An attempt to put a stop to the arrival of a building 14 meters high and 400 meters wide near Oranjedorp stranded in the council chamber last night. The parties of Hart voor Emmen, the PVV, the SP and GroenLinks introduced a motion.
Inset: revoke that permit. That attempt could not count on sufficient support from fellow council members. In any case, local residents, also present during the discussion, do not leave it at that.
Two weeks ago, five residents of Oranjedorp spoke at a committee meeting. The Solidiam company’s distribution center is to be located on Business Park A37, at a location less than 80 meters from their homes.
The arrival of the company is likely to create between 300 and 400 jobs. In their emotionally charged speeches they spoke out against the arrival. After critical questions about, among other things, the spatial design from speakers and council members, alderman René van der Weide promised to further investigate the planning and legal rules.
The results of that investigation were released last week. Buildings up to a maximum of 18 meters are permitted on the site. There are also no strict rules for size. Final conclusion: the Solidiam building can simply be built, because it falls within all spatial rules.
However, the four submitters thought this was too simplistic. For example, two streets (Pascalstraat and Stephensonstraat) have been removed from the business park in recent years. This created larger plots and, in their opinion, the layout of the site changed.
This creates a plot that is ‘400 percent larger’ than what is stated in the management bye-law. In short, the situation as described in that spatial document and Solidiam’s initiative are at odds with each other.
The four factions also submitted a motion of mourning. In their view, communication left much to be desired and that did not help confidence in public administration. Because according to Robart de Jong van Hart voor Emmen, the municipality often missed the target in that respect.
He mentioned the process surrounding the waste water injection at Schoonebeek and the communication around the Paradijsvogelwijkje on Schietbaanweg as examples. High time for a yellow card, as he labeled this motion. These he also served together with the same three parties, who had also sharpened their knives.
“Such actions increase the lack of confidence of citizens,” said Bernadette van der Woude (GroenLinks). “It would be credit to the college to learn from this.” Klaas Bosma understood from the spatial plans that the distance to objects should be 100 metres. While this is now 80 meters. “This plan is therefore in conflict with the applicable management regulation and the permit was therefore wrongly issued.”
The CDA viewed the matter through a more practical lens. Party member Dirk van Dijken once again cited the area’s management bye-laws. “This also aroused the expectation for us that it would concern building blocks of approximately two hectares.” Van Dijken considered the letter with the explanation from the Board to be insufficiently elaborated. “Two roads have been removed and that creates a completely different situation, doesn’t it?” It might be an idea to have an independent third party look at this, he suggested.
Alderman René van der Weide kept it to the point that no coloring outside the lines of the spatial rules was done. “We have no grounds for refusal for not issuing a permit,” he told the council. The 2014 zoning plan is based on a site that responds flexibly to market demand. “With the intention that we can serve both small and large companies.”
Companies with a wide range of business areas have already established themselves on the site. The removal of roads does not change anything from a legal point of view, he quotes the CDA’s argument. The two deleted streets have been removed because they were unnecessary. And that is possible without any problem.
Van der Weide could not agree at all with the idea that the municipality of Emmen is missing out in terms of communication on the basis of a few ‘selective’ examples. He himself cited the forthcoming doubling of the Emmen-Klazienaveen road, the zoning plan for the southern water buffer at Bargerveen and the approach to subsidence at Nieuw-Amsterdam as dossiers that he believes have gone off without a hitch.
Van der Weide also says that he went home with an ‘unpleasant feeling’ after the previous, emotionally charged meeting. He also invited the speakers to talk to each other. “They have indicated that they do not need this. But the invitation remains.”
Both motions were ultimately rejected by a majority. The PvdA thought a yellow card went too far and ruled that the council had not dropped any ‘gross stitches’ in this story. The VVD questioned the legal feasibility of revoking a permit. The ChristenUnie once again stressed that the concerns about safety and quality of life in the village have not been taken away. “Therefore, enter into a discussion about this”, Roy Prusscher urged the board.
Corina Vink of the village council of Oranjedorp says she is disappointed with the outcome. “I hoped that all parties had woken up to the idea that we have a point. The result is a pity. I went into the meeting with hope.” The refusal to accept Van der Weide’s invitation is somewhat nuanced, says Vink. “He suggested discussing the communication process again. But in our view that makes no sense. Because it ends in wells and nots. That makes no one happy and adds nothing.”
Oranjedorp has already submitted various objections to the granting of permits to Solidiam. The municipality and residents again cross swords during a hearing of the independent objections committee. If that also ends in disappointment, Vink already knows what she will do: “In that case I will go to court.”