Craven Arms meat firm sees planning appeal dismissed

An appeal over plans to cover a watercourse at a south Shropshire meat processing plant has been dismissed by government planning inspectors.

The scheme proposed by Euro Quality Lambs in Craven Arms to culvert a brook at their site off Dale Street to create extra parking and turning areas for lorries was turned down by Shropshire Council earlier this year.

In their original application, the business said extending the culvert which runs under Corvedale Road would remove a “hazardous and unnecessary incidental operational obstruction” to the site, and said covering over the water course would protect it from the risk of industrial pollution.

A flood risk assessment submitted with the original application indicated that while the site was in a high-risk flooding zone, the proposed use of the land as a lorry park placed it in a ‘less vulnerable’ category, which was not disputed by planners.

However in January, the council’s planning committee said they agreed with the opinion of their planning officers who had recommended the scheme for refusal due to concerns that the proposed 70 metre culvert under the site could become blocked by debris and lead to flooding elsewhere.

And on appeal, government planning inspectors agreed that the risk of flooding off site as a result of the brook being culverted had not been addressed.

“In the absence of detailed information that demonstrates otherwise, I cannot be satisfied that the issue of flooding elsewhere would be capable of being satisfactorily mitigated,” said Inspector Elaine Moulton.

“Whilst I acknowledge the benefits to the business that would arise from the proposal through the removal of the barrier and the extension of the lorry park, that does not justify development I have found to be unacceptable.

“The proposed development conflicts with the development plan as well as national guidance and legislation and there are no material considerations, either individually or in combination, that outweighs the identified harm and associated development plan conflict.”

The applicant had indicated that the firm’s planned move to nearby site within the next five years would mean the open watercourse could be reinstated, but the inspector still felt the risk was too great to allow.

“Whilst that may be the case, any increased risk of flooding elsewhere, even for a limited period, would still be unacceptable,” she added.