Minutes:
The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.
Members were referred to the update list which advised of an additional response received from the Port Health Authority (a letter which was attached to the update list) and an additional objection regarding the lack of information provided outlining the reason for demolishing the building and suggesting that the site be used as a marina instead. It was also confirmed that the Local Lead Flood Authority had confirmed no objections subject to detailed drainage design secured by condition. Natural England was now satisfied that there would be no likely effect on protected species following the Council’s advice but this would be subject to the recommended conditions listed.
It was also reported that two further emails had been received, one to the Local Planning Authority and one to the Chair and Vice Chair of the Committee, details of which were provided by Officers.
Further objections had been received from Manchester Ship Canal Company (part of the Peel Ports Group), Manchester Port Health Authority, Peel Land and Property and Bridgwater Canal Company. Members were advised of the principle concerns of these bodies which included proposed expansion of trade and associated investment; noise pollution from the docks and dust pollution from cargo. It was noted that the Council’s Environmental Health Officer had accepted the findings of the noise assessment, as discussed in the Officer’s report, and raised no objections.
Officers also advised the Committee of a further recommended condition to be added, specifically relating to the interim landscaping and maintenance of the retained canal corridor.
The Committee was addressed by Mr Marshall from the Manchester Ship Canal Company, who objected to the proposal on their behalf. He stated that Port Runcorn was a successful Port for the Company that operated 24 hours 7 days a week and employed 40 staff. He raised concerns relating to the future occupiers of the properties and the potential for complaints relating to noise and dust pollution from the Port and cargo. He argued that the noise impact survey already carried out was not robust enough and that there would be an impact on the environment. He quoted Policy number PR7 from the Council’s Unitary Development Plan (UDP) and advised of the objections made by the Manchester Port Health Authority. He requested that further investigations be made into the potential for noise and dust pollution.
Ms Holly Bryant, a representative from Halton College, then addressed the Committee. She spoke in support of the application and began by providing Members with the history of the viability of the College Campus. She stated that all planning requirements with regards to the site had been met and that a Legal Agreement would secure land in relation to the Bridgewater Canal restoration. She disputed that there would be noise pollution from the Port and advised that the development would provide quality housing with sound proofing.
Officers clarified Policy PR7 in relation to the risk of pollution and referred Members to page 43 of the report where this was discussed. It was noted that there was no evidence of noise and dust pollution provided by complainants of surrounding residential areas in the past.
Following debate on the potential for noise and dust pollution, one Member wished to move an amendment to the recommendation and proposed a deferral, so that time could be given to the objectors to provide evidence of pollution that had occurred in the past. This was not supported by the Committee. The original recommendation to approve was then moved and seconded, and the Committee voted to approve the application.
RESOLVED: That authority is delegated to the Operational Director – Policy, Planning and Transportation, in consultation with the Chair or Vice Chair of the Committee to conclude negotiations in respect of the Legal Agreement; and that the application is approved subject to:
a) The entering into of a Legal Agreement or other agreement for the maintenance of specified land in accordance with the landscaping requirements of the Permission and the transfer of that land to the Council upon written notice for the purpose associated with the reinstatement of the former Bridgwater Canal and subject to negotiations over viability for affordable housing and open space.
b) Conditions relating to the following:
1. Standard outline planning permission conditions relating to submission of reserved matters and timescales;
2. Specifying approved plans (BE1);
3. Requiring submission and agreement of a detailed Construction Environmental Management Plan including wheel cleansing facilities, construction vehicle access routes, construction parking and management plan, noise and dust minimisation measures (BE1 and GE21);
4. Materials condition, requiring the submission and approval of the materials to be used (BE2);
5. Landscaping condition, requiring submission and approval both hard and soft landscaping, including replacement tree planting (BE2);
6. Submission and agreement of boundary treatment including retaining walls (BE2);
7. Construction and delivery hours to be adhered to throughout the course of the development (BE1);
8. Vehicle access, parking, servicing etc to be constructed prior to occupation of properties / commencement of use (BE1);
9. Condition relating to further detailed site investigation / mitigation/ verification (PR14);
10. Condition relating to unidentified contamination (PR14);
11. Submission and agreement of details of on-site biodiversity action plan for measures to be incorporated in the scheme to encourage wildlife including dwellings to be fitted with bird/bat boxes (GE21);
12. Conditions relating to tree protection during construction (BE1);
13. Submission and agreement of detailed surface water / highway drainage scheme (BE1/PR5);
14. Requiring submission and agreement of site and finished floor levels (BE1);
15. Submission and agreement of scheme of protective fencing to watercourses to secure a minimum 5m buffer zone (GE21);
16. Submission and agreement of site Waste Management Plan (WM8);
17. Submission and agreement of a sustainable Waste Management Plan (WM9); and
18. Submission and agreement of detailed lighting scheme including measures to minimise light spill onto surrounding habitats and sky glow (PR4/GE21).
c) That if the Section 106 Agreement or alternative arrangement was not executed within a reasonable period of time, authority be delegated to the Operational Director – Policy, Planning and Transportation, in consultation with the Chair or Vice Chair of the Committee to refuse the application.