Sutton Bridge villagers welcome news that South Holland District Council has rejected asphalt plan
Villagers have welcomed news that plans for an asphalt plant have been turned down.
Franklin Bros applied to South Holland District Council to build a semi-mobile asphalt mixing plant at Greenworld Park, Sutton Bridge.
The council has now turned down the application - which received 427 objections - on the grounds that it would be unacceptable due to noise and odour.
One person who was opposed to the application is Pippa Burrows, owner of Pippa’s Pantry, who had previously threatened to move abroad if the plans were approved.
She said: “I am so happy that it’s been refused.
“It has made my day.
“It was going to cause a lot of huge issues for the whole of Sutton Bridge.”
Another person who had opposed the plan was Craig Jackson who said this was a “victory for common sense and people power”.
He said: “The asphalt plant would have been the wrong type of development in the wrong location. The planners have made the right decision in the best interests of Sutton Bridge and local residents.
Sir John Hayes, MP for South Holland and The Deepings, held a public meeting about the plans back in July when residents voiced a string of concerns including the plant’s proximity to a children’s play area in Memorial Park.
Originally plans for the facility, within the existing Nene Transport (Lincs) depot site, were submitted to SHDC in June and amendments were added to the application.
The council stated that it had outlined noise and odour as areas of concern with the applicant but added that the issues were ‘so fundamental to the proposal that it has not been possible to negotiate a satisfactory solution’.
The decision notice read: “The proposed development is considered to be inappropriate to the local area and neighbouring land uses, is an unacceptable use of land due to odour and noise which adversely affects character and should be refused planning permission.”
It goes onto say: “The proposal represents an inappropriate use over and above the existing lawful use, adversely impacting adjoining land uses, out of keeping and failing to respect local character within the locality given their mixed use nature and proximity to residential and leisure uses.”
The notice also stated that the proposal would be ‘an unacceptable use of land, failing to maximise opportunities to improve the character and quality of the area due to odour.’
“It is considered the adverse impacts cannot be suitably mitigated or avoided and would result in harm to amenity.”