Rotherham tree nursery plans deferred after no agreement reached over rejection

Applicants Carrier Landscapes Ltd hoped to widen the existing access to a 12ha site off Worksop Road, Lindrick, provide new tracks on the site and erect a water tank and a building to house borehole equipment.

The site is currently used to grow trees and bushes for use on large sites such as housing developments and crematoriums, and the applicants say the proposals will ‘provide a safer, easier and quicker route to the barn instead of the existing narrow and winding track, which hugs the cliff edge’.

Applicant Duncan Carrier told today’s (December 14) planning board meeting that it has been a ‘long, drawn out saga’ to secure permission for the scheme.

Mr Carrier, who has been running his business for 25 years, said there were 31 HGV movements this year, nine of which were articulated lorries.

He added that his business had planted 8,000 trees and 61,000 shrubs this year, employing local people.

Ms. Etchell-Anderson, a residents of Lindrick Dale, objected to the plans, telling the meeting that that A57 is a ‘dangerous road’, and called for the entrance to the site to be moved elsewhere for ‘safety reasons’.

Mr. D. Nos added: “It’s hard to sum up 21 months of hell” and accused the applicant of “running roughshod” over the planning process.

He said that works had been completed in ‘rapid time, before the planning department contacted [the applicant]’, and that ‘contaminated tracks’ have been ‘built over neighbours land’.

Councillor Diane Graham, chair of Anston Parish Council, said that the land had been vacant for a ‘considerable number of years;, and that residents had “suddenly found HGV vehicles practically on [their] doorstep, annihilating the site.”

“It is causing residents an awful lot of distress”.

Councillor Clive Jepson, vice chair of Anston Parish Council, added that the site is an ‘accident waiting to happen’, and that visibility is not wide enough on to the A57.

However, Simon Gammons, RMBC highways development control officer, said that visibility meets industry standards, and that only one accident causing an injury had been recorded in five years on the stretch.

Councillors voted to reject the application, five for and six against.

Nigel Hancock, RMBC’s head of planning, said that the plans were ‘retrospective’, and that councillors had to consider ‘what is a reasonable approach for enforcement action, bearing in mind that the use is lawful, and the access will be used in its substandard state’.

However, upon determining the reason for refusal, councillor Simon Burnett said that officers had ‘months and weeks to prepare’, but the six councillors who voted against the plans had ‘six different opinions’.

Councillor Drew Tarmey proposed that the plans were deferred to allow for an agreement to be reached between the applicant and council, regarding vehicle movements on site, but councillor Robert Taylor said he was ‘uncomfortable’ with the suggestion, as a democratic vote had already taken place.

“I feel quite uncomfortable that we’ve been pushed into this position, having to come up with reasons and rationale.

“We’ve already stated in our dialogue why we oppose [the plans]”.

Chair of the meeting, councillor Alan Atkin however, said: “That’s the problem, members haven’t.

“You have to have reasons for refusal because that will then be the subject of the developer, to go to appeal.

“You went against the officer recommendation, I asked you as members to put forward a reason for refusal and you couldn’t decide between yourselves.”

A second vote was taken to defer the proposals, which were accepted unanimously.