Industrial storage extension at Belle Engineering Ltd The Brund Sheen

“Altrad Belle (Belle Engineering Sheen Ltd) is located to the south west of the village of Sheen. The extensive manufacturing site is long established and has expanded incrementally since the early 1960s. The company manufactures light equipment for the building and construction markets, including products such as high tip dumpers, compactors, wheelbarrows and concrete mixers.”

“The site as a whole occupies a roughly triangular shaped footprint bordered by Pown Street to the east (from which access is gained). The main industrial buildings are split into two distinct areas, the ‘top yard’, to the south of the site, and the ‘bottom yard’ to the north. There are a number of residential properties directly to the north of the site and to the east facing Pown Street.”

“September 1996 – Planning permission granted for extensions to factory and offices NP/SM/0593/057). Subject to a section 106 legal agreement preventing further additional production, warehousing/storage and office space and providing for off-site highway improvements.”

“November 2001 – planning application submitted for extension to existing engineering plant. (NP/1101/102). Application went to the Authority’s planning committee who resolved to approve subject to a section 106 agreement to revoke the 1996 permission and to repeat earlier provision re: restrictions to expansion. However, the agreement was never signed and the application was subsequently withdrawn.”

“A simple Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) has been submitted. This demonstrates that from Pown Street the building would be sell screened by the existing belt of trees along the site boundaries and by existing buildings on the site.”

“In conclusion the criteria in Development Management policy DME7 with regard to the expansion of existing industrial premises in the countryside are met and therefore the proposed extension is acceptable. Impacts on trees, amenity, surface water flooding, land contamination and highways are all acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. Consequently, the application is recommended for conditional approval.”

“Highway Authority – ‘Application is very similar to a previous application which was approved apart from a S106 was not completed. Previous application required the construction of passing bays between B5054 and the site access. These constitute localised widening and appear to have been provided. The route between B5054 and site access is in current use by vehicles associated with the site and is adequate for this use.”

“In conclusion, no objections subject to conditions to control hours of construction works; measures to minimise construction impacts; control over lighting and use of forklift trucks during construction; noise attention measures within the building; and submission and agreement of contamination risk assessment.”

“The applicant had requested for one of the portacabins to be retained as a construction site office during the works, to be removed prior to first occupation, which officers accepted as reasonable. The final conditions would be precise and include the triggers to ensure condition requirements were met in a timely way.”

“Members discussed the following points: • During the day when the site is operational it had little noise and visual impact on the landscape.”

“A motion to APPROVE the application in accordance with the officer recommendation was moved, seconded, put to the vote and carried.”

“That the application be APPROVED in accordance with officer recommendation with amended conditions subject to a S106 agreement to rescind planning permission ref NP/SM/0593/057 and subject to the to the following conditions:”