Agenda item

19. The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2)) concerning Planning Application (2) 23/02802/FUL in respect of the change of use of land to provide up to 84 storage containers for self-storage use (B8) and erection of boundary fence (part retrospective) at Priors Court Farm, Priors Court Road, Hermitage.

20.   Debra Inston introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was acceptable in planning terms and officers recommended that Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions outlined in the main and update reports.

21. The Chairman asked Paul Goddard if he had any observations relating to the application. He noted the following:

·       The existing access was suitable for the size of vehicle that had been on the site before and was expected with this proposal.

·       The sight line was compliant with standards.

·       There were six Vehicles in and six Vehicles out expected per day.

22.   In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Howard Williamson, objector, and Kerry Pflegger, agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Objector Representation

23. Mr Williamson addressed the Committee. This representation can be viewed on the recording:

Western Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 24th July 2024

Member Questions to the Objector

24.Members asked questions of clarification and received the following responses:

·       Mr Williamson’s clients were residents who lived locally to the area.

·       The site had been operational for some time so the lack of data relating to the site was confusing. He highlighted the lack of accurate traffic count records.

·       There were several similar facilities in the area, with limited take up. He questioned whether this site was sustainable for this type of business.

·       The fence along Old Street was subject to a separate application. Highways England had submitted a statement which indicated that there was no consent for closed board fencing which was being used to comply with AONB regulations.

·       The Planning Officer had received photo evidence of large HGVs which had entered the site and parked on the blind corner. He informed Members that the site was proposed for commercial use but there was an incident on a Sunday morning of a commercial vehicle attending the site when it should have been closed.

Agent Representation

25.Ms Pfleggeraddressed the Committee. This representation can be viewed on the recording:

Western Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 24th July 2024

Member Questions to the Applicant/Agent

26.Members asked questions of clarification and received the following responses:

·       The dark green colouring of the containers was conditioned in the update report.

·       Highways England had stated they had no objection to the fence being constructed.

Ward Member Representation

27. Councillor Dick addressed the Committee. This representation can be viewed on the recording.

Western Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 24th July 2024

Member Questions to the Ward Member

28.   Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Member Questions to Officers

29.Members asked questions of clarification and received the following responses:

·       Paul Goddard advised that National Highways owned a lot of the land around the area and had done since they purchased it to construct the M4. They had no objection to the fence being constructed.

·       Debra Inston advised that this application was submitted following a visit from the enforcement team who felt that an application to regularise the site was welcome given the nature of its usage.

·       Debra Inston advised that Priors Court School had not raised any issue of noise.

Debate

30.   Councillor Denise Gaines opened the debate by stating the economic viability of the site was not a material planning consideration. She advised she could not see a problem with the site and felt as though the location adjacent to the M4 meant that noise would not be a problem. She highlighted that the proposed usage was better than the approved usage.

31.   Councillor Anthony Amirtharaj suggested that the proposed usage was safer than the approved usage due to the flammable nature of the pallets.

32.   Councillor Phil Barnett noted he was very impressed with the site when visiting.

33.   Councillor Vickers highlighted that the AONB was not a no development zone, particularly this section of it which had the M4 going through it. He felt that this was an ideal location for a site like this as it was extremely accessible. He agreed with Councillor Gaines that the economic viability of the site was not a planning matter but felt that the site was more viable than previously approved sites with a similar purpose.

34.   Councillor Benneyworth supported the application noting there would be a benefit in regularizing traffic movements.

35.   Councillor Gaines proposed to accept the Officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report. This was seconded by Councillor Amirtharaj.

36.   The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Gaines, seconded by Councillor Amirtharaj, to grant planning permission. At the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that the Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report.