Minutes:
The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.
It was reported that this application was a re-submission as it had been presented previously to the Committee in June 2010. It had now been amended reducing the throughput form 400,000 tpa to 200,000 tpa and access to the site had also been relocated 90m north, up Tan House Lane.
Mr Ted Besinski addressed the Committee and spoke in support of the application. He referred to the amendments mentioned above, and the access road alterations, which were referred to in the report under a separate application 10/00305/FUL, which was being considered with this report. He further stated that there had been a positive response from a public consultation of 3000 residents.
Councillor Parker then addressed the Committee and spoke against the application. He cited that there would be an increase in traffic which would come through the Town Centre itself, the waste material would produce acid water into the River Mersey and that Halton View residents had not been included in the consultation procedure.
The following additional comments had also been received since the report was published:-
Environment Agency – stated that this would be acceptable provided conditions are attached in relation to the following: being implemented in accordance with the flood risk assessment; surface water regulation; further details on contamination and remediation strategy; verification report on remediation; long term monitoring; maintenance and contingency for remediation; scheme to treat and remove solids from surface water run-off during construction work; scheme for foul and surface water drainage including oil and petrol interceptors; trapped gullies and roof drainage sealed at ground level.
Further advice was provided as an informative to the applicant in relation to water abstraction licenses and Environmental Permits, and the requirement for site waste management plans.
It was noted that further
comments had been provided in relation to lighting and soft boundary screening
treatment along the
Natural
They noted that the proposal included remediation of the site that would significantly improve quality of the shallow ground waters, removing direct discharges to controlled waters, and were pleased that this work was being carried out in consultation with the Council’s Contaminated Land Officer and the Environment Agency. It was noted that they had asked that a relevant condition be attached to control this.
They had further commented that the air quality impact on the River Mersey SPA had not been assessed, but taking into account the type of the development and the assessment/surveys carried out as part planning application, they do not consider the proposal would have a significant impact on the river Mersey designated site relating to air quality.
It was noted that the ecological surveys concluded that no protected species would be affected. However in the event that any were found, they would stop until further surveys were carried out until suitable mitigation measures were put in place.
Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA) – The proposal fell outside the scope that the NWDA would statutorily be consulted upon. They had noted that the site was within the Widnes Waterfront EDZ and that the number of jobs that would be generated was generally low compared to the size of the development. It was noted that they wished to be assured that the proposal would not impact on the future development potential of the wider EDZ area. They had looked to the Council to access the impact of the proposal including the traffic movements. If the proposal was approved, they commented that it should be satisfactorily landscaped and operated in accordance with current best practice.
British Waterways – The proposal did not lie within the consultation zone of any waterway, reservoir, canal, feeder, channel, water course, let off or culvert owned or managed by British Waterways, therefore they had no comment.
United Utilities – Had no objection provided the site was drained on a separate system with foul drainage only connected to the foul sewer. They noted that the overall regeneration of the Widnes Regeneration Area required a significant amount of water and the existing network would not support the total demand. Work was currently underway to provide a new connection of the large diameter main. Further information would be required from the developer before they knew if the local mains could support this. The development could only be supplied once reinforcement had been installed.
Knowsley Council – Had no objection subject to Halton being satisfied that the proposal met its own policy requirements and noted the comments of MEAS in that the application was the same as the previous in that it seeked permission for a Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) and a Vessel Composting (IVC) facility. The difference being that the throughput was now reduced to 200,000 tpa and the access had been amended.
It was also reported that since the report was published three further representations had been received from local residents and businesses concerning the following:
a) The traffic would have a detrimental impact on the Town causing congestion which would impact on the operation of existing businesses;
b) Concerns raised that perception of the waste resources park would have an impact on investment. Companies, including Forward Partnership had invested in developing new office units which were vacant; the new proposal would further prevent business wanting to move into the units; and
c) The proposal was contrary to the commitments of the Widnes Waterfront Masterplan which seeded high quality mixed uses, including offices business parks and residential leisure and retail;
Finally, it was reported that additional conditions were required in relation to:-
a) Contamination and remediation strategy;
b) Submission of a verification report on remediation;
c) Submission of a long term monitoring, maintenance and contingency plan for the remediation;
d) Submission of a scheme to treat and remove solids from surface water run-off during construction work;
e) Submission of a scheme for foul and surface water drainage including oil and petrol interceptors, trapped gullies and roof drainage sealed at ground level;
f) Details of permanent wheel cleaning facilities at the site for during operation; and
g) Condition specifying and restricting the types of waste to be processed at the site.
RESOLVED: That application 10/00446/EIA be approved subject to:-
a)
The entering into a Legal Agreement for the provision of a financial
contribution towards Environmental Matters, and the provision of a bus service
to the site for employees.
b)
The
following conditions:
1
Time
limit for the commencement of development; (in accordance with the Town &
Country Planning Act 1990);
2
List of
approved plans and documents (BE1, BE2);
3
Prior
to the commencement of development submission and approval of materials (BE2) ;
4
Prior
to commencement provision and use of wheel cleansing facilities during course
of construction to be submitted and approved; (BE1);
5
Conditions
for prior to commencement approval of detailed landscaping scheme including hard and sift landscaping and
planting and cultivation (BE1 and GE27);
6
Condition
that any planting lost within the first five years following completion be
replaces;
7
Prior
to commencement approval of fencing and boundary treatment details (BE22);
8
Condition(s)
in relation to the submission of a ground investigations and remediation
strategy to be submitted to and approved by contaminated land and environment
agency. This shall include the monitoring maintenance and any contingency final report demonstrating
that all long- term site remediation criteria;
9
No
development shall begin until the provision of pre-development site levels and
proposed finished floor levels and adjacent land levels; (BE1);
10 Prior to the commencement final construction
details of the access road and the point of access onto Tan House Lane to be
submitted for approval (BE1);
11 Prior to occupation of the buildings laying
out of approved vehicle access, service and parking areas and to be retained as
such (BE1);
12 Condition limiting the throughput of
material to 200,000 tpa;
13 Prior to commencement condition relating to
the disposal of foul and surface water (PR5);
14 Condition relating to installation of oil
and petrol separators (PR5);
15 Condition relating to the installation of
trapped gullies (PR5);
16 Condition relating to the installation of
roof drainage-sealed at ground level;
17
The
development to be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk
Assessment and the mitigation measures as detailed within; (BE1 and PR16);
18 Prior to commencement provision of a surface
water regulation scheme to be submitted and approved; (BE1);
19 Prior to the commencement of development
details of secure cycle parking (TP16);
20 Prior to the occupation of the buildings a
framework travel plan shall be submitted for approval;
21 Condition restricting no external storage of
materials (BE1 and RG3);
22 Condition preventing the unloading, loading
or handling of waste associated with the facility shall take place outside the
building (BE1, PR1 and PR3);
23 Condition ensuring the doors to the facility
building shall be kept closed at all times except for essential access and
egress to and from the building (PR1 and PR3);
24 The waste reception hall, processing and
composting buildings shall be held under negative pressure during operating
hours (PR1 and PR3);
25 Prior to commencement a scheme of noise
attenuation is provided to demonstrate that noise levels from the proposed
development can achieve 10dB(A) below background at the ‘Routledge’
site (PR2 and PR28);
26 Prior to the commencement of
development details of lighting shall be submitted to and approved in
writing. This should include details Lux levels and light spill diagrams (BE1 and PR4);
27 Prior to the commencement of development, details
shall be provided to demonstrate how at least 10% of the proportion of the
developments energy requirements can be secured through the provision of
renewable, decentralised or low carbon sources. For implementation prior to
occupation and operation of the development lifetime (RSS – EM18);
28 Use restriction that the building shall only be
used for B2 ‘General Industrial (BE1 and RG3); and
29
Traffic
Management Plan.
c) That if the S106 Agreement or alternative
arrangement is not executed within a reasonable period of time, authority be
delegated to the Operational Director – Environment & Regulatory Services
in consultation with the Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Committee to refuse
the application on the grounds that it fails to comply with Policy S25
(Planning Obligations).
RESOLVED: That application 10/00305/FUL be approved subject to the
following condition(s):
1. Time limit for the commencement of development; (in accordance with the Town & Country Planning Act 1990).