The proposal was identical to another dismissed in 2007. The inspector in that case found that the scheme would undermine local residents' amenity due to odours, particularly when the building was being cleaned. She agreed that a straw bedding system might limit or reduce smells, but decided that this could not be achieved through conditions. A legal obligation was required, she held.
The appellants then submitted a legal obligation requiring implementation of a bedding system. The second inspector accepted that this was likely to result in a 25 per cent cut in odour emissions. However, he was concerned that there was no commitment for the system to be maintained in perpetuity. Neither was there any indication that it would apply to existing buildings, as would be necessary to mitigate overall odour from the site.
DCS Number 100-064-735
Inspector Christopher Gethin; Written representations