Ashbourne: Care home plans rejected over smell concerns

The proposed care home would have been located between the A52 and an industrial site

Plans for a new care home in Derbyshire have been unanimously refused over smell and noise concerns linked to a neighbouring industrial estate.

Councillors rejected the proposed 74-bed care home off Derby Road in Ashbourne at a Derbyshire Dales District Council meeting on Tuesday.

An officer report said issues could arise from the site's proximity to the A52 and the Airfield Industrial Estate.

The agent for applicant Muller Property Group said the report was "misleading".

The planned care home would have shared a boundary with animal feed producer Trouw Nutrition and meat processing facility Moy Park, the Local Democracy Reporting Service said.

Tony Aspbury, agent for the applicant, told the meeting the report it was considering was "materially defective" and "misleading" because it did not rely on the most up-to-date information.

He claimed sealed non-opening windows would not be necessary, saying: "The potential adverse environmental impacts have been overstated and been given undue weight."

'Significant risk'

Mr Aspbury also said the apparent issues on the industrial estate had not prevented homes being approved on the opposite side of Derby Road - the Cameron Homes site - or at Turnpike Way.

He said there was a need to look after the "elderly and infirm" and that the benefits of the scheme outweighed the potential harm.

Chris Whitmore, the council's development manager, said other housing sites had mitigation methods to suppress noise and odour issues which had been assessed and approved - and they also sit further away from the planned care home site.

He said a core concern of the application was its potential location next to an industrial unit "containing materials significant enough to cause a hazard" - at the animal food production facility.

Mr Whitmore said the facility "presents quite a significant risk" due to the "hazardous substances" close to the boundary.

He also confirmed the site had been linked with ongoing complaints about noise and odour, which are regulated by the Environment Agency.

Councillors had a brief discussion about drainage for the site before promptly rejecting the plans.