FOUR controversial planning applications will again come under scrutiny next month.

East Lothian Council’s planning committee meets on June 7, but an extra meeting – where proposals for a trio of car parks in North Berwick and an anaerobic digester, near Ballencrieff, will be considered – has now been pencilled in for the following Wednesday.

The four applications were considered by councillors last month, but each item was then deferred for further consideration.

The meeting, which was moved to Haddington’s Corn Exchange due to the expected turnout from members of the public, saw two applications, relating to Marine Parade and Tantallon Terrace in North Berwick, deferred before the meeting had even got under way.

A spokeswoman for the local authority explained a late representation came in, which could have an impact on both items.

Minutes later, J Haig Hamilton and Sons’ plans for the anaerobic digester were also deferred and, later that afternoon, a fourth application, looking at plans for the land at the Glebe Field in North Berwick, was also deferred.

East Lothian Council wanted to increase the size of the beachside car park at North Berwick’s Marine Park by 22 spaces – which would see the car park extended on to East Beach by eight metres.

More than 100 protesters turned out days before the meeting with a simple message to ‘Save Our Beach’, while a petition set up by North Berwick resident Clare Devereux attracted more than 5,000 signatures.

Meanwhile, ahead of the report of the proposed anaerobic digester, which attracted more than 340 letters of opposition and more than 250 letters of support from members of the public, an attempt was made to change two of the planning conditions.

At the time, Councillor Tom Trotter was unhappy at the bid to change the conditions and Councillor Stuart Currie suggested the matter was deferred.

Haig Hamilton said: “We wrote to the council to suggest changes to a couple of planning conditions.

“The conditions related to the time that the AD plant could operate and the capacity of crop that the AD plant could process.

“The wording of the condition relating to the operation was not appropriate because, as proposed in the officer’s report, it required the biological process to be turned off at night, which is not possible, or clearly what was intended by the council.

“The wording relating to the capacity was ambiguous and we simply requested clarification.

“Within a few hours of seeing the officer's proposed conditions, we wrote to advise of these two issues.

“From the start, the planning application and all related assessments were undertaken on the basis of the plant operating 24 hours, and to the capacity (excluding on-site water) in the planning condition.

“We did not therefore change the proposal in any way.

“We simply brought to the attention of the council these two corrections to proposed planning conditions so that should planning consent be granted that all parties would be clear on the basis upon which the plant would operate and be controlled.”

Members of the public have until tomorrow (Friday) to make comments on the proposed amendments relating to the anaerobic digester, while no deadline has yet been set for comments on the car parks.