to main content

Agenda item

23/03211/DMPO- Rendcomb Airfield, Rendcomb, Cirencester

Proposal

Vary the obligation of the Section 106 Agreement at Rendcomb Airfield Rendcomb Cirencester Gloucestershire GL7 7DF

 

Case Officer

Harrison Bowley

 

Ward Member

Councillor Paul Hodgkinson

 

Recommendation

The planning obligation shall continue to have effect without modification.

Minutes:

The Chair explained that he had previously been employed by the Council as an Environmental Health Consultant between 1986 to 2012 and had dealt with noise complaints relating to flying operations at this airfield. He left the Council in 2012 before being elected as a Councillor in 2015.

 

The Case Officer introduced the item.

 

The application was to vary the obligation of the Section 106 Agreement at Rendcomb Airfield Rendcomb Cirencester Gloucestershire GL7 7DF.

 

The background to the application, as set out in the Officer report was that, upon the original planning permission being granted on 20 June 1989, the approval was subject to a legal agreement, which included “11. Not to use the land or allow or permit the use of the land for commercial purposes with the exception that aircraft used elsewhere for commercial purposes may be kept or stationed upon the land."

 

The application had been submitted owing to commercial activity at the site, where wing walking had been operating since 1992, resulting in a breach of the condition, and subsequent complaints from residents regarding this.

 

Following consultation with an independent noise consultant, The Case Officer had deemed that in legal terms, the condition continued to serve a useful purpose in protecting residents from noise and conserving the tranquillity of the Cotswolds National Landscape, and therefore recommended that the condition not be amended.

 

Public speakers addressed the Committee.

 

Councillor Mark Tuffnell, from North Cerney Parish Council, addressed the Committee. Councillor Tuffnell stated that the level of wingwalking flights had increased over the years, and that these were excessively noisy for residents.

 

Councillor Graham Horwood, from Rendcomb Parish Council, addressed the Committee. Councillor Horwood stated that wingwalking to the general public had been a recent development, leading to the increase of complaints. Councillor Horwood stated that the legal agreement continued to serve a useful purpose, and therefore should be maintained.

 

Nicholas Arbuthnott, an objector, addressed the Committee. The objector raised issues with the noise created by the proposals being contrary to the quiet enjoyment of the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, in which the site was situated.

 

Mike Dentith, a supporter, addressed the Committee. The supporter stated that wing walking flights to the general public had been operating from the 1990s and raised money for charitable causes. They also stated that they did not believe there was an impact on biodiversity.

 

Vic Norman, the applicant, addressed the Committee. The applicant stated that the aircraft was flying as quietly as possible, and highlighted the support for charitable causes.

 

The Ward Member had sent his apologies but had distributed a statement within the additional pages.

 

Members who attended the Sites Inspection Briefing addressed the rest of the Committee, raising the following points;

  • The buildings and field were very well maintained.
  • Biodiversity was likely unaffected.
  • The noise impact was noticeable, particularly once the flight that was operating at the time of the visit had ceased.
  • Members stated that the disruption caused by the aircraft was in keeping with the objective of the Cotswold National Landscape.

 

Member Questions

 

Members asked questions of the Case Officer, who responded as follows:

  • There were 6,300 non-commercial flights permitted a year, permitted on 180 days of the year, with 35 take-offs per day. The application to discharge the legal obligation sought to operate 1000 flights of these as commercial wing-walking flights. Wing-walking flights would stay within the vicinity of the site, following a set route, this nature and character was different from other types of flights.
  • The Case Officer believed that the original Section 106 legal agreement had been in breach for 28 to 30 years but explained that there were conflicting views on this.
  • The Case Officer explained that unlike a usual planning application, the test to be applied in determining the application was more specific, this was, does the condition continue to serve a purpose, and would modification allow it to achieve the same purpose. Therefore, matters like raising money for charitable causes was not something that the Committee could consider.
  • The Noise Officer explained that in the applicant had excluded two sites in their report as they deemed the noise in that environment to be higher than the noise produced by aircraft but that the measurements had not been provided.
  • The length of the breach was not relevant in this sort of application.
  • The existing planning use was as a grass airfield, so the biodiversity of the site was unlikely to be impacted by a rejection.
  • In an appeal against another Authority in a similar case, preserving the quality of the National Landscape was considered a material consideration.
  • The noise consultant felt that although the 45dBa noise did not exceed the 55dBA department for transport guidance, the Committee may wish to give special weight to the setting of this site (in the Cotswold National Landscape), as the guidance did not distinguish between rural and urban settings.
  • Considerations such as the tone, and other characteristics of the noise should be taken into the consideration as well.

 

Member Comments

 

Members made the following comments on the application:

  • The nature of the noise felt more disruptive than the volume of it, in their experience on the site visit.
  • The history of the site was appreciated and respected, although a balance needed to be struck between this and the quiet enjoyment of the Cotswold National Landscape.
  • Flying from point A to B was deemed very different to circling in a set route.

 

Councillor Mark Harris proposed accepting the officer recommendation, and Councillor Andrew Maclean seconded the proposal.

 

RESOLVED: That the planning obligation shall continue to have effect without modification.

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages