Agenda and minutes

Up to 15 minutes are allowed for public participation.  Participants are restricted to 3 minutes each.

There was no public participation.

i)       Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 24 August 2016, previously circulated.

Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 24 August 2016.

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 24 August 2016, be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

Members may make any declarations of interest at this point but may also make them at any time during the course of the meeting.

Councillor Cotton declared that as he ministered to the Parish of Upton and also knew several of the objectors he would not take part in determination of the item in order to avoid any perception of bias. (Application 134462 – Upton).

Councillor Cotton declared that as he had not been present at the previous meeting and heard the speakers, and had not been able to be present for the site visit, he would not take part in the deliberation of the item (Application 131181 – Caistor).

Councillor Cotton then left the meeting at 6.31pm.

The Planning Services Manager noted that he had circulated details of the hearing sessions for the Local Plan that were coming up in November/December.  He had also advised that a new 5 year supply had been published by the Central Lincolnshire Planning Team and that it confirmed that the authorities met the required test and could demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing.   The document can be viewed online (document 039A in the Planning Policy Library) : https://www.n-kesteven.gov.uk/central-lincolnshire/planning-policy-library/

The Chairman proposed that given the number of people present at the meeting for the Upton application, it be dealt with first.

This was seconded and it was AGREED that the order of the agenda be changed to hear the Upton application first.

RESOLVED that the applications detailed in report PL.05 16/17 be dealt with as follows:-

Planning application to construct 2 pig rearing units and 1 strawstorage building on land off Cow Lane, Upton.

Planning application to construct two pig rearing units and one strawstorage building on land off Cow lane, Upton.

The application was presented to the planning committee given the level of public interest.

The Development Management Officer advised the Committee that there was an error in the report in that Condition 9 should read ‘prior to any operation of the building’ not ‘of the lagoon’.  It was also noted that the proposal for a farmhouse had been removed from the original application.  78 further objections had been received from Animal Aid, and the online total of signatures was now 7828, however the Committee was reminded that animal welfare was not a material consideration in the determination of planning applications and there were other organisations to deal with such matters.

Mr Jamie Allen addressed the Committee representing the Parish Council, noting that there had been several public meetings and there was a clear mandate from residents to reject the application.  Any development in the village should improve quality of life but the current application would have a negative impact.  The proposals conflicted with national and local policy.  It was felt that the methodology of the environmental assessment was not acceptable.  Peak readings should be used rather than average.  Given a 10-20% mortality rate for the pigs there would be animal carcasses on site.  It was unacceptable to not concede that there would be an odour impact, and for the burden of proof to be on the consultees.  Who would be accountable in the event of a flawed assessment?  It was pointed out that although no residences, there was a business within 200m of the proposal, but given that this business supplied farms, had raised no objection.  Residents would not rest if they lost their case.

Tim Elwess, the applicant, then addressed the meeting, pointing out that although Lincolnshire was agrarian in nature, farmers were usually unpopular.  Most issues raised had been covered within the report, the suitability of the site was shown as being comfortably outside of the village envelope, and its nearest neighbours were sewage treatment and a composting site.  Mr Elwess owned the site, and crops were not a secure income provider, pigs would be better.  There were no subsidies.  The operation was not ‘intensive’ and fitted with all welfare standards, and exceeded those required by the RSPCA, and meat would carry the Red Tractor logo.  The animals would receive natural light and would have straw beds, with daily mucking out.  The products were for human consumption and would meet the exacting standards of the UK customer.

John Spencer, resident of Upton spoke in objection to the application, stating that when communities deteriorated house prices plummeted.  There was a balance between the employment of one person against the misery of many residents.  There would be a danger of contamination, odour and disease, and should not be next to a village.  Superbugs were resistant to antibiotics and cancer patients’ greatest fear was of infection.

Helen Villamuera also spoke on behalf  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42a

Outline planning application for erection of 69 dwellings - access tobe considered and not reserved for subsequent applications on land at Brigg Road, Caistor.

Outline planning application for the erection of 69 dwellings - access tobe considered and not reserved for subsequent applications on land at Brigg Road, Caistor.  The application had been deferred from the previous meeting in order for a site visit to be undertaken.

The Principal Development Management Officer updated Committee Members on the revised drainage scheme received.  The proposal was for a hybrid scheme including swales, soakaways and drainage ponds.  The Lead Flood Authority (LFA) response felt that a hybrid proposal was not the appropriate solution, and a single scheme would be better.  An email had been received from the LFA stating that there was insufficient certainty for the prevention of flooding or potential pollution of chalk watercourses.  The applicant’s agent had stated that to undertake a full SUDS scheme would reduce the number of houses by 27, thereby making the proposals unviable.  The applicant was prepared to continue working on an acceptable solution, however a traditional pipe scheme would require further work and time.

The Town Council had submitted their representation at the previous meeting and had reiterated their concerns, requesting a number of conditions should the application be approved.

A further letter of objection had been received raising concerns regarding increased traffic, the possibility being around an additional 130 cars from 69 houses.  Residents knew the area better than ‘experts’.

Mark Hodson, agent for the applicant, thanked the Committee for undertaking the site visit, and described the proposals as an opportunity to deliver housing close to the amenities of Caistor.  The 8.5 hectare site was allocated within the CLLP and the proposals for a density of 8.12 dwellings per hectare were acceptable.  The previous meeting had agreed that all issues met requirements other than the drainage matters, and these could be resolved in time.  There were constraints due to the topography of the land, but it was necessary to maintain the number of houses proposed to ensure the viability of the scheme.

Paul Stubbs, local resident, spoke in objection to the proposals, citing the dangerous nature of the road, the already high level of traffic and its tendency to experience more severe winter weather due to it being higher above sea level.  A previous application had been refused on highways grounds, and there were more appropriate sites within Caistor.

The Principal Development Management Officer assured the Committee that Highways officers had given lengthy consideration to the traffic implications and, subject to a number of proposed improvements, had no objections.

Members acknowledged that the site was allocated within the CLLP, although Caistor Town Council had requested its removal, the document had now been submitted for examination.  Sites within market towns were being given further consideration.  There were no site allocations within the Caistor Neighbourhood Plan, but the ambition was to ensure development close to the town centre and on brownfield land where possible.  It was generally agreed that there was the potential for a high quality development, however the drainage constraints were of serious concern.  It  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42b

RESOLVED: that the determination of appeals be noted.