A SECOND appeal could be launched in a bid to open a car wash facility on the outskirts of Haddington.

Gleam Machine Haddington and East Lothian Council have been in discussions for more than a year for a drive-thru car wash between Haddington Retail Park and the A199 to the north.

An application was turned down in April last year before the plans were given the green light following an appeal to the council’s local review body, which is made up of councillors.

However, a condition included in the approval stated: “No development shall take place unless a report has been submitted to and approved by the planning authority to demonstrate that the formation and operation of the car wash will not compromise the stability of the land to the south of the site.”

READ MORE: Bid for car wash on outskirts of Haddington could be stalled

Gleam Machine Haddington applied to the council for the condition to be removed but the bid was turned down by the planning department.

Tony Thomas, representing Gleam Machine Haddington, was unsure if the proposals would become a reality.

He said: “The applicant and advisors are consider- ing their situation with regards to a potential appeal or what sort of work could be done to help Gleam Machine progress with their proposals, which had overwhelming support in the Haddington area.

“The whole process has been bitterly disappointing when all it involves is a local business trying to expand to employ more local people to provide a service that is sadly lacking for Haddington.”

The application to remove the condition was submitted to East Lothian Council in December.

At that time, the supporting statement suggested that the business was “happy” to secure planning permission and “happy” to comply with all approved conditions.

The document alleges: “However, in looking further into the situation, it became clear that the developer of the Haddington Retail Park, immediately to the south, had illegally entered the site and dumped waste mater- ial from their development on the application site and around the area specifically referred to in condition eight.”

Mr Thomas described it as “unreasonable” to have a condition attached to the permission that “neither of the two professional advisors (planning and flooding/structures) deemed necessary”.

Previously, it was suggested that the business intended to invest £200,000 in the project and create nine full-time and four part-time jobs.