Agenda item

Approval of reserved matters (Access, Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and

Scale) following outline approval B/23/0172 (extension to existing business

including the erection of a storage building, new vehicular access and associated

parking areas)

 

Reed Point, Spalding Road, Sutterton, Boston, PE20 2EP

 

Mr Richard King, Envirotyre UK Ltd

Approval of reserved matters (Access, Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale) following outline approval B/23/0172 (extension to existing business including the erection of a storage building, new vehicular access, and associated parking areas)

 

Reed Point, Spalding Road, Sutterton, Boston, PE20 2EP

 

Mr Richard King, Envirotyre UK Ltd

 

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report and advised committee of two updates to the report tabled, both requested by Lincolnshire County Council Highways.  The first being an additional condition in relation to maintain the height of the boundary treatment and a second additional condition for the installation of a 2-metre-wide footway to connect the sites.  

Members were advised that the application had been called-in by Councillor James Cantwellwho had cited concerns in respect of significant visual impact contrary to Policy 2 points 1, 4, 7 and Policy 3 point1.  Further concerns cited also included a lack of suitable parking and turning space.  Drainage of the site being of paramount importance due to flooding in the vicinity and finally assessment against policies 2,3, and 4 of the Local Plan.

The site was a small field located outside the village of Sutterton, close to the A17.   The site was a triangular piece of grassland, wider to the north, with a vehicular access and a small area of hardstanding towards the south of the site. The land was within flood zone 3 and was primarily within the Danger for Some hazard area with some small pockets of Danger for Most to the south of the site.

To the north of the site was primarily open agricultural land, with a ribbon of dwellings along Mill Lane extending north away from the northeast corner of the site and a cluster of 5 dwellings on Reed Point, which was a private access opposite Mill Lane. To the west was a site owned by Anglian Water. Along the east of Spalding Road were a pair of commercial sites, including Envirotyre to the southeast, accompanied by individual dwellings in conjunction with those uses.  The site’s last lawful use is agricultural but there has been some intermittent storage of vehicles in connection with the Envirotyre site. The proposal sought reserved matters approval for the access, appearance, layout, landscaping, and scale in connection with the erection of a storage building, granted outline planning permission under reference B/23/0172.   The proposed building would be approximately 6.75m to the ridge and 4.75m to the eaves, and it would be 45m x 60m, giving an internal floor area of 2672m2. The proposal includes tree planting along the boundary with Spalding Road with a group of trees in the north east corner by the existing dwelling and at the southernmost point of the site, it also includes a new hedgerow along the northern boundary and along Spalding Road. Two additional plans had been submitted following consultation responses from the highway authority showing a swept path analysis for HGV’s entering, leaving and manoeuvring within the site and a plan detailing the level of parking provided on the site.

 

Representation was received in objection to the application by Ms K Edwards which included:

 

Confirming she was speaking on behalf of neighbours at Reed Point, Ms Edwards advised that their concerns were in respect of the size, scale and appropriateness of the development which would have an ongoing impact on other things in the area.  Further concerns had been voiced at the impact of the larger building on flooding and drainage of the site as the site was in flood zone 3, and at the environmental impact of any light pollution on wildlife within the site which was a habitat for birds and bats. Mindful of the lack of objection by LCC Highways, members were advised that residents had ongoing concerns in respect of traffic in the vicinity of the site and although the access had been moved, there were issues of HGV’s travelling through the village and historically a number of accidents at the junction of the A17. Concluding their representation, Ms Edwards noted that residents were very concerned at the tyre recycling and did not want to see tyres stored so close to their properties due to the fire risk of the product.  They felt the business had outgrown the site on the edge of the village and it would have a visual impact on the village.

 

Member questions were tabled to Ms Edwards who responded as follows:

 

In response to a question querying any issues residents had with the operation of the company on its current site, Ms Edwards advised that there had been issues with very bright lighting impacting on a neighbour and also with HGV’s going through the village when they were not supposed to.  Furthermore, residents felt that the company had not been very sympathetic to residents historically when residents had tried to liaise with them.  Ms Edwards stressed that residents were not opposed to or had any issues with the actual business itself, but with future housing in the village planned, felt that the business had out grown the site and a more suitable location could be found.

 

The Senior Planning Officer confirmed that drainage was an outline consideration and whilst a SUDs scheme not yet been received, even if it had it could not be discharged by the application under consideration.  It would require a separate discharge. 

A preliminary ecology assessment had been carried out at outline stage and had not identified any protected species.  Recommendations for mitigation had been primarily bird boxes which were on the layout presented.

A condition was in place in respect of lighting and all details of the lighting would be required upfront before any installation began.

An expansion of the waste process from the main site would require a separate application to Lincolnshire County Council who were the waste authority.

 

Representation was received from Mr A Clover the agent for the applicant which included:

 

Referencing the outline permission already granted in December 2023 by officer delegation, Mr Clover voiced his surprise at this application coming to committee for determination and for the reasons noted for the Call-In which were all controlled by conditions.

Visual impact and the floor and ridge heights had been considered acceptable at outline along with a robust landscaping scheme.

Flooding and drainage were not a material consideration for this application and as an update, members were advised that work was ongoing in the background in respect of drainage with percolation tests having been carried out. A scheme for sustainable drainage would be submitted.

LCC Highways had no concerns with the scheme and had supported the application with their request for a footpath being agreed in the outline application.  There was adequate parking for both staff and HGVs with no issues in respect of manoeuvrability of any vehicles.

Offering some background Mr Clover advised that two local people who had extensive knowledge of the product, recognised the need for an outlet in Lincolnshire.  Planning application had been granted in 2013 along with a robust EA permit allowing them to move to a purpose build site.  Originally six members of staff were employed and that had now grown to 35 local people having employment at the site. The business now needed more storage and parking and to move to the proposed site over the road, due to the owners having made unsuccessfully attempts to purchase land adjacent to the existing site. 

 

Member questions were tabled to Mr Clover who responded as follows:

 

Committee were reassured that Envirotyre worked to strict rules and regulations and in compliance with a process governed by permit and regulated by the Council.  The business served a genuine need in the area and had been successful but now struggled to operate on the existing site. The expansion would make the business stronger and operate better.

 

The proposed storage facility would accommodate both whole and bailed tyres which would be stored and then moved on from the site for recycling.  Whilst the new facility would probably generate a minimum number of new jobs due to it being solely a storage facility, the other site could increase due to the re-structuring of the operation which could generate further employment.

 

Representation was received from the Ward Member Cllr James Cantwell which included:

 

Thanking the speaker who spoke in objection to the application, Councillor Cantwell advised her had heard from a number of residents with several valid reason of concern raised.   He further noted that Sutterton Parish Council had objected to the application.

Members were advised that whilst he was not in opposition to development on the land but wanted it to be sympathetic to residents and to be mindful of the landscape and heritage of the area.  Citing a number of points within the report tabled members were referred to points which included 7.7  and 7.13, and advised that further detail was required, and that 7.16 be given due regard to avoid a haven for vermin.  In relation to 7.27 Councillor Cantwell advised he was not convinced that there was adequate room to manoeuvre on the site and in respect of 8.3 stated that he disagreed the harm had been successfully mitigated and further work was required to achieve agreement by all parties.

 

Member questioning followed which included:

 

In response to a question seeking what experts had been sourced by Councillor Cantwell and the Parish Council to support the objections raised by Councillor Cantwell, committee were advised that none had been sourced.  When asked if the objections raised were of Councillor Cantwell’s own opinion, Councillor Cantwell agreed stating they were also based on the objections of the Parish Council and the residents.  

 

It is recorded that Councillor Cantwell absented from the meeting at this part in the proceedings in line with the Planning Committee protocol.

 

Member deliberation followed which included:

 

Whilst noting their surprise at the application being tabled through committee with the outline permission already being in place, a member questioned the possibility of a further two conditions being added. One requiring the installation of a fire hydrant on the site and a second to require the installation of a sprinkler system within the storage building.  Members were reminded of how difficult it was to extinguish tyres once alight and reference was further made by another member to an historic tyre fire in Kirton which had burned for many days and had a significant effect on residents within that area. 

 

In response to the suggestion a member stated they fully supported the recommendation as within the report, but advised they could not support the addition of the two conditions proposed.  Members were advised that there was a very clear process for the disposal and recycling of tyres with the owners having to securing permits from the EA and they did not want to add additional costs onto the applicant unnecessarily.

 

A point of clarification was tabled by the Assistant Director – Planning who advised committee that whilst he understood the request for the additional conditions, he cautioned members to be very careful in making such a decision. Members were reminded that national guidance very clearly stated that where other permissive regimes were in place, planning would not be involved.

 

Councillor Peter Bedford who had moved the two additional recommendations, withdrew them at this point in the meeting, but requested full notation within the minutes of his initial motion and his reasons for the implementation of fire mitigation measures on the site. 

 

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the committee approve the application in line with officer recommendation, subject to the conditions and reasons as identified within the application submitted and subject to the additional two conditions tabled by the officer:

 

The development hereby permitted shall only be undertaken in accordance with the following approved plans;

 

• Drawing No. 59024-01 (Site Location Plan)
• Drawing No. 59024-03 (Proposed Site Plan)
• Drawing No. 59024-04 (Proposed Floor Plan)
• Drawing No. 59024-05 (Proposed Elevations)
• Drawing No. ERPS-BSP-XX-XX-D-H-0001 Rev P01 Internal Layout & Parking Plan
• Drawing No. ERPS-BSP-XX-XX-D-H-0002 Rev P01 Swept Path Analysis Plan

 

Reason: To ensure that the development is undertaken in accordance with the approved details, in the interests of residential amenity and to comply with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan (2019).

 

The materials to be used in the construction of buildings and hard surfaces shall be as specified on Drawing No. 59024-04.

 

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and character in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan 2019

 

The scheme of landscaping and tree planting shown on drawing. no. 59024-03shall be carried out and completed in its entirety during the first planting season following completion of the development. All trees, hedgerows, shrubs and bushes shall be maintained for the period of five years beginning with the date of completion of the scheme and during that period all losses shall be made good as and when necessary.

 

Reason: To ensure that the development is adequately landscaped, in the interests of its visual amenity and character in accordance with Policies 2 and 3 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan 2019.

 

Details of the external illumination of all buildings and areas of the site including details of luminance and fields of illumination shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first use of those buildings and areas and there shall be no external illumination other than that so approved.

 

Reason: To ensure that the Local Planning Authority retains control over these matters, in the interests of the visual amenity of the overall development, to prevent light pollution and to prevent harm to protected species accordance with Policies 2, 3 and 31 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan, 2019.

 

The arrangements shown on drawing no. ERPS-BSP-XX-XX-D-H-0001 and ERPS-BSP-XX-XX-D-H-0002 for the parking, turning, manoeuvring, loading and unloading of vehicles shall be available at all times when the premises are in use.

 

Reason: In the interests of safety of the users of the public highway and the safety of the users of the site in accordance with Policy 2 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan 2019.

 

Prior to the commencement of the development above slab level, details showing the arrangements for covered cycle storage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved arrangement shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the dwellings and retained thereafter.

 

Reason: In the interested of amenity in accordance with Policies 7 and 36 of the South East Lincolnshire Local Plan 2019.

 

Paragraph 13 of Schedule 7A to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 states that planning permission is deemed to have been granted subject to the “biodiversity gain condition” which means development granted by this notice must not begin unless:

 

(a) a Biodiversity Gain Plan has been submitted to the planning authority, and

(b) the planning authority has approved the plan.

 

Biodiversity net gain does not apply to applications for reserved matters.

 

Based on the information submitted in the planning application documents, the Planning Authority considers that this permission is exempt from biodiversity net gain, and as such does not require approval of a biodiversity gain plan before development is begun.

 

Statutory exemptions and transitional arrangements

 

There are statutory exemptions and transitional arrangements which mean that the biodiversity gain condition does not always apply. These can be found at Paragraph: 003 Reference ID: 74-003-20240214 of the Planning Practice Guidance, which can be found at https://www.gov.uk/guidance/biodiversity-net-gain.

 

Irreplaceable habitat

If the onsite habitat includes irreplaceable habitat (within the meaning of the Biodiversity Gain Requirements (Irreplaceable Habitat) Regulations 2024) there are additional requirements for the content and approval of Biodiversity Gain Plans.

 

Effect of Section 73(2D) of the 1990 Act

Under Section 73(2D) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) where -

(a)  a biodiversity gain plan was approved in relation to the previous planning permission (“the earlier biodiversity gain plan”), and

(b)  the conditions subject to which the planning permission is granted:

(i)  do not affect the post-development value of the onsite habitat as specified in the earlier biodiversity gain plan, and

(ii)  in the case of planning permission for a development where all or any part of the onsite habitat is irreplaceable habitat within the meaning of regulations made under paragraph 18 of Schedule 7A, do not change the effect of the development on the biodiversity of that onsite habitat (including any arrangements made to compensate for any such effect) as specified in the earlier biodiversity gain plan.

 

- the earlier biodiversity gain plan is regarded as approved for the purposes of paragraph 13 of Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in relation to the planning permission.