Construction of a 499kw Agricultural Anaerobic Digester to produce renewable energy from on-site generated waste and energy crops.

The application was approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet. She drew Members’ attention to an error in the update sheet under sub heading ‘para 6.15’ and advised that the second sentence should refer to accidents up to 2005 and not accidents since 2005.

 

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr Lyons, representing a number of the local residents, spoke in objection to the application and Mr Williams, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support. Mr Davis, Chairman of Hentland, Ballingham and Bolstone Group Parish Council also addressed the Committee; he raised some concerns in respect of the application but was broadly in support of it.

 

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor RB Hamilton, one of the local ward members, commented on a number of issues, including:

 

·         The local residents had raised a number of concerns in respect of the application, these included:

•       The accuracy of the report had been questioned.

•       The application should be refused in line with the Locality Act as the majority of local residents opposed it.

•       There were concerns over the time taken to bring the application to Committee.

•       Why could the Anaerobic Digester not go on the applicant’s other site.

•       Some objectors felt that the applicant had mislead the Committee in respect of the plot size.

•       It was also considered that the traffic data provided was inaccurate and misleading.

•       It was also believed that the swale was added to the application at a later date to ensure that the application was initially treated as a smaller site.

•       Concern was raised that although the proposed Anaerobic Digester was just under 500kw it would be increased in the future.

•       There was concern that the report had been written in a way to mislead the Committee.

•       The qualifications of some of the professional consultees had also been questioned.

•       Concern had been raised in respect of some of the measurements contained within the report.

•       Some of the local residents felt that the AD plant should not be within 1000 metres of a residential dwelling.

•       The issue of flooding had also been raised by local residents.

•       The vehicular movements contained within the report were disputed.

•       The figures in respect of accidents on the A49 were also disputed.

•       Odour from the AD plant was an issue that had also been raised.

•       Health concerns had been raised with particular reference made to a local resident who suffered with asthma.

•       The lack of a site management plan had also been raised.

•       The Environment Agency had confirmed that even if planning permission was granted a licence may not be granted for the operation.

 

·         Councillor Hamilton then took the opportunity to share his own views with the Committee, he advised that:

 

•       He had listened to all sides and considered that the application had been bought forward in a genuine way.

•       Local people should not be condemned for taking an interest in local planning issues.

•       The applicant made a significant contribution to the local economy and was a major local employer .

•       There were sound business reasons for the application.

•       The applicant could have done more to discuss matter with the locals and address their concerns.

•       It was in the applicant’s interest to ensure the plant ran smoothly.

•       The application needed to be considered on its merits with due consideration given to the concerns raised in respect of health.

•       The key concern related to traffic management.

•       Improvements were needed to the St. Owen’s Cross crossroads, these improvements would be sought.

•       Finally the local member advised that he had no objection to the application subject to the concerns being addressed.

 

Councillor JA Hyde, the other local ward member, added:

 

·         Her main concern was regarding the access to the site from the B4521, however she was satisfied that this had been addressed.

·         The applicant had advised that journeys from the site would now be reduced as a result of the proposed application.

·         The Council was currently looking into a reduction in the speed limit for St. Owen’s Cross.

In response to a question from a Member of the Committee, the Principal Planning Officer confirmed that the Highways Agency had not ruled out accessing the site from the A49 but they had issued a holding direction requesting a re-assessment of the access if it were to be used. The applicant had therefore decided not to proceed with this access.

 

In response to a further question, the Principal Planning Officer advised that she was not aware of any boreholes within 250 metres of the site. She added that the applicant owned most of the land within this area and he had stated that there were none on his land.

 

A Member of the Committee opened the debate by speaking in support of the application. He also made reference to the issues raised in respect of possible boreholes in the proximity of the site and advised Member that due to the depth of the hole, some 60 to 70 metres, the water would be drawn from up to three miles away. He noted the concerns raised in respect of accidents at the crossroads but noted that none of the accidents referred to had occurred as a result of farm vehicles, he therefore considered that refusing the application on grounds of highway safety would not be defendable. In summing up he advised the Committee that he had visited an Anaerobic Digester recently which had produced no odour and could not be heard until within 5 metres of the sealed digester unit. Finally he noted the support of the nearby Sellack Parish Council and requested that the application be approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

 

Members continued to discuss the application. The issue of flooding was raised but it was considered that any flood concerns would be mitigated through the provision of a sustainable urban drainage solution comprising of drainage leading into a swale which would hold the water during heavy periods of rainfall.

 

The issue of collating data in respect of Anaerobic Digester plants was also raised by a Member of the Committee. It was considered that this may be a beneficial exercise to ensure that there were sufficient plants throughout the county providing adequate cover.

 

The Committee also raised the possibility of requesting a Section 106 agreement to ensure suitable improvements were made to the nearby crossroads. However the Development Manager (Hereford and Southern Localities) advised that this would not be reasonable as no additional traffic on the crossroads could be attributed to the proposed application. Members were however reassured by the inclusion of a traffic management plan which addressed their concerns.

 

The Committee continued to debate the application with the majority of Members speaking in support of it. They noted the concerns in respect of health that had been raised by the neighbouring residents however they considered that these concerns had been addressed in the Officer’s report and additional update sheet. They discussed Anaerobic Digester plants in general with the majority of the Committee of the opinion that if operated responsibly there would be little impact on the neighbouring residents and that more plants would be installed throughout the County over the coming years.

 

Councillors Hamilton and Hyde were given the opportunity to close the debate. They reiterated their opening remarks and made additional comments, including:

 

·         The local residents’ concerns in respect of traffic were valid.

·         The footpath referred to should be diverted.

·         There were no valid planning reasons to refuse the application.

·         The accidents referred to by the objectors could not be linked to the farm enterprise.

 

RESOLVED

 

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

 

1.         A01 Time limit for commencement (full permission)

           

2.         B01 Development in accordance with the approved plans

 

3.         The external colour and finish of all parts of the development hereby approved shall be permanently maintained in accordance with details which have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

 

Reason: To protect the visual amenities of the area and to comply with the requirements of policy DR1 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

 

4.         Within four months of any new hard surface being constructed in connection with the development hereby permitted, the proposed Sustainable Urban Drainage Solution (SUDS) shall be constructed and implemented in accordance with the submitted 'Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Drainage Strategy' and the following plans, all received on 13 September 2012:

• GRE0010/PE-RE10/SuDS 01; SuDS Design 21/8/12

• GRE0010/PE-RE10/SuDS 02: SuDS Cross Section 21/8/12

• GRE0010/PE-RE10/SP 03: AD Plan Cross Section 21/8/12

The provision of the proposed retention basin (swale) shall be incorporated into biodiversity enhancement measures as outlined in the scheme required under condition 6 below, with reference to Biodiversity Action Plan priority species and habitats.

 

Reason:  To provide satisfactory surface water management and drainage, minimise flood risk, and improve biodiversity in accordance with policies S1, S2, DR1, DR4, NC1, NC6, NC7, NC8 and NC9 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

 

5.         Before the development hereby permitted begins, a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The TMP shall include the following in particular:

 

a. Management methodology for vehicles and deliveries during construction of the plant, including working hours and routes to be used;

b. Management methodology for vehicles and movements during operation of the plant, including working hours and routes to be used;

c. An assessment of the existing access to the B4521 having regard to the anticipated additional use and details of any visibility improvements considered necessary;

d. Details of the numbers, types,size and weights of all vehicles to be used in connection with the anaerobic digester;

e. Means of ensuring all delivery drivers accessing the site are fully informed as to road conditions and their responsibilities along the delivery route;

f. Assurances that the TMP shall remain in use throughout the life of the plant;

g. Confirmation that no materials shall be brought to and/or treated in the anaerobic digester hereby permitted unless they have been produced within the applicant's landholding.

 

The TMP shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason:  To minimise the impact of vehicles in the interests of highway safety and the potential for traffic intensification in the area, and to conform with the requirements of policy DR3 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

 

 

6.         Before the development hereby permitted begins, a Landscaping and Habitat Enhancement Scheme for the site and access road shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Scheme shall include in particular:

 

Soft landscaping:

a. A plan to scale 1:500 or 1:1000 showing the layout of proposed tree, hedge and seeding areas;

b. A written specification clearly describing the species, sizes, densities and planting numbers and giving details of cultivation and other operations associated with plant establishment;

c. Details of specific proposals to provide or enhance wildlife habitats, including an outline of the priority species the scheme is intended to attract, having particular regard for the adopted Biodiversity Action Plan, the improvement of hedgerows and field margins, and enabling wildlife to take advantage of the retention basin (swale) as part of the SUDS provision;

d. A management plan to ensure after-care of planting and continuity for habitats, for a specified period of at least five years;

 

Hard landscaping:

e. A plan to show the position, design and materials of all site enclosures including bunding, fences etc;

f. Details of hard surfacing materials;

 

The scheme shall be implemented as approved and maintained for the agreed period.  During this time, any trees or plants which are removed, die, or are seriously retarded shall be replaced during the next planting season with others of similar sizes and species.  If any plants fail more than once they shall continue to be replaced on an annual basis until the end of the after-care period.

 

Reason: To improve biodiversity and connectivity for wildlife and improve hedgerow, field margin and wetland habitats, in accordance with the requirements of policies S1, S2, S7, DR1, DR4, NC1, NC6, NC7, NC8, NC9 and CF4 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

 

7.         E01 Site investigation - archaeology

 

8.         I16 Restriction of hours during construction

 

9.         F02 Restriction on hours of delivery

 

10.       The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use unless or until the submitted scheme of noise mitigation and control outlined in report reference R11.1203/DRK (Noise Vibration Consultants Ltd, 23 February 2012) has been implemented in full, having particular regard for sections 7 and 8 of that report.  The scheme shall continue to be implemented for the life of the development, subject to any review or amendments as may be deemed necessary in due course.

 

Reason: In order to protect the amenity of the occupiers of nearby properties and to comply with policies DR13 and CF4 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

 

11.       The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use unless or until a comprehensive Odour  and Environmental Management Plan as set out in paragraphs 5.4, 5.4.1 and 5.4.2 of the submitted Supporting Statement (edited 11 October 2012), has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  In addition, the Plan shall include the following in particular:

 

a) The appointment of a named qualified and responsible person to oversee implementation of the plan;

b) Operational contingencies for dealing with any abnormal events (e.g. fire, flood, spillage);

c) Production of a working manual for staff, covering all site operations including feedstock handling, digestate handling, gas management and emergency procedures;

d) Provision of a site diary to be kept on site in which day-to-day observations and actions are recorded, including any complaints and responses. The diary shall be made available for inspection by the local authority on request at reasonable times.

The scheme shall be implemented as approved, and shall continue to be implemented for the life of the development, subject to any review or amendments as may be deemed necessary in due course.

 

Reason: In order to protect the amenity of the occupiers of nearby properties, to prevent pollution and to comply with policies S2, DR1, DR4, DR9, DR13 and CF4 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

 

12.       Within six months of the equipment hereby approved becoming redundant, inoperative or permanently unused, the anaerobic digester and all associated infrastructure shall be removed and re-used, recycled, all materials recovered, or be finally disposed of to an appropriate licensed waste facility, in that order of preference.

 

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development, avoid any eyesore from redundant plant, prevent pollution, and to safeguard the environment when the materials reach the end of their life, in accordance with policies S1, S2, DR1 and CF4 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

 

13.       In connection with the development herby permitted, no poultry litter or manure or waste shall be carried on the public highway unless it is held within a sealed or securely sheeted vehicle.

 

Reason:   In the interests of road safety and the amenity of the locality, and to comply with the requirements of policies S2, DR3, DR4, DR9 and T8 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

 

14.       I27 Interception of surface water run off

 

15.       I32 Details of floodlighting/external lighting

 

16.       I30 Restriction on storage of organic wastes or silage

 

Reason for Approval

 

1.         The proposal has been considered having particular regard to possible adverse effects from vehicle movements, noise, odour and flood risk, along with potential impacts on landscape, visual amenity and health.  The principles relating to renewable energy, sustainability and carbon footprint reduction have been taken into account in light of current national policy. Anaerobic digestion is a sustainable renewable energy option for farm effluent that would otherwise be waste. Furthermore, the final residue is a valuable fertiliser from which proportions of the polluting and odorous elements have been removed by the process. Its use on land is regarded as a benefit. The need for renewable energy carries weight provided other factors can be mitigated; the site and the proposal have been assessed with this in mind. Operation of the plant would be regulated by an Environmental Permit issued by the Environment Agency, rather than through the planning system.  In light of the above, the proposal is considered to accord with, or be capable of compliance with, policies S1, S2, S6, S7, S11, DR1, DR2, DR3, DR4, DR9, DR13, DR14, T6, T8, LA2, LA6, NC1, NC6, NC8, NC9, ARCH1, ARCH6 and CF4 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework, with particular (but not exclusive) reference to paragraphs 28, 93, 97 98, 186, 187, 196 and 197.  The local planning authority has engaged in pro-active and positive negotiation with the applicant, in identifying matters of concern, obtaining further details and clarification as required, and considering proposals offered to address points raised by respondents. As a result, the local planning authority has been able to grant planning permission for acceptable development subject to conditions, in favour of sustainable development as defined in the National Planning Policy framework.

 

INFORMATIVES:

 

1.         The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing the proposal against planning policy and any other material considerations. Negotiations in respect of matters of concern with the application (as originally submitted) have resulted in amendments to the proposal.  As a result, the Local Planning Authority has been able to grant planning permission for an acceptable proposal, in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework. 

 

2.         N11A Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) - Birds

 

3.         N11C General

 

4.         HN01 Mud on highway

 

5          The applicant is advised to contact the case officer when preparing the details required in addressing the above conditions, to enable liaison with and advice from other departments prior to submission.