Agenda item

The Chairman introduced the first item of the meeting, application number 144738, to erect 7 no. commercial units, 5 units to fall within Use Class E((g)i) office ii) the research and development of products or processes or iii) any industrial process, (which can be carried out in any residential area without causing detriment to the amenity of the area)) and 2 units within Use Class B8 (Storage and Distribution) on land off Willoughton Drive, Gainsborough.

 

The Officer stated that there were a few updates to the application. The first was that this application had returned after a site visit. There had been additional landscaping plans, and it was deemed suitable for the site. Moving to the landscaping condition, the Officer confirmed that the replacement of landscaping was required for a period of 5 years He also stated that he would recommend the removal of condition three and renumber the conditions. There was also an additional letter of support from the Vulcan Bossit site.

 

Note:               Councillor I. Fleetwood declared a non-pecuniary interest that he had previously hired the agent but had not spoken to him about this application.

 

Note:               Councillor S. England entered the Chamber at 6.43 pm.

 

The Chairman advised that there were five registered speakers for the application. He invited the Democratic and Civic Officer to read out the first statement, from the agent for the application. The following statement was read aloud.

 

“Good evening to the planning committee members and thank you for considering this planning application during both Octobers and this current November committee meeting.

 

The Development Proposals. As previously discussed, the proposals seek planning permission for 7no commercial units on a plot of land within the Foxby Lane Business Park, Gainsborough. We note that during the previous committee meeting, comments were raised regarding the un-maintained hedgerow being partly removed. The legal team clarified that none of the trees or hedgerow on the site were protected and the site owners were perfectly within their legal rights to instruct the clearing of all vegetation without consequence.

 

After the clarification above, the applicant, without hesitation chose to appoint a landscape specialist to ensure the landscape proposals were developed further and not removed completely. This approach would retain as much as possible and provide new tree and shrub planting with a detailed planting/ maintenance strategy. The applicant also met with the adjacent site owners Vulcan Bossitt to discuss our proposals and we have now received written support for our proposals.

 

The applicant has once again demonstrated a collaborative approach and willingness to engage with others to produce a scheme which will be beneficial both socially and economically and goes far beyond the minimal requirements often seen on other business parks throughout the region. The proposals will provide aesthetically pleasing units which will enhance the character and locality. To compliment Policy LP3, the proposals will provide much needed employment and business start up opportunities in the area and will also compliment the major housing developments on the land adjacent to Foxby Lane.

 

Conclusion. We have taken appropriate steps to revise the designs/ building arrangements to reflect the comments made on the WLDC planning website and comments made during the previous committee meeting. When read in conjunction with the relevant planning policies, we consider the proposals to be in accordance with the Central Lincolnshire Plan and Gainsborough Neighbourhood Plan.

We would like to respectfully ask the planning committee to grant planning permission for the development proposals on the established Foxby Lane Business Park.”

 

The Chairman thanked the Officer for reading the statement, and invited the next registered speaker, Vicky Dixon, a supporter of the application, to address the committee.

 

The speaker thanked the Committee for the consideration of the application and explained that she was an interested party in one of the units as an owner and director of a small business in the District. Members heard of the business details, that the company was looking for a larger base, and could not find a suitable one already existing. The speaker said that to solve this problem, creating much-needed space for business owners would be beneficial, and unit 5 allocated for them was perfect for her vision.

 

Members heard that potential unit owners stated that when it was sold, it was commercial land, with no boundary issues or preservation orders, and residents were aware of the site being for commercial use. The speaker then explained that only when it came to the application submission did any issues about the removal of the hedge for screening come about. This pushed for further amendments, a reduction of one of the proposed units, to facilitate established trees and hedgerows, in addition to a landscape gardener.

 

The speaker explained that the screening location was about 4 metres from the boundary, which prevented a loss of land that might stop the project. Members heard that the suggested comments of going elsewhere were unfeasible due to the significant financial aspects and plans submitted. The speaker clarified that they did not want to disrupt the residents and hoped that should the application be granted, they would be working regularly with the immediate local community. The speaker further expressed this by asserting that the development would be aesthetically pleasing and not use common designs in other sites across the country.

 

The speaker concluded her statement that they had listened to the concerns raised but that the building could not continue without some amendments to the hedge and vegetation existing on the site. She emphasised that they would plant new trees, shrubs, and hedges to compensate for the development, and promoted the business opportunities in Gainsborough with this site.

 

The Chairman thanked the speaker for her statement, and invited the registered objector, Andrew Boulton, to address the Committee. He gave the following statement.

 

“Frequent reference has been made, to the screening - between Plot 5 and the adjacent residential properties - as having been deliberately, consciously, planned, funded, and the planting subjected to contract by LCC.

 

The useful links included in the Report submitted to the last Planning Committee on 5 October, confirm that the original Planning Application states that the specification approved by West Lindsey, along the Western boundary, was to include a total of 132 trees within” a tree and shrub mix - to be planted at 1.75m centres in species groups of 3 to 5.

 

The above contradicts the poorly-informed comments by the Council’s “tree and landscape officer”, who describes the eighteen-year-old screen as ‘hedgerows unmanaged that’s left to grow’.

 

Trees, especially thriving eighteen-year old trees - surrounded by “unmanaged” undergrowth or not - are a material planning consideration. It is evident that within this report, the existing established trees, have NOT been given serious consideration.

 

This undermines the erroneous, and merely subjective opinion expressed within the Report's “Planning balance and conclusion”, that the proposal “would not conflict ... or cause harm to the amenities of neighbours (and that) the scale and appearance is acceptable”.  This is merely a subjective opinion, which is not supported by the physical evidence, shown in the attached photographs. These photographs contradict that subjective opinion, and undermine the Report’s Recommendation to Approve.

 

The attached photographs, conveniently show the distant industrial unitserected by the separate developer Stirlin. It is not difficult to form an objective opinion of very similar units being erected merely 1.76 meters from the boundary fence shown in the photographs once all the existing, established, screening has been ripped-out.

 

At the last committee meeting “details-of-planting” were required. The details now provided - confirm, as / have previously mentioned, that there will be no meaningful planting between the rear of the units and the adjacent neighbouring residential properties. The details now provided, seek to deliberately misrepresent four decorative conifer bushes, planted by my wife as extensive, verdant “trees and bushes on adjacent site”.

 

The material planning consideration of “Impact on the neighbourhood” has demonstrably been ignored, as illustrated by the above. The Woodland Trust have confirmed to me that the “National Planning Policy Framework”, sets out the Government's planning policies for England and how these should be applied. This is the context in which environment-based policies must be considered. It states that existing trees should be maintained wherever possible.

 

The suggestion somewhere else that some of the trees could be moved – is naive - verging on the incredulous! It is ridiculous to suggest that delicate and interlocking 18-year-old, root systems can be disturbed and the trees be successfully transplanted.

 

Frequent reference has also been made to the numerous more appropriate alternative sites available on the nearby Heapham Road South industrial estate, for the applicant to pursue his private financial ambitions, and where his cavalier distain for social obligations to neighbouring residential property owners, would not be an issue.

 

Banks Long & Co have produced a brochure confirming that they have a comparable site in competition to this Application. However, from O5DEC, Drewery & Wheeldon will begin to auction the alternative 1.52 acre ANGEL site on Marshall Way, opposite the WLDC re-cycling centre. There is no reason why the applicant's architectural drawings and existing plans, could not be super-imposed on this site.

 

As mentioned at the last Committee meeting, there would be positive effect in rejecting this PA. The prospective purchaser, will be looking to the Committee to reject the application, as LCC will then be required to refund the £6,000 deposit, enabling the prospective purchaser to look for a more appropriate - less contentious - site than Plot 5, where he will still be able to offer employment, and short-term rental opportunities, for prospective entrepreneurs.

 

I am concerned that if all the above is to be ignored, and should the recommendation within the Report remain unchanged, and regrettably lead to the approval of this application, this would inevitably result in the further protracted delay associated with the Appeals process. Hopefully, all the above will provide enough of a reason for the Chairman of the Planning Committee, to now propose that PA Number 144738, be rejected.”

 

The Chairman thanked the speaker for his statement, and invited Councillor Michael Devine, the first registered local ward Member, to address the Committee. The following statement was read out aloud.

 

“Firstly, Chairman I would like to thank the Committee for agreeing a site visit at their last meeting. Planning application M03/P/1164 granted 28^th October 2003 condition 3 outlines the requirement for landscaping, the current application proposes to rip up a 19 year old hedgerow including mature trees and replace with new plantings, this will not screen the neighbouring properties from the view of the new industrial units.

 

The Design and Access Statement 22/04/22 clearly quotes that the mature hedgerow will remain: ‘The scale of the proposed buildings have been carefully arranged to ensure the single storey unit is positioned to the rear of the site with the mature trees/ hedges providing screening from the adjacent dwellings. This will also ensure the height of the units does not provide a detrimental impact on the adjacent dwellings. The two storey units have been positioned towards the front of the site adjacent to the secure gated site access.’ Itappears now that the impact on the adjacent dwellings is no longer a concern for the applicant.

 

The only reason I can think of to change the original Design and Access Statement is to squeeze in larger units than planned or that the original plan was wrong. I am not against the development of this site, it is after all designated for light industrial use, I do however object to this planning application on the grounds that it will destroy a mature hedgerow that is the nesting place for birds, there will also be insects and other wildlife disrupted damaging the Ecology of the whole area, it will also remove the screening for the neighbouring residential properties. I ask that the Committee refuse this application as it is not in line with policies LP17, LP21 and LP26.”

 

Note:               Councillor D. Devine left the Chamber for the remainder of the item at 6.54 pm.

 

Note:               Councillor S. England left the Chamber for the remainder of the meeting at 6.54 pm.

 

The Chairman thanked the Member for his statement, and then invited Councillor David Dobbie, the second registered local ward Member, to give address the Committee.

 

The Member clarified that he had made a representation in a previous application on the site but did not include the proposed landscaping scheme. The Town Council made a submission in which the Member expressed his happiness with the language of the decision recommended.

 

The Member concluded his short statement to state that though it was known that the area was for industrial units, the plans were next to a public footpath and expressed concerns over what future development might do to the site, which included potential restriction of access.

 

The Chairman thanked the Member for his statement.

 

Note:               Councillor D. Dobbie left the Chamber for the remainder of the item at 6.56 pm.

 

The Chairman then invited a response from the Planning Officer. The Development Management Team Leader explained that planning permission was not required to remove hedgerows, and it was up to the applicant to decide what trees and vegetation were to remain on the site. The Officer further elucidated that the height of the proposed units was smaller than the dwellings directly adjacent to the site. Members also heard that the biodiversity concerns would be addressed by the proposed new tree planting and landscaping, along with retention of part of the existing hedgerow, with the potential to  improve biodiversity. Members also heard that future footpath concerns were not a matter before the Committee

 

The Chairman invited comments from Members of the Committee. Members made remarks that included aspects from the site visit, the hedges, the levelling of the site, and the landscaping concerns raised. Members also commented about the height of the boundary fence and that the proposed application would likely clear some of the heavy littering in the area.

 

In response to a query made at the site visit and stated in the meeting about drainage run-off, Members heard that this was dealt in the amended condition 4 of the report.

 

Having been proposed and seconded, the Chairman took the vote and it was agreed that permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

 

Conditions stating the time by which the development must be commenced:

 

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

 

Reason: To conform with Section 91 (1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

 

Conditions which apply or require matters to be agreed before the development commenced:

 

2. No development must take place until a demolition and construction method statement has been submitted and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The approved statement(s) must be adhered to throughout the construction period. The statement must provide for:

 

(i) the routeing and management of traffic;

(ii) the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors;

(iii) loading and unloading of plant and materials;

(iv) storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development;

(v) wheel cleaning facilities;

(vi) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt;

(vii) details of noise reduction measures;

(viii) the hours during which machinery may be operated, vehicles may enter and leave, and works may be carried out on the site;

 

Reason: To restrict disruption to the living conditions of the neighbouring dwelling and surrounding area from noise, dust and vibration and to accord with the National

Planning Policy Framework and local policy LP26 of the Central Lincolnshire Local

Plan 2012-2036.

 

Conditions which apply or are to be observed during the course of the development:

 

3. In the event that previously unidentified contamination is found when carrying out the approved development immediate contact must be made with the local planning authority and works must cease in that area. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Following completion of the remedial works a verification report that demonstrates compliance with the agreed remediation objectives and criteria shall be submitted to the local planning authority. No unit shall be occupied prior to the approval of the verification report in writing by the local planning authority.

 

Reason: In order to safeguard human health and the water environment and identify potential contamination on-site and the potential for off-site migration to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework and policy LP14 and LP16 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan 2012-2036.

 

4. The permitted development shall be undertaken in accordance with a surface

water drainage scheme which shall first have been approved in writing by the Local

Planning Authority. The scheme shall:

 

• be based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development;

• provide flood exceedance routing for storm event greater than 1 in 100 year;

• provide details of how run-off will be safely conveyed and attenuated during storms up to and including the 1 in 100 year critical storm event, with an allowance for climate change, from all hard surfaced areas within the development into the existing local drainage infrastructure and watercourse system without exceeding the run-off rate for the undeveloped site;

• provide attenuation details and discharge rates which shall be restricted to greenfield rates;

• provide details of the timetable for and any phasing of implementation for the drainage scheme; and

• provide details of how the scheme shall be maintained and managed over the lifetime of the development, including any arrangements for adoption by any public body or Statutory Undertaker and any other arrangements required to secure the operation of the drainage system throughout its lifetime. No building shall be occupied until the approved scheme has been completed or provided on the site in accordance with the approved phasing. The approved scheme shall be retained and maintained in full, in accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason: To ensure that the permitted development is adequately drained without creating or increasing flood risk to land or property adjacent to, or downstream of the permitted development.

 

5. Prior to any work above existing ground levels details of the proposed walling and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority with the development carried out in accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason: To ensure the use of appropriate materials to accord with Policy LP26 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan

 

6. With the exception of the detailed matters referred to by the conditions of this

consent, the development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with

the following drawings:

 

Site Location and Block Plan D01 P06;

Proposed Site Plan D02 P07;

Unit C to Unit G floor and elevation plans D06 P06;

Landscaping Plan Drawing No. MPN CUW

Unit A Plans and Elevations D04 P03;

Unit B Plans and Elevations D05 P03;

Site Section Drawing No. D09 Rev P02;

The works shall be carried out in accordance with the details shown on the approved plans and in any other approved documents forming part of the application.

 

Reason: To ensure the development proceeds in accordance with the approved plans in the interests of proper planning.

 

Conditions which apply or relate to matters which are to be observed following completion of the development:

 

8. The hours of use of the hereby approved units shall be limited to:

08:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday and 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays with no Sunday or Bank Holiday operation.

 

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of nearby residents in accordance with policy LP26 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan.

 

9. Notwithstanding the 1987 Use Classes Order (as amended) Units C, D, E, F and G shown on drawing D06 P06 can only be used for purposes falling within Use Class E (g)i)ii) and iii) and for no other uses.

 

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of nearby residents in accordance with policy LP26 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan

 

10. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shown on Drawing No. MPN CUW shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the occupation of the buildings or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

 

Reason: To ensure that an approved landscaping scheme is implemented in a speedy and diligent way and that initial plant losses are overcome, in the interests of the character and appearance of the site and biodiversity in accordance with policies LP21 and LP26 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan.

 

Note:               Councillor M. Devine returned to the Council Chamber at 7.05 pm.

 

Note:               Councillor D. Dobbie returned to the Council Chamber at 7.05 pm.