Issue - meetings

That planning permission be granted for a 2 year temporary period subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment).

The Committee considered the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) in respect of this application which had been the subject of a site visit on 10^th October 2016.  The usual consultations had been undertaken and the responses received detailed in the report. 

                        The Officer explained that the application was for the siting of 1 yurt and 3 shepherds huts for use as holiday accommodation which was deemed acceptable in the location.  It would not give rise to any significant adverse impacts on the amenity of nearby residents or adjacent land users.

                        The proposed yurt would accommodate 4 guests and the shepherd’s huts would accommodate 2 each, making a total of 10 guests at full capacity.  A shed would house the shower and toilet for the yurt visitors.  All of the units would be equipped with log burning stoves and have a small outdoor fire pit.  The site would be accessed via the existing private drive with parking for 5 cars within the existing application site.  The application was for operation from mid-February to 1 January but the recommendation by officers was for operation from 1 March to 1 January which was deemed more appropriate.

                        Mr Peace spoke against the application on behalf of local residents on the following basis: access would be required via his land; the application was not compliant with many aspect of the UDP, citing access issues, impacts on local residents, loss of privacy and disturbance; the nature of the application encouraged outdoor living which by its very nature would be intrusive.   The Solicitor explained that any issues relating to Rights of Way were not for consideration by the Committee.

                        Mr Levy spoke in support of the application based on the following: a small glamping facility which was eco-friendly and back to nature; the site had been significantly improved following a planting programme of willow hedging which would provide appropriate screening; maximum occupancy on the site was 10 people; any noise issues would be dealt with immediately by them as they resided on site; contractual agreement at the time of booking would be specific about levels of noise.

                        Councillor Roberts proposed the recommendation for approval which was duly seconded.  Following attendance at the site visit he felt the application could not be refused on highways ground and the issue raised by the objector the Right of Way access was a civil matter.  The application site would also not result in any windows overlooking neighbouring properties.

                        Councillor Bithell said that people booking such a facility would be seeking a quiet retreat and it was also in the interests of the applicant to promote a peaceful site as they also resided on the site.  He felt that, on balance, the objections listed in the report were outweighed by the proposal.

                        The local Member, Councillor Carolyn Thomas said she had received numerous phone calls and emails from residents about the application.  She had also met the applicant on site but still had a number of concerns which  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83