Change of use of building 1 from agricultural building to storage; change of use and adaptation of old factory building (building 2) from offices and storage to offices, storage and manufacturing.

Provision of a sprinkler system comprising the erection of a water tank and pump room building.

Erection of a 26 metre stack together with the provision of ducting and other associated infrastructure, together with the removal of roof mounted fans from production plant (building 3).

The applications were approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet.

He advised that there were three separate applications that had been presented to the Committee in one composite report. The first application had been deferred previously by the committee due to further information being required regarding odour and traffic issues. As a result of the deferral the applicant had now agreed to amend the traffic management plan which was subject of an earlier application to require all HGV’s to leave the site in a Northerly direction. In respect of the odour issue related to the production of popcorn, the Principal Planning Officer drew members’ attention to the comments of the odour consultant.

He advised Members that the second application was a retrospective application for a water tank and pumphouse for a sprinkler system on the site. He added that the primary concerns in respect of the application appeared to be the visual impact of the water tank, although he was of the opinion that this had been addressed through condition 2 of his recommendation.

The third application was for a 26 metre high chimney stack which had been identified as a consequence of an earlier permission requiring the applicant to reduce odour resulting from the production of potato chips. He advised Members that the three year commencement condition should be replaced with a condition requiring the chimney stack to be completed within a specified period.  Upon consultation with the applicant, a period of eight months was considered to be reasonable, and an appropriately worded condition to reflect this was suggested. He also drew Members’ attention to the Committee Update Sheet and noted that there had been two letters received regarding odour from the manufacture of popcorn and not one letter as previously stated.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Ms Ford and Mr Block, two of the neighbouring residents, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Worrall, representing the applicants, spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor MJK Cooper, the local ward member, commented on a number of issues, including:

·         That he supported Tyrell’s as a brand and a company.

·         That Tyrell’s should not expand its existing site any further due to the impact it would have on the neighbouring residents.

·         Any proposal needed to be sustainable.

·         He had no objection to the water tank application subject to it being painted a suitable colour.

·         He could not support the second application as it was an expansion to the current enterprise.

·         He could not support the chimney stack application as there were more sustainable methods of filtration that had not been fully investigated. The stack would also have an unacceptable impact on the landscape.

A member of the Committee opened the debate by speaking in support of the three applications. He did however note that it was a difficult balance between the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73