Agenda item

Site Visit: 10.25am – 10.35am

The Committee considered the two reports of the Director of Growth & Regeneration, following a site inspection.  Application 18/01299/FUL sought for the retention of the mobile home approved on appeal in 2005 which continued to be used in association with the agricultural operation at Woodside Farm.  Application 18/01300/FUL sought the removal of Condition 9 of planning permission 12/00604/FUL to allow retention of the mobile home in connection with established agricultural operation.

Councillor R. Jackson local Ward Member Dover Beck spoke in support of the application on the grounds that the applicant had lived there for twenty five years and had built an enterprise on this site.  He had sought permission to build a house for his son to occupy with his wife and child.  The farm was a large enterprise with cows, calves, ewes and 10,000 laying hens.  This was a labour intensive family farm unit with grandchildren.  The need for living on the farm was explained to Members.  He asked that Members consider the hard working family unit which should be allowed to stay together and look after Mr Kirk senior later in life.

A schedule of communication was tabled at the meeting which detailed correspondence received after the Agenda was published from Fisher German LLP (on behalf of Mr C Kirk).

Members considered the application and it was commented that the mobile home should have been removed after the house was built and occupied.  There were a number of buildings on site that had potential for conversion for residential use as long as the buildings were connected for agricultural use which would be a fall-back position. 

A Member commented on the history of this application which was contained within the report.  The existing house was approved by the Local Planning Authority and the applicant was required to remove the existing mobile home.  The house was required to be large enough to accommodate at least three family members.  This would allow Mr Kirk senior to be available on site.  Within a few months of the house being completed an application was submitted for an annex to be converted for Mr R Kirk.  At the time of the application 2014, the supporting statement confirmed that Mr R Kirk would reside in the annexe with his parents Mr and Mrs C Kirk residing in the main farm house.  The committee has however been informed that Mr I Kirk is residing in the main house, which was contrary to the information provided for the 2014 application.  It was felt that Mr C Kirk should have moved into the main farm house in 2012 and the mobile home removed within six months of the house being completed.

A Member commented that the Local Planning Authority had failed to pick up on this unauthorised use.  It was commented that the report said that people were dependent upon one another and this was being looked upon from a financial perspective.  Families help one another and the mobile home was still standing and was being used for residential purposes.  If the occupier of that mobile home was helping on the farm it could be argued that the building was being used for agricultural use and had a purpose for serving that agricultural business.  It was suggested that a temporary permission be granted.

Other Members commented that this application was retrospective; the mobile home had been there for six years more than it had permission for.  This was not a sudden thing and the applicants had been given time to resolve their living accommodation. 

AGREED           (with 7 votes For and 6 votes Against) that:

(a)                planning permission be refused for the reason contained                            within the report; and

(b)               a Breach of Condition Notice be served at the same time to                        require the mobile home to be removed from the site                            within 6 months.