Agenda item

Some Members had visited the site the previous day.

The report was introduced by the Planning Officer who explained the reasons for the recommendation of refusal as set out in the report.The application had been deferred from a previous committee meeting. He pointed out some amendments to the plans and in the report in paragraphs 12 and 13, arising from changes to the proposals since the application was last at committee. In paragraph 12 it should read ‘a hardstanding to the north-east’ as the building had been re-oriented, and paragraph 13 was removed entirely and replaced with new measurements denoting a reduction in size of the proposed building since its previous consideration.

The following spoke under the public participation at meetings scheme:

·         Jo Harrison, agent – statement read out by Democratic Services

Members were grateful to the applicant for listening to comments from Members in the previous meeting and amended their application to reflect this. Members could understand the agricultural need for the building but were concerned about the exposure and visibility of such a large building in an open landscape. However, from the site visit, Members learned that due to the nature of the road that overlooks the proposed building, it would only be in view for a very short amount of time. It was also pointed out that this building would reduce the amount of agricultural traffic on the highway.

Members asked the Planning Officer if there were any improvements that could be made regarding the screening of the building. He suggested that the scope of impacts could be reduced by changing the cladding material to vertically boarded timber, and a hedgerow bounding the outer edge of yard fencing could be required. Members agreed that these were good options and were minded to approve the application subject to these being added as conditions. They pointed out that these hedgerows also bring wildlife and biodiversity to the location.

Members recalled some issues around drainage that were discussed at the previous planning committee where this item had been discussed, to which officers confirmed that the amended application had addressed these concerns and that runoff should not affect highways.

A motion to approve the application was proposed, seconded, voted on and carried.

RESOLVED:

To APPROVE the application subject to the following conditions:

1.    3-year statutory time limit for building commencement

2.    Adopt approved plans

3.    Timber cladding

4.    Landscaping carried out

5.     

6.    Hedgerow along fence boundary of yardExternal lighting

7.    Spoil disposal details to be agreed

8.    Building to be removed if the agricultural need no longer exists