For:     Mr & Mrs J J Windham per Kernon Countryside Consultants, Brook Cottage, Purton Stoke, Swindon, Wiltshire, SN5 4JE – to consider a planning application which has been referred to the Committee because the Southern Area Planning Sub-Committee was mindful to approve it, contrary to policy and officer recommendations.

Ward: Old Gore

The Development Control Manager said that the Southern Area Planning Sub-Committee was mindful to grant planning permission contrary to the Council’s policies and officer recommendation.  He advised that the application concerned a chalet type mobile home within the grounds of The Hyde, a grade II listed building. The mobile home was granted permission in 2000 to meet the special needs of an elderly person with a condition that when the use ceased, the chalet should be removed.  The applicants had now sought approval to remove the condition and allow the mobile home to be occupied permanently by an agricultural worker.  He also said that a letter had been received from the agent acting on behalf of the applicants stating that they did not wish to have an agricultural occupancy condition imposed which would link the chalet to the existing farmhouse.  He felt that there was a functional and financial justification for an agricultural worker’s dwelling but that it was essential for there to be an occupancy condition.  He felt that there was also scope within the existing buildings for the need to be met.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs. Drewett the applicants agent spoke in support of the application.

Councillor JW Edwards the Local Ward Member, shared the views of the applicants that it was essential for a stockman to be living on site and that the applicants could not manage the farm on their own during peak times such as lambing.  The existing farmhouse was a large six-bedroomed building with high maintenance costs.  It was not practicable for the applicants to make it available for a stockman and try and find alternative accommodation nearby, which would be beyond their means. He felt that the only practical alternative was for the application to be granted and that this could be done with an agricultural occupancy condition which tied the chalet to the farm. 

The Development Control Manager reiterated his concerns that the continued use of the chalet was not essential to support the farming enterprise.  He pointed out that there was existing accommodation which was available to meet the needs of the holding.  He also drew attention to the fact that the proposal would conflict with the Council's policies for mobile homes in the countryside and would harm the rural character of the area which was identified as a Great Landscape Value in the UDP.  He was also concerned that approval without an occupancy condition could lead to the farm house being sold off separately and lost to the farm.

Having considered all the facts about the application, the Committee decided that the applicants had put forward adequate grounds for approval and that it would be reasonable for permission to be granted but that there should be an agricultural occupancy condition which would tie the chalet to the holding. 

RESOLVED

that the application be approved subject to any conditions felt to be necessary by the Head of Planning Services and subject to an agricultural occupancy tie to the existing farm holding