Agenda item

Application Proposal: The use of part of the building as residential accommodation for facilities manger (Retrospective)

The Development Management Specialist presented his report to members. He advised members that the application was seeking permanent residential use for part of the clubhouse for use as manager accommodation.

Using a PowerPoint presentation, he provided images to show the building as well as floor plans to show the area which would be used as managers accommodation. He also provided photographs to show the site.

He advised that it was not considered that the site was within a sustainable location. He advised that the applicant had not provided any evidence to support the need for an on-site worker such as financial accounts.

The applicant addressed the Committee. He also advised that he received positive advice from the planning team in 2014, when he detailed his intentions for the land and buildings, prior to his purchase. Following this advice, he felt comfortable with moving onto the land and starting a business. Furthermore, when approving the previous temporary permission, the planning officer agreed that there needed to be a worked living onsite. He advised that he had spent significant amounts of money on improvements to the site.

He referred to a photograph, which he had previously provided and at his request, was shown on the PowerPoint presentation. It contained a copy of a letter from the applicant’s accountant to confirm that the business was profitable. He also explained that he would be unlikely to be able to insure the site and items within the site without him living on the site. He added that it would irresponsible and unsafe for a site owner to be living off-site. He summarised that it was essential that he lived on site.

The agent addressed the Committee. He advised members that he had received no contact from the Planning Officer throughout the duration of this application. He explained that the owners of the site had invested a large sum of money into developing the site. He added that since the owners moved onto the site, planning approval for an additional 60 touring caravan pitches had been gained. He explained that the site was highly successful, very busy and extremely popular. He also referred to the letter from the applicant’s accountant, which confirmed the viability of the business. He added that an on-site presence was essential for emergencies including fire, medical emergencies or drowning. He also added that the Parish Council supported the application.

Councillor Hayward Burt, the Ward Member, felt that the application should be supported. He advised that, in his view, the site met the aims of policy SS2 within the South Somerset Local Plan as the site provided employment and facilities for the local community. He also referred to HG9 of the South Somerset Local Plan. He felt that the application met all 7 points of policy HG9.

Councillor William Wallace, also Ward Member, agreed with the comments made by Councillor Hayward Burt. He further advised that the Parish Council supported the application and he felt that this was a valuable asset to the community. He agreed that the applicant needed to be resident on site.

During the discussion, some members commented that rural businesses should be supported.

One member commented that it would be useful if the report contained details to advise whether pre-application advice has been sought.

It was proposed and seconded that the application should be approved, contrary to the officer recommendation, subject to conditions to detail the approved plans and to ensure that the occupation was linked to the running of the adjoining business.

The proposer and the seconder withdrew their motion, and it was subsequently proposed and seconded by the Ward Members, that the application should be approved, as there was a functional need for a permanent onsite presence, subject to conditions to ensure approved plans were detailed and to ensure that the occupation was linked to the running of the adjoining business.

On being put to the vote, this was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED:  that planning application 18/01931/COU be approved, contrary to the officer recommendation, subject to conditions to ensure amended plans are detailed and to ensure that the occupation would be linked to the running of the business, for the following reason;

The application demonstrate a functional need for a permanent onsite presence and that the business has been planned on a sound financial basis and, as such, the principle of a rural worker’s dwelling is acceptable in this location. Furthermore, there will be no adverse on residential or visual amenity, or highway safety, in accordance with local plan policies SD1, HG9, EQ2, TA5 and TA6 of the South Somerset Local Plan and the aims and objectives of the NPPF.

Subject to the following conditions:

01.          The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 17166-4, 17166–6A, and 17166-8

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

02.          The occupation of the dwelling hereby approved shall be limited to a person solely or mainly working in the surrounding leisure club, known as Henstridge Golf and Leisure, and to any resident dependants.

Reason: Except for the essential need for a full-time worker on site the location would otherwise be considered as an unsustainable location for residential development.

(Voting: Unanimous)

At the end of the meeting, Members were passed a briefing note to cover points raised at a previous meeting. These points included;

·         Clarification of the process for applications which are referred to Regulation Committee.

·         Clarification around legal officer attendance at Committees

·         self/custom build homes

·         the meaning of green/brown field land

·         Application letters to have generic planning officer contact details.

These were circulated to members and then subsequently sent electronically