Poultry Barn Plans to House Additional 15,700 Birds Deferred by Councillors

Plans to extend a poultry barn to house an additional 15,700 birds in Wrexham have been deferred by councillors.

Members of Wrexham’s planning committee yesterday debated proposals to build a second agricultural poultry barn for barn egg production on Talwrn Farm in Legacy.

The development would provide an extension to the to the existing building, allowing for an additional 15,700 birds to be housed as well as the erection of two feed silos. In total the number of birds on site would be 31,400.

The application had been recommended for approval, however an amendment was passed after a majority of councillors voted in favour of deferring the report .

A representative speaking in favour of the development at yesterday’s meeting told the committee that the applicant was looking to extend their operation via an additional building.

It was also noted that of full odour and noise report had been accepted by environmental health and that the new development would not increase the volume of traffic entering the site.

Planning Officer David Williams referred the committee to a previous application to build the first barn on the site, which was won on appeal in 2015.

Mr Williams said: “A previous application for an egg barn was refused and allowed on appeal – that is a significant material consideration. You are not being asked to agree the principle of use, the issues relate to the intensification of use and the visual impact of the barn. It is an important point to bear in mind.

“I would say it sits alongside the existing building which is not visually prominent. What is helpful is the building is already there and there are limited views.”

He added: “We’ve also received reports in terms of odour. Public Protection are satisfied it won’t raise odour levels. There will be a clean out once a year where there may be an occasional odour.

“The other key point is in terms of highways. As mentioned a 100% increase in birds does not equate to the doubling of traffic on the site. There will be an increase of 39 lorries and that is in a 52 week cycle. It is 1.5 movements per week, which is probably lower than an average working farm.”

However Cllr Paul Pemberton put forward a recommendation to defer the report, stating: “Well I respect the inspector’s decision, I reserve the right not to agree and I still don’t until this day. I agree it is in operation at the moment and I haven’t had complaints, but I had had a lot of comments.

“In the initial representation at the original application was traffic movements. For respect out of everyone we haven’t reached the end of the cycle. When we do there will be substantial traffic movements and HGVs and the like.

“I move we defer this until we get an assessment and see the impact of traffic movements – and if we don’t and we get a dogs breakfast, then the two planning permissions will run in tandem and we can’t do anything about it.

“Out of respect for everyone, the residents and applicants I think it should be done.”

Chairman of the planning committee, Cllr Mike Morris added: “We have to be careful. I have to ask if this can be subject to non-determination.

“If we refuse it would go to appeal and I’m not sure what grounds we would be able to defend it on. It is not sensible to send something to appeal if officers find there is not sufficient evidence to back up what we say.

“Have to think carefully, it is not normal to wait until something is completed.”

Mr Williams noted that the applicants would be entitled to apply for non-determination and that the council could be at risk of costs if they were unable to defend the reasons for the application’s refusal.

The recommendation to defer the application was seconded by Cllr David Griffiths, who said: “We have to accept the principle has been set for the planning to be there, but that wan’t for two units and four silos.

“I think it is a fair thing to wait for the full picture. I’m not saying I will say no but I will be more comfortable knowing more.”

The recommendation for deferral was passed, with nine councillors voting in favour and six voting against.