Watery Lane storage plans get the go-ahead
THE construction of a storage building on a coal yard that was once mooted as a potential home for a family of travellers has been waved through by planning committee members - despite a last-ditch attempt by a neighbour to highlight potential problems with the plan.
Susan Lewis, who lives next to the coal yard in Clifton, off Watery Lane, wrote to the district council ahead of last Tuesday’s meeting highlighting a string of problems with the application, chiefly around access to the site.
The junctions in Watery Lane had been the scene of many accidents, she said, and damage had been caused to her property by large vehicles.
She urged the planners to impose conditions on any consent given to build the storage unit that would prevent large vehicles from accessing the site.
In response to her concerns, ahead of the meeting, officers pointed out that the storage building would be occupying part of the site used for storage, and would only cover up the items. There were no objections from the highways authority and no suggestion that vehicle movements would change if the plans were to go ahead.
During discussion over the Zoom video conferencing platform, planning committee member Robert Archer, who lives in Clifton, commented on Mrs Lewis’s concerns and asked about the possibility of imposing conditions.
But, with no signs of any intensification of the use of the yard relating directly to the building of the storage facility, he was advised it would not be appropriate to impose any restrictions.
Councillor Archer suggested that the opposition from neighbours might have arisen from a “general level of distrust” following the secrecy that surrounded the site’s proposed use as a traveller encampment.
He reiterated concerns over access to Watery Lane, which villagers have always said is “very tight”.
He did concede there was “no particular planning reason” to vote against the application, which was solely to build an L-shaped storage unit close to the rear boundary of the site.
The motion to approve the application and grant planning permission was passed unanimously.