Retention of polytunnels.

Ward: Sutton Walls

Retention of polytunnels.

Referring to the Schedule of Committee Updates/Additional Representations that was circulated at the meeting, the Central Team Leader reported that:

§                Comments had been received from Natural England (no objections).

§                Comments had been received from the Environmental Health and Trading Standards Manager (no objections).

§                Comments had been received from the Council’s Ecologist (no objections).  The recommendations of the Landscape Officer in relation to the removal of a section of polytunnels and the planting of a new hedgerow to the north of the public right of way were supported.  Consequently, an additional condition was suggested and is incorporated into the recommendation.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr. Ternouth spoke on behalf of Marden Parish Council and Mr. Fraser spoke in objection to the application.

Councillor KS Guthrie, the Local Ward Member, noted that the application had to be considered on individual merit but felt that the cumulative impact of development at Brook Farm and the impact on its surroundings had to be taken into consideration.  She said that her late father, former Councillor JGS Guthrie, had on many occasions expressed concerns about the extent of the polytunnels in Marden and the detrimental impact on the landscape and on the amenity of local residents.  She drew attention to the concerns raised in the letters of objection and felt that the level of activity at the site was more akin to industrial use rather than rural enterprise.  She felt it essential that the character and amenity of the area be protected and that the application be refused as the development would be contrary to PPG7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas) and policies S2, S7, DR1, DR2, DR4, E6, E10, E13, LA2 and LA3 of theHerefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

Councillor DW Greenow drew attention to the letters of representation and, in particular, noted the unsightly nature of polytunnels, the need to ensure that water and mud did not run-off onto nearby roads, and the need to control hours of operation.

Councillor SJ Robertson was surprised that the Public Rights of Way Manager did not object, especially given recent injuries to horses resulting from rubbish being left on bridleways.  She agreed with the Local Ward Member that the application should be refused given the impact on the area and also commented on the potential impact of the development on tourism.

The Development Control Manager acknowledged concerns about the other polytunnels in the area but emphasised the need to focus on the application before the Sub-Committee.  He added, unlike some other areas, officers felt these two fields to be well related to the farm complex and were contained within areas considered acceptable in landscape terms.

Councillor PJ Edwards supported the officers’ appraisal and felt that, with the recommended conditions and appropriate landscaping, the site would be reasonably well screened.  Furthermore, refusal of planning permission would undermine the authority’s position in respect of less suitable sites.

A number of members commented on the detrimental impact of polytunnel development on Marden and the wider landscape, particularly from public vantage points throughout the county.

Councillor AT Oliver felt that the proposal was not a sustainable form of development, particularly in terms of the use of non-renewable resources, and should be refused.  Councillor GFM Dawe concurred and commented on the aesthetic intrusiveness of polytunnels.

Councillor DB Wilcox drew attention to the recommended conditions, noted the need for farm diversification and the benefits to the local economy, and felt that temporary planning permission provided the best opportunity to control the development.

RESOLVED:

That                                        

(i)      The Central Area Planning Sub-Committee is minded to refuse the application subject to the reasons for refusal set out below (and any further reasons for refusal felt to be necessary by the Head of Planning Services) provided that the Head of Planning Services does not refer the applications to the Planning Committee:

1.      The retention of the polytunnels is considered unacceptable due to their detrimental visual impact on the landscape quality of the area and when taken cumulatively with the existing polytunnels at Brook Farm, the setting of the village of Marden.  Accordingly the development is contrary to Policies S2, S7, DR1, DR2, DR4, E6, E10, E13, LA2 and LA3 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan 2007 and the guiding principles of PPS7 - Sustainable Development in Rural Areas

(ii)     If the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee, officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers be instructed to refuse the application, subject to such reasons for refusal referred to above.

[Note:

Following the vote on this application, the Development Control Manager advised that, although the resolution was contrary to the officers’ recommendation, he was not minded to refer the matter to the Head of Planning Services.]