Agenda item

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer for the redevelopment of waste transfer station, including the construction of an additional waste reception building, site office and welfare building and weighbridge office, with associated hardstanding, drainage and ancillary works.

(Report attached)

Members had visited the site earlier in the day and plans and photographs were shown to Members during the meeting.

The application proposed the redevelopment of an existing waste transfer station. This would include the construction of an additional waste reception building, site officer and welfare building and weighbridge office, with associated hard-standing, drainage and ancillary works including the provision of staff parking within the site.

The application had been brought to Plans Panel at the request of Cllr. Ronald Grahame who raised concerns regarding environmental impacts and highway safety from the operation of the site.

The Panel were provided with a brief outline of the proposed site at Cross Green Industrial Estate as set out at 3.0 of the submitted report.

The Panel was informed that complaints had been received in relation to dust, odour and highway safety.

In relation to concerns raised in regard to highway safety the Panel were informed that part of Knowsthorpe Road was un-adopted and the applicant as part of the proposed redevelopment had committed to funding a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) to resurface the road and to protect the junction of Knowsthorpe Road and Knowsthorpe Gate and provide yellow lines to restrict parking.

Photographs of the current site and plans of the proposed development were presented to the Panel. The presenting Officer explained the location of the proposed buildings and facilities for processing the waste and odour management.

The Panel were informed that the operator would focus solely on the production of Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF). The process of producing RDF was explained to the Panel including the packaging and wrapping of the RDF bales to reduce odour and pests.

Mr Ballam, MWP Planning spoke on behalf of Vehicle Bodycare Centre (VBC) a neighbouring business who had objected to the application on grounds of highways and environmental impact, the latter arising from dust and odour.

Mr Ballam informed the Panel that VBC had been at that site before Impetus had moved in. He went on to say that VBC had received numerous complaints from their many customers who included Mercedes, Volkwagon, and West Yorkshire Police in relation to the dust on the vehicles and the odour both outside at the premises of VBC and inside the vehicles. 

Mr Ballam informed the Members that VBC had requested;

·  Pest control plans

·  Traffic plans

·  Odour plans

VBC were of the view that in relation to highway safety it was the number of vehicles travelling to and from site rather than the tonnage that was the concern.

Mr Ballam proposed that it be agreed at the Plans Panel that a meeting with neighbouring business should take place on a regular basis to discuss any issues.

In response to a question from the Panel Mr Ballam was of the view that the road needed repairing to cut down on the dust and an odour management plan needed to be in place. He said that it was common practice for waste companies to agree to meet with neighbouring businesses to discuss issues as they arise.

Mr Lee Searles – Enzygo Ltd spoke on behalf of Impetus. He informed the Panel that Impetus had offered to meet with VBC however the offer had not been taken up. 

He went on to explain that Impetus had kept information flow going with VBC sending the full application to them which sets out how the redevelopment of the site would address the issues raised.

The application proposes a purpose built facility to house the odour control system.

The dust was an historical issue but would be addressed through Section 106 funds to resurface the road and the TRO would address highway safety issues.

He informed the Panel that no other businesses within the vicinity had made comments to Impetus.

In response to Members questions Mr Searles said;

·  Active baiting was being used to rid the area of vermin

·  60 nests had been cleared

·  Environmental Health had no complaints

·  The dust had been caused by waste aggregates, but this was no longer recycled.

·  They had been brushing the road but VBC thought this made situation worse

·  The proposed new road surface would  address the dust issue

·  The site is accessed one way and exited another to address highway safety

·  Vehicle movements had been discussed and agreed with Officers

Members were informed that the drawing up and signing of the Section 106 would normally be completed within 3 months. An assurance was given that the road resurfacing would take place as a top priority with passing places and yellow lines.

Officers clarified a number of points for Members including;

·  Information at 7.1 of the submitted report

·  Information provided by the Environment Agency

·  The type of waste to be recycled at the facility

·  If waste was sent to the facility by LCC

·  Landscaping at the site

Members had also queried the fact that no travel plan had been submitted. The Highways Officer clarified that travel arrangements had been looked at, with most employees choosing to drive rather than use the bus. A cycle path and cycle park had been provided for those who wished to cycle.

In response to Members it was suggested that in relation to condition 23 – the external storage of bales - a review mechanism could be added as part of the planning condition.

RESOLVED – To defer and delegate to the Chief Planning Officer as set out in the submitted report subject to the conditions with;

·  Condition 16 to be deleted

·  Variation to condition 23 to include a review mechanism

·  Add a condition of liaison arrangements