Agenda item

To determine conditions.

Tracey Ranger presented the report to members.

Members asked questions of officers as follows:

·         Councillor Marks stated that the application had been discussed at the previous meeting in November and at that time members had been advised that there were no refrigerated lorries, however, it appears that has changed and the figure has now changed to 16. He added that officers have explained that there are refrigerated lorries across the road and he expressed his concern regarding the noise impact on residents residing nearby, especially during the summer months when people spend more time outside.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that she also shares the same concerns as Councillor Marks, and she would like to see the application deferred in order to seek further guidance and the professional opinion of an Environmental Health Officer.

·         Nick Harding explained that the noise assessment was submitted when the application was first received, and the content of the report actually modelled sixteen refrigerated trucks operating from the site at night and with the proposed mitigation that has always been part of the proposal, with the Environmental Health Officer stating that the situation is satisfactory in respect of noise impact on the nearest noise sensitive premises. He added that the noise assessment would have taken into consideration the existing background noise generated from existing activities and it would have been those activities prior to the development taking place with this proposal adding onto it. Nick Harding stated that committee should be assured that the applicant’s consultant has looked at this appropriately, but he does appreciate that the committee may wish to question the Environment Health Officer and defer the application.

Members made comments, asked questions and received responses as follows:

·         Councillor Benney expressed the view that he does not see any reason to refuse the application and whilst it could be deferred to discuss the proposal with the applicant, the application, in his opinion, is policy compliant. He added that the officer’s report states that the noise levels are acceptable and whilst he would support a deferral, in his opinion, if the proposal is brought back to committee he anticipates that the same conclusion will be reached. Councillor Benney acknowledged that it would be nice to receive some assurance from Environmental Health on whether there could be acoustic fencing installed to see if it would mitigate the noise prior to the application being determined.

·         Councillor Gerstner stated that the noise assessment has been carried out to the satisfaction of Environmental Health. He added that he has spoken to the nearest resident to the site which is at least 300 to 400 metres away and at the present time, the application site is not causing the residents any problems at all, however, this may alter once refrigerated units are brought onto the site. Councillor Gerstner explained that it is an industrial site and he concurred with the comments made by Councillor Benney that at the current time there are very few reasons to refuse the application.

·         Councillor Marks stated that at the last meeting when this application was considered, there was no mention of refrigerated vehicles until that particular question was asked. He added that his fear is that the number of vehicles could escalate and, in his opinion, the company are likely to expand and his concern is that whilst the residents do not have any concerns currently, once additional lorries are added that an increase in noise is inevitable and if they are left overnight, the refrigeration units cut in and out and the noise is not a constant running noise. Councillor Marks stated that he is not in objection to the actual planning permission, but he does have major concerns over the noise, and he would like assurances that steps have been taken to mitigate the issue. He added that is why he would with like to listen to the expert opinion of Environmental Health Officers so that residents can be provided with some assurance.

·         Councillor Benney stated that any assurances the Environmental Health Officers give to the committee cannot be guaranteed, and he reiterated the fact that as the application stands currently, it is fully compliant.

·         Councillor Gerstner stated that a request can be made for a mathematical modelling of 16 refrigeration units to be provided which can provide the amount of noise, sound and frequency that could be generated but he does not know what the outcome of that would be. He added that the science could be that there is a slight variation between the mathematical modelling and the actual practical modelling. Councillor Gerstner stated that whilst he appreciates the issue concerning the units cutting in and out there are no residents living adjacent to or very nearby and, therefore, even with the noise impact statement, he would find it very difficult not to agree with the officer’s recommendation.

·         Councillor Connor stated that there is a noise impact assessment in place and whilst he does sympathise with the opinion of Councillor Marks, consideration does need to be given to the fact that if a decision is not reached today then the applicant and agent could penalise the Council for non-determination of the application.

·         Councillor Marks made the point that he would be more content if the opinion of the Environmental Health Team can be sought and whilst he appreciates that to date the residents have not complained, if approval is given, then there maybe a time when complaints do start and he would like to have the comfort factor of speaking to the noise specialists and the applicant so that they can explain to the committee how they intend to marshal 16 trailers.

·         Councillor Mrs French made the point that the application was actually determined at the committee meeting in November and a condition was added to the application and, therefore, the Council cannot be penalised for non-determination. Nick Harding explained that as a result of the committee resolution, the planning application decision notice has not been issued due to the fact that following the meeting some checks were made on the noise assessment and it was identified that the noise assessment made a provision for 16 refrigerated vehicles operating overnight and, therefore, it was thought to be prudent to bring the application back to committee to see if members would be minded to amend that one condition or keep it in place.

·         Councillor Mrs French asked whether the committee can stand by the decision that they made last month when the application was determined. Nick Harding stated that the committee do not need to alter their decision which they have already made.

·         Councillor Marks expressed the view that officers have been very fair to the applicant, however, consideration does need to be given to the residents living there as well and, in his opinion, then the Environmental Health Team along with the applicant should be invited to committee to ensure those safeguards are in place and he would be happy to see the application deferred.

·         Councillor Benney stated that he does not welcome deferments unless there is good reason for it, and he does not see what difference it will make if any experts are invited in to address the committee as they will just reaffirm what it says in the report. He added that if the application went to appeal the Council would lose and he made reference to the point made by Councillor Gerstner that the nearest resident is 300 metres away from the site and there is no noise at the present time although that could alter. Councillor Benney stated that he will support a deferment but, in his opinion, there needs to be grounds to support it. He made the point that the application has come back to the committee with a variation of a condition and, in his view, that condition that the committee placed on the application in November was reasonable and whilst he appreciates that the number of refrigerated units may increase, the committee need to base their decision on what is before them which, in his opinion, is a policy compliant application.

·         Councillor Gerstner stated that there is another major distribution centre, DFDS, who operate a much larger 24-hour operation, which is closer to the settlement of Kings Delph in Whittlesey. He expressed the view that if the application is deferred or refused then the applicant will appeal, because adjacent businesses across the road, such as McCain Foods, which are closer to the residents have no restrictions.

·         Councillor Imafidon expressed the opinion that if the application is deferred then it will be a waste of officer’s time. He added that the noise assessment has been undertaken and when the application had been previously discussed in November, he had mentioned whether there were any refrigeration lorries going to be on site and at that time there was not but, in his opinion, a storage yard like this always has refrigeration units. He added that the noise assessment report states that the noise levels are within acceptable levels, and he does not see any reason for a deferment as it would be wasting officer’s time.

Proposed by Councillor Gerstner, seconded by Councillor Imafidon and agreed that the alternative condition be GRANTED to state that no more than 16 operational (loaded with the engine running) refrigerator lorries to be stored on site between the hours of 7pm and 7am.

(Councillor Connor declared that the applicant for this item is known to him from when he was Chairman of the Planning Committee at the County Council and liaised with him over the Kings Dyke Bridge, however, he has had no contact for 4 – 5years and does not socialise with him, and is not pre-determined and would approach the application with an open mind)

(Councillor Gerstner declared that he had been lobbied by individuals and also the Saxon Gate Residents Group but he is not pre-determined and would approach the application with an open mind)