The proposal was an application to modify a section 106 agreement to allow further fencing to divide the north western part of the paddock. When the land was converted from a school to residential land the section 106 agreement included a provision for the application site to be maintained as open pasture land. The erection of fences required prior approval from the Council.

The proposed fencing would be 1.1m timber posts (sited 3.4m apart) with single wire and mesh. Two gates would be also be located along the southern boundary fence.

Officers considered that the proposed fencing would harm the open character and appearance of the land and would set an unwelcome precedent.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:     -

For the Application:            Mr. Hayes

Parish Representative:       -

Local Member:                    Cllr. Mrs. Cook

The applicant confirmed to the Committee that he intended to use the land to keep sheep and hens. Some Members of the committee  noted that the fencing was therefore crucial for agricultural purposes.

Other Members of the Committee were concerned that if fencing were erected it could lead in future to the further division of the rest of the land into parcels.

It was MOVED by the Vice-Chairman and was duly seconded that the recommendation in the report, as amended by the Late Observations Sheet, to refuse the variation be adopted. The motion was put to the vote and there voted –

6 votes in favour of the motion

11 votes against the motion

The Chairman declared the motion to be LOST.

It was then MOVED and duly seconded:

“That variation of the section 106 agreement be GRANTED as the planning obligation continued to serve a purpose and would serve that purpose equally well if it had effect subject to the modifications specified in the application.”

The motion was put to the vote and there voted –

11 votes in favour of the motion

5 votes against the motion

Resolved:        That variation of the section 106 agreement be GRANTED as the planning obligation continued to serve a purpose and would serve that purpose equally well if it had effect subject to the modifications specified in the application.