Beginning by quoting from the applicant's Design & Access Statement, which read 'the building was then constructed within the yard area, however was sited further to the south west than the approved plans with the addition of roller shutter doors', (application 0371/21/FUL), we noted the purpose of this application was 'to regularise the siting of the building and the use of the building for agricultural and equestrian use.'

More pertinently, the building had been sited a considerable distance from the approved location. In our opinion it was impossible to state that this error was a mistake. The proposed floor plan also made it clear that there were now significant equestrian facilities within the layout, meaning that approval of this application would be in breach of Planning Condition 3 of the decision notice for the previous application. That only permitted agricultural usage.

Recommending conditional approval, the case officer wrote: 'As has been found in the previous permissions at this site a building for agricultural purposes would fall within the limited type of uses accepted by Policy TTV26 and there has been no change in the policy since such a proposal was found to be acceptable last time. The proposed equestrian use however activates another Policy TTV28. This Policy states that horse related developments will be supported when there is adequate land for the amount of horses, when existing buildings are reused and new buildings minimised and when the site can be effectively managed whilst also taking cognisance of any cumulative issues arising from other horse related uses in the area.'

In other words, if you want to build some stables where consent might not otherwise be given, you might think about first building a building for purely agricultural purposes and then apply for change of use.