Knacker's yard: new documents could change everything
Jeff Beck (Con, Clay Hill), who initially ‘called in’ the matter in order for it to be decided by committee, revealed this week that planning officers had been set to reject the controversial application.
But that has changed, because of the new reports.
Meanwhile letters continued to be registered this month - principally, but not exclusively, objecting to the proposals, thereby bringing the total to more than 300.
One prominent critic of the application, Chaddleworth Parish Council chairman Grahame Murphy, has asked that the application be withdrawn and a new one submitted.
Mr Murphy said the first, new technical report, submitted this month by applicants J Passey and Son, suggested so many changes to the original plans that it was effectively a new proposal.
Permission is sought to move a knackers’ yard used for storing horse carcasses, plus additional horse incinerator, from its current location on the Turnpike industrial estate in Newbury, to the vacant Wessex Saw Mill site in Great Shefford.
Ironically, nearly 50 people have signed a petition in support of the application - all of them near neighbours of the existing yard who want it moved because they can no longer stand the “foul smells” emanating trom it.
And many objectors from the Lambourn Valley say they fear that a smell of death emanating from the premises will spook sensitive racehorses in the region.
Last month it emerged that, in an apparent attempt to draw the sting from such objections, the applicants had commissioned a report from a firm of odour suppression consultants which suggested installing “a sequence of nozzles” around the building which could pump “atomised ‘Airborne 10’...to help eradicate any odourous gasses or dust particulate.”
Airborne 10 is the proprietary name for surfactant induced absorption technology which, manufacturers claim, “greatly increases the absorbency of water for odour and dust eradications.”
Meanwhile the second new report, a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA), suggests dealing with contaminants from the site by increasing a proposed storage tank to 30 cubic metres.
In addition, it concludes that the proposed development “will not affect conveyance of fluvial flood flows or floodplain storage capacity.”
Mr Murphy has written to planning chiefs stating that the new, technical FRA “makes so many changes to the original 2014 application that, in my opinion, a new application should be submitted to take account of all these changes.”
In September, Jeff Beck (Con, Clay Hill) announced he was “calling it in” - meaning that the decision will be made following a debate between elected councillors at a meeting of West Berkshire Council’s western area planning committee, instead of by planning officers.
He denied claims by critics that he was using undue influence to ensure the knacker’s yard was removed from his ward, and said it was in everyone’s interest that, if the decision was “on a knife edge,” that the issue was debated fully.
Indeed, said Mr Beck, he has since reversed his decision to call the matter in to committee, explaining: “There was an Environment Agency report which was so damning of the potential drainage situation that I was told the application was going to be turned down flat. I therefore withdrew my decision to take it to committee.”
However, said Mr Beck, the new reports mean the outcome is again far from certain.
Graham Jones (Con, Lambourn Valley) said: “The matter has attracted so many comments that it will now be called in to committee automatically.”
He sided with opponents of the application, saying: “I’m concerned about the site with regard to the water table. Anyone who went through the experience of last year know’s that flooding is a major issue. That a huge obstacle to overcome.”
Meanwhile the Environment Agency and the council’s planning department have yet to respond to the new reports and there is still no scheduled date for a decision.
Meanwhile comments can be left by visiting West Berkshire Council website’s planning applications area and using the reference 14/01615/FUL