DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 21 NOVEMBER 2016 Case No: 16/01545/FUL (FULL PLANNING APPLICATION) Proposal: PLANNING APPLICATION ACCOMPANIED BY AN

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT. ERECTION OF 3NO. AGRICULTURAL BUILDINGS FOR FREE RANGE EGG PRODUCTION AND 1NO. AGRICULTURAL BUILDING FOR REPLACEMENT PULLET REARING, TOGETHER WITH ASSOCIATED FEED BINS, ACCESS, HARDSTANDINGS AND DRAINAGE.

Location: FAIRVIEW FARM ST IVES ROAD YELLING PE19 6TW Applicant: MR BIRD Grid Ref: 526629 260785 Date of Registration: 02.08.2016 Parish: YELLING

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE This application has been referred to Development Management Committee as the adjoining Eltisley Parish Council (in South Cambridgeshire District)’s recommendation to refuse is contrary to the officer recommendation which is to approve. 1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION 1.1 This application relates to an approximately 44 hectare site in the

countryside 1.2km north of the village of Eltisley, 1.5km south-east of Yelling village and 1.8km south-west of Papworth. The site is irregularly shaped and has a vehicular access to St Ives Road (B1040), which links onto the A1198 and Yelling and Papworth to the north and the A428 to the south. The site is in Yelling Parish with Eltisley Parish to the south and South Cambridgeshire District to the east of St Ives Road.

1.2 The site comprises the access, grade 2 agricultural land, trees,

hedgerows, 4 ponds, scrub, and a derelict dwelling and outbuildings to the south-west. Two of the ponds are inhabited by Great Crested Newts.

1.3 The site is surrounded by arable land and there are isolated

residential and commercial properties in the area. 1.4 Public Bridleway No. 3 Yelling runs between Yelling and Eltisley

immediately west of the site. 1.5 The proposal is to erect three 137m x 24m poultry houses, with an

eaves and ridge height of approximately 3m and 6.18m respectively with projecting vents, for free range egg production and one 100m x 20m pullet rearing building with an eaves and ridge height of

approximately 3.45m and 6.12m respectively with projecting vents, together with associated feed bins approximately 7.5m high, to upgrade the access and provide hardstandings and drainage and extensive landscaping. The walls and roof of the 4 buildings and the exterior of the food silos would be clad in olive coloured cladding. Surface water will be disposed of via soakaways/infiltration.

1.6 Each building will have the capacity for 32,000 birds, resulting in a

combined total of 128,000 birds for the site. The single rearing unit to the south-west will operate for a period of 16 weeks with a four week turnaround for cleaning before the next incoming flock. The proposed free range egg laying units require a ranging area which amounts to a minimum of 12.8 hectares (32 acres) per laying unit. The three egg laying units will operate for a 60 week period with four weeks at the end for cleaning and turnaround for the next arrival of birds. The poultry houses would have ‘pop holes’ which would provide the birds with daytime access to the outside ranging areas and would be ventilated by high velocity ridge/roof mounted fans each with a short chimney.

1.7 The application follows a scoping opinion (15/70216/SCOP) and is

accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES) under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 1999.

1.8 The application is also accompanied by an Ecological Impact

Assessment, odour assessment and details of the farm waste management, landscape and visual impact assessment, design, access and planning statement, ecological survey, soft landscaping specification, archaeological evaluation report, flood risk and surface water management plan, Environment Agency ammonia screening and transport statement, Great Crested Newts survey report and plant noise assessment to BS4142:2014 ‘Methods for Rating and Assessing Industrial and Commercial Sound’ for the extraction fans.

1.9 The applicant has amended the scheme at officer request to enhance

the landscaping, landscaping specification/ maintenance programme and improve the access as required by the Highway Authority.

2. NATIONAL GUIDANCE 2.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) sets out the three

dimensions to sustainable development - an economic role, a social role and an environmental role - and outlines the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Under the heading of Delivering Sustainable Development, the Framework sets out the Government's planning policies for : building a strong, competitive economy; ensuring the vitality of town centres; supporting a prosperous rural economy; promoting sustainable transport; supporting high quality communications infrastructure; delivering a wide choice of high quality homes; requiring good design; promoting healthy communities; protecting Green Belt land; meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change; conserving and enhancing the natural environment; conserving and enhancing the historic environment; and facilitating the sustainable use of minerals.

2.2 Planning Practice Guidance

For full details visit the government website https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government 3. PLANNING POLICIES 3.1 Saved policies from the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995)

• E7: “Small businesses” • E8: “Small scale employment generating development” • En17: “Development in the countryside” • En25: “General Design Criteria” • CS8: “Water” • CS9: “Flooding” • En12: “Archaeological implications” • En18: “Protection for countryside features” • En20: “Landscape scheme” • En22: “Conservation”

3.2 Saved policies from the Huntingdonshire Local Plan Alterations (2002)

• None apply 3.3 Adopted Huntingdonshire Local Development Framework Core

Strategy 2009 • CS1: “Sustainable development in Huntingdonshire” • CS3: “The Settlement Hierarchy” –development will be strictly

limited to that which has essential need to be located in the countryside.

3.4 Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013)

• LP 1 – ‘Strategy and principles for development’ • LP 6 – ‘Flood Risk and Water Management’ • LP 11 – ‘Built-up Area and the Countryside’ • LP 13 - ‘Quality of Design’ • LP 15 - ‘Ensuring a High Standard of Amenity’ • LP 17 - ‘Sustainable Travel’ • LP 21 – ‘Rural Economy’ • LP 28 – ‘Biodiversity and Protected Habitats and Species’ • LP 29 – ‘Trees, Woodland and Related Features’ • LP 31 - ‘Heritage assets including archaeology’

3.5 Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD):

• Huntingdonshire Design Guide SPD 2007 Part 5 Industrial and Storage Buildings

• Huntingdonshire Landscape and Townscape Assessment SPD 2007

Local policies are viewable at https://www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk 4. PLANNING HISTORY

0901138AGDET Proposed upgrading of an agricultural track details required 2009. 1300314CLED Certificate of lawfulness for use as a single private dwellinghouse approved 2013.

15/70216/SCOP Scoping Opinion for 3 free range egg laying units each for 32000 birds and erection of a pullet rearing building to house 32000 birds-reply issued 10.02.2016.

5. CONSULTATIONS 5.1 Yelling Parish Council: The Parish Council has now met to consider

the application and, given the contention that the application will: (a) comply with all necessary planning legislation and policy statements; (b) meet the three sustainability criteria set out in the National Planning Policy Framework and; (c) implement a range of appropriate measures to mitigate the environmental impacts which it is acknowledged the development will create; accordingly recommends approval subject to conditions (COPY ATTACHED).

5.2 Adjoining Eltisley Parish Council in South Cambridgeshire District:

Object on the basis of size and scale of the development. They are also concerned about the proximity to the village and the impact of traffic, smell, flies etc. (COPY ATTACHED).

5.3 Adjoining Croxton Parish Council: No reply received. 5.4 Adjoining South Cambridgeshire District Council: No reply

received. 5.5 Adjoining Papworth Everard Parish Council in South

Cambridgeshire District: No reply received. 5.6 Natural England- No objection. Air quality impact on Papworth Wood

SSSI, Elsworth Wood SSSI and Portholme SSSI and Special Area of conservation has been considered and the EA ammonia screening assessment is accepted.

5.7 Cambridgeshire County Council (CCC) Highways: Original plans:

No objection subject to revised plans to show access 7.3m wide with 15m kerb radii with vehicle to vehicle visibility splays of 2.4m x 215m. Amended plans: Re-consultation response will be reported to Committee.

5.8 CCC as Lead Local Flood Authority: No objection subject to

condition on surface water drainage scheme. 5.9 CCC Archaeology: No objection subject to archaeological works in a

condition because the surveys and evaluation report identified significant archaeology on the site.

5.10 CCC Rights of Way: No objection- no direct effect on Public

Bridleway 5.11 Beds and Cambs Wildlife Trust: No objection - satisfied with the

survey information and the proposed mitigation/enhancement measures.

5.12 Environment Agency: No objection 5.13 Ramblers Association: No reply received 5.14 British Horse Society: No objection to the development. 5.15 HDC Environmental Protection: No objection. The noise and odour

reports are acceptable. The Environment Agency will regulate this installation under an Environmental Permit and the planning conditions should not duplicate or conflict with the Permit conditions.

6. REPRESENTATIONS 6.1 None received. 7. THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT 7.1 As noted in the first section of this report the application has been

accompanied by an ES. The ES was scoped formally with the Council in February 2016.

7.2 The ES and accompanying reports are considered to assess each

issue satisfactorily for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (as amended). However, it is for the Council to consider whether it agrees or disagrees with the conclusions reached in each part of the ES and then to assess the impacts arising against planning policies and material considerations. Cumulative impacts and alternative sites have also to be considered.

8. ASSESSMENT 8.1 The main issues to consider are the principle of the new poultry farm

in the countryside, the impact of the proposal on the character and appearance of the countryside, the traffic and highway safety implications, the impact on the amenity, impact on protected species and biodiversity, drainage and archaeology.

Principle of new poultry farm in the countryside 8.2 The proposal is to develop a poultry farm on a greenfield site in the

countryside. The applicant operates as an egg production, packing and distribution company based in Swineshead, Bedfordshire. The existing business currently employs 5 farm staff, 30 staff in the egg packing station, 11 drivers and 5 office staff, totalling 51 full time workers. The business currently packs 2.7 million colony eggs and 500,000 free range eggs per week.

8.3 The applicant’s egg production system is currently entirely based on

intensive production in colony cages but in 2012, they started selling bought-in free range eggs. A shift in consumer demand for eggs away from colony egg production combined with the announcement of major food retailers of their intention to phase out intensively produced eggs has jeopardised the future of the applicant’s existing business.

8.4 In order to ‘future proof’ the business, and safeguard the jobs of the existing 51 employees, the applicants advise that they have an essential requirement to diversify into free range egg production. They consider that the proposed development, is essential to maintain the supply of eggs into the packing station and customer base. The applicant also advises that the development will provide 8 new full-time jobs.

8.5 The applicants also point out that the “modern livestock production

unit contributes to food production and national food security in a sustainable way”.

8.6 The proposal will entail the loss of grade 2 agricultural land to

buildings, hardstandings and landscaping, which is unfortunate. However, the development is considered to be essential operational development for an existing rural/ agricultural enterprise and it will contribute to a prosperous rural economy. The principle of the new poultry farm is therefore acceptable on this site and satisfies policies En17 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995), CS1 of the Core Strategy and LP1 and LP 21 of the Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013) and the NPPF, subject to the other elements being satisfactory.

Character and appearance of the countryside 8.7 The site currently makes a positive contribution to the character and

appearance of the locality with the undeveloped space and landscaping. The large buildings, the silos and altered access will intrude into views, for example from the bridleway and road. However, the existing landscaping will be supplemented by extensive new landscaping which will provide considerable screening for the development and soften views of the buildings from the roads and western bridleway.

8.8 The proposed buildings and silos are of a simple form and the colour

of the external cladding can be controlled by condition to minimise the visual impact. The areas of hardstanding would have little visual impact and are considered necessary to the practical operation of the site.

8.9 Conditions can also secure the retention of existing landscaping and

the provision of the proposed landscaping. 8.10 It is concluded that the proposal would not be unduly intrusive or

significantly detrimental to the character and appearance of the countryside and will be in accordance with policies En25 and En20 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995, CS1 of the Core Strategy 2009 and LP1 and LP13 of the Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013).

Traffic and highway safety 8.11 The existing access on to the 60mph road is to be upgraded to

accommodate Heavy Goods Vehicles and provide satisfactory visibility splays.

8.12 The applicant has revised the plans to address the County Council request for a 7.3m wide access with 15m kerb radii and vehicle to vehicle visibility splays of 2.4m x 215m. The applicant has provided confirmation of the kerb radii dimensions and these have been forwarded to the County Council and the details can be conditioned.

8.13 Traffic movements will be typically 17 trips totally 34 in and out of the

site in a day increasing to 25 trips (50 in and out once a week) for feed delivery and manure removal.

8.14 The traffic assessment concludes that the additional traffic

movements are ‘well within daily variations of traffic flows and would not result in a detrimental impact on the operation or safety of the existing highway network’.

8.15 Yelling Parish Council suggests that a restriction should be imposed

to deter HGV vehicular movements through Yelling village during the construction and operational phases of the proposed development. It is noted that the applicant’s Traffic Statement states that HGV traffic movements entering and leaving the site will only use the B1040 St Ives Road south towards the A428 Cambridge Road and thence either towards Cambridge or St Neots but the Parish Council advise that Yelling is already suffering from high traffic volumes from vehicles seeking to by-pass the A428. However, it is considered that it is not essential to secure such a condition due to the limited traffic movements entailed.

8.16 Subject to the advice of CCC Highways about the dimensioned plan

of the kerb radii of the access, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of traffic and highway safety in accordance with policies E8 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995 and LP17 of the Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013).

Impact on amenity 8.17 The neighbouring residences closest to the site are at Broadview,

approximately 275 m north-east of the closest of the proposed poultry houses and Hunters Chase, Gate House and two other residences that would be between approximately 430 m and 470 m north-east of the closest of the proposed poultry houses.

8.18 The proposal will generate additional traffic including HGV’s but it is

considered that this will not cause undue disturbance. 8.19 The proposal could cause, noise, mainly from the fans of the

ventilation system, odour, dust, fly and waste issues. However, the odour and noise assessments indicate that the noise and odour levels will be satisfactory. In addition, the proposal will be controlled by an environmental permit managed by the Environment Agency which will require the applicant to adhere to guidelines on noise, odour and emissions from the site. The Environment Agency has no objection to the proposal.

8.20 The noise and odour reports submitted with the application indicate

that the proposal would not have an unacceptable physical relationship with any neighbouring properties. It would however, be appropriate to impose a condition to ensure that either the ventilation

system, which will generate noise, is either installed as specified in the noise report, as this noise level is acceptable or that if an alternative system is used, that a revised noise assessment be submitted and approved so that adverse noise impacts are avoided.

8.21 A condition can control external lighting in the interests of minimising

potential light pollution. 8.22 Yelling Parish Council seek ‘additional undertakings which may be

necessary to protect the amenity of neighbouring communities and recreational users of the surrounding area’ beyond the IPPC regulations. Eltisley Parish Council’s objections and Yelling Parish Council’s concerns are noted. However, given the scale of the distances of separation between the development and houses and villages, it is considered that the proposal would not have an unduly harmful impact on amenity of residents and it is considered that the proposal would not have an unduly harmful impact on amenity generally, for example for the users of the adjoining bridleway, and the proposal accords with policies E7 and E8 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995 and LP15 of the Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013).

Impact on protected species and biodiversity 8.23 The submitted Ecological and Great Crested Newt reports are

acceptable and can be approved. A condition can secure the implementation of the recommendations from the two specialist’s reports such as protection of Great Crested Newt areas during construction, retention of the ponds/their habitat, biodiversity enhancement and protection from chickens for the Great Crested Newt with barriers in perpetuity around ponds 2 and 4.

8.24 Subject to the implementation of the mitigation strategy, the proposal

should not have a significant impact on any legally protected species or habitat and will enhance biodiversity at the site with the creation of new wildlife corridors and extensive landscaping and will accord with policy En22 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995 and policy LP28 of the Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013) and paragraph 118 of the NPPF.

Drainage 8.25 Conditions can secure the implementation of the proposed drainage

details which include a sustainable drainage system with attenuation entailing swales discharging to watercourses, site run-off limited to greenfield rates and sealed tanks for dirty wash water. The proposal should not exacerbate flooding or result in pollution. The potential environmental effects of pollutants leaching into the drainage network and groundwater is a matter for the Environment Agency to regulate via the IPPC environmental permit.

Archaeology 8.26 The archaeological evaluation has identified significant archaeological

evidence for settlement related activity of Middle Iron Age date and some evidence for Roman activity. The development would result in severe damage or destruction of these important archaeological

assets and a programme of archaeological investigation to mitigate the archaeological impact of the development can be conditioned in accordance with policies En12 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995 and policy LP31 of the Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013).

Cumulative impacts 8.27 Cumulative effects are those effects which would be likely to arise

from the combination of likely significant effects from the proposed development with likely significant effects of other committed developments in the vicinity. It is considered that there are no significant cumulative impacts such as on the landscape and visual appearance, noise, odour and protected species which cannot be mitigated against.

Choice of location / Alternative sites 8.28 The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations require an

Environmental Statement to cover alternatives studied by the applicants.

8.29 The applicants existing egg production units at Swineshead do not

have sufficient adjacent land to enable conversion to free range egg laying units. In order to facilitate the development of a free range egg laying business, the applicants sought to purchase a farm to develop free range egg production.

8.30 Fairview Farm was identified by the applicants as a potential location

for the development and the applicant commenced pre application enquiries with both the Local Planning Authority and the Environment Agency to further assess the suitability for the proposed use.

8.31 The applicants presented a development brief to the Local Planning

Authority as a pre application enquiry which was registered under 15/70221/PENQ. The response to the pre application enquiry was issued on 10th February 2016 and confirmed that the principle of the proposed development at Fairview Farm is acceptable, subject to other matters being resolved.

8.32 The applicants also undertook pre application enquiries with the

Environment Agency in connection with the requirement for an IPPC permit. The initial screening for the proposal at Fairview Farm showed the proposed location to be acceptable from an IPPC screening prospective.

8.33 In view of the initial support for the proposals from the Local Planning

Authority and the Environment Agency, the applicants proceeded to purchase the land and pursue the planning application for the proposed development. As the site was considered to be a suitable location for the development, the applicant has not considered an alternative site. This is considered to fulfil the requirement of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.

Conclusion 8.34 The conclusions reached in each part of the ES are agreed and the

impacts arising have been assessed against planning policies and material considerations.

8.35 Having regard to applicable national and local planning policies, and

having taken all relevant material considerations into account, it is recommended that the application be approved for the reasons set out above, subject to the advice of CCC Highways.

9. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL subject to

conditions to include the following

• Time limit • As plans • Archaeology • Access and visibility • Surface water drainage • Ventilation system and noise • External lighting • Landscaping, tree and hedge retention, replacement and

maintenance • External materials • Ecology mitigation and enhancement.

If you would like a translation of this document, a large text version or an audio version, please contact us on 01480 388388 and we will try to accommodate your needs. CONTACT OFFICER: Enquiries about this report to Sheila Lindsay Senior Development Management Officer 01480 388247

1

Huntingdonshire DC Public Access

From: Phil Himbury <phil@himbury.freeserve.co.uk>

Sent: 04 September 2016 18:56

To: DevelopmentControl

Subject: Planning Permission Consultation - Fairview Farm St Ives Road Yelling (ref

16/01545/FUL)

For the attention of Ms Sheila Lindsay

Dear Ms Lindsay,

I refer to your letter dated 11th August in the above connection, (letter forwarded by email of even date).

The nature of this application, i.e., the development of a free range egg production facility to house 128,000 birds, meant that it needed to be supported by an Environmental Impact Assessment. The applicant’s agent has also incorporated reports by a number of professional advisors which focus on particular environmental aspects stemming from the application, for example, landscape and visual impacts, waste management, odour, noise, etc., and the relevant elements of national and regional planning policy resulting in a significant volume of related documentation in excess of 300 pages.

The Parish Council has now met to consider the application and, given the contention that the application will:

(a) comply with all necessary planning legislation and policy statements;(b) meet the three sustainability criteria set out in the National Planning Policy Framework and;(c) implement a range of appropriate measures to mitigate the environmental impacts which it is

acknowledged the development will create;

accordingly recommends approval.

However, in reaching this conclusion the Council noted that the various specialised reports which support the application have been commissioned by advisors engaged on behalf of the applicants and so cannot be considered to be entirely independent. As a result, the Council’s recommendation is subject to the following conditions:

Section 3.5 of the Traffic Statement states that HGV traffic movements entering and leaving the site will only utilise the B1040 St Ives Road towards the A428 Cambridge road and thence either towards Cambridge or St Neots. Yelling is already suffering from high traffic volumes from vehicles seeking to by-pass the A428 and the Parish Council considers that any approval should preclude any HGV vehicular movements through the village during both the construction and operational phases of the proposed development.

The development proposes three 137m x 24m poultry houses and one 100m x 20m pullet rearing building each having a ridge height greater than 6m with attendant infrastructure. These would be significant structures in an otherwise undeveloped rural landscape so the Parish Council is not entirely in agreement with the commentary in the Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment, (summarised at Paragraph 8 of the Design, Access & Planning Statement), that “the proposed scheme would not be out of character with its surroundings when considered as part of the wider landscape” and “the function and purpose of these buildings are clearly linked to an agricultural use of the surrounding land”. This Assessment concedes that the significance of the impact to two of the seven recorded viewpoints would be ‘moderate’ with one of the further viewpoints subject to a ‘major/moderate’ impact. As a result, the Parish Council considers that any approval must require the implementation of all of the proposed environmental enhancements as mitigation to any adverse impacts and to make a positive contribution to the wider landscape.

2

The Environmental Impact Assessment and supporting advisor reports covering the matters listed in HDC’s Scoping Opinion letter dated 10th February 2016 conclude, broadly, that any potential nuisances will either not be material or can be mitigated by the adoption of appropriate measures. The IPPC regulations and general legislative framework may well provide for remediation in the event of failure to comply with the appropriate conditions, however, the Parish Council considers that any approval should also include additional undertakings which may be necessary to protect the amenity of neighbouring communities and recreational users of the surrounding area.

When making its deliberations the Parish Council also noted that paragraph 2.5 of the Design, Access & Planning Statement indicates that the overriding rational for the proposed development is to provide for the expansion into free range egg production because the future of the applicant’s entire business has been jeopardised by a shift in consumer demand away from colony egg production. However, at paragraph 11.8 this purposes is seemingly discounted in favour of meeting the ‘social’ dimension of the NPPF’s sustainable development purpose as the proposed “modern livestock production unit contributes to food production and national food security in a sustainable way”... “making optimum use of increasingly scarce resources and without causing harm to the environment”. While possibly not a material planning consideration, the Parish Council felt it is interesting that the purpose of the proposed development changes depending on the condition it is targeted at fulfilling.

Finally, I must apologise for the slight delay in responding on this application. This was caused by broadband connectivity issues so thank you for agreeing the extra time.

Your sincerely

Phil HimburyClerkYelling Parish Council

1

Huntingdonshire DC Public Access

From: developmentcontrol@huntsdc.gov.uk

Sent: 14 September 2016 11:48

To: DevelopmentControl

Subject: Comments for Planning Application 16/01545/FUL

Planning Application comments have been made. A summary of the comments is provided below.

Comments were submitted at 11:47 AM on 14 Sep 2016 from Miss Jane Bowd.

Application Summary

Address: Fairview Farm St Ives Road Yelling St Neots PE19 6TW

Proposal:

Planning Application Accompanied By An Environmental Statement. Erection of 3No. agricultural buildings for free range egg production and 1No. agricultural building for replacement pullet rearing, together with associated feed bins, access, hardstandings and drainage.

Case Officer: Sheila Lindsay

Click for further information

Customer Details

Name: Miss Jane Bowd

Email: eltisleypc@btconnect.com

Address:Village Hall, Overcote Lane, Needingworth, St Ives PE27 4TU

Comments Details

Commenter Type:

Town or Parish Council

Stance: Customer objects to the Planning Application

Reasons for comment:

Comments: Council object on the basis of size and scale of the development. They are also concerned about the proximity to the village and the impact of traffic, smell, flies etc.

Application Ref:16/01545/FUL© Crown copyright and database rights 2016

Ordnance Survey HDC 100022322

1:10,000Scale = Date Created: 02/11/2016

Development Management Panel

Location:Yelling

KeyThe SiteConservation AreaListed Building

PROPOSED FREE RANGE EGG LAYING UNIT - 137m x 24m

PROPOSED FREE RANGE EGG LAYING UNIT - 137m x 24m

Parking & Turning Area

Parking & Turning Area

FeedBins

FeedBins

2.4M X215MVISIBILITYSPLAY

2.4M X215MVISIBILITYSPLAY

7300

15M RADII

15M RADII

DRAWN BY

SCALE

DRAWING TITLE

JOB TITLE

REVISIONDATE DRAWING No

CLIENT

dta

david tucker associates

t r a n s p o r t p l a n n i n g c o n s u l t a n t s

Forester House, Doctors Lane,

Henley in Arden,

Warwickshire B95 5AW

Tel: +44(0)1564 793598

Fax: +44(0)1564 793983

www.dtatransportation.co.uk