Agenda item

Deferred for greater clarity of environmental view including fuller explanation on air quality and internal process.

PROPOSAL:

Erection of first floor extension to front of building, alterations to the front forecourt layout, reduction in width to existing vehicle access, retention of extraction plant and wood burner installation to the rear and change of use from office (B1a) to a mixed use with B2 (general industrial), B8 (warehouse & distribution) with ancillary office and ancillary showroom (as amended by revised plans).

RECOMMENDATION: Grant planning permission subject to conditions and informatives.

This application was deferred from Planning Committee on 18 September 2013 after it came to light that a database error had occurred which meant that not all interested parties had been notified of the Committee arrangements. In addition, revised details including plans and specification relating to a wood burner at the rear of the building had been received from the applicant and consultation undertaken.

Neil McClellan, Area Planning Manager in reference to the tabled supplementary report drew members’ attention to officer responses to queries raised by Heather Park Branch Neighbourhood Watch (HPBNW) through the local Member of Parliament.  He then referred to a number of additional representations received from HPBNW since the report was published and submitted the following responses;

Once the burner was reported by HPBNW in early March 2013 the Council sought further details and an amended application. Consultation of the amended scheme was undertaken and notice of the meeting in excess of the minimum requirement was given to residents. In respect of the environmental permit, he stated that there was no legislative requirement for the Council to consult and that the standard Council procedure was not to consult on environmental permit applications.  Members were advised that since the applicant was granted a draft permit Environmental Health (EH) had not received any complaint about the burner being operated.  He continued that the equipment had been rigorously tested and approved for use within a Smoke Control Zone and as there was no evidence that its operation was in breach of draft permit conditions, EH were comfortable with its location.

Mr David Stock Chair of HPBNW in objecting to the application stated the residents were not consulted on the amended scheme that included the wood burner and were also not informed about the issuing of the draft environmental permit to operate the burner.  He continued that the residents did not complain about the wood burner because they were not consulted about it.  He considered that the wood burner was not used for burning paper but rather medium density fibreboards (MDF) which were carcinogenic with dust particles settling on nearby parked vehicles and blighting the area.  As a result, residents had not been able to open their windows since December 2012 when the operation commenced.

Mr Stock continued that in his view the application was flawed as it did not contain details of the MDF burner and that its location was inappropriate due to its close proximity to residential dwellings.  He therefore requested a deferral until residents’ concerns were addressed.

Prior to members’ discussions, Councillor Brown informed the Committee that he had received emails from the objector which he had forwarded to officers and sought legal advice on whether he could still take part in  the discussion and voting on the application.  The legal representative advised that Councillor Brown could take part in the consideration of the application as he had passed on the emails and had confirmed in response to a question that he would pursue the application with an open mind. The legal representative also added that in his role as “Councillor” it was part and parcel of the democratic process that he was likely to receive correspondence on such matters from local constituents.

Members sought clarification on MDF products and requested additional information and greater clarity from Environmental Health (EH) on the impact of the wood burner on air quality, noting the potential hefty European Union fines if the Council was unable to achieve its air quality targets.  It was therefore suggested that the application be deferred for greater clarity and added that the re-submitted scheme should be in two parts to distinguish the application for extension from the wood burner.  Councillor Kabir recommended that an officer from the EH team should be present to offer clarification when the Committee met to reconsider the application.  Concerns were also raised as to why residents were not consulted prior to the issuing of the draft permit.

In responding to the above, the Area Planning Manager reiterated that consultation with residents was undertaken following the receipt of the amended scheme.  He clarified that the draft permit allowed wood burning but not MDF products.  Stephen Weeks, Head of Area Planning agreed that if members would like to receive additional information as requested then it would be appropriate to defer the application

DECISION: Deferred for greater clarity of environmental view including fuller explanation on the impact of air quality.