Issue - meetings

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for retrospective installation of plant equipment to west elevation.

Mr Baker (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

Councillor Payne (Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application by a written statement read by the Committee Manager:

i.                Understood planning officers had not identified any planning grounds for rejecting this application, but wished to underline and reinforce to the Committee the importance of the condition for approval given by Mr Adam Finch in the planning consultation response, which was for the noise levels not to exceed those stated within the Plant Noise Assessment.  The extent of the noise from the new plant cannot be properly assessed because of the current unacceptable noise which Environmental Health consider to be coming from the nearby Iceland store. Therefore, in order for this condition to be met the noise nuisance coming from Iceland needs to be resolved so that the decibel level from the new Aldi plant can be accurately assessed.

ii.               The need for this retrospective planning application was first identified when residents on Windsor Road and Nursery Walk became aware of a new and louder noise coming from the site, which was constant and a nuisance.  This noise followed the installation of the new units for which this application has been made; however at the time there was no such planning application. Due to swift attention from the planning enforcement officers, it was found that new equipment had been installed without planning permission, thus a retrospective application was made. 

iii.             The noise levels have continued since this date, from 8am in the morning until around 11pm in the evening, and causes significant disturbance to neighbouring residents.  Environmental Health have responded to these complaints by visiting the site, and their assessment is that the noise is actually coming from the Iceland store. In the noise assessments, it states that the noise from Iceland masks that from the new plant in this application, making an accurate assessment of the noise levels there very difficult to make.  Despite at least two complaints to Environmental Health, this noise continues, which is clearly not satisfactory.  In addition to this, there appears to be a new duct and vent installed at the side of the Aldi building for which a planning application has not been made.

iv.             Suggested that until the noise complaint was addressed and a proper assessment of the noise from the new plant could be made, we cannot be assured that the installation in this application will not cause a disturbance for residents.  As the equipment was refrigeration and fans, assurance should also be sought from Aldi that the noise will not increase during the summer when the equipment may need to work harder. 

v.              Therefore, if this application were approved, urged the Planning Committee to consider the needs of residents living alongside Aldi, who have suffered from this noise for many months, and not approve the application without the conditions recommended by the Officer report. As this cannot yet be assessed due to the background noise from Iceland, this must first be resolved to be sure this condition has been met.

Councillor S. Smith (Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application by a written statement read by the Committee Manager:

i.                Would be grateful if the following statement could be read to the Committee in respect of the environmental quality officer’s consultation responses of 28 September and 9 November 2021 along with comments made by the occupier of 7 Windsor Road.

ii.               In his consultee response of 28 September 2021, the officer reported:

a.    To this end, I am satisfied that the proposed new plant for the Aldi store (serving as a replacement to the existing plant) will operate at lower noise levels than the existing plant and will result in betterment of the existing noise climate.

b.    Notwithstanding this, it is important that the applicant installs the equipment as proposed and detailed within the acoustic assessment. Any digression from the plant stipulated in the acoustic assessment may result in the assessment (including results and conclusions) being outdated and in need of revisions. As such, I recommend a bespoke compliance condition to ensure that the plant is installed as proposed / detailed within the submission documents. 

c.    In addition to the above, I recommend our standard condition restricting hours for any construction activities.

iii.             In his response of 9 November 2021, the Officer reported:

a.    Following my original memo of 28 September 2021, I was informed… that the plant proposed…had already been installed before determination.

iv.             It follows the conclusions set out in the report dated 28 September were based on a theoretical as opposed to a real-world assessment.

v.              In the background information / additional comments of the response dated 9 November 2021, the officer:

a.    Reviews the results of an additional monitoring exercise (presented in a Technical Note prepared by the applicant’s consultants dated 29 October) and

b.    Reports on a site visit of 9 November 2021 to verify the observations made by the consultants as follows:

1.                   With regards to the new Aldi plant, noise from the condensing unit was almost entirely masked by noise from the Iceland units / vent and noise was only audible from the walk-in unit (refrigeration packs) with my ear pushed up against the wall of that unit.

2.                   In conclusion, given the results of the original acoustic assessment, the more recent ‘Technical Note’ and our observations during the site visit, I cannot see any reason to object to this application on the grounds of noise.

vi.             The proposed compliance condition would enable any complaints to be investigated and action taken.

vii.           It was clear from residents’ concerns that piecemeal applications for over 15 years including extensions to the Aldi and Iceland stores and intensification of related plant and vehicles movements, have led to noise and nuisance creep. Each step contributing to the further erosion of the residential amenity of the area.

viii.         To sum up, it is highly unsatisfactory Aldi and Iceland have installed plant without submitting a planning application, this is disrespectful to this Committee and their residential neighbours.

ix.             Called on the Committee to invite Aldi, Iceland, and the Co-op to collaborate with the Council and residents with a view to taking steps to mitigate nuisance and bring forward further investment in plant to reduce noise nuisance and energy use.

The Committee:

Unanimously resolved to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the Officer.