Agenda item

Simon Cousins, Planning Team Leader, presented a visual power point display in which he:

 

a)    outlined the detail of the planning site location and proposal as follows:

 

·         Submission of access reserved matter was requested for the construction of a Haul Road between Phase 1A Skellingthorpe Road and Phase 1B Tritton Road relating to hybrid (outline) planning permission 2019/0294/RG3

·         Outline Planning Permission was granted for the Western Growth Corridor urban extension in January 2021 and at the same time full planning permission was granted for the first length of road and the junction with Skellingthorpe Road. The construction of this first length of road and the formation of the new junction was currently under way.

·         Full planning permission was also granted for the first length of road, the construction of the bridge over the railway and the formation of the junction with Tritton Road at the same time as the works detailed above and the application now before Planning Committee sought permission to build a temporary road, a Haul Road, from Skellingthorpe Road, across the length of the Western Growth Corridor site, to the west side of the railway line adjacent to Tritton Road.

·         This road would then be used to transport materials to and from the site of the road bridge over the railway to enable it to be constructed.

·         The east side of the railway could be accessed from Tritton Road and the commencement of works on that side of the railway did not need a further application in relation to access.

 

a)    referred to the site history to the planning application as detailed in full within the officer’s report

 

b)    advised that the application for Outline Planning Permission assessed the proposals for the Western Growth Corridor Sustainable Urban Extension taking account of National and Local Planning Policy; the application for the approval of Reserved Matters should conform to the extant planning permission

 

c)    reported that:

 

·         The application before the Council for consideration now was an application for the Approval of Reserved Matters – this meant the application sought to discharge, or partially discharge, conditions that were included on the Outline Planning Permission granted in 2021.

·         The 2021 planning permission was the most significant material consideration and the details of how this proposal accorded with that permission was the relevant consideration for Committee.

·         Equally, whilst the usual issues of visual and residential amenity were still relevant, the committee would have to decide how much weight to accord those issues whilst also considering the high level of weight to be attached to planning permission being in place for the new road and bridge which the haul road was intended to serve.

·         The conditions which were relevant to the consideration of this reserved matters application were as follows (the 2021 planning permission was attached as an appendix to the application that preceded this one on your agenda – 2023/0736/RM).

·         Each condition listed below required details to be submitted and/or compliance with existing approved details on the original permission:

·         12. Details of access, appearance, landscaping, layout, scale (the reserved matters) – the temporary haul road is relevant to the matter of access;

·         19. Development in accordance with the Flood Risk Assessment;

·         20. Up to date ecological appraisal;

·         21. Written Scheme of Investigation in relation to archaeology;

·         22. Construction Management Plan;

·         25. Construction Environmental Management Plan;

·         29. Implementation of appropriate archaeological works;

·         34. Highway Construction Management Plan;

·         51. Air Quality Assessment;

·         66. No removal of trees or hedgerows during bird nesting season;

·         69. Scheme for recruitment of workers from the local area.

 

d)    outlined the responses made to the consultation exercise

 

e)    referred to the Update Sheet circulated at this evening’s Planning Committee which included an additional response received in respect of the proposed planning application

 

f)     detailed measures within the officers report to address all of the above conditions as follows:

 

·         The application for the haul road was a necessary consequence of the original approval of the road bridge over the railway at the eastern end of the site. The bridge and embankment/abutment could not be put in place entirely from the Tritton Road side of the railway.

·         The detail submitted with the application indicated that the work in respect of the temporary haul route was programmed to commence before the new road and junction that formed Phase 1a of the development was completed.

·         This road and junction work was currently under way and it was proposed that this would be the route into the site for the construction traffic once it was available.

·         In the interim it was proposed that the haul road would be accessed from Pig Lane, which was an unsurfaced lane to the west of Burghley Close.

·         It was proposed that the lane would be upgraded with a bounded surface suitable for the construction vehicles that would use it, and other temporary works would also be undertaken to facilitate the use of this route.

·         Once the Phase 1a road became available traffic would switch to this point of access and then meet with the route of the haul road within the site.

·         The applicants had submitted a Construction Management Plan and a Construction Highways Management Plan that detailed how the works would be undertaken and how the construction traffic would be managed, particularly where it entered and left the public highway on Skellingthorpe Road. These details had been checked and validated by the County Council as Highway Authority.

·         The applicants had also provided details as to how the traffic would be managed along the route of the haul road. Pig Lane was also used as a footpath route and also served the property known as Roe Deer House located close to the Catchwater Drain on the northern edge of Western Growth Corridor.

·         The haul road would also cross public footpaths and so the management of the construction traffic, as carefully detailed in the documents accompanying the application would be important.

·         The route of the haul road across the wider site, had been designed to minimise effect on standing trees and hedgerows and the applicant had submitted an up to date ecological assessment of the impact of the haul road. This also included an assessment of impact where the road would cross ditches and other potential habitat. The detail submitted was comprehensive and provided the necessary reassurance that any significant impact on biodiversity was mitigated.

·         The applicants had undertaken an archaeological evaluation of the area of the haul road and the new connecting bridge, which had demonstrated that the Swanpool Roman Industrial site did not appear to continue into the area that would be affected by the proposed works.

·         However, the evaluation did identify undated archaeological remains in a number of trenches, and it would therefore be prudent that monitoring and recording of groundworks be required to ensure that any finds or features could be recorded appropriately, especially in the light of Historic England’s concerns regarding impacts to the nearby Roman remains, as set out in their letter dated 19/12/23.

·         A written scheme of investigation which addressed these issues was currently in preparation in accordance with condition 21 of the outline permission and would be dealt with by planning condition as part of the consent granted.

·         The applicants had submitted an assessment of air quality as required by condition 51. One neighbour consultee response had questioned the validity of part of that assessment and their representation was copied in full. The haul road was a significant distance from the nearest residential properties except for where it would utilise Pig Lane or the new signalised junction, and the hours of work would be restricted to 7am to 6pm Monday to Friday and 8am to 1pm on Saturdays. This would be a significant mitigation on the effects of noise on any residents.

·         With regard to the scheme of local recruitment there was a condition on the original consent that required that a scheme of recruitment and employment by the contractors for each phase of development should be submitted with each reserved matters application, to demonstrate what measures would be taken to recruit workers from the local area. A statement accompanied the application which satisfied this requirement.

 

g)    concluded that:

 

·         The haul road was a necessary early part of the development which would facilitate the construction of the new road bridge over the railway from Tritton Road.

·         The applicants had satisfactorily demonstrated that the impact of this haul road would be appropriately managed and mitigated.

 

Debbie Grant, local resident addressed Planning Committee raising objections to the proposed planning application. She covered the following main points:

 

·         Good evening ladies and gentlemen.

·         She thanked Members for allowing her the opportunity to address Planning Committee this evening.

·         She was here to express her deep concerns and objections regarding a development near Lincoln Holiday Retreat, which was not only her home, but also the location of her family business.

·         The retreat was nestled at the very end of Pig Lane. It was a haven of tranquillity and natural beauty.

·         Its unique selling point lay with providing a retreat location amidst a natural habitat, allowing her guests to unwind in private in hot tubs with the Lincoln skyline view.

·         We took pride in offering space through relaxation, exploration through lovely walks, bird watching and creating a pet friendly environment for all to enjoy.

·         Over the years we had built a reputation for being a serene escape from the hustle and bustle of city life.

·         Our location was a mile walk from Lincoln City Centre or the pub on the riverbank.

·         We were an attraction for the wildlife enthusiasts and those seeking the wonder of our beautiful gardens and grounds.

·         No longer the modest cultivation of land surrounded us now though. Now in the melancholic air of the sub-let fields, mud was being driven up and down the lane constantly, and degradation had occurred rapidly.

·         It was unfair on authorised vehicles and pedestrians.

·         Pig Lane, once a lovely journey had turned into navigation through a construction site and many entrances.

·         Unfortunately this had impacted her enjoyment, her guest experience and every day running of her business, and consequently, her reputation regarding her means of access

·         To cope with the adverse side effects of this, she employed someone seven days a week for two hours a day to clear mud and pot hole fill.

·         She stressed that she was not opposed to progress or development, however, the current situation was causing her significant anxiety, frustration and loss of income.

·         Despite assurances that businesses would not suffer and support would be provided, the reality was starkly different.

·         Attempts had been made to discuss these concerns with the Chief Executive of Lincoln City Council, but they had met with delays.

·         This left her as an isolated business owner with services and others reluctant or refusing to use Pig Lane.

·         If the haul road crossing Pig Lane would all become a bonded surface, the issue of dry or wet mud would be a growing concern and both brought hazards.

·         A sweeper was used on Skellingthorpe Road to disperse mud accumulation and debris, should Pig Lane not have the same respect?.

·         The traffic laws were not being adhered to. The sweeper faced a challenge as it could not keep mud clear if the area being treated was not a bonded surface.

·         The centre section of Pig Lane was made up of tarmac chippings, the Council obtained a quote for a bonded surface, however this work was not completed before construction work started.

·         Clear and visible signage to the Retreat should remain on post to avoid confusion, and in principle, the presence of marshals was welcome to play a crucial role in addressing issues promptly and maintaining control.

·         Availability of use should align with the operational hours of any site deliveries and priority should be given to her Retreat guests.

·         The verge and dyke maintenance was important to protect the local wildlife, especially the Roe Deer jumping out, to prevent accidents and promote the well-being of the surrounding eco system.

·         A security key pad gate was vital to stop unwanted visitors and nuisance experienced since the development started.

·         The noise was a concern due to the nature of her business. HGV’s cut corners at Pig Lane and mounted the pavement.

·         We experienced heavy traffic and long waits, exiting was difficult.

·         Increased haulage to the site would impact on the Retreat.

·         She would further like to ask if borough pits would be connected to the haulage road alongside the gardens and the lane, this was very concerning and inconsiderate to her business.

·         Due to many issues with the water supply of which the Council were aware since the development started, could she have a new water supply before the haulage road was installed.

·         The contract farmers now entered and exited Skellingthorpe Road in convoys to access the sub-let fields. Would they also use this haulage road and then in the future drive through the new estate roads?

·         She asked for a bridge at Main Drain to be relocated to stop driving through.

·         (Five minutes speaking time now ended)

 

Alistair Lewis, representing the Applicant addressed Planning Committee in support of the proposed planning application. He covered the following main points:

 

·         Good evening everyone.

·         He was a Contracts Director with Graham Construction the applicant for the reserve matters application for this temporary haul route.

·         Graham Construction were a U.K wide civil engineering contractor with considerable experience in the highway and rail sectors.

·         Graham was appointed by the City of Lincoln Council in May last year to develop the design proposals for the new road and pedestrian bridges over the railway from Tritton Road.

·         This part of the scheme availed from significant Central Government investment via the Levelling Up Fund.

·         The construction of a temporary haul road was one of the first activities to be commenced as part of the construction phase of the project, and was essential for its success.

·         Without boring the audience too much on why the haul road was essential;

·         The new access bridge over the railway was located next to Chieftain Way as detailed on the map during the PowerPoint presentation.

·         The bridge would provide access to the eastern end of the overall scheme, and future development of the 1b site, both of which already had planning permission granted.

·         The Eastern approach to the bridge would be constructed directly off Tritton Road, however, access to the western side was currently restricted by the railway line and the Catchwater.

·         The temporary haul road from Phase 1a to the rail over bridge, some 2 kilometres in length, was essential to build the western abutment and substructure ahead of the main bridge components being delivered.

·         The bridge deck beams would not require access via the haul road as they would be lifted in place from the eastern side.

·         Significant amounts of granular fill material would also be required to build the approach embankments. We intended to source this from within the site to avoid the need for significant deliveries, utilising the haul road.

·         Phase 1a development adjacent to Pig Lane was well underway.

·         The new access road from Skellingthorpe Road through the Phase 1a site was due to be completed later this summer.

·         As construction of the haul road commenced before Phase 1a was available for use, vehicle access may initially be via Pig Lane. This shared access of Pig Lane was necessary to deliver the materials and equipment to construct the haul route.

·         Once Phase 1a roads were completed, vehicular access would switch to the new infrastructure and interface to Pig Lane would be via a single crossing point.

·         The route of the haul road had been carefully planned; preconstruction, environmental, geotechnical and archaeological investigations had helped its route to be determined.

·         Moreover, the route had been selected to skirt along the existing hedge boundaries wherever possible. This avoided severance of agricultural lands into unsuitable field parcels and also minimised disturbance to the hedge lines and utilised existing field gates.

·         The retention of the hedges helped to screen the existing properties from nearly all of the haul route. At its closet point, the Haul road was situated over 200 metres from the residential housing south-west of the Catchwater and over 800 metres south of the Lincoln Holiday Retreat.

·         ‘At the closest point’ represented the start of the haul road, therefore, as the construction of the haul road continued that distance was actually increased.

·         To construct the haul road a relatively small workforce would be required, plus some supervisory staff. This was due its linear nature providing limited work performance at any one time.

·         A detailed Construction Environmental Management Plan had been developed for the project, including mitigation measures for construction related noise.

·         In summary, the successful delivery of the bridge project required access to the western side of the railway via this temporary haul road, in order to build the western approach embankment and abutment prior to the main bridge components being installed.

·         The haul road and its location, like the entire project, had been carefully planned to consider ecology, the environment, cultural heritage and stakeholders, to minimise any impact.

·         (Five minutes speaking time now ended)

 

The Committee discussed the content of the report in further detail.

 

The following questions and comments were received from members and responded to by officers:

 

·         Thank you. His question went back to his previous question. The haul road mentioned words such as ‘as soon as possible’ This didn’t mean a great deal for local residents. More accurate timings on this were required because he had honestly thought unless he had missed it, that once the bell mouth was opened up, all works traffic would go through there, including any road traffic that was going to go through to the new bridge.

·         : The Pig Lane road was obviously going to cost quite a sum of money to become a bonded road, together with other necessary provisions he was sure. Why was this money not being used in the first stage of the main road that was going to be built eventually?

·         He was concerned for residents because they had already had a year of this, and were going to have to cope with more traffic, even though the bonded road would make a difference, possibly making it quieter with less dust, etc.

·         There was a current issue of vibration which was being investigated, and consultations were being held with residents of some of the houses regarding this, together with cracks to their buildings. He was concerned that this application would get the go-ahead before the problems had been discussed and sorted with residents.

·         : He didn’t see why couldn’t go through the main road to build this road. He also needed reassurance on timings; it could be 2, 3 or 4 years which was no good for residents. We needed a cap on the timeframe as a matter of urgency and respect to local residents.

·         Three questions first please.

·         : Was any consideration given to routing the temporary haul road along the proposed route of the Spine Road? Would that have resulted in any mitigation on the final cost of the Spine Road and speeded it along?

·         He had listened to the reasons why the route of the haul road had been picked and fully appreciated it was essential to the completion of the project. Without it the bridge could not be built and Phase 1a, 1b could not go ahead, and little else without it.

·         : What was the expected completion date for the new junction and the new road? He walked past it every day and had seen significant progress certainly in the last couple of weeks. As we had been told, that would be the main access once ready. When was it expected to be fully functional with permanent traffic lights and pedestrian crossings, signal controlled on each of the four legs?

·         On page 109 of the pack, a Construction Vehicle Movements Plan was available, which gave a histogram of expected vehicle movements. He assumed these were return journeys, so 260 per week were actually 130 return journeys. This linked in with Councillor Bean’s comments and the letter we were presented with at the start of the meeting from the residents of 1 Burghley Road, and the problems they had been suffering already.

·         The plan started 6 May, week commencing 13 May right through to the week commencing 29 July, it projected 150 vehicle movements per day, then in August we moved up to 260. Taking the work timings that were given in the plan, from 7.00am to 6.00pm, 5 days a week and then the half day on Saturdays, through a working week 150 vehicles per week represented 27 vehicle movements per day, or nearly 2.5 per hour, every 25 minutes or so. When it rose to the maximum of 260 per week, this was 47 movements per day, 4.3 per hour, every 14 minutes. That was significant movement.

·         While Pig Lane was being used as the main entry and exit point from there, there was a real safety concern with the current positioning of the temporary traffic lights in that the entry to Pig Lane was within those traffic lights. In other words, it was not controlled by traffic lights. As you approached from the Hartsholme Lake end, when the lights changed colour to green in that direction, people waiting to come out of Pig Lane would either rush to jump the queue that they had just seen moving, or wait and tag on to the end of it. The next point to go green would be Birchwood Avenue, which often led to traffic that appeared to have jumped the lights, however, it was the traffic coming out of Pig Lane tagging on the end.

·         : While Pig Lane was being used as the main exit route from the site, with these considerable number of vehicle movements, plus any other construction related traffic, would there be any additional traffic control onto that point of entry onto Skellingthorpe Road, which was not controlled by traffic lights?

·         With 47 movements per day on top of any other construction traffic, that was significant, and created a significant disturbance for residents of Burghley Road and Haddon Close.

·         Thank you.

·         He was broadly supportive of this application. It was clear we needed the access roads to build a bridge which was desperately needed as part of the development. Unless he had missed it, there wasn’t a direct response within the report documents to the concerns raised by Mrs Grant and it was hard not to be moved by what she said regarding the impact of the development on herself and her business. He appreciated the applicants were not here to speak, so hopefully the officers were able to respond to the concerns raised by Mrs Grant. If not, he would find it very hard to support this scheme, specifically as the proposals were impacting not just a local resident, but local business as well.

·         There was some comments made within her statement about the Authority not perhaps being as responsive as he would like from a public body. There were other various concerns raised about how the applicant was acting as a neighbour to their most impacted neighbour.

·         : Could the Planning Authority provide a response to Mrs Grant?

·         : Was there any condition that could be imposed to ensure that the applicant and developers kept Pig Road clear etc to positively respond to Mrs Grants concerns.? We wouldn’t be doing our job as a Planning Committee if we didn’t dig a little deeper into the comments that had been put in the report and raised here by Mrs Grant this evening.

 

The Planning Team Leader offered the following points of clarification to members:

 

·         In response to Councillor Beans comment and that of Councillor Watt earlier, we were not party to the detailed construction timetable for the development as such. However, there was a clear intention within the Construction Environmental Management Plan for both this application and the previous application, together with a condition on the outline planning permission, that when the new road was available it would be the principle source of access into the site.

·         The graph referred to by Councillor Clarkson which talked about traffic movements indicated work would commence on the haul road  in May/June time. In consultation with the applicant, we were expecting the new road into the site to be completed during the summer. While it was difficult to be absolutely definitive, discussion with the applicants again had suggested as a pessimistic view that it would be six months before that road was available. He was not sure from a planning point of view he could say any more than that.

·         In terms of comments made by Councillor Clarkson in terms of the haul road relative to the Spine Road, as shown on the Masterplan, the Spine Road was an indicative route and subject to change through the master planning process which had recently started for the wider site. As mentioned by the applicants, the line of the haul road was chosen essentially as the line of least resistance across the site, to avoid ecological features and archaeological points of interest.

·         The haul road was a substantial construction, the applicants were certainly aware of this and were considering how it could be utilised in the future were it not to be part of the line of the Spine Road through the site i.e. cycleways, footways across the development were being considered.

·         In terms of the junction completion date he had mentioned this as the summer, although we didn’t have a definitive date from a planning point of view. It was always difficult with these types of work, opening up a development was expensive and complicated Whilst we would all like the stars to line up perfectly, in terms of the new road being available in time for commencement of the haul road, that may not be the case. This was what the applicants were proposing and we were satisfied that there would be an element of overlap, clearly we would want this to be as short as possible.

·         In terms of the histogram diagram referred to, together with traffic movements, the temporary traffic lights, traffic control on Skellingthorpe Road; in discussion with the Highways Authority those traffic controls would need to be adjusted for the volume of traffic mentioned. Ideally, by the time the significant numbers of traffic peaks hit the site, the new road would be available which would be fully traffic signalised and controlled.

·         He understood Councillor Dyer’s comments and the point he was making. He had listened and read Mrs Grants comments with interest. There was a lot of detail that he hadn’t reported within the application from the applicant, in respect of how traffic would be managed along Pig Lane, how a significant element of it would be resurfaced to a level that was much improved from its current status, also times of work, and marshalling of the traffic.

·         As the applicant had stated, at the closest point the haul road was 800 metres away from Mrs Grants property, which was a significant distance to giving reassurance in terms of noise and air quality. Equally, there was a control in terms of hours of operation. It would be difficult to add another condition stipulating that the road be kept clear, as there was already a requirement on the outline planning permission that access along Pig Lane and to the property to the north was maintained at all times. This was put on the outline planning consent originally, to ensure Mrs Grant would have access to her property and business, and to be able to operate successfully at all times.

 

Questions and comments from Members continued:

 

·         He referred to the letter from Historic England at page 119 of the agenda bundle, relating to the Roman ceramic industry, the significant remains of which were present on the site. He also referred to and our response as a Council on page 104, paragraphs 5 and 6. The significant part mentioned that a written scheme of investigation which addressed these issues was currently in preparation in accordance with condition 21 of the outline planning consent and would be reported in the update sheet if received before the meeting, otherwise a condition could be added.

·         : Could officers give guidance as to whether or not a condition needed to be added this evening?

·         She felt a little bit disappointed, although she understood we needed change and new homes as a city. It was disappointing to hear from Mrs Grant that actually as a Planning Authority and a developer, we seemed to be letting people down.

·         Whilst she was sure Mrs Grant appreciated at the start of the development that there would be some kind of impact, Councillor Smalley was not sure we were being entirely fair to how Mrs Grant had suffered a loss of income, and additional expenditure when reading the letter and looking at the detail of how much it was affecting her. Mrs Grant had reached out and not had much of a response. Councillor Smalley was concerned she wasn’t getting a duty of care and felt we had clearly let her down there.

·         Supporting Councillor Dyer’s comments, we were happy to clean the road which obviously we should, however, when there were other businesses and people refusing to use the road at Pig Lane, we should be making sure that it was safe to use as well.

·         : She wondered whether any further support or suggestion could be offered as to how we could assist?

·         : Could the planning officer clarify his statement relating to a ‘pessimistic view’ that it would be six months before the new road into the site would be available, when did that six months start?

·         : Where did this bring us to as regards to Pig Lane being able to return to its original use if there was no definitive date specified?

·         This made it hard for him to vote at this stage of the planning application.

·         In all his dealings in the local vicinity with local residents to the scheme, all the residents had been positive towards the contractors, Lindum, saying they had been very helpful and answered all their questions. He wished to put on record that many residents had been happy with the contractors responses to their concerns

 

The Planning Team Leader offered the following points of clarification to members:

 

·         In response to Councillor C Burke, a condition was suggested on page 105 of the agenda bundle in terms of the archaeological written scheme of investigation that was referred to within the report. The condition dealt with any concerns that the City Archaeologist may hold, and dealt with the issues and representation made by Historic England.

·         In terms of the concerns raised again by Councillor Smalley regarding the impacts on Mrs Grant and her business in particular, as previously stated we had a condition on the outline planning permission that Pig Lane remained open at all times in order she could maintain access, and the two Construction Environmental Management Plans also reiterated this.

·         The planning process could go so far in ensuring that a person’s business was unaffected by development, and equally as members would appreciate, the applicants were in the room listening to the debate, he had no doubt that they would take away the comments and concerns raised, and we would seek to deal with them.

·         In terms of a definitive date for the new road to be available, which he was reluctant to give and could not do so, the graph as part of the agenda bundle indicated a May start for the haul road, therefore six months from then was a pessimistic view of when the main road into the site would be available. It was hoped it would be ready by summer. Six months from May was November, which was why it represented a pessimistic view.

 

Questions and comments from members continued.

 

·         Could the planning officer offer a point of clarification. He walked past this junction every day and had seen significant progress on the Birchwood Avenue side of the development. The opposite side of the road seemed to be completed, however, since the hoarding fences were erected a few weeks ago it was impossible to see into the site.

·         : Was as much progress being made behind the hoarding for the road that would lead to the temporary bridge as was visible at the Birchwood Avenue junction?

·         Looking at the Birchwood Avenue junction it was hard to think it would be six months before it was completed. They were putting in the sub strata, bringing up the levels, laying the curbing and it looked as if they just  needed to complete the fill out of the hole and lay the tarmac.

 

The Planning Team Leader advised that progress was moving forward rapidly, which was why he had used the word ‘pessimistic’ over six months. It was difficult to say for certain as unexpected things could happen. He felt that summer was the most likely completion timescale which was earlier than November.

 

No further comments or questions were forthcoming.

 

The Chair moved to the vote.

 

(Councillor N Chapman and Councillor D Armiger  did not vote as they left the room before the vote was taken and were not party to the full debate.)

 

RESOLVED that:

 

That the application be granted subject to the following condition:

 

 

1. Submission of an archaeological scheme of investigation should it not be received before a decision is taken on the application.