Agenda item

Some Members of the Committee had visited the site the previous day.

The Head of Planning introduced the report and informed Members that since the report had been published he had received a letter from the Agent on behalf of the applicant, which provided further arguments on some comments within the report as follows:

·         A need for the building on the site is justified as the current building is no longer fit for purpose, and the new building would remove inefficiencies currently experienced.

·         An alternative site assessment was undertaken for the proposed building, and it was concluded that the site was the only feasible and viable option.

·         The Officer’s report refers to containers being kept on site, but to clarify there will be no storage containers kept on site, but there maybe trailers which do not require planning permission.

·         The Officer’s report stated that there were 5 representations received from 4 different individuals, but in fact there were 5 different individuals who had written in support of the application.

·         That the proposed landscaping in the key areas as set out in the drawings, would notably enhance the landscape of the site, and greatly assist in assimilating the building into the identified views and can be subject to a condition to secure their implementation/planting, in advance of the building works as necessary.

The Head of Planning informed Members of a correction to the report at paragraph 15 which should read “That the height of the building is reduced by a metre to 4m to the eaves and 5.5. to the ridge, not 6.5m to the ridge”.  The Head of Planning also reported that amended plans had been submitted, but Officers still felt that the proposal would still result in significant harm to the character of the landscape.

The following spoke under the public participation at meetings scheme:

·         Mr C Howland, Natural England Volunteer and Supporter

·         Cllr C Gamble, District Councillor, Supporter

·         Ms R Hilton, Agent

Although Members respected the need for a building to be used for animal welfare and for the storage of equipment, there was some concern on the location, and the impact it would have on the open landscape, and even with a landscaping/planting scheme in place, it would take several years to have an impact due to the exposed conditions.   Members queried if other sites had been considered.  The Head of Planning confirmed that alternatives were identified but were advised that Natural England considered this site as the only viable option.

A motion to defer the application  to allow a further report to enable Members to better understand he operational potential of the alternative sites as well as the size and design of the building, was proposed, seconded, put to the vote and carried.

RESOLVED:

That the application be DEFERRED to allow for further discussions to take place with the Officer and Applicant regarding alternative sites as well as the size and design of the agricultural building.