The first application submitted for this site ( 4421/21/FUL) was for no more than a 'New Single Storey Three Bed Dwelling' with no agricultural tie suggested, despite the fact that agricultural justification was offered as one of the two supporting justifications. That application was withdrawn and this new application submitted, this time advertised as a new dwelling with an agricultural occupancy condition.

However, and as we pointed out in our objection, holiday lettings generate more than 50% of the farm income, while game rearing and shooting also make a noticeable contribution. Neither of these activities are considered 'agricultural'. We also failed to comprehend why the building was to be located such considerable distance away from the farmstead itself.

Recommending refusal, the case officer noted our objection and stated: 'the proposal is considered to lack the requisite evidence or exceptional circumstances that would warrant justification for an additional dwellinghouse at this countryside location...' and that the site was 'in a sensitive landscape and designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and has not been supported by an appropriate landscape visual assessment. At an elevated location the design is not considered to conserve or enhance the protected landscape and instead would have a harmful impact on the character and setting of the AONB'.

Despite this the then ward councillor Daniel Brown took the application to the Development Management Committee, arguing 'there are competing factors to consider including the nature of development in the AONB versus the significant ecological design of the home.' Fortunately members were not persuaded, and the application was refused.