Re-submission of a previous application to import inert materials in order to raise existing ground levels.
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Lesley Day
Minutes:
Re-submission of a previous application to import
inert material in order to raise existing ground levels.
(a) The Senior Development Control Officer elaborated on the background of the application, noting that the application had been deferred at the Committee meeting held on 4 July,
2016 in order to undertake a site visit. It was noted that
Natural Resources Wales
(NRW) and the Council's Public Protection Service had been re-consulted on the Construction Environment Management Plan and the scheduled mitigating environmental factors submitted to support the application. NRW and the Council's Public Protection Service were satisfied with that which was submitted.
It
was emphasised that the application had been submitted for undertaking
engineering work and raise the level
of the land in order to provide a site for further
development.
Attention
was drawn to the additional observations
that had been received. It was reported that a late objection had been received today
by Friends of the Earth. It was noted
that the issues raised had been assessed in the report.
The development complied with the GUDP for the reasons noted in the
report.
(b)
The local member (not a member of this
Planning Committee) noted the following main points:-
·
That part
of the application was retrospective
as the land levels had already been raised;
·
That there
were no record of the materials used on the site so
its structure could not be confirmed;
·
That the land
surveys had been superficial;
·
That the site
was open to erosion and that she
was concerned about the stability of the land;
·
That the design
of the sea-wall was insufficient
and that it would not protect
the site from the sea;
·
That there
had been cases where the Local Authority had been successfully prosecuted when things had gone awry on
unstable and contaminated land where planning permission had been granted;
·
That sufficient
geo-environmental assessments
could ensure the safety of the site;
·
That the proposal
was contrary to policies
B28 and B30 of the GUDP and
to the Welsh Government's Technical
Advice Note 15;
·
That the land
was contaminated albeit not
listed on the contaminated land register and if
houses were developed on the site in future,
it would pose a substantial risk to human health;
·
That there
was risk that the contaminated material could seep into
the Menai Strait. Are the recommended conditions sufficient to ensure that pollution would not escape from the site?
(c) In response to the observations of the local member, the Senior Planning
Service Manager noted:-
·
That any application for development in the future
would be decided on its own merits and that the proposal was to provide a site
for development;
·
That the land had been allocated in the GUDP as a
redevelopment site;
·
Confirmation had been received that neither NRW nor
the Public Protection Service had objected the application;
·
There was no evidence to justify refusing based on
pollution;
·
That the detailed technical reports submitted as
part of the application had been assessed by specialists.
(ch)
It was proposed
and seconded to approve the application.
During the ensuing discussion, the following main observations
were noted:
·
That the report was comprehensive;
·
That there was a preconception that applications
should be allowed if the conditions imposed made the development an acceptable
one;
·
There was no firm evidence to justify refusing the
application;
·
That Bangor City Council was concerned about the
visual impact of the development on the city and its residential areas;
·
Last time, a member supported deferring the
application and after receiving specialist opinion and by imposing the
recommended conditions, the proposal was deemed acceptable;
·
Time will tell whether problems arise with the site
and consideration will be given to the situation when an application is
submitted for redevelopment;
·
That the local member had made valid points. Would
the company be liable if problems arose?
·
Could Gwynedd Council be held responsible if
problems were to arise?
·
The development would improve the site.
(d) In response to the above observations, the officers noted:-
·
It would not be easy to justify refusing the
application based on the visual impact considering the condition of the site at
present;
·
The landowner would be responsible if problems were
to arise;
·
Should the application be approved, the developers
would have to obtain a marine licence from NRW before they could commence the
development and this is a highly detailed and thorough process;
·
There was no evidence of land instability;
·
Internal and statutory experts gave their opinion
which noted that the proposal with conditions was acceptable. It was explained
that as the Council was following expert advice, should the application be
allowed, the Council's legal position would be robust.
RESOLVED to
delegate powers to the Senior Planning, Environment and Public Protection
Service Manager to approve the application, subject to the following scope of
conditions and where indicated, the submission of specific information in
accordance with the requirements of conditions prior to the commencement of the
development;
·
Temporary operations
involving the full implementation of the scheme and import of 19,000 tonnes of material to be implemented within a nine-month time-scale of the date of notification to the Local Planning Authority,
·
Permitted Operations & Compliance with the Submitted Details/Plans,
·
Import of materials restricted to 500
tonnes per day, between the
hours of 08.00–17.00 Mon to
Fri & 08.00 – 13.00 on a Saturday,
or 25 loads per day,
·
Restoration to commence within 3 years of the completion of land raise operations
unless a further planning permission is granted,
·
Mitigation measures
to reduce the impact on redshank, rock
pipit and other features of local biodiversity interest, including;
·
Prohibiting construction/dumping work one
hour before and one hour
after high tide,i.e. a no work period of 3 hours encompassing high tide,
·
To avoid damage to nesting birds (rock pipits)
no construction/dumping on the coastal slopes between (1st March and 1st August),
·
Biodiversity enhancement
to be incorporated into the
development including features for waders
& rock pipits,
·
Monitoring surveys
should be undertaken during the construction period to check that birds are
continuing to use the site and that
measures to minimise disturbance are being implemented successfully,
·
Development to include provision for biodiversity enhancement,
·
Removal of civil engineering equipment, structures & surplus plant machinery upon completion of the development,
·
Control dust released and provide
wheel cleaning equipment on site
as a planning condition,
·
Use restricted
to the disposal of inert materials,
·
Condition to specify the detailed design of the rip-rap material to
specify the minimum and maximum size
of stone to be used and any future
maintenance requirements,
·
Pollution control
measures, site monitoring and ecological mitigation to be implemented in accordance with the Construction Environment Management Plan,
·
Applicant to implement a scheme of water sampling and analysis to ascertain the presence of pollutants,
·
Fuels or lubricants to be stored in a location to be agreed in writing
with the Local Planning Authority. Bunding to be at least 110% of
the fuel tank capacity.
·
Note to applicant referring to the consultation response of Natural Resources Wales and Gwynedd Council Flood Risk Management
and Coastal Erosion service,
·
Note to applicant that the responsibility and subsequent liability for safe development
and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer and/or
landowner,
·
Note to applicant that the application has been assessed in
accordance with the seven sustainability goals of the Well-being of Future Generations Act (Wales)
2015.
Supporting documents: