Minutes:
The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.
The case officer presented the item to Members highlighting the additional suggested condition regarding the submission of a scheme which reduced the air infiltration rate to the building to ensure that the accidental risk level in relation to the proximity to the COMAH site was not considered to be significant.
The Committee was addressed by Mr Lomax, a local resident, who objected to the application. He advised Members that the Weston Quarry site was contaminated land that had been ‘tipped on’ as recently as 2001/2. Also he stated that the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) had recommended that the site be left alone. He spoke further on the history of the quarry and referred to a dip on the site where the ground was sinking and questioned therefore the suitability of the site for development. He stated that other residents were of the same opinion as him and although they did not have the capacity to prove it they knew that the land was contaminated.
Mr Rogan, a representative of the applicant, then addressed the Committee. He provided some background information to the application and advised that they had taken residents’ concerns into consideration after which a more detailed scheme was submitted to Halton Council. In response to queries regarding the suitability of the site for a hotel he stated that a previously private piece of land would now become publicly accessible; it had views of the Estuary; and would improve the landscape of the area. Additionally, he argued that a hotel was needed for business users of the Heath Business Park; that it would help support the businesses on the Park; would provide employment in the local area; and could be used as a conference venue which the area had been without since the conversion of Lawson House.
Councillor Rowe, a Ward Councillor for the Heath, then addressed the Committee against the application. He referred to points made in the report that he considered to be misleading relating to:
· safety issues with speeding traffic especially where there was a curve in the road on Heath Road South;
· that the report seemed to skip over the issue of contamination of the land;
· The Environment Partnership (TEP) document and the inconsistencies around the issues discussed in the report;
· the reference of the greenspace value of the land in the Unitary Development Plan (UDP);
· that the character of the Village would be changed; and
· the statement made by the HSE in relation to granting planning permission.
Councillor John Gerrard, a Ward Councillor for Mersey, then addressed the Committee opposing the application. He referred to the objections made by Mr Lomax, a local resident with 30 years plus experience working in the chemical industry, mostly notably with ICI, and tabled a written statement from him for Members to read. The statement included a list of waste items buried in the North Quarry and provided a detailed background of the history of waste and chemical disposals made on the site over the years. The statement also made reference to the Halton UDP policies relating to this application and discussed the proximity of the site to the COMAH site and the involvement of the HSE. Councillor Gerrard urged the Committee to refuse the application.
Further to Members queries regarding the contents of the earth underneath the site and potential for contamination, Officers explained that for Condition number 12, a full site investigation and a remediation plan (if necessary) would be needed prior to any development taking place followed by a validation report demonstrating that the site had been fully remediated. Members were also provided with clarity over the meaning of ‘access reserved’ in relation to an outline application.
After hearing the representations made by the speakers and after considering the Officer’s report, the Committee voted to approve the application. Councillor John Bradshaw wished to record his vote against the application.
RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to it not being called in by the Secretary of State following referral to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and subject to the following conditions:
1. Time limit – outline permission;
2. Submission of reserved matters;
3. Development parameters;
4. Plans approved;
5. Site levels (BE1);
6. Facing materials to be agreed (BE1 and B2);
7. Breeding birds protection (GE21);
8. Reasonable avoidance measures – reptiles (GE21);
9. Landscaping scheme (BE1);
10. Tree protection (BE1);
11. Ground contamination (PR14);
12. Construction management plan (Highways) (BE1);
13. Electric vehicle charging points (CS19);
14. Site waste management plan (WM8);
15. Sustainable waste management design (WM9);
16. Surface water regulatory scheme (PR16); and
17. Air infiltration scheme (PR12).