Laboratory and workshop buildings at Land at the Valero Refinery, Rhoscrowther, Pembroke

What was proposed

The application proposed laboratory and workshop buildings with internal access, parking, turning and landscaping, replacing buildings within the refinery’s blast zone.

“The proposal is to construct a laboratory building (52.650m long x 28.38m wide) and workshop building (71.09m long x 19.09m wide) together with internal access, parking and landscaping. The workshop building would have a gross external floor area of 1887sqm and the laboratory building 2161sqm. The laboratory building would be single storey and located on higher ground compared to the workshop building that would be 2-storey and situated on lower ground.”

“The proposed access would be from the western boundary which adjoins the existing access point associated with the fire hall building and would lead to car parking areas for each building and on-site turning. A bund is proposed along the southern boundary.”

Officer report

The site

The 1.14-hectare site lies within the refinery boundary, is mostly hard-surfaced, and is used mainly for informal parking and vehicle manoeuvring.

“The application site comprises a rectangular parcel of land (1.14 hectares in area) situated on the eastern side of the refinery within its existing functional boundary. The site is enclosed by the existing refinery operation on three sides, with the highway immediately to the south. Land broadly slopes from south to north but with localised differences in levels. The site is mostly hard-surfaced and primarily used for informal parking / vehicle manoeuvring.”

“The site is bounded to the north by an internal road, to the east by a car park, to the west by a fire hall and to the south by an embankment leading to a grassed verge with the highway. Vehicular access to the site is via an internal road that also acts as the pedestrian access into the site.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions

Earlier permissions for the buildings and related spoil relocation were not implemented and expired, while a further spoil application was being considered separately.

“A related application, for the relocation of spoil associated with the laboratory development, was granted under application reference 19/0744/PA on 8 th…”

“In accordance with the Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Wales) Regulations 2017 (as amended), an Environmental Impact Assessment Screening Opinion was adopted confirming that the development was not EIA development. As the current proposals are similar in character and scale, the developer has not carried out any further EIA Screening to accompany the application.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to conditions covering matters including contamination, ecology, construction, lighting, drainage and landscaping.

“It is recommended that the application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:”

“Time period for implementation • Compliance with approved plans • Gas risk assessment/protection measures • Scheme to deal with unforeseen contamination • Vegetation clearance strategy • Construction environmental management plan • Lighting strategy • Drainage details • Landscaping…”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the development suitable for the refinery, appropriately designed, visually acceptable and acceptable for biodiversity, drainage, transport and amenity subject to conditions.

“Policy SP 2 (Port and Energy Related Development) supports development for port related facilities and infrastructure in those areas that are spatially defined in the LDP. The application site is within the policy SP 2 area. The proposal would benefit the refinery, an energy related development that is supported by reason of policy SP 2 (Port and Energy Related Development).”

“A number of planning conditions, as detailed in paragraph 1.1, are necessary to ensure compliance with relevant planning policy and appropriate implementation of the proposed development. These conditions are necessary to make the development acceptable and accord with the tests laid down in Circular 016/2014 (The Use of Planning Conditions for Development Management).”

Officer report

Who spoke

The Chief Planning Officer presented the application, and the local member addressed the committee; no public speakers attended.

What members discussed

Members discussed wildlife habitat, existing biodiversity measures and the absence of solar-panel images, while noting that conditions addressed wildlife concerns.

“Councillor Simon Hancock highlighted concerns regarding the wildlife habitat at the location but noted that these concerns had already been addressed by the conditions set out in Section 1.1 of the report.”

“Councillor Alderman highlighted that, due to biodiversity at the western end of the site, there was a large area of habitat which was actively maintained to encourage and support biodiversity in the area.”

Minutes

The vote

The roll-call vote recorded twelve votes for approval, with no votes against and no abstentions.

“The vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows:”

“There were no votes against and no abstentions.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee approved the application subject to the conditions in the officer report.

“That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1.1 of the report.”

Minutes