Agenda item
Retrospective double field shelter comprising of a hay/storage barn and a stable.
Minutes:
Councillor Goldman at this time returned to the Committee for the rest of the meeting.
The Committee heard that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee by Councillor Land on the grounds of intrusion into the open countryside, blocking views of the Hamford Water Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) with no detail of how environmental factors would be dealt with.
Members were told that, the application before it sought planning permission to relocate the existing double field shelter south of its current location onto a new concrete base within the area of land previously granted planning permission for grazing horses for private use and it had been recommended for approval subject to the necessary conditions set out in the Officer report (A.3).
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 (AP) in respect of the application.
An update sheet had been circulated to Members prior to the meeting including an update from Officer discussion with the Applicant and the proposed removal of Conditions 2, 3, 4 and 5 which were as follows:
1) “Following discussions with the applicant, it is confirmed that the application proposes to relocate the existing double field shelter south of its current location onto a new concrete base within the area of land previously granted planning permission for grazing horses. The description has been updated to reflect this and now reads “Relocation of existing double field shelter comprising of a hay/storage barn and a stable onto a new concrete base with fenced corral”.
2) Condition 2 (private use only) and condition 5 (no burning of manure) will be removed as these conditions already apply to the site area as approved under application reference 18/01276/FUL (Condition 3 and 5 respectively).
3) Condition 4 will be removed as a Waste Management Strategy for the same site area was conditioned on application reference 18/01276/FUL (Condition 4) and subsequently discharged on 19/00011/DISCON.
4) Condition 3 is removed. The condition has not been imposed on previous applications and as this application is solely for the double field shelter and corral it is not reasonable or necessary as it is evident the land is used for the grazing of horses.”
Paul Brown, member of the public, spoke against the application.
Councillor Dan Land, the Ward Councillor, spoke against the application.
|
Matters raised by Members of the Committee:- |
Officer’s response thereto:- |
|
This is not about agricultural land, is it? |
That is correct. |
|
This is sitting above Hamford which is an SSSI, is that correct? |
Hamford water as an SSSI is just over 2km away so you can see it in the distance, yes. |
|
The area that this stands in, is that part of that SSSI or is it only the waters below? |
The land lies outside of the scientific interest area, around 2km away. The land does not fall within that, no. |
|
Under the policy, Members are looking at this application in its own right for retrospective approval to keep that building and to make it into a permanent structure by moving it forward, why has the applicant got to move it forward and not leave it where it is? |
As a temporary structure, it would need to be moved every 28 days so an application has been made to make it a permanent structure which means it will need to be moved into land of private use. |
|
Was this application from planning enforcement? |
There was an enforcement complaint originally. At this moment in time, planning enforcement are not pursuing that matter and they consider the building to be lawful at this current time. It is a moveable object; it is not a permanent structure. This application is basically to pretend the building is not there right now and that this is for a new permanent building within the site. |
|
Why does it have to stay where it is? |
The entire paddock has planning permission for the keeping of horses. It is a moveable building; it is up to the owner of the land to place it wherever they wish in the land that they own. Where the owner puts it is not up for Members’ consideration, but what Members have is a permanent location that they can determine. |
|
The address on the application and the owner of the property, is that the same person? |
Yes, that is correct. |
|
What would happen if more horses were added, are there any conditions in place in case more horses were added to bring the application back to Members? |
If a new building is proposed in the future for a number of reasons, then they would need planning permission in any event. If they were to put further field shelters on site that can move around the site like the current shelter, they would not need planning permission. |
It was moved by Councillor Alexander, seconded by Councillor White and unanimously:-
RESOLVED that:-
1) the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions as stated at paragraph 10.2 of the Officer report (A.4), as amended in the update sheet, or varied as is necessary to ensure the wording is enforceable, precise, and reasonable in all other respects, including appropriate updates, so long as the principle of the conditions as referenced is retained; and
2) the sending to the applicant of any informative notes as may be deemed necessary.
Supporting documents:
PDF 301 KB