Agenda item

Full Application - Change of Use to Retain Existing B2 & B8 Uses, Together with All Existing Permitted Uses and Change of Use to Include Sui Generis Use to Import, Store, Recycle and Process of Waste for the Manufacture of Biomass Fuel and Solid Recovered Fuel Pellets and Briquettes for Use in Waste to Energy at the Former Laybond Products Limited, River Lane, Saltney (051499)

Decision:

            That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Head of Planning, the conditions reported in the late observations, the extra condition requiring removal of superfluous tanks/equipment from the site and subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement under the terms of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) Section 106 to:

 

- Provide a commuted sum of £5100 for additional funding required for the delivery of Phase 2 of the Saltney and Saltney Ferry ‘Sense of Place’ Riverside Walk Project. 

 

If the Section 106 Agreement (as outlined above) is not completed within six months of the date of the Committee resolution, the Head of Planning be given delegated authority to REFUSE the application. 

 

Minutes:

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Planning in respect of this application which had been the subject of a site visit on 7 April 2014.  The usual consultations had been undertaken and the responses received detailed in the report.  Additional comments received since the preparation of the report were circulated at the meeting.    

 

                        The officer detailed the background to the report and explained that if the application was approved, the large amount of waste outside the building on the site would be removed and all processes would be undertaken in the existing building.  No objections had been received from statutory consultees and the Local Member had not objected to the application but had raised concern about odours from the site.  The officer drew attention to the late observations and said that the main issues that had been considered included the principle of development, need, flood risk, drainage, amenity and habitat.  There was no reason to refuse the application and the officer advised that environmental permitting would also regulate the operations on the site. 

 

            Councillor Alison Halford proposed the recommendation for approval which was duly seconded.  She welcomed the application which had been well thought out and which would bring employment to the area.  Councillor Chris Bithell said that the Local Member had been involved in discussions on the proposals and that any issues which had been raised had been addressed.  He asked that an additional condition to remove any superfluous equipment from the site be included if the application was approved.  Councillor Halford agreed to include the condition in her proposal for approval. 

 

            The Local Member, Councillor Richard Lloyd thanked the officer for her excellent report and said that all of the issues that he had raised had been covered by conditions.  His main concern had been the odours from the waste outside the building but if the application was approved, this would be moved inside and any existing waste would be used before any more waste was brought on to the site.  Another concern was for the residents of Saltney and those that bordered the site.  It was reported that Saltney Town Council had not responded but Councillor Lloyd indicated that they had replied and had requested that all conditions be enforced.  He asked the officer to explain what was meant by the comments in paragraph 3.07. 

 

            Councillor Richard Jones said that a permit from Natural Resources Wales (NRW) would be required and the site would be monitored by NRW and he queried whether a condition to monitor the site by the Council was also required on the application.  He referred to conditions 9 and 10 and queried how they could be enforced and managed and also asked how it could be ensured that there would be no detriment to the residents from leachate from the site.  Councillor Derek Butler said that it was a comprehensive report but felt that there was a need to co-ordinate with NRW to ensure that the conditions imposed were complied with. 

 

            In response to the issues raised and comments made the officer said that:-

 

- it was the intention of the applicant to remove all surplus equipment from the site

- paragraph 3.07 referred to statutory nuisance and that the Local Authority had received a number of complaints about odours from the waste on site.  If planning permission was granted then nuisance from odour would be controlled by NRW not the Council

- discussions were ongoing with NRW on conditions for the site and the officer assured the Committee that conditions would not be duplicated but would be enforced

- conditions 9 & 10 were strongly worded in the full draft conditions to ensure that the building was sound to prevent odours or dust escaping from the building

- the site would be monitored by the Monitoring Team within the Minerals & Waste shared service

- Condition 17 required submission of a drainage plan to ensure that any leachate was contained within the site

 

            On being put to the vote, the proposal to approve the application was CARRIED.     

 

            RESOLVED:

 

            That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Head of Planning, the conditions reported in the late observations, the extra condition requiring removal of superfluous tanks/equipment from the site and subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement under the terms of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) Section 106 to:

 

- Provide a commuted sum of £5100 for additional funding required for the delivery of Phase 2 of the Saltney and Saltney Ferry ‘Sense of Place’ Riverside Walk Project. 

 

If the Section 106 Agreement (as outlined above) is not completed within six months of the date of the Committee resolution, the Head of Planning be given delegated authority to REFUSE the application. 

 

Supporting documents: