Agenda item

The application was for the removal of condition 7 of 94/0998 requiring agricultural occupancy of the bungalow at Bourne Holdings and discharge of the section 52 agreement under 87/1324 which restricted the use of the site to agriculture and the parking of two HGV vehicles.

The application would have normally been determined under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation, however, it had been called in for determination by the Planning Applications Committee at the request of Councillor Surinder Gandhum, as the property was subject to an agricultural tie.

Members were advised of the following updates and an appendix published with the supplementary agenda papers:

“i) An additional site plan (scale 1:1250) has been provided by the applicant to define the existing residential curtilage of the dwelling, and a reduced sized plan has been attached for convenience (Appendix II).  The proposed Condition 2 would remove permitted development rights for all extensions and outbuildings within this defined residential curtilage. Additional planning permission would also be required for any further development within the land outside this curtilage.

ii) Two additional representations have been received on behalf of Windlesham Arboretum, raising the following additional concerns:

•           It is not clear how the Council’s Agricultural Consultant has arrived at the discount of 25-30%

•           The property has never been marketed for the lower advised rate of £1million

•           The house has never been placed on the market on its own, to be available for an agricultural worker without the encumbrance and extra costs of the adjacent holding (which adds £500,000 to the sale cost)

•           The conclusions of the Council’s Agricultural Consultant are therefore not evidence-based

Officer comment:

There are no local or national planning policies or guidance that advise of specific market discount rates, or that agricultural sites should be subdivided for separate marketing exercises. The tests considered relevant in this case are already outlined in Paragraphs 7.3.1 – 7.3.10 of the Committee Report (Pages 71-73).

Furthermore, no evidence of an identified need for agricultural workers dwellings has been identified or provided, and this was also one of the considerations of the Inspector in allowing the recent appeal within the Borough attached in the Annex A (Page 79, Paragraph 9). It is therefore considered unlikely that subdividing the site between the dwelling and the adjacent land for additional marketing exercises would attract additional interest from persons compliant with the agricultural condition.

iii) Officers have also had sight of representation made by Cllr Gandhum emailed to all Committee Members on 10 December.

Officer comment:

Even if livestock were grazing on the land in 2012/13, this is not fatal to the application as it is seeking planning permission for removal of the occupancy condition, not a lawful development certificate application which would be reliant on the “ten year rule”. The application site will remain in the Green Belt, irrespective of the determination of this application.

All other planning issues raised have already been addressed above or within the Committee Report.”

The recommendation to grant the application was proposed by Councillor Adrian Page and seconded by Councillor Robin Perry, put to the vote and carried.

RESOLVED that application 18/0709 be granted subject to the

conditions set out in the officer’s report.

Note 1

It was noted for the record that:

                      I.        Councillor John Winterton declared that he had been in email correspondence with the applicant and discussed procedural matters with the applicant on the application site.

                    II.        Councillor Victoria Wheeler declared that she had received email correspondence from Councillors in regard to the application.

Note 2

In accordance with Part 4, Section D, paragraph 18 of the Constitution, the voting in relation to the application was as follows:

Voting in favour of the recommendation to grant the application:

Councillors Mrs Vivienne Chapman, Edward Hawkins Paul Ilnicki, Jonathan Lytle, Katia Malcaus Cooper, Adrian Page, Robin Perry, Ian Sams, and John Winterton.

Voting against the recommendation to grant the application:

Councillors Pat Tedder, Victoria Wheeler and Valerie White.