Agenda item

This application has been referred to Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Bush due to concerns relating to the significant increase to this existing industrial farming facility and the lack of economic benefits to the local economy.

 

The application is for an additional three buildings to raise broiler chickens. The site is fully operational (as approved under 20/00194/FUL) with an office building and two other buildings for a biomass boiler and straw storage along with a caravan for agricultural workers home (temporary permission given for a 3 year period). The highways access is completed and a significant amount of planting has been undertaken to screen the site from views in the surrounding countryside.

Minutes:

It was reported that this application had been referred to Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Bush due to his concerns relating to the significant increase to this existing industrial farming facility and the perceived lack of economic benefits to the local economy.

Members were made aware that this application was for an additional three buildings to raise broiler chickens. The site was fully operational (as approved under 20/00194/FUL) with an office building and two other buildings for a biomass boiler and straw storage along with a caravan for an agricultural workers’ home (temporary permission given for a 3 year period). The highways access had been completed and a significant amount of planting had been undertaken to screen the site from views in the surrounding countryside.

The proposed buildings would be of an identical design to the two currently in situ and would have a typical agricultural building appearance, being of a steel portal construction covered by olive green coloured polyester coated profiled sheeting except for the plinth to the walls, of pre-formed concrete.

The Committee was informed that the site was in a rural locality, between the settlements of Wix and Great Oakley, and within the Parish of Wix. Although set within open countryside, the site was at a position which was not prominent in the landscape and the proposals included landscaping mitigation works as well as biodiversity enhancements. The proposal was in planning terms considered by Officers to be an agricultural use within an agricultural area.

 

The Committee had before it the published Officer report containing the key planning issues, relevant planning policies, planning history, any response from consultees, written representations received and a recommendation of approval.

 

At the meeting, an oral presentation was made by the Council’s Planning Officer (Amy Lang) in respect of the application.

 

An update sheet had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting with details of one additional objection letter received via email from Mr Bob.

 

Ian Pick, the agent acting on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

 

Councillor Mike Bush, the local Ward Member, spoke against the application.

 

Matters raised by Members of the Committee:-

Officer’s response thereto:-

Confirm that the economic benefit in terms of employment is just 1 person?

1 extra employee is correct.

Confirm the number of objectors, is it 1 member of the public and an objection from Wix Parish Council?

That would be correct.

Confirm whether in 12 months that this has been operational, that there have been any complaints from Wix Parish Council or members of the public with regards to issues with traffic or HGV?

I can only confirm that we in the Planning Department haven’t received any complaints. That is not confirm there hasn’t been any that may have gone to Environmental Health or Essex County Highways.

Do Highways have any issues with route for straw tractors?

In terms of the Highways comments they have not objected to any part of the additional operation and that would’ve taken into account the flock cycle over the 48 day period. Within that you have the straw and the maintenance upkeep throughout that period. They way these operations work is actually quite well orchestrated in order that we do have sound understanding of the management of HGVs and other vehicles. A normal agricultural operation can be sporadic needs based on crops.

Confirm there have been no environmental agency concerns with this development over last 12 months whilst it has been operational?

We have consulted the environment agency and they have felt no cause to raise concerns in respect of the existing operation and the proposal before us.

Wix Parish Council have mentioned that S106 money or compensation could be used for loss of amenities, is that realistic?

We are not saying there is a loss amenity that would warrant that mitigation requirement or a refusal. It is not our advice to you to pursue any requirement of a S106 agreement.

 

Following discussion by the Committee, it was moved by Councillor Fowler, seconded by Councillor Alexander and RESOLVED that the Assistant Director (Planning) (or equivalent authorised officer) be authorised to grant planning permission for the development, subject to the conditions as set out in Paragraph 8.2 of the related Officer (or as need to be varied in order to account for any errors, legal requirements or the update sheet) and those in addition that may be deemed necessary by the Assistant Director (Planning). 

 

 

Supporting documents: