Cranswick has mounted a robust defence of its proposal for a large pig and poultry unit in Norfolk, after planning officers recommended that it should be rejected.
Its application to expand an existing site to house 714,000 chickens and 14,000 pigs near the villages of Methwold and Feltwell is due to considered by King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council’s planning committee on Thursday, April 3.
But in a blow to the Hull-based company, in a 200-page report published in March, planning officers recommended the application be refused for two reasons.
With the lying close to a number of European protected sites, planning officers said Cranswick had failed to demonstrate that the development ‘would not result in significant adverse effects on the protected sites’.
They also concluded that insufficient environmental information had been submitted to enable the council to reach a view on the impact of the project on the environment and climate change.
Despite the setback, Cranswick insisted it was pushing ahead with its application and, days before the scheduled hearing, it published its statement to the planning committee.
It reiterated its arguments that the development will:
Ensure better use of local land, improving the existing site,
Deliver higher welfare for pigs and poultry. The number of chickens housed in a unit will be reduced by 20% compared to the Red Tractor standard and 100% of chickens will hatched in the barn, rather than at a hatchery facility, under the NestBorn system.
Improve British food security, reducing the country’s reliance on imports. Currently, 30% of all the chicken we consume is imported.
The document stated: “We look forward to the meeting and to having the opportunity to address the Committee and answer any questions. Meanwhile, we want to ensure that the Committee is clear on the purpose of the proposals and the details included.
The planning officer report reveals the plans received 12,604 objections, a 42,133-signature petition and seven representations in support. Objectors included five parish councils, a local campaign group, two local MPs and several NGOs.
Cranswick said it ‘fully recognised that a range of concerns and views have been expressed by local stakeholders and residents’, and had worked hard to address the issues.
But it criticised the approach of the council, noting that it was ‘extremely disappointed’ to find that the council’s report was ‘littered with basic factual errors’.
Cranswick said it had fully responded to all requests from the council to provide more information. However, it said that in the run-up to the hearing, the council said it needed further information, but was not clear what that information was and had not given it time to provide it.
A council spokesperson said councillors would ‘consider the applications professionally and objectively on the planning issues, as they would any other application’, the BBC reported.
It said Cranswick’s comments would be sent to the decision-makers as late representations “in line with usual planning committee procedure”.
“The applicant will also have the opportunity to address members on the matters they raise at the planning committee meeting,” the spokesperson added.