Agenda item

RESOLVED

Application would be DEFERRED to allow investigation regarding noise issues and to further review the site history.  

The Planning Officer gave an illustrative presentation, recommending the grant of planning permission for the proposal, as outlined in the Officer’s report.

The Committee noted the report and that the main issues were:

Principle of Development • Urban Design • Impact on Adjoining Properties.

Following the Officers presentation, Members questions related to:

Noise. The Officer advised the Committee that the applicant had submitted a noise report and that the Environmental Health Team confirmed the mitigation measures proposed, were appropriate.

The applicant addressed the Committee and described the application site. The applicant discussed: population health, location, noise output, noise assessment conducted, noise mitigation measures, no objections from environmental officers, no harm to listed building or conservation area, ability for environmental protection services to intervene if noise mitigation measures fail. The applicant discussed the reasons why the previous application was refused. The applicant assured Members the applicant had been re-submitted with issues of concern addressed.

Members’ did not put any questions to the applicant.

A representative with objections addressed the Committee. The representative discussed: The ambient, long-term noise of the existing MRI machine and cooling plant, hospitals failure to comply with a noise abatement order issued in 2007, request that a condition agreed to ensure the abatement order be enforced, noise measurements, the continued noise from the existing MRI scanner and associated cooling plant, lack of consultation regarding current application.

Members’ questions put to the representative, related to: conditions, plant operation times.

The DMTL advised the Committee that environmental health officers had assessed the noise assessment report submitted and they concluded the proposal was acceptable.

The Officer confirmed to Members the time of plant operation would be between 7am to 7pm. Members were also advised the noise would be reduced by 5dB.

During Member discussion several Members raised concerns regarding the impact of noise from the existing plant, which had not been addressed, in conjunction with the current proposal if approved.

The DMTL advised the Members that noise testing conveyed the noise was accumulatively acceptable.

The Members also felt there was an issue of trust amongst the residents. If the current noise level was not addressed, then they would not welcome the current proposal. The Chair advised Members that noise arising from other areas of the site was not a material planning consideration given the noise assessment submitted. Members requested further clarification. The Chair advised that the noise of the existing plant was not material to the consideration of the current application. Noise issues relating to the existing plant, would require intervention from environmental protection officers.

Members were not satisfied that noise from the existing plant was not viewed as a material consideration to the current application.

A Member put forward a motion that in light of current noise levels and the cumulative effect, the application should be deferred.

The DMTL advised Members that in order for a deferral, the motion would need to be in relation to information not put before the Committee.

The DMTL reiterated previous advice that environmental officers were satisfied with the noise assessment report, which was professional.

Members felt that despite the findings of the noise assessment report, there existed a conflict with the fact an alleged noise abatement order issued in 2007 issued to the hospital, had never been complied with. Therefore the required information was before Members and a motion was put forward for a deferral on this basis. The motion was seconded.

Members voted on the motion for the deferral of the application, with a result of 2 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention. It was

RESOLVED – unanimously

Application would be DEFERRED to allow investigation regarding noise issues and to further review the site history.