Agenda item

Planning application for a proposed Agri-Robotics Research Facility toform part of the new Lincoln Institute for Agri-Food Technology Centre - to accompany application reference 134780 at University Of Lincoln, Riseholme Park, Riseholme, Lincoln

Planning application for a proposed Agri-Robotics Research Facility to form part of the new Lincoln Institute for Agri-Food Technology Centre - to accompany application reference 134780 at University of Lincoln, Riseholme Park, Riseholme, Lincoln.

The Case Officer confirmed there were no updates to the report.

Ruth Andrews of Riseholme Parish Meeting then addressed the Committee.  Riseholme Parish had recently made its Neighbourhood Plan and therefore had a clear mandate.  They were not objecting in principle to the application and understand that agriculture needed to develop and grow, however they urged that any development should be sympathetic to the village.  They considered the application had a number of unknowns, for example how the industrial building would sit in a rural setting.  Furthermore it would be 1.2 metres higher than any other building on the site, the figure in the report was disputed and thus would be clearly visible.  The use of the building was questioned and how this use would affect its surroundings.   The application had not been completed in its entirety and would have provided such information.  Reference had been made to chemical use in other meetings but was not referred to in the application.  How would light and noise pollution affect the area?  The Parish questioned what screening would be used, how historical assets would be protected.  There were concerns regarding tree removal.  The applicant had stated there were no trees in the development site this was simply not true and misleading.  Flooding was regular in the area, there was reference to a mains sewer that did not exist.  Ownership of the land was in dispute and the list of anomalies identified was not exhaustive.   The Parish listed a raft of policies that they considered the application did not adhere to.  The recently approved Neighbourhood Plan supported development but only if the character of the village was maintained and key assets were not affected and materials were local and in keeping.  They urged committee to either defer the application pending further information and at the very least undertake a a site visit.

Mr Simon Pearson, agent for the application then addressed the Committee.  He outlined his current role and previous experience in agriculture and indicated he understood the issues.  Lincolnshire had a world class agricultural sector and the University aimed to provide first class support to the industry.  His organisation had been successful in securing over £10m funding into collaborative research into the agri-sector.  He outlined a number of pioneering projects being undertaken.  Brexit was likely to impact migrant labour and he considered there had never been a more important or urgent time to develop robotic farming systems.  This is what the centre would be used for.  One project had a high national priority and would be featuring on a BBC show in December, putting Lincolnshire on the map for agri-tech.   The University over recent years had made significant investment in this area and now had the largest establishment in the sector in Europe.  Their work was also spreading world wide and world class facilities were required if the momentum was to continue. 

The centre would be the first of its kind in the UK and would replace delapidated buildings, subject to its approval it would release £6.2m of funding and investment for the County.  This included EU funding, that in light of Brexit was now highly time limited.  The funding also required the centre to support 150 SMEs across the county and would bring wide ranging benefits.

The Case Officer responded to the points raised and whilst accepting there were a number of anomalies in the design spec, enough information had been received to determine the application.  The recomendation was to approve subject to conditions and these conditions aimed to address the anomalies particularly surface water drainage.  There were also conditions to address the materials used.

The Chairman reminded Members that whilst this was linked to another application yet to be determined, it must be determined on its own merits.  This had been brought forward on its own due to the related funding issues.

Councillor Brockway, as County Councillor for the area then addressed the Committee and advised whilst she had no particular objections, three areas of concern had been raised with her by residents and these were outlined.  Primarily that cognisance of the content of the Neighbourhood Plan should be taken into consideration.  Hearing the applications individually did not take account of the cumulative effect.  This approach had been taken previously in order that the cumulative effect was accounted for and she considered this should follow the same approach.  She urged Committee to defer the application pending a site visit and requested that the size of the building be clarified, in light of the Parish Council’s differing figure.

The Case Officer responded, advising that the applications needed to be heard on their own merits, contextually, it was small and determining it on its own would not prejudice Members’ decision on the larger pending applications.   Whilst there was a dispute on the measurement, Officers were of the view whether it was 0.5m or 1.5m it would not be deemed to have a inappropriate visual impact. Conservation had no concerns and Historic England were happy that the Authority could make the determination.

The Committee debated the application and the Vice Chairman proposed that a site visit be undertaken, whilst acknowleging this was a world class facility, the impact on the historic site had to be a consideration.  There had been concerns over trees and these could be clearly seen on the illustration.  It was further suggested that whilst committee were not determining the other applications referred to, it may be timely to look at the whole site and where other development was proposed in the future.   It would also allow the Committee time to review the Riseholme Neighbourhood Plan. 

Having been proposed and seconded it was AGREED that a SITE VISIT be undertaken at a time and date to be agreed for the reasons outlined above.