Committee to receive an update on the enforcement situation regarding the Anaerobic Digester Plant at Crown Hill.
Minutes:
The Planning Department had been unable to send an officer to the meeting to respond to comments made at the last meeting. However, they had provided the following statement:
a) New silage clamp
a. The agent was advised that a new planning application would be required for the new silage clamp and as such, we understand this is being prepared for submission with a view that it will be submitted in March.
b) Noise condition cannot be enforced
a. The noise condition requires the agent to submit further information of which the agent is again preparing and will submit in due course.
c) Traffic – nothing can be done
a. We understand this relates to the concerns arising around the traffic movements – unfortunately it is a working farm and as such there is nothing the planning authority can do to assist with this problem.
d) Output evidence was fine
a. Part of the condition required the applicant to submit details of the amount of power that was output from the digester, in this instance, 500kw. The information we have received to date would not give us cause for concern and as such we are not pursuing this further at present.
e) New building and dwellings on adjacent land
a. We do not currently have any further information on this at present. Are there any more details that can be provided to assist us with this?
f) Land used for Housing
a. As above. We would need more information. However if there was an application in regard to housing on this land, the application would need to be assessed on its own merits. If the land is outside the settlement, not boundary, then there would need to be clear justification as to why this should be granted as we steer development away from the open countryside unless the Council does not have a 5 year land housing supply.
Discussion took place with regard to:
· The lapsing of the Liaison Group. The previous owner of the site had agreed to allow the existence of the group and worked with them but the new owner had not and the ‘good will’ was not there anymore.
· Halberton Parish Council strongly wanted the reinstatement of the Liaison Group and for information regarding the AD plant to be made available to them. They would be working hard to try and make this a condition of any future planning application.
· The Cabinet Member for Continuous Improvement confirmed that this fell within her portfolio area and she would be keeping an eye on it.
· The lack of availability of data and information regarding the working of the site was of great concern. The public needed to know what was happening.
· Should an FOI request be submitted?
· Potential seepage from large amounts of built up silage into the canal was a serious concern. Also concerns regarding phosphates on the offside of the canal.
· The need for the JAC to see the original Planning approval document with the conditions.
· A new planning application was expected imminently and the JAC would have an opportunity to comment and make representation.
It was AGREED that when the new planning application was received by the Local Planning Authority a special meeting of the JAC would be called to discuss the detail and effects of the application upon the canal. Mr Adam Pilgrim agreed to research the planning portal to ascertain what information was currently available and would circulate this to committee members.
Note: (i) Mr Peter Saupe declared a personal interest in that he had worked on site previously.
(ii) Cllr L Cruwys explained that as he was the Vice Chairman of the Planning Committee he would not take part in the special meeting to discuss this issue.