The property is an existing shed, within the Built-Up Area (as defined on the Jersey Island Plan 2002), forming part of the Happy Hens farm complex. The proposal involves internal alterations to the existing shed for the creation of a meat smoking and preparation area, with refrigeration facility. The key issue in the consideration of the original application and this Request for Reconsideration is whether there is an unreasonable impact on the amenity of the area caused by the generation of smoke from the operation of the smoking unit. The smoking unit would receive meats from off-site, and is proposed to be used once a week, during usual working hours, with a 3 / 4 hour cycle. The smoke (from hickory / oak woodchips) would be ejected, from an exhaust on the roof, at the end of the process for an hour or slightly less. As the smoking unit was already at the property, the Planning Panel requested a trial run, to enable the Health Protection and Social Services Department to observe, and provide comment on, its operation. Following the trial run, the Health Protection and Social Services Department concluded that on the basis of various recommended mitigation measures and, based on one cycle per calendar week, “provided all mitigation measures are adhered to, the likelihood is that the operation would not constitute a Statutory Nuisance.” (letter of 22nd March 2007). The original application attracted 15 letters of objection and the trail run was attended by many of the local residents and the Chairman of the Planning Panel. The Policy tests are therefore set out in both Policy G2 and C15 of the Island Plan, being whether the development: - Will unreasonably affect the character and amenity of the area;
- Will have an unreasonable impact on neighbouring uses and the local environment by reason of noise, odour, pollution, visual intrusion or other amenity considerations.
The Request for Reconsideration as submitted by the applicant sets out the exhaustive process, including the trial run, which they willingly entered into to try and address the concerns of local residents, and so demonstrate compliance with the Policy tests. The Request then correctly identifies that it is the generation of smoke which is the fundamental concern, and also that the decision as to whether this has an unreasonable impact on the area, is subjective. No further information in support of the Request For Reconsideration is offered. There have been four further representations (including Deputy Carolyn Labey) in response to the Request for Reconsideration, all objecting to the proposal on the basis on the nuisance and loss of amenity caused by the smoke, and the general introduction of this form of activity in the area. A consultation response from the Health and Social Services Department also sets out that their comments in relation to potential nuisance remain as per their original letter of 22nd March 2007. Notwithstanding the comments of the Health and Social Services Department, the Panel were of the opinion that due to the nature of the use, and the character of the area generally, that the impacts caused by the operation of the smoking unit would be unreasonable – and so contrary to G2 and C15. The current Request for Reconsideration has not added any new information to address this issue and therefore the recommendation is that the refusal is maintained. | 
gov.je