Planning applications and related matters.
Minutes:
Consideration was given to item 1 of the report of the Strategic Manager for Planning and Infrastructure Delivery.
RESOLVED:
That the application be determined as detailed below:
The reasons for the resolutions made in accordance with Officer recommendation were given in the planning report. Where resolutions are made contrary to Officer recommendations the reasons for doing so are contained in the minutes.
A schedule of additional representations received after the printing of the report were submitted at the beginning of the meeting and were drawn to the attention of Members when considering the application.
Application: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
21/01623/FUL |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Details: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Full planning permission for the onshore elements of the Perpetuus Tidal Energy Centre (PTEC) to include construction of a substation / control room (including outdoor transformer compound and welfare facilities); alterations to access, parking and turning arrangements; installation of cabling to connect marine electricity export cables to substation (to include trenching and construction of transition pits and/or Horizontal Direction Drilling, and temporary removal and reinstatement of coastal protection); and enabling works, including possible reinforcement or alteration of access roads within the onshore area, creation of temporary laydown/construction areas, construction of temporary site security fencing/provisions, possible tree and scrub clearance, site levelling/landscaping (revised description).
Further information has been received relating to the Environmental Statement, including a Transformer Noise Appraisal, updated Arboricultural (tree) Impact Assessment Report, and drawing PL33 - visualisation of the proposed substation and outdoor transformer compound from within the existing Southern Water pumping station site.
Flowers Brook, Steephill Road, Ventnor. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Site Visits: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The site visit was carried out on Friday, 10 December 2021 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Public Participants: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr Daniel James (Objector) Mr Tony Flower (Objector) Mr Dan Clare (on behalf of the applicant) Rear Admiral Rob Stevens (on behalf of the applicant) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional Representations: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Following feedback from the applicant regarding the proposed conditions, condition four and 14 were amended. Three additional letters of representation had been received by the Local Planning Authority. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comment: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Oliver Boulter Strategic Manager for Planning and Infrastructure read out a statement from Councillor Gary Peace as Local Member for the application.
Clarification was sought regarding the access to the site, Officers advised that the statement read out by one of the public speakers for Red Squirrel Limited had confirmed that there was prospect of the access being permitted by way of a transfer of title facilitating the scheme.
Concern was raised regarding the noise levels and the Committee asked if two decibels above existing background levels was too noisy and could it be reduced. Planning Officers advised that Environmental Health had been consulted on the application and they had suggested the noise levels, assurance was provided that noise levels would be monitored by the Local Planning Authority and Environmental Health.
The Committee raised concerns regarding the level of commitment from the company to proceed with the application, they were advised that a previous application had not commenced due to government grants being withdrawn.
There was discussion regarding whether a bond could be secured to ensure that the public open space at Flowers Brook would be restored if the development was not completed. Officers explained that the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) advised that bonds could only be used in exceptional circumstances and they didn’t believe that it was justified in this case.
A proposal to approve the application was made and duly seconded.
A further proposal to approve subject to applying a bond to restore the site and reduce the time limit of the construction was made and duly seconded.
The Chairman called a short adjournment to allow officers time to consider the proposal.
Following the adjournment officers advised that strengthening conditions relating to the construction management plan could be made to alleviate concerns regarding the restoration and completion of construction works.
All proposers and seconders agreed with the proposal and a vote was taken, the result was: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Decision: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RESOLVED:
THAT the application be approved with amendments to conditions to strengthen the Construction Management Plan.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Amended Conditions: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Supporting documents: