Agenda item

We considered the report of the application and late correspondence which was recommended for approval subject to the conditions outlined in the report.

Llangybi Fawr Community Council, had submitted a written statement outlining the community council’s objections to the application which was read to the Planning Committee by the Head of Planning, as follows:

‘Until recently the applicant has been using this barn, contrary to planning regulations, as a base for his motor trading business, openly advertising it on websites and social media.  This activity only stopped after the applicant was served with an enforcement order, one of several enforcement actions taken against this applicant.  There has been no suggestion in the past that the applicant is an enthusiast and collector of motor cars.  In any case, we would suggest that there is a fine distinction between a private collector of motor cars who buys and sells vehicles to enhance their collection and a commercial trader operating for profit.

If the committee is minded to approve this application, (and we accept that there appear to be no planning reasons not to), we would respectfully urge them to impose tight conditions on the use of this commercial building – we hesitate to call it a barn as it has never been used for any agricultural purpose.  We endorse the conditions suggested by the planning officer in her report, but would be happier with a lower limit on the number of vehicles.’

The applicant’s agent, Sullivan Land and Planning, had submitted a written statement in support of the application which was read to the Planning Committee by the Head of Planning, as follows:

‘The Community Council appear to be confusing this with a previous withdrawn application for the cattle shed (2020/00072) to the north, which was the subject of enforcement action against a tenant who traded vehicles from those premises without the authority of the applicant and in contravention of his lease.

It should be noted that the Dutch Barn which is the subject of this application has never been used to trade vehicles, only to store vehicles which are the personal property of the applicant. The applicant is content with the number of vehicles proposed to be stored as part of this application, which was discussed and agreed with the case officer.’

Following discussion it was proposed by County Councillor G. Howard and seconded by County Councillor P. Clarke that we be minded to defer consideration of application DM/2020/01076 to a future Planning Committee meeting to allow officers time to gather evidence of when external alterations had occurred, to review the Inspector’s decision and to establish whether the application was advertised correctly.

Upon being put to the vote the following votes were recorded:

For deferral               -           14

Against deferral        -           0

Abstentions               -           0

The proposition was carried.

We resolved that we be minded to defer consideration of application DM/2020/01076 to a future Planning Committee meeting to allow officers time to gather evidence of when external alterations had occurred, to review the Inspector’s decision and to establish whether the application was advertised correctly.