Transcript

Testing. Testing. Yeah. Let's just do this. Yeah. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. David, you just not got Peter Armitage. He hasn't gone to the wrong building as you buy any chance. Have you got a number for him? Just check he's on his line. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. You can go to the right side. The reciting center. Reciting materials used in association with the construction industry. This includes enforcing, crushing and screening, concrete, grease, hammer, topsoil and subsoil. As well as importing, using sand, gravel, limestone and car stones. The recycling center, in which the batch and fantasy positions have got permission. It was given permission in 2014 through a lawful development system for the development system. As a council, the rest of it works on that application. To the side is highlighted on the pan by the star. To the north of the side is late in his plate target center. To the west of the side is front and low. To the west of the side is front and low and beyond that is our east later hill. To the east of the south is open agricultural land. The side is within the 1,000 people to go around those parts of the FCA, which falls for a paper supporting so-called hurlough and natural England should less ice impact this zone. There is probably quite a way to the rest of the site. A adjacent to the highway. As stated, the site is allocated a site that immediately adjacent to the western special protection area and therefore within the 1,000 people to meet for far the main components of the western special protection area, which supports what we are capable of supporting the song curling. Natural England and our ecology officer are both concerned that the proposals would not have an adverse impact without any ecology including the stone curling. The reasons for this have been identified as being the nature of the development being a commercial, not residential and would therefore not increase any visitors to the FCA in the same way new housing goes. No additional lighting is proposed to the site. The batching plant would not exceed the current noise level from the recycling plant as is and the minimal cumulative increase would be less than one death above. The batching plant would lose the site and construct it outside the mass nesting area. The batching plant is tested in a well-established site which already sees a degree of disturbance and use from range of vehicles and plant machinery. The commission would be overall reduced within the wider SAC as the site is closed to the end user for the FCA. The site itself of the recycled centre is predominantly hard-standing and does not therefore facilitate any nesting habitat or contribute to any features of the FAC. The batching plant would be located to the rear of the recycling plant at the recycling centre site. Approximately 345 meters from the western boundary which was adjacent to the highway. As safety the site would be classified as such policies the end-filing would apply. These tools could make economic roads an expansion of businesses and end-fries within the countryside. Politics CSC also looks to support sustainable economic development and quite like employment uses as R.A.F. late meat as a priority to the industry. The material produced by the batching plant would be used in the ongoing improvement and work at the R.A.F. base. Not just in operational works but also to accommodate the residential facilities. I have been advised those include upgrades to run my craft areas to treat accommodations for personnel including the facilities provided to the forces families. This has been evidenced by the African who has sent a number of invoices illustrating ongoing works at the R.A.F. base. 8 for the R.A.F. late in heat is located to the north east of the site and is approximately 2.1 kilometers from the entrance of the recycling plant. It was used to the batching plant would largely be on site already within the recycling center and traffic would increase by a modest amount of approximately 12%. With the majority of movements associated with the batching plant being sure and in close proximity to the site being from the batching plant itself to gate 8 of the R.A.F. base. The plant itself is illustrating the proposed batching plant loading areas in which the hard core materials will be placed to the left and silos for storage to the right. The concrete would be dispatched into vehicles which would drive underneath the central section. This plant illustrates the elevations of the batching plant. The batching plant would have a length of 33 meters and a width of 20 meters. The highest part of the batching plant would be the silos which have a height of 17 meters. The highest part of the batching plant would be the silos which have a height of 17 meters. This is just showing the section through of the proposed batching plant as stated. The loading area here where your materials further sectional plants illustrating the batching plant. Specifically the central area areas, where lobbies would drive through to receive the concrete before taking it onto REF Lake and Heath. We have views of the batching plant. This is taken from the shooting range car park to the north east of the site. You'll be able to see the silos projecting and the surrounding countryside from around the recycling plant. As you'll be aware, landscapes have objected to the proposal and they have highlighted that there's a potential for moderate harm to the landscape. The point out that the batching plant is set well within the existing recycling centre and is some 345 meters from the boundary with the highway. The batching plant would be seen in the context of the well-established recycling plant and against the backdrop of storage of aggregate machinery, materials, storage buildings and other construction machinery. The play services have requested an environmental colour assessment be submitted to the LPA. It is considered that this would ensure that there is due regard given to the colour and texture of the machinery with the mitigating some of the visual impacts of the development on the surrounding landscape. I think that's going to be highlighted. I'm going to slide. This is the entrance to the site. As mentioned, the batching plant would be located to the rear of the existing recycling centre and it would utilise the existing site access. The batching plant is taken from the north of the site from the access road as you are going to the shooting range. It's looking to illustrate how visible the batching plant would be from views within the wider landscape. This would be a view of the batching plant from the 1865. As mentioned, the plant would be located away from the highway and this would look to reduce the impacts of views from the main world itself. These are from the west of the site. So again, taken from the highway, I had safely pulled over. The batching plant seen in the context of the recycling plant, including the storage building and storage piles of aggregate. Now, as stated, the recycling plant does benefit from planning permission so it would just be the batching plant that we'd be looking at, but it's just to highlight the context of how the batching plant would be seen. Further views of the batching plant taken from the south of the site, again along from the highway. Again, highlighting the existing character of the recycling center, including the various machinery and the storage of aggregates. We receive no comments from the panish book. Councillor Kelly and Councillor Ritten did raise various concerns, specifically the increase in traffic and traffic. We received no comments from the panish book. Councillor Kelly and Councillor Ritten did raise various concerns specifically the increase in traffic. Specifically southbound. Lack of real washing facilities impact of the recycling plant on the landscape and concerns raised about natural England's views and support of the proposal. In regards to this, I'd highlight that wheel washing facilities are already on site for the larger recycling plant. And the development relates only to the batching plant. So a condition for wheel washing could only relate to vehicles visiting the plant. And not all vehicles accessing the recycling center. And as stated, it would be quite a moderate increase in traffic resulting from the batching plant itself. Already discussed landscape and ecology concerns. So I won't go over those again. And as discussed the batching plant is there to produce materials for the ongoing project. So R.F. Lake and Heath. Not just the F-35 project. See, there are no objections other than that from landscape. So, most notably, highways, ecology, public health and housing and waste have no objections to the proposal. So, in terms of the landscape officer, we have already raised and discussed. And again, no further objections from console seas notably natural England and the R.F.P.V. The proposed batching plant would bring economical benefits by supporting the existing recycling center and upgrading works to the adjacent space, which is one of the largest employers in the region. As such, the proposal would comply with the aims of DM-5 and CS-5. The impact to the development on the landscape has been carefully considered, especially in light of the concerns raised by the landscape officer. DM-13 permits development which would have an adverse impact upon landscape character where harm will not be significantly and demonstrably away the benefits of the proposal. And development will be permitted subject to other planning considerations. There have been no concerns regarding high-race safety and the proposal will have a minimal increase in traffic to the site. With the majority of traffic for the batching plant, traveling short distances only and going from the batching plant to gate eight of the adjacent R.F. gate eight is the contractors base for the R.F. base. The ecology officer at Natural England have no objections to the proposal and they have stated that the development would not result in any harm to stonker-loos. As such, it is considered that on balance the potential impact upon the landscape has been carefully assessed and taken into account fully, but it would not be considered to outweigh the process. The proposal should be approved by the proposal and officers would therefore consider that the proposal should be supported. Thank you.

Thank you very much indeed, Joanne. I think next time I will ask for a motorised chair. [ Laughter ] Okay. So we now turn our attention to registered public speakers and we have got Ryan Holbrooke and you are the applicant. So you have got, I think you have been brief, you have got three minutes, Ryan, yes? We will try to keep it as best in the three minutes. I will stop you if you can. Ready to go. Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to sit and speak to you today. Currently, R.F. is being supplied to existing concrete batches across Norfolk and Suffolk. The grade of the aggregate that we produce would be suitable for general concrete foundations and lower the cost at being recycled. If approval was given today, the site batcher would aim to primarily use recycled aggregate and sand being produced on the site where the batcher is. So the regional road movement should be created in theory of the batcher by utilizing the recycled aggregate that would have otherwise been delivered to other locations. The location of the batcher is essential with high strength mixes of concrete being used for runways and taxiways that have an active life of two to three hours. On occasions can take two hours plus to access through the batch level of the noise band adjacent to the silos will end up being seven metres higher than the current silo height. The batching plant is set on the existing runway foundation installed in the 1940s and since we took stewardship of the site in 2018 we have established two new nesting locations for stone curlers. The site is continuously subject to annual ecology audits by a retained ecologist middle march looking to ensure that the batcher is the best part of the show for the bag house being highly efficient and using the most modern technology. This was approved by Fay Rushby with the go ahead to begin batching once planning has been approved. I believe during the site you will on Monday that you were showing our self-contained wheel wash that as a part of company policy all vehicles leaving the site must exit. Our F mildenhall and our F felt well. Currently our JH are supplying nine separate contractors with aggregates and removing of demolition arising across all three locations. The most notable work is taking place be the expansion of fuel stations undertook by Adler and Allen. The reconstruction of sports facilities by AD Bligh and touring contracting. This is actually quite an active way of concrete and fulfilling an airfield maintenance package as part of KVF 35 by Volcker Fitzpatrick. As well as minor works being completed in preparation for the next phase of major works. On the 29th of January 2024 BBC announced an additional £39 million was being allocated to RAF Lake and ETH by the U.S. Secretary of Defense to construct these measures. As well as to partake in the nuclear weapon storage capabilities. Ryan, it's amazing how quickly three minutes goes. Can you finish up in one sentence please? To further bolster this by the news last night that $50 billion is to be allocated to help Ukraine fight Russia with RAF Lake and ETH and Mildenhall being essential for mid-stop projects. All right, members. Committee discussion and debate now. Remember you have to put your hand up. Peter? Just one quick question. What's your view on it being three years long? Peter, you can't ask him direct question. Sorry. If you ask the officer. It's a good question. Yes. Are we on that given what's been said about the other project, some of which I think were mentioned as five years? Yes. Okay. I will direct that. Can you answer the question, Joanne? Yes. Do you want to do it, Rachel? What we're dealing with is an application for three years. I don't know why it was just submitted for three years. Perhaps in terms of the applicant certainty over contracts that they may have already. But beyond that, another application would need to be submitted to renew that temporary consent if it was approved. Yes. The reason I wanted you to direct the questions, because I thought officers might have the answer. If they hadn't, I could have then engaged directly with Ryan, okay, just to be clear on that. Right, just to make sure I'm getting used to this old style again. I've got Councillor London, Councillor David Smith, and Councillor Glossop so far. Anybody else want to speak? Councillor Waldron and Neil. Okay, Councillor London, please. Thank you very much, Chair. I think a lot of the local animosity for this seems to come down to the issue of fairness with regards to stone curliers and Brandon. So in that light, I'd like to ask officers if something along these lines were to occur, an application were to come in and say on the outskirts of Brandon that was still in the SPA, something like that, is there anything about this application that sets it apart differently from any other application in the SPA near Brandon? And in that counterfactual, if something like this were to, you know, an industrial unit application to come forward in Brandon, would that similarly, I'm trying to dig down into why this one is acceptable and yet other things aren't. And as far as I can tell, the current differentiation is as far as industrial versus residential and therefore the main question is, does that mean that other industrial uses near Brandon are similarly as acceptable to officers as this one? Thank you, Councillor. Councillor David Smith, please. That was quick. I wasn't expecting to speak. Yeah. Can you clarify? You said the traffic increases. A modest 12%, can you put some of that up? I don't know. I don't know if I said the rate is 1, but 12% of 800 is 100. So, you know, it's all about numbers really, isn't it? Let's believe that this is -- this plant is, regardless, mobile. Can you tell me if there's any difference in the policy is whether it would be a permanent site rather than mobile? When does mobile become permanent? If it's going to be extended by contract, when it's becoming permanent, it would have mentioned about the three years. It would have mentioned that. The bond will be built before this site comes into operation. And do they supply any other sites from this particular plant? Or is it just like any? Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Smith. Councillor Glossup, please. Thank you, Chairman. Yes, I'd like to know the recycling plant had planning permission. Has that got a time limit on it or is it forever? The other thing I do want to ask, and I know Councillor London has alluded to what I was going to say, I don't quite understand natural England because are we saying that I know that housing is considered a problem because of cats and movements and cars and all of those kind of things. So within natural England's criteria, are we now saying that they look at employment sites quite differently to housing? I'm finding this all a little bit odd, so if we can have some clarification on that, please. Thank you, Councillor Glossup. Councillor Waldron, please. Thank you, Chair. I'd like to draw attention to number 10, natural England's no objections on page 15. If we read through it, they're based on plans submitted for further information supplied. Natural England considers the proposal of development will not have likely effect on Brechtland's special protection area. Fine. It also notes, natural England notes that the habitat regulations assessment will be not being produced by our authority, but by the applicant. As the competent authority, it is our responsibility to produce the HRA and be accountable for its conclusions. We obviously haven't been, because we're still using the middle mark on page 15. I would like to say that this is not going to be as important as possible. We obviously haven't been, because we're still using the middle mark assessment from 2023. Why is this, and why hasn't it been done if we're going to carry the can if it's wrong? Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Waldron. Councillor Neill, please. Thank you, Chair. I'm very familiar with Lake and Heath Face because I'm on there all the time, and I know the people are here, and it's moment in time in this debate, I just want to talk about the logistical side of things. It's said that they deliver to Milden or Lake and Heath and Feltrell, but also it says that they supply Suffolk and Norfolk sites. There was a meeting with Norfolk County Council, and because the sidings where the stuff comes in in Brandon has been expanded to a second siding. So the doubling the amount of aggregate that's coming in, that's got to be shipped over, I assume, to this plant and other locations as well. And the amount of mess that's created, I visited that site, the station, and the amount of mess that's created from aggregate is unbelievable. You've really got to see it to believe it. I'm sure you touched on it when you had your site visit, and they hadn't got a wheel wash there. So that's a condition that's now going to be created at the station. And for the traffic management, the amount of vehicles that's been going through Brandon High Street, it's been agreed that from Brandon to get to this location, they're going to go to Munford, which is into Norfolk, across to Thetford, down the A11, the five ways roundabout, and up to this location. Now, there's no way that's going to happen. What is going to happen is the rat run, and these great lorries, they're going to be going through from the station at Brandon, they're going to go to Wheaton, it's a hot quad, through Lake and Heath, Eraswell, and the Eraswell turning comes out onto that 1066. So that's the route that, let's make numbers take about it, that's the route that's going to be taken. And these lorries, they're going to take the shortest route to the plant, and that's pushing lorries through the villages. So the logistical side of it has great concerns from me, and that's all I'll say at this moment in time. Thank you, Councillor Neill. Any other members wishing to contribute at this point, Councillor Bould please. Just a very quick one on the transport. My understanding is at the moment that once the aggregate has been dealt with, it goes off to other batching plants to make concrete. Presumably now that if they're able to make concrete there, there will be a huge cut down on all that aggregate being taken off the site. So that must be a plus in a way that they're going to do the batching on site, rather than sending it all off. Just a thought. Thank you, Councillor Bould. Right, can I come back to officers, please, to respond to the questions that have been raised so far. Thank you. Sorry, I've been trying to look for the exact figures in terms of what the 12% increase would represent. And unfortunately, I don't have those in front of me. I've not been able to find them in such short notice. But, I mean, it is quite a modest increase in terms of what traffic would be accessing the site. And it would reduce the overall traffic in the area because the lorries coming to the concrete batching plant would obviously then be using the materials largely already on the recycling plant and then just traveling to gate eight, rather than being able to go to the concrete batch that's happening further a field. As when does temporary component, well, we are only looking at the temporary permission, which does really allow the local authority to keep a level of control because in three years' time, they will have to come back and request an extension of time if that's what it is. And it's also being mentioned, or it's been provided for me, that the plant itself is a moveable structure, so it gets moved on and off site and it gets moved two different places. So I've done this with the intention of having the temporary structure there becoming permanent. But we do have that control after three years. I mentioned the bunding site, whether that's to become operational. That is not part of this application. I don't have details about the bunding, I believe it's being constructed to the north of the site in association with the shooting range, but it certainly does not form any part of this application. So I wouldn't have specifics on that. And also to note, I know the question is about the level of aggregates coming to the recycling plant. The recycling plant has an established planning permission. It gained an LDC in 2014. We really can't take into account the aggregates going to the recycling center itself. That already has permission. Whether the batch implant is approved, whether it's not the recycling plant has permission, and that will continue as it is at the moment. Okay. Thanks, Chair. I wanted to, there's two, three questions asked about the Stonecurlough and the different view in relation to the comments that we've had from natural England and then Councillor Waldron's asked about the habitats regulations assessment as well. So, in terms of Stonecurlough and the comments that we receive from natural England and other nature conservation bodies, and in terms of the evidence about the impact of development on the Stonecurlough, it does relate specifically to residential development. So the concerns relate to recreational impacts from new houses being built close to the SPA so that you've got more population that might go into areas to walk or, you know, to recreate within the forest or the Heathland that impacts the presence of Stonecurlough, as well as predation from domestic pets. So, the main concern that the nature conservation bodies have about development and how it impacts on that species does relate to residential development as opposed to commercial or industrial development. So, to answer your question, Councillor London, if we have this sort of proposal in Brandon itself, you know, subject to all other things being equal, it would be the type of proposal that could be acceptable in Brandon itself because it doesn't involve those residential or recreational impacts on the species that we're concerned about. And I think that answers your question as well, Councillor Gossack, which was related to wise employment different to housing. In terms of the Habitat's regulations assessment, it is quite normal for a developer to do what is normally termed as a shadow HRA or an information HRA, so it's the applicant's version of what they think the impacts are in relation to that Habitat or that species. From that, though, we then do our own Habitat's regulations assessment as the competent authority. So, the comments from natural England would have been at a time that we hadn't got to the stage of doing our own HRA. But if you look on the website and our ecology officers comments, and I think they're summarised in the committee report, we have done our duty in terms of the Habitat's regulations, and we have done our own assessment under those regulations following the comments that we have received from natural England. So, hopefully that explains that point. We've certainly fulfilled that duty as a competent authority. Thank you. Thank you. I'm Rachel and Joanne. Right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members, please let me off my extreme ignorance here, but I don't know what an LDC is that Joanne mentioned at all. I apologise for you not knowing this. I'm very interesting about the Stone Curloon and I certainly learn something. Every time I come here, this committee regarding the explanation Rachel has just given. I know we can't take into consideration, which is a shame because I am concerned of the traffic movements from the station in theatre, obviously comes on Norfolk, and were they consulted at all, Norfolk County Council, because it still obviously will create traffic possibly in their area. I find this hard. Obviously, permission was given for this site to operate there, yet we as Councillors here don't know how many extra movements they are actually be, so we can get an idea. Plus, we don't actually know how much effect this will have down the high street of Brandon. If I may, I do look at the Facebook page of Brandon and see concerns on there, which does worry me, and it's a shame that it seems I can't take that into consideration at all. I think possibly, I don't know if there are any limits on the permission that the site has for movements to the site from the local area, anything from the station. It's a funny one, this, that I understand what we can only object on if we wanted to object to, and yet we would then be making potentially the high street in Brandon suffer more, so difficult one, this, but thank you anyway. I suggest you won't be alone on that. Oh, the LDC, yes, yes. Lawful development certificate. So it's like a certificate of lawfulness, so because it relates to minerals, it was a certificate granted by the county council in 2014, so sorry, we went into planning language. It's all right, it's not a problem. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor DICKIT. As I looked up, I saw Councillor Thorne Dyke, Smith and London. I'm not sure that was the right order, but I'll go with Councillor Thorne Dyke first, please. Thank you, Chair. 12% increase, I think roughly equates to where you've got eight, now you'll have nine, which will follow on. Whether you think that's an insignificant increase or not is your problem. We haven't got very much on noise on this thing, and I'm a bit concerned. I noticed on the top of page 26, it says you won't hear it because the rest of the aggregate recycling facility will be running. So the question is, is the aggregate recycling facility running all the time, so this will fade into the background behind it, but I'm a bit worried because we had plans for one on my patch some years ago, and one of the things it got thrown out on was noise. So I'm a bit concerned about we're not seeing a true noise figure for this plant when it's running at full chat. We've got comments somewhere that it's very quiet because of its electric motor, but it's not quoted as running at high speed. It probably is somewhere and I haven't found it, but I'm a bit concerned about noise levels. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Thondike. Councillor David Smith, please. Yes, let's come back from a previous question. I'm not sure if they've got fully answered. I did ask if any difference in our policies, whether the site is considered mobile or permanent, and also is this just to supply Lake and Eve, or is it supplying sites for a field. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Thomas. Councillor John London, please. Thank you, Councillor Chairman Andrew Smith. Two questions and three suggestions. I'm not quite at making a proposal stage yet. Not question, but a suggestion with regards to this and the Stone Cool use. We've just had our previous training session for this body. I really feel like if officers were able to provide a training session on the entirety of the Stone Cool use issue, that would be very, very useful with this in mind. Secondly, in three years, say this is approved and it comes back up again for approval in three years' time, will our decision now have any material consideration on the extension of the application or will the application in three years, if we can come forward be an entirely separate thing that would not depend upon what we say here. I then have three things that I think we would want to have in place if we were to approve this, which would be three additional conditions. I don't believe they are particularly onerous, but I note that there is no conditioning the use of the wheel washing facility, seeing as it is already company or an onerous condition to say that the wheel washing facility should be used. Secondly, as we have heard, this is in effect due to an accident of democratic boundaries, one-half of two submissions, including issues and things that are happening in Norfolk, and I think that if we were to put this one forward and accept this application, we should probably mirror the traffic management plan that was put forward to avoid, to make sure that vehicles are avoiding Brandon High Street, and possibly we could look up and mirror the wording that was used to ensure that there are no issues where, say, for example, Norfolk is trying to impact how journeys are made being made in Suffolk, and we are not trying to impact how journeys are being made in Norfolk, and that it is entirely equivalent across that boundary, and that everyone is working in concert. And finally, I note that when talking about the use of this plant and the use of the recycled materials on site, words we used along the lines of, we will be able to use the recycled materials, and we should be using the recycled materials, but there was nothing actually conditioning that a certain proportion of the material being created in the batching plant will actually come from the recycled materials on site, and to my mind, the location of this batching plant co-located with the recycling plant, the only reason to put it here is for that synergy of being able to use that recycled material. And yet, there is nothing that says that that recycled material would actually be used in the batching plant. It could all just be brought in from outside. I don't think that might be economical, but again, I think that looking at some kind of condition where we are making sure that it is not a case of and there turns out to be no further aggregate in the area that needs to be recycled, so we are just going to all bring it to Brandon, some kind of condition about that if officers could word that. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor London. I've got no other members wishing to speak. Oh, yes, Councillor HOOD. Yes, just one point of clarification. I wrote down when the applicant was speaking that what was going to be there would be seven metres higher than now. Can I just -- that just be clarified? That is -- and then I've got something I wanted to say. Okay. Rachel can clarify that. Yes, Chair, I think that was relating to what Joanna's clarified is a bond that is offsite, so we've got the shooting range just to the north of the site, and there was a consent some time ago that included quite significant bonding around that development. So that reference is to the bonding that's offsite and nothing to do with this planning application. But visible from the road. Yes. Okay, thank you. So it's no secret that I believe that we should take local councillors comments extremely seriously. And I'm not persuaded by the reference in section 60 that comments from local members concerning responses are noted each application must be considered on its own merits because my reading of local members' comments is that they are considering this application on its own members' merits. Sorry, I also note that the place service landscape officer has objected. As far as the noise, again, I'm not persuaded that that's not an issue, nor the traffic, and going to section 46. There's a statement that is such that development would be visible within the wider rule of landscape, but it would read as being part of the established recycling centre. So what? It would be visible. And then 50, taking the above into account, it's considered that taking on balance the proposal would be acceptable. Thank you. I feel very uncomfortable about this application, particularly in light of the local members' rejections. Thank you, Councillor Maye White, just beat you to it, Councillor Neill. Thank you, Chairman. I think, yes, the local members have written them, but it's not going to happen. I, too, am interested in where this aggregate is really going. Are we certain it's only going to be going to the RAF and Mildenhall? Because I find it surprising there's no letter of support from either any of those organisations. I would have expected them to have commented and made the point that this is useful having this batching plant on their doorstep because of all the fact that we could have a little bit more clarification about or certainty that these aggregates really are being or the cement rather is really being used locally and not travelling miles. That would be useful. Thank you, Chairman. Just before I come to you, Councillor Neill, can I just clarify the impact that's been considered is on Brandon, but the actual ward members are at Lake and Heath Ward just for absolute clarity. But the impact, quite clearly, is felt more closely by the ward members for Brandon. So, Councillor Neill, please. Thank you, Chair. Well, I disagree with what you've just said there, surprisingly, because, yes, it's going to have an impact on Brandon. And Brandon stations have on the second side in, so there's twice the amount of aggregate coming in, logically, twice the amount of aggregate is going to have to come out. And because of the condition that's been suggested that they take a different route to the batch implant by going to Mumford, to Thetford, and down the A11, the alternative is that they come through those villages, and anyone who lives in a village, the last thing they want is a stream of these and they are massive lories coming through their village. I know, particularly, I mention errors, well, there's a real tight bend there, and the flint walls continuously happen to be rebuilt, where two vehicles can't pass. A car and a bus or a lorry, if the car doesn't hold back, the HGV, it clips the flint wall. And that's what we're doing. We're going to be pushing the traffic, these lorries, through the villages. And I don't think that's acceptable. If anything, I would want to push for a deferment on this until we can get the numbers correct. What is 12%? As a percentage, it doesn't represent a number. And I think we need to know the growth that this is going to install. And one other point, directly across the road, from the entrance to this site, is a school. And what impact is this facility going to have on that school? And also, I think, when we're talking about, is it a mobile facility, or is it a permanent facility? I think that relates to the fact that it's sectionally built. So it could be dismantled and taken somewhere else. But once this is built, isn't it? That's the reality of the situation. Thank you. Thank you. I wasn't trying to be controversial, by the way. I was just trying to reassure members that it's in a different ward to Brandon Town Centre. That's all I was attempting to do. You were. Yes. But thank you very much as usual. Now, look, I'm going to take that as a proposal then, Councillor Neill. Is that seconded, please? Yeah. Councillor Hood. Now, as ever, we need reasons for the deferment. Is it about clarity on, I mean, Councillor Thorne, like, mentioned noise. Others have mentioned other matters. I'm not trying to steer you, but vehicles. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Use your microphone, please, because we're live-streaming. Sorry. Yes. The noise and the increase in vehicle movement. Clarity on the number of the anticipated. Okay. Is there anything you want to add to that, Councillor Hood? Well, I can't. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. It would be helpful to have a response from the parish council. And I know that as well, they hadn't given one, but it would seem quite important. Okay. Thank you for that. I'm not sure we can twist their arm on that. Can I just ask? Two members. I've got Councillor Bawlin, Councillor Gossett. Councillor Bawlin was just before you, Councillor Gossett. Thank you, Chair. The plant, if we don't approve the batching equipment, the plant is still going to be released, and it strikes me in this day and age, there is more and more requirement for recycling this aggregate. So although I understand entirely about Lori's coming through Brandon, they are still going to be going through Brandon to the recycling plant because that will still be operational. And I know we talk about the 12% and how many it is, but there must be a reduction in Lori's rate distances leaving the plant if the cement is going, they're using the on-site staff, and then the cement is going just to leak and heat from the local places. So I do understand the worry, but those Lori's are still going to be going into that plant because it's an operational recycling plant, and I can only see the business there getting busier, you know. Thank you. Well, I mean, obviously Joanne's here and Rachel's here, and they'll take these comments on board if this does get deferred when I put it to the vote. Councillor Glossop, please. Thank you, Chairman. I think we do need to know whether this plant is just for cement for leak and heat, because that in a way was the way it was being sold to us, or is it for everywhere, and so if we are going to defer it, that's another reason why we're deferring, because we don't actually know if it is for the RAF base, please. Thank you, Councillor Glossop. Councillor London, please. Thank you, Chair. I wouldn't normally ask to question applicants. However, if we are looking at deferring and the answers to the questions are in this room, that might be an appropriate time to just ask if the 12% number could be clarified. Apparently, we have an answer, which I'm going to come back to officers now. There's been some research going on, Councillor London. So when you're already officers? Just in regards to the traffic point through the planning statement, it gives various facts and figures. Walked, it does say that approximately this will create five additional vehicle movements per day to the site. Chair, I've picked up a couple of other questions. Obviously noting that we've got the motion for deferral. Councillor Smith asked about do we view mobile and permanent any differently in terms of policy considerations? No, we don't. It's a structure in the landscape and analysis. It's a structure in the landscape and an activity associated with it, whether it was mobile or permanent plant. That really doesn't make a difference to our policy considerations. A couple of members have picked up on this point about, you know, will it only be for aggregates that are on the site already? And then also, where does the product go? Is it just to the base or other other destinations? And I think if members are moving towards a vote for deferral, I think that would be a useful addition to clarify. We have been told it is for the base, but we need to be able to clarify that. And it would be helpful for us to be able to say whether it's suitable to restrict it to such if that was the case, which goes to one of the points that you've raised, Councillor London. I think that was it. So I'd captured in terms of a deferral, I'd captured queries in relation to noise. We can certainly get some more information about the number of vehicles, but we've told you what is in the planning statement, questions about routing, and then also the destination and origin of the products that would go through the plant, is what I've noted down as a question. Oh, and also the question of the parish council, we can try and consult them again to find out if there is, if they do have any comments, but it appears that they don't at this stage. Thanks, Rachel. I've got Councillor Thorne. Then Councillor Hood. Councillor Thorne, please. Yeah, only I've talked to where it's going to go. I thought the applicant said that he will be using Lake and Heath, Milton Hall, and felt well as sites for delivery. So we already have information that relates to that. It will not be just going to Lake and Heath. It'll be gone all over. Thank you, Councillor Thorne Dink. And dare I say, Councillor, I meant, yeah, Councillor Thorne. You've dared. Yeah. Is it possible? I mean, I'm concerned about the cement dust too, in the recommendation, and without wishing to be controversial. Enforcement has always been something I think we have struggled with, and I would be concerned that if we are going to need to enforce matters, if this is approved, there should be much greater clarification of how we're doing that. Because, you know, it's no secret enforcement, just, well, my area doesn't seem to happen. So, I don't think we can leave it without specific, specific, you know, how is it going to be enforced. For instance, if there was a problem with dust, which I would be concerned about, how do we find out, and how do we make sure it's dealt with. So, I would have liked to see greater specificity in any kind of enforcement requirements, but also, again, I'm not persuaded by the applicant's response to the dust situation. So, if we can have a clarification, if we do defer, that would be helpful. Thank you, Councillors. Now, who was I hoping you would be the last member, but Councillor I just got my eye. I'll keep it back for a quick then. I was just going to say, the concern that the cement might go to three different places, if it's not being converted to cement the aggregate on the site, it's going to be going out of the place anyway. So, those lorries are going to be going even further afield. So, I'm not sure on balance, if there is a, you know, trying to say it can only go to those three places, it's going to reduce anything. But let's hope the work that will be presented to us for the next Development Control Committee meeting I'm expecting would have four clarification of that, Councillor. Councillor David Smith, please. Just a quick one, really. I might have missed it in the application, but it's a seven-day a week operation, because going back to the numbers, five doesn't sound a lot, but seven days a week, 365 days a year, and that's almost 2,000 movements. And it's always a trick to sort of use a smaller figure as possible. Okay, thank you. You've used the multiplier of five, have you? Yeah, okay. Right. I've got no members wishing to speak. Have officers got anything else to add? The opening hours are specified in the planning statement. They are apparently going to be the same as the operational hours that the larger recycling plant has. So that would be seven until five Monday to Friday and seven till 12 on Saturday. So nothing on a Sunday. Thank you, Joanne. Right. No members. Right. Here we go. It's been proposed for the reasons that I'm not going to summarise, but Rachel has very kindly done. So by Councillor Neill for deferment, and it's been seconded by Councillor Hord. Could I see a show of hands in favour of deferment, please? Okay. And those against, please. Thank you. And it's over to you, Claire. Thank you, Chair. That's seven votes in favour and six votes against. So motion is carried and the application is deferred. Well, thank you very much indeed. Claire, thank you very much indeed. Members, there's no meeting in May. So this, all things being called, could return for the first meeting in June. At which point I will close the meeting and wish you a good break from development control. All right. Refresh your batteries, Councillor Neill. Take care. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [BLANK_AUDIO]

Transcript

Transcript

Transcript

Transcript