Residents hit out at ELDC planning committee after controversial Manby decision

ELDC HQ - Tedder Hall, Manby ENGEMN00120140114105907 ENGEMN00120140114105907 ENGEMN00120140114105907
ELDC HQ - Tedder Hall, Manby ENGEMN00120140114105907 ENGEMN00120140114105907 ENGEMN00120140114105907

Anger erupted at East Lindsey’s planning meeting after councillors approved controversial plans for construction of a vehicular access off the B1200 road in Manby.

After the voting – 9-3 in favour – had taken place at the planning committee meeting on Thursday, a villager in the public gallery leapt to her feet and shouted: “I hope you can all sleep in your beds, you lot.”

As she left the debating chamber, committee chairman Coun Neil Cooper called after her: “Good morning to you, too, madam.”

Earlier, ward councillor Terry Knowles had spoken against the application submitted by Mr D. Grantham, claiming the same contractor had been responsible for allowing accumulations of mud on the B1200 deposited from lorries leaving another access road nearby.

“There has been lack of management control,” he complained.

“I’m being bombarded with a barrage of emails, phone calls and personal visits from villagers concerned about the danger. There have already been several minor accidents, not to mention more near-misses than Andy Murray.”

Coun Jill Makinson-Sanders shared the concerns over road danger, saying she had experienced it from cycling along that stretch of road. “There is a huge amount of children living in the area,” she said. “Why the need for another access?”

The chairman warned the committee not to be ‘led up the garden path’ by objections, saying the application should be judged on its merits.

“How the applicant chooses to use land served by the proposed new access is up to him,” he said.

Case officer Chris Panton reminded the committee that allegations about mud on the highway were a matter for the police and the highways authority, not for ELDC’s planning department.“They can take action if they feel it is really necessary,” he observed.

According to a note submitted by the applicant, the intention is for ‘no more than five HGV movements a day’ to be served by the new access, though the case officer cautioned that the precise number could not be restricted by a planning condition.

Several metres of roadside hedging will have to be removed to make way for the new access and to allow for visibility splays, but Mr Panton insisted the loss ‘would not undermine the spacious and open character of the rural area’.

He concluded: “The proposed access is unlikely to cause any significant harm to residential amenity or the character of the area and the access is unlikely to be detrimental to highway safety.”