Bit of a long shot.
A company wants to build a rather large bio methane lorry refilling station within 100m of existing residential housing in my parish.
We are looking for experts in this field, primarily to object at planning stage.
Anyone on here, know of similar planning apps, communities that are suffering or suffered similar.
Or the type of expert / barristers that we need to start talking to.
The silos are said to be over 30m ( yes 30m) tall. Somewhat overpowering. As for hazards, where do we start. And lorries movements 24/7 :-(.
Any suggestions or pointers....greatly appreciated .
RT.
P25/012/SCR Plot 9000 Land at Western Approach Distribution Park Severn Beach South Gloucestershire BS35 4GG. Screening opinion for a proposed BIO-LNG refuelling station.
SCREENING refused.
But they will be back.
Not sure about planning, but for the hazard side I'd start looking at the COMAH regulations and go from there - in particular Regulation 7 although they may not fall into this category if the amount stored on site isn't large enough.
I'm imagining one of those huge tanks that grow/shrink depending on how much gas is stored. Look at the 2012 Jersey Gas explosion for an example of one hazard they pose, and Buncefield for broader example of a gas vapour explosion.
Either way it's not something I'd want within 100m of residential housing, but unfortunately these things seem to be decided on a case-by-case basis rather than having a set distance from residential/public spaces.
Playing devils advocate here - it is a fairly industrial area already which would probably negate any extra lorry movements, they are about 10m from the A405 and there's a big distribution centre and the M49 within 500m.... I doubt extra traffic is going to be a consideration.
Attached to the proposed site there are a number of buildings. etc that look pretty tall (and a big wind turbine) - plus the houses are below the level of the A409 and there's trees between the road and the proposed site.
I also can't see any residential within 100m of where the silo's would be (the houses on the other side of the road are about 250m away).
Given the existing industrial nature of the area I'd be saving my money TBH.
Screening opinion for a proposed BIO-LNG refuelling station.
SCREENING refused.
But they will be back.
It wasn't refused - the local planning department said an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was not required.
Just personal opinion, I would also think about how much money you would be willing to spend the fight this, in what is an industrial area. And you need to be armed with facts, and be realistic, if you are going to go down that route.
Having looked at the hazardous substances application (P25/02322/HS) it's basically a petrol station with above ground tanks rather than below ground. Three tanks at 30 tonne each, are the 16.25 m tall tanks in the documents uploaded to the planning application website. And 205 m from the houses in Severn Beach (there is one farm house closer). I can appreciate why you might not want these tanks near houses, but we have to accept all the mitigation that goes in to the design of these sites, the likelihood of an issue, and then what is the alternative here?
The site isn't within the Avonmouth Severnside Enterprise Area or in the adopted Local Plan, but it has been put forward in the Call for Sites for the Local Plan update. Unfortunately the consultation for that Call for Sites has expired. You could have a friendly phone call to the planning department at South Glos to question, was the northern limit of ASEA in all the strategic developments plan because of land availability or to have that buffer between ASEA and Severn Beach residences? And has anything changed in that regard? i.e. try and find out if they are likely to include that parcel in allocations in the next Local Plan. Because if they are minded to include it, then you are going to have some development there - and is this proposal any worse, or better, than another industrial unit? Whereas if they refuse it, you can use that as an argument to object to the planning application, if it comes forward, i.e. if the hazardous substances application is accepted.
You need the planning objection starter pack:-
• Lots of banners saying "NO XXX HERE".
• Posters knocked up in Word with some nice rainbow art. These must be badly laminated so all the ink inside gets wet and runs!
• A meeting in the local Church Hall.
• Grumpy face photo in local tat newspaper.
• A Facebook group linked to all local 'spotted' groups.
• Endorsement from a local councillor (as your MP will be too busy/can't be arsed).
• And don't forget a petition!
...then they'll just ignore you anyway and crack on! 😬
Seems unlikely the proposer won't be considering the health and safety aspects - you'd be unlikely to provide a material objection on those grounds, as they'll have had a bunch of professionals properly work through the risks.
The planning and safety are largely distinct areas that'd benefit from.different expertise
However, for both your starting point is their initial submission which should cover an assessment and plan for both areas. What this currently looks like can help guide how you respond.
On the planning side it should cover both built environment (e.g. views, light to residential developments) and traffic generation (e.g. carriageway wear is proportional to the 4th power of axle load - if it is generating significant heavy traffic then are they paying a commuted sum to cover increased road maintenance costs?
On the safety side I'd expect something along the lines of a safety case citing what established practices/standards they're conforming too and a hazard and risk assessment.
Thanks for all the information above and pointers.
All of Western Approach was built with dubious open planning from 1957. So we have always been getting screwed :(.
Modern developers have taken that planning in a modern context, not the spirit of 57.
Plot 9000 was created from nothing by the land owner taking it to planning and getting the land description changed from ecology buffer zone (1995 amendment, wildlife and ecology corridors) to industrial.
Bit of a coup for them.
£5000 an acre to £1 million plus.
We are all being bummed in this region.
*Apparantly questions are being asked in parliament by our MP Claire Young. Same goes for the Megashed in Pilning.
Since the change of use was approved (in 2021) then I think you have to accept some development is going to happen there, so you need to focus on, what does the community feel is appropriate? From a planning perspective, getting involved in the Local Plan, Call for Sites, WECA strategy consultations is when you can have the biggest impact. I do know it's frustrating - the field immediately next to our house has had an appeal approved through very underhand tactics - but I also know the local authority did their best. It's difficult if you don't think the LA are, and that is worth a call. The Government is pushing a growth agenda, that means development, that's just the way the wind is blowing. Overall you've got jobs, good infrastructure, and excellent new flood defences because of ASEA. It's a double edged sword.
• Endorsement from a local councillor (as your MP will be too busy/can't be arsed).
Planning applications to local councils are the remit of local councillors, not MPs.
Overall you've got jobs, good infrastructure, and excellent new flood defences because of ASEA. It's a double edged sword.
Not really, the so called jobs are low grade. No disrespect to warehouse workers. They mostly come Bristol and South Wales.
Many can't afford to live in the immediate vicinity. No hope of affording a property of any kind.
Everyone of the Mega Sheds has been built on plateaus. So all of the flooding will not affect them as they are a couple metres in the air.
We will be flooded again, not tidal by fluvial.
The seawall improvement is an illusion, in some areas by Avonmouth the wall has not changed height, gaps under railway bridges etc. and so on.
Government distraction for barely controlled planning and more building.
The building tide has already washed over Severn Beach, Pilning will be next and Eastor Compton and all of the Severnside and SevernVale in time.
But I'll be pushing up daisies by then.
🙂
I will never accept the below, IMO they are borderline criminals. But I will sulk like Achilles for some time, for ever probably.
This was a set aside wildlife buffer, set aside by ICI estates.
Orchards Pools 1995 Ammendment to 57 planning was the same. On that occasion I was in front of a bulldozer when they were destroying mature woodland.
Bit scary that.
Since the change of use was approved (in 2021) then I think you have to accept some
Overall you've got jobs, good infrastructure, and excellent new flood defences because of ASEA. It's a double edged sword.
Not really, the so called jobs are low grade. No disrespect to warehouse workers. They mostly come Bristol and South Wales.
Many can't afford to live in the immediate vicinity. No hope of affording a property of any kind.
Everyone of the Mega Sheds has been built on plateaus. So all of the flooding will not affect them as they are a couple metres in the air.
We will be flooded again, not tidal by fluvial.
The seawall improvement is an illusion, in some areas by Avonmouth the wall has not changed height, gaps under railway bridges etc. and so on.
Government distraction for barely controlled planning and more building.
The building tide has already washed over Severn Beach, Pilning will be next and Eastor Compton and all of the Severnside and SevernVale in time.
But I'll be pushing up daisies by then.
🙂
I'll be living on the Isle of Portishead by then. I will then claim independence from Westminster, if it's still there that is 😉
JeZ