Agenda item

Permanent siting of a Biomass boiler and container for the control unit (retrospective)

Public Participation:

·       Becky Holloway – applicant - spoke in support of the application

David Cox, Senior Conservation/Planning Officer presented the report that recommended planning permission should be approved subject to the conditions and informatives as detailed in the report, for the retrospective permanent siting of a Biomass boiler and container for the control unit.

The officer stated that the main issues for consideration by the Committee was an assessment of the principle of development, the environmental impacts (air quality), neighbouring impacts, highway impacts and biodiversity.

The case officer described the site which included detail on the proximity to other properties, access and the use of the adjoining agricultural fields. He explained that the boiler was powered by burning wooden pallets, which were stored both outside and inside. Members were advised that heat from the boiler is used to dry wood chip which is sold on for biomass boilers to use.

Prior to the committee meeting, members attended a site visit, and it was noted that the boiler was in use but was producing any smoke.  Members were also advised that the boiler was not used when there is a south westerly wind.

The report detailed the previously imposed restrictions in terms of the use and hours of operation of the boiler whilst it benefitted from temporary permission, which had now lapsed.

Members heard that the same conditions were recommended for any permanent facility to define the terms of the permission and to provide neighbours with sufficient respite from dispersed smoke or fumes in the evening and weekends and bank holidays.

The Committee noted that the applicant was willing to adhere to the restricted hours of operation and the number of container loads.

For this application a new condition was recommended to secure more robust boiler management plan for its use and operation to reflect best practice.   

The officer indicated that during the initial consultation there had been one objection from Hilperton Parish Council, and no objections from the Council’s Environmental Health Officer (subject to conditions), the Council’s Highways Officer and the Environment Agency. A further letter of objection was received during the second consultation. Overall, the publicity generated seven letters of objection and one in support.

Officers confirmed the options available to the Committee and advised that they should only appraise the application as submitted.

Members of the Committee were then given an opportunity to ask technical questions to the officer. The main issues raised included the justification for making the current temporary permission permanent, comments from Public Protection in relation safeguarding of the environment and residential amenities from potential harmful levels of smoke, fumes and general disturbance, how hours of operation would be enforced, and questioned the long-term source of fuel for the boiler.

In response, officers confirmed that there had been no complaints received pursuant to the use of the boiler during the temporary permission, and advised that through securing an updated Boiler Management Plan, officers were satisfied that the boiler would operate within acceptable parameters. Members were advised that the environmental health officer would undertake random checks on compliance, and the committee was advised that alternative non-hazardous sources of fuel may need to be sourced for the boiler should pallets become unavailable.

Members of the public, as detailed above, then had the opportunity to address the Committee and speak to the application.

Local Unitary Member, Cllr Ernie Clark, addressed the Committee and detailed his objections to the application, and confirmed to being unsatisfied that the proposal would be an acceptable permanent facility due to the proximity to neighbouring properties, the failure to protect nearby residential amenity from the smoke produced by the boiler, and that the proposal would be contrary to the adopted Wiltshire Core Strategy Core Policy 57 criterion vii.

Cllr Clark then moved to refuse the application against officer recommendation, which was seconded by Cllr Antonio Piazza.

During the debate, Cllr Vigar commented on concerns about smoke and odour radiating from the boiler when it was in operation and the frequency of out of operational hours visits by Environmental Health officers. He suggested that the length of the flue could be extended to reduce the impact of smoke and odour on neighbouring properties. Cllr Wickham observed that wind direction was not a constant and indeed was liable to change.

At the conclusion of the debate a vote was taken on the motion to refuse the application.

Following which, it was:

Resolved:

To refuse the planning application for the following reason:

The Council is not satisfied that this proposal would be an acceptable permanent facility in such relative close proximity to residential properties. The Council argues that by reason of the smoke produced by the boiler it fails to protect nearby residential amenities, contrary to adopted Wiltshire Core Strategy Core Policy 57 vii.

(Note – During the debate the Committee intimated that the applicant should be encouraged to submit a separate application for a taller flue to ensure the boiler accords with the enhanced smoke dispersal as outlined in the supporting surveys).