Agenda item

To determine the application.

Tracy Ranger presented the report to members and drew attention to the update report that had been circulated.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Andrew Hodgson, the agent. Mr Hodgson stated the officer has raised the previous outline permission which was for a B8 distribution unit on the site but due to the climate, build costs rising and demand in that location it was not possible to deliver. He advised that it is the same applicant for this and the previous outline application and they have had to look at alternative uses with the crucial thing about this scheme is that it is primarily to serve Chiltern Distribution who are the business opposite the site to the north.

Mr Hodgson expressed the opinion that if this site had not been found there was a good chance that they would have relocated to a site in Peterborough taking away those jobs from Whittlesey. He stated that normally if he was advising a client he would not advise them to undertake any works on site prior to planning permission but the reason the works were undertaken on site is because Chiltern had an immediate and very urgent requirement to store some of their newer lorry fleet.

Mr Hodgson stated that the only works that have been carried out are site clearance and there has been some levelling works, with the type 1 material that has been laid coming from an Environment Agency licensed waste management company, it is all inert waste and there has been no excavation or digging into the ground on site just levelling out where there has been some dips on the site, with planings put on top. He reiterated that the site will be used by Chiltern Distribution to store their lorries, with them being a big distribution company which have freezer lorries but it is not intended that there will be lorries on the site with their freezer units running overnight.

Mr Hodgson made the point that there is a residential unit on the site but it is not habitable at the moment so there are no issues with noise impacting on this property and it is in the ownership of the applicant, it needs a full refurbishment which will be subject to a wider application in due course. He expressed the view that the only time the units will be running is likely to be during the day if there is a full load on the lorry and they are waiting to swap over lorry drivers, the full refrigeration units will not be left overnight as it is not safe and they will be kept in their main yard opposite.

Mr Hodgson stated that it is hoped that Chiltern will take on most of the site going forward and in the future it might be possible to erect buildings on the site to enhance their business and to stay in Whittlesey. He stated that at this moment they have taken about a third of the site so the remainder of the site is available for other uses and there are conditions that restrict the height to 6 metres and they are looking for clean uses, with the filtration system that they have been asked to put in by the Flood Authority and the only contamination may be from drips from the lorries, which has been taken care of through an attenuation pond which is going to deal with any surface water run-off.

Mr Hodgson made the point that the site lies in a primary location, the landscaping is going to grow up around the site so visibility over the years is going to be screened and it is within an employment area, with the principle already established through the previous scheme.

Members asked questions of Mr Hodgson as follows:

·       Councillor Mrs French notes the Highway and Lead Local Flood Authority objections and asked if they have been complied with? Mr Hodgson responded in the affirmative.

·       Councillor Imafidon referred to security on site and said there will be no chilled lorries on site and asked what is the difference in security risk between a chilled and unchilled lorry? Mr Hodgson responded that Chiltern Distribution have refrigeration units which make a noise when they are running to keep the food cool and other HGVs do not so that is difference. Councillor Imafidon made the point that it was stated that units would not be running overnight and if you have perishables in chilled lorries you have to have the refrigerant. Mr Hodgson advised that the lorries would not be left on that site if they are loaded as they will be kept in a more secure yard, it will only be the empty lorries that are left at the site overnight.

·       Councillor Connor asked for clarification on what the base coat surfacing was and what was laid over this? Mr Hodgson responded that the original ground was not touched and a type 1 crushed inert material was laid, which goes through a licensing scheme and grading to make sure it has no chemicals or anything in it which came from Midland Waste who are in Whittlesey and are regulated by the Environment Agency and on the top was some planings, a finer gravel which was compressed on top to level the site. Councillor Connor asked if this was IBAA? Mr Hodgson appeared to confirm it was. Councillor Connor stated there is conflicting views on this type of material, Cambridgeshire County Council accept that it is not waste but the Environment Agency have different views and they say it is so he is a little worried as there is no standard for this. Mr Hodgson made the point that it is not a planning issue per se but the materials have been sourced from a location where they have been tested to be inert. Councillor Connor stated that he does not agree but acknowledged that it is not a material planning consideration. Nick Harding stated that looking at the Government website in relation to IBAA it says that if you are using IBAA in building a road sub-base an environmental permit for waste is required, however, the Environment Agency will not normally take enforcement action if the legal requirements are complied with. He stated that the controls in respect of this product lie outside of the planning system and the planning system cannot duplicate controls under other legislative regimes so whilst members concerns are appreciated it is for somebody else to deal with. Councillor Connor stated that it is a concern that the Environment Agency recognise it as waste but he acknowledged that it is not a material planning consideration and made the point that IBAA is banned in Scotland. Mr Hodgson advised that he is unable to confirm exactly what the material is but he is told it is an inert material.

·       Councillor Marks referred to it being a lorry park, with refrigeration lorries only running during the day if they are on site and asked if there will be a time limit such as from 7pm to 7am bearing in mind there is a residential property on site, although not habitable at the present time, but equally there are going to be lorries going into the site 24 hours a day hooking up trailers which makes a noise. Mr Hodgson responded that part of the planning application has a condition which relates to noise, a noise assessment has been undertaken and there is some mitigation which has been agreed which would have to be put in place if that dwelling was habitable, such as an acoustic barrier. Councillor Marks made the point that it has gone from will not to occasionally so there are going to be occasions, as knowing Chilterns they have lorries that come from abroad and what provisions are there for, not only English drivers, but any of the foreign drivers, to know they are not to have fridges standing on the site overnight. Mr Hodgson advised that it will be rare that refrigeration units would be left on the site overnight but there is a condition that deals with addressing noise through an acoustic barrier so there is not an impact on that dwelling. Councillor Marks asked again if a time period of 7pm to 7am was being implemented? Mr Hodgson responded that once the barrier is in place it would not make any difference as once it is in place it is mitigated. Councillor Marks made the point that the argument could be then that lorries could be on site all the time running at night. Mr Hodgson advised potentially as if it has been mitigated the issue has been addressed.

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

·       Councillor Mrs French referred to Whittlesey Town Council’s request to refuse the application but there are no reasons that it should be refused. Tracy Ranger stated that there were two consultation responses that were conflicting.

·       Councillor Marks stated that he still has a concern over noise with lorries going in and out of the site 24 hours a day, with a residential property nearby and whilst he has heard it can be mitigated against he still has a concern that there should be something put in place that fridge engines should only be allowed from 7am until 7pm as they are a disruption and can keep you awake and there will be other lorries coming onto the site at night and they will not switch off their fridge engines.

·       Councillor Mrs French agreed and this occurred many years ago at March Coldstore, which was within a residential area so if a condition can be applied time wise she thinks it would be much appreciated.

·       Councillor Connor expressed the view that it is imperative as that will safeguard residents going forward.

·       Councillor Marks referred to the base element which members have expressed a concern about whether it is environmentally friendly or not and asked if this needs to be clarified that this cannot get into the water course, although he has heard the guidance from Nick Harding and that mitigation dams are being installed.

·       Nick Harding stated there is an existing condition that requires the recommendations from the noise assessment to be implemented and that would deal with the issue of containing the noise sufficiently well so as not to cause disturbance to the nearest noise sensitive premises and he does not believe it needs to go as far as preventing the truck refrigeration units on site between certain times of day. He added that if it is not already in the conditions then confirmation can be required of the type of material to be used for the surfacing and this would ensure that it is appropriate for the circumstance on site.

·       Councillor Connor questioned that some of that hardstanding is already in situ. Nick Harding responded that this is correct so the recommendation before committee include conditions relating to the implementation of surface water schemes and that is all designed to manage water on the site and deal with any contamination but if a type of material has been used on the site which renders that surface water management system inappropriate then that inappropriate material would either have to be removed or the surface water system would have to be changed to deal with that new material that has been put on site.

·       Councillor Marks asked who would make that decision, would that be with consultation with the IDBs, the Environment Agency or is that just for a building inspector or someone to make that decision? Nick Harding responded that it would be a condition and consultation would be undertaken with the Lead Local Flood Authority plus the Council’s Environmental Health Team and the Environment Agency.

·       Councillor Marks expressed the view on the noise issue there still needs to be a timed element of 7pm to 7am or similar as these lorries do make a lot of noise especially when they are cutting in or out and it is not known what is going to happen on the site in the future. Councillor Connor made the point that members heard from the agent that the fridges will be taken into the main depot and then it was stated that there may be some on this site and there may be lorries coming in at 1.00am who are going to park at the most appropriate and easiest place so he agrees that something needs to be put in place that does recognise the noise factor and could it be confirmed whether IBAA is hazardous waste or is it just waste. Nick Harding responded that the agent in his presentation said he was not 100% sure whether or not what material had or had not been used but what he did say was that a type 1 material had been sourced from a fully licensed provider so it is just a question of checking whether or not IBAA has been used but the use of that product is of no consequence to planning. He feels that outside of the committee officers can have a conversation with the agent, it can be determined whether or not that product has been utilised and if it has then it can be referred to the Environment Agency and colleagues in Environmental Health to make sure that material was used in compliance with the appropriate regulations but this is outside the planning regime.

Proposed by Councillor Mrs French, seconded by Councillor Marks and agreed that the application be GRANTED as per the officer’s recommendation with an additional condition to include that no fridge units to operate on the site between 7pm to 7am.

It was further requested that the surface material be checked to ascertain what was used and if it is IBAA and not permitted the issue be raised with the Environment Agency and Environmental Health.

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