Agenda item

Application 21/01223/FUL

Saltby Airfield, Skillington Road, Sproxton

Minutes:

Application:

21/01223/FUL

Location:

Saltby Airfield, Skillington Road, Sproxton

Proposal:

Change of use of former airfield land to use for the import, storage, and export (B8 use) of straw for commercial purposes; construction of weighbridge and welfare building (retrospective)

 

The Planning Officer (HW) addressed the Committee and provided a summary of the application and advised that further representations had been received following publication of the agenda however they did not raise any new concerns that were not already covered in the report. The application was recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

Should the application be approved, an amendment to condition 6 was recommended which stated the hours of operation as being between 0700 and 1900 hours Monday to Friday and no vehicle movements on Sundays and bank holidays, and the second part should be replaced to state, no vehicle movements on weekends and bank holidays.

 

Members raised concerns and the Planning Officer responded as follows:

 

·       With regard to the number of vehicle movements, these were 2 way vehicle movements, 40 movements would likely equate to 20 vehicles into the site and 20 leaving the site in one day

·       Although the applicant had provided weights of the HGVs both empty and at capacity, there were no weight or length limitations placed on the operation by the Highways Authority

·       The application had been assessed by the Leicestershire and Lincolnshire Highways Authorities and was deemed acceptable

·       The accumulative effect of vehicles on the roads had formed part of the assessment including the nearby poultry farm which generated 34 x 2 way HGV movements

·       There had been no weight applied to the report in terms of the environmental impact of renewable energy

·       There was a condition which limited the operation to 40 vehicle movements. This would be recorded by a weighbridge on the site which kept records of vehicle weights and movements and should there be any concerns that the restriction was exceeded then the Council could use enforcement powers to investigate

 

Pursuant to Chapter 2, Part 9, Paragraphs 2.8-2.28 of the Council’s Constitution in relation to public speaking at Planning Committee, the Chair allowed the following to give a 3 minute presentation:

 

Councillor Joey Newton, Sproxton Parish Council

 

Following the speaker’s presentation the following points were noted:

 

·       The application only conditioned the entrance and exit to the site within the application

·       The Planning Officer advised that there was no mechanism for routing the vehicles outside the application site as there were no concerns raised by either of the Highway Authorities and they were not able to control vehicles beyond the site. The entry and exit points were to reduce the impact on neighbouring properties and were not due to highway concerns

·       There had been some consultation with the parish council 

 

Tricia Laurance, Objector

 

Following the speaker’s presentation the following points were noted:

 

·       The Hungerton Farms Road Traffic Assessment had had to be completed  after the school holidays and was issued on 6 October. It had been forwarded to both the Leicestershire and Lincolnshire Highway Authorities

·       The Planning Officer advised that the Highway Authorities had sent in their responses to the report within the last few days. The responses confirmed that the report did not change their position on the assessment of the application. Leicestershire Highway Authority advised that the data provided indicated a lightly trafficked route which did not suggest an issue with excessive speeds. Therefore there was no change to their advice on this planning application. Lincolnshire Highway Authority advised that their response remained unaltered from advice provided in April. They had taken into account the additional information and maintained the development would not result in a severe impact on highway safety or capacity with regard to paragraph 111 of the NPPF

·       The data provided related to the survey which was carried out on the Hungerton to Wyville Road

·       There was a powerplant storage site at Fulbeck Airfield which had a maximum of 20 HGVs in and 20 out per day and 25,000 bales stored on site

 

Frazer Jolly, Farm Manager, Saltby Farms supported by a Planning Consultant and a Highways Consultant

 

Following the speaker’s presentation the following points were noted:

 

·       The Planning Consultant advised there had been consultation with the parish council which had resulted in a change to the routing of HGVs however if Members considered a different route was more appropriate, then they would agree with that

·       The Planning Officer advised that a workshop had been held with the parish councils, the chair and ward members and as a result the rerouting was put forward as part of a wider scheme to mitigate harm including the entry and exit points, limiting the number of bales and height of bales on the HGVs within the application site but there would not be any control of the route as part of the application

 

During debate the following points were noted:

 

·       There was concern at there being no passing points on the routes in and out of the site

·       The routes to and from the site were not enforceable which could result in HGVs on unsuitable routes

·       Policy EN10 was considered should a refusal be put forward

·       There was concern that the Hungerton Farms survey and the Highway Authority responses had not been included in the report

·       The Planning Officer clarified that she had explained in her introduction that there had been additional information submitted since despatch of the agenda that did not change the position and was already covered in the report. This was the Hungerton Farms survey and the responses received from the Highway Authorities which did not alter their position

·       The Solicitor advised that routing traffic outside of the site could not be enforced

·       Members could have influence on the entrance and exit points

·       It was noted that traffic accidents for the area were taken into account by the Highway Authorities

·       There was concern at the potential for traffic issues at Denton crossroads

·       The Planning Officer advised that they could not control the routing of vehicles when they exited the site as there was no justification with regard to highway safety

·       The Planning Officer advised that following the consultation with the parish councils and ward members, officers reconsulted on the new proposals with the parish councils and all consultees on the new route

·       Deferral was suggested to enable the applicant to discuss with the parish councils a mutually agreeable plan although the Solicitor pointed out that any such route would not be enforceable, it was felt that following such consultation the Committee would then know that some level of trust and compromise had been reached between the parties

·       The Solicitor advised that this would not be a strong reason for deferral due to the risk of non-determination of the application

·       The Solicitor advised that weight restrictions were set by the Highway Authorities

 

(The meeting was adjourned at 7.52 pm and reconvened at 8 pm)

 

·       There was some consensus for a deferral for more community engagement by the applicant to consider the routing of the HGVs and it was felt that EN10 was applicable due to the impact on the homes and residents of Croxton Kerrial

 

Councillor Evans proposed that the application be deferred. Councillor Smith seconded the motion.

 

RESOLVED

 

That the application be DEFERRED

 

(5 for, 1 against, 3 abstentions)

(Councillor Illingworth left the meeting during the debate and before the vote at 8.02 pm.)

 

REASONS FOR DEFERRAL

Being in conflict with policy EN10

To facilitate further discussion between the applicant and the community with regard to the routing of the HGVs to and from the site

Supporting documents: