Agenda item

Note:              Councillor Roger Patterson stepped down from Committee for the duration of this item.

The Chairman introduced planning application number 139936 for the erection of 3 no. buildings to provide either B1 (Business) or B2 (General Industrial) floor space; with provision of vehicle parking spaces, hard landscaping and means of enclosure. The Committee heard this was a resubmission of planning application reference: 139515 and the Area Development Officer confirmed there were no updates to the report.

The Chairman stated there were three registered speakers for the application and invited the first to address the Committee.

The first speaker introduced himself, Councillor Mark Nicholson from Ingham Parish Council. He explained that the Parish Council were undertaking a development plan and that all people involved were supportive of the business and employment opportunities this development would bring to the area. He stated there was housing development underway, providing a 15% increase in housing and the Parish Council would like for there to be employment opportunities for those people to work locally. The proposed development would provide opportunities for greener employment with people able to walk or cycle to work. He reiterated the Parish Council’s support of the proposed development and thanked the Committee for their time and consideration.

The Chairman invited the second speaker, Mr James Rigby, the applicant, to address the Committee. Mr Rigby explained that his company felt the Officer’s report had oversimplified the case and that, in relation to LP5, the site should not be considered as being in the countryside. He added that LP5 established support for generating employment in these areas and the proposal was for employment development. There was support for 50 jobs, the area locally was considered to be an employment site which would be in accordance with LP5 and paragraph 84 of the revised framework. Mr Rigby commented on the suggested visual impact to the area and advised the Committee that the proposed development would benefit from substantial screening, the buildings would sit below the treeline and he was confident no harmful visual impact would occur. He added that there was strong demand from businesses looking to expand into the area and he believed the proposals would provide significant benefit to the area. He thanked the Committee for their time and consideration.

The third and final speaker, Councillor Roger Patterson, Ward Member, was invited to address the Committee. He stated that he could not find any grounds for refusal of the application. Councillor Patterson explained that the building sat on the ridgeline, there were other businesses along the same building line, the site itself was part of an old airfield and the A15 ran alongside the area. He agreed that the area was countryside but it was a significant industrial area with some major businesses operating around the proposed development site. He stated LP5 was supposed to allow businesses to thrive. Councillor Patterson highlighted that the proposals would make the development the greenest office building in West Lindsey, using green energy as well as requiring minimum vehicle use from employees living in the local area. He quoted LP55 part E, paragraphs A and D and LP1 regarding sustainable development. He also drew Members’ attention to section 2.4 of the CLLP, designed to encourage expansion for existing businesses. To conclude, Councillor Patterson stated there would be no visual impact of the building, there were no objections within the community, the community and workers supported and wanted the development. He invited the Committee to look favourably on the application.

Note:              Councillor Roger Patterson left the room at 6:49pm

The Chairman invited further comment from the Planning Manager who clarified that ‘brown field sites’ related to areas which had previously been developed whereas the site in question for the application was a green field site. He advised the Committee to consider whether it was a local employment site, and whether it was expanding an existing business or building on new ground. 

The Chairman invited comments from the Committee. Initially, several Members of Committee expressed their support for the application and agreed with the arguments in favour presented by the speakers. This was countered by other Committee Members who felt that the site was isolated and separated from the village. It was suggested that the commendable green credentials of the development could be implemented in other locations and there were other sites available that would be more suitable to such a development. It was also commented that Members should be consistent and support the relevant policies, a Member of Committee moved the Officer recommendation to refuse planning permission and this was promptly seconded.

At the close of discussions, the Chairman enquired whether there was any Member offering a second proposal to Committee. After giving fair time, but receiving no second proposal, he put the original proposal to the vote.

With five votes in favour of the Officer recommendation, and four votes against the Officer recommendation, it was duly resolved that permission be REFUSED for application number 139936.

Note:              Councillor Roger Patterson returned to the room at 6:55pm and re-took his seat at Committee.