Furore over floods fear
A man seeking planning permission to create a caravan site says he is being penalised for acting honestly.
Mr Frederick Horner has applied to Newark and Sherwood District Council for permission to knock down a bungalow he owns on Tolney Lane and replace it with three family-sized caravan plots.
The Environment Agency has objected because of the risk of flooding and the district planning committee cannot overrule that objection.
Mr Horner and his wife walked out of Tuesday night’s planning committee meeting.
The following day he said that although areas of Tolney Lane had flooded in the past — notably in 2002 — his land had not flooded in living memory.
“I am 61-years-old and was born there,” he said.
“It has not flooded in all that time and I could hazard a guess it hasn’t flooded in 500 years.
“This is ridiculous. We are being penalised for doing things in the right way.”
Mr Horner told the Advertiser he intended to sell the land and that only gipsies would consider living on Tolney Lane.
He said he wanted to sell it with planning permission and within a week of putting an advertisement on the entrance gate he received a dozen telephone calls expressing interest.
The district planning committee agreed to ask the Environment Agency to reconsider its objection.
Committee member Mr Brian Smith said: “Things happen on Tolney Lane that are happening without planning permission. It must seem to the Horners that they are being harshly treated.”
Local member Mr David Payne said: “The Horners’ land is considerably higher than the areas of Tolney Lane that have flooded in the past.”
Mr Tom Bickley said approving three new plots on Tolney Lane would make no difference to the 12 sites already there.
Mrs Marika Tribe supported the application.
Mr Allen Tift, however, said: “We go out to consultation to these so-called experts and if we don’t heed what they’ve got to say is there any point in consultation?”
The head of planning services, Mr Michael Evans, said it was “with a heavy heart” that refusal was being recommended and it was solely due to the Environment Agency objection.
He said, and it was agreed, that the committee could contest the objection on the basis that the size of the three plots was less than that of the bungalow to be removed; that if any flooding occurred it would be from watercourses rather than flash flooding so there would be enough warning to instigate an evacuation; and that the three plots could form part of the 88 the council is likely to have to find within the district to meet demand.
