Report Reference: 5.3

Regulatory and Other Committee

Open Report on behalf of Richard Wills Executive Director for Communities

Report to: Planning and Regulation Committee

Date: 4 February 2013

Subject: County Matter Application – W127/129257/12

Summary:

Planning permission is sought by Mr Adam Duguid (Agent: G J Perry Planning Consultant) for an anaerobic digestion plant comprising of a technical building, digester and storage tanks and ancillary equipment at land located adjacent to Hemswell Cliff Industrial Estate, Hemswell Cliff, Lincolnshire. The key issues to be considered in relation to this proposal are the potential environmental and amenity impacts arising from the development and whether the need for this development is sufficient to justify and outweigh any impacts on the open countryside and local landscape.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that planning permission be granted.

The Application 1. Planning permission is sought to construct an anaerobic digestion unit

comprising of a technical building, digester and storage tanks and ancillary equipment at land located adjacent to Hemswell Cliff Industrial Estate, Hemswell Cliff, Lincolnshire.

2. The main aspects/elements of the proposed development are summarised

as follows:

Anaerobic Digestion (AD) Tanks: Six tanks comprising of wide, concrete walled cylinders which would be partially buried 1m below existing ground levels so as to reduce their overall height. The six tanks to be constructed comprise of the following:

- Main Tanks: Two 4.5m high by 30.3m diameter tanks. A domed

protective membrane cover would be fitted on top of the tank walls which would be approx. 5.3m (at its centre) giving each tank a total overall height of approx. 9.8m above existing ground level. The

Page 1

domed cover would have a grey coloured matt finish so as to blend into the skyline.  Each of these tanks would have an approximate holding capacity of around 5,600m3.

- Residual Storage Tanks: Four 3.8m high by 33m diameter tanks. A

pointed protective membrane cover would be fitted on top of the tank walls which would be approx. 5.4m (at its centre) giving each tank a total overall height of approx. 9.2m above existing ground level. The protective cover would have grey coloured matt finish so as to blend into the skyline. Each of these tanks would have an approximate holding capacity of around 4,700m3 (equivalent to approximately 180 days of storage capacity).

Technical Building: A portal framed building (approx. 80m x 24m x 12m

high) with ‘olive green’ profile steel panel walls and ‘goosewing grey’ composite roof panels. All personnel and roller shutter doors would be ‘moorland green’ with white uPVC double glazed window units. The building would house a reception/de-packaging area for incoming commercial/industrial wastes; a mixing room; 3 pasteurisation rooms; 2 combined heat and power (CHP) gas engines/rooms; control room and office spaces, and; toilet, shower and changing room facilities.

Wastes received within the building would be de-packaged and shredded/processed to a form a ‘pulp-like’ material prior to being fed into a mixing tank where it would be added to other waste materials/feedstocks produce a homogenous mixture. These would then be transferred into the post-separation tanks (described below) and/or pasteurisation tanks prior to being fed into the main digester tanks.

Ancillary Tanks and Equipment: The following are associated with the pre-treatment plant and machinery that would be housed within the Technical Building and would be all located adjacent to the northern elevation of the building.

- Post-separation Storage Tanks: Two tanks (approx. 6.2m high x 7.5m

diameter) which would be used to temporarily store de-packaged/pre-screened ‘pulp-like’ materials which are not directly fed into the system. As the AD plant is to operate 24 hours a day, a continuous and steady supply of feedstock materials is required at all times. These tanks facilitate this by ensuring materials are available and can be fed into the plant during periods when wastes are not being directly accepted/delivered at the site.

- Pasteurisation Cooling Tanks and Liquid Feedstock Tanks: Four

liquid feedstock tanks (approx. 5.4m high x 3.2 diameter) and three pasteurisation tanks (3m high x 2m diameter). These tanks hold liquid feedstock wastes (i.e. animal slurries) which are also proposed feedstock/waste materials to be used by the plant. The pasteurisation process pre-treats commercial/industrial wastes by heating them to a temperature in excess of 70°C to kill any germs.

Page 2

Hot water required for this process is produced by the plants CHP engines.

- Vertical Mixer/Hopper Unit: This unit (4m high x 3m wide x 10 long)

would be sited adjacent to the Technical Building and accept agricultural based feedstocks (i.e. crop residues/silage, etc). The hopper would be fitted with a hydraulic lid to minimise any odour emissions and has a holding capacity to meet the equivalent of 2 days of feedstock demand. Materials fed into the hopper are transferred into the mixing tanks (within the Technical Building) where they are mixed with other feedstock/waste materials prior to being transferred to the main digestion tanks.

Combined Heat & Power Engines, exhaust stacks and cooling fans:

Two combined heat and power (CHP) engines would be housed within the Technical Building which utilise gasses produced by the fermentation/digestion process to produced heat and power. Associated with these would be two 10m high exhaust stacks and sets of free-standing cooling fans which would be positioned adjacent to the southern elevation of the Technical Building.

Gas Flare Stack: A 5.5m high flare stack would be positioned in the

north-eastern corner of the site close to the anaerobic digestion tanks. This would be used occasionally to flare/burn gasses produced by the anaerobic digestion facility in the event gas pressure in the CHP engines exceeds a predefined level or during periods of maintenance.

Associated infrastructure/works comprising of:

- construction of a new circulation/service areas around the anaerobic

digestion tanks and Technical Building, weighbridge and car park (5no. spaces and 1no. disabled space);

- underground pipework to connect the various elements/tanks of the

AD plant and the Technical House; - a perimeter earth bund would be constructed around the anaerobic

digestion tanks which would have an external face height of 0.5m high (above ground level). The bund would be grass seeded along with all other peripheral areas around the site;

- a surface water lagoon would be constructed within the application

site. All surface waters would be directed towards this lagoon where they would be stored before being allowed to naturally infiltrate into the underlying ground. Permeability tests carried out within the site indicate that infiltration rates are good and the size and capacity of the lagoon has been designed to ensure that surface water run-off is capable of being controlled to an acceptable level.

Page 3

Annual Throughput/Feedstock Quantities: The facility would be capable of processing up to 40,000 tonnes of materials per annum including Category 3 Animal By-Product (APB) wastes. Category 3 APB wastes are low risk materials and the proposed feedstocks could include (amongst others):

- household, commercial and industrial food and catering wastes (e.g.

expired fruit and vegetable products, waste from food factories and retail premises such as butchers and supermarkets);

- liquid wastes such as milk products and fruit juices; - farm wastes such as animal slurries and crops, vegetables, etc; - slaughterhouse wastes or products not intended for human

consumption for commercial reasons (e.g. hides, hair, feathers, bones, etc).

It is estimated that approximately 80-90% of the product entering the AD plant would be returned as dry compost and liquid digestate. The applicant states that treatment processes ensure that the digestate produced is compliant with PAS110 and therefore can be used as fertiliser and spread on farmland in the local area.

Hours of Operation & Traffic Movements 3. The AD plant would operate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year and would be

staffed at all times. The delivery of feedstock materials to the site would be restricted to between 06:00 and 18:00 hours Monday to Friday with the occasional delivery proposed on Saturdays (no proposed hours cited).

4. The applicant estimates that approximately 7-9 HGV loads per day (Monday to Friday) would be associated with the delivery of feedstock materials to the site. Access to the site would be via the existing industrial estate road that leads off the A631.

Heat and Power Production 5. Electricity and heat generated by the development would be used to both

power and regulate the temperature of the digestion tanks with the surplus electrical energy being exported to supply the nearby Eco Plastics facility. Any surplus power not utilised by the plant itself or the nearby adjoining businesses would be exported and fed into the National Grid for wider use.

6. The AD plant would be capable of producing around 3MW of electricity and

would be connected to an existing transformer located close to the Eco Plastics building via an underground connection. Potentially surplus heat/hot water produced by the AD plant could also be supplied to the Eco Plastics facility where it could be converted to steam which is used in their current recycling processes.

Page 4

Employment 7. The application states that five permanent jobs would be created associated

with the operation of the facility with more being supported/created during its construction.

Supporting Information 8. The application is supported by a Design and Access Statement,

Justification/Supporting Statement and supplementary documents/reports including a Flood Risk Assessment and preliminary/draft Odour Management Plan.

Site and Surroundings 9. The proposal site is an open agricultural field which is located alongside, but

outside, the existing and allocated Hemswell Business Park (a former RAF base). The proposal site and the land to the north, west and south are identified as open countryside within the West Lindsey Local Plan whilst the land to the east which forms the Hemswell Business Park is identified as suitable for a range of commercial/industrial uses including B1 (Business), B2 (General Industry), B8 (Storage or Distribution) and A2 (Financial and Professional Services). The former hangars which lie within this site are occupied by light/general industrial and storage uses (e.g. Use Classes B1, B2 and B8) and a new purpose built industrial building (approx. 151m long by 65m wide by 19.5m to the roof ridge) lies to the north of the proposal site and is operated by Eco Plastics as a waste plastics recycling facility. The land to the west and south of the site is in agricultural use and to the east, beyond the existing hangars, lies an antiques centre (approx. 300m) and the settlement of Hemswell Cliff. The nearest residential properties to the proposal site are approx. 335m to south-east with the Hemswell Cliff Primary School approx. 550m to the east.

10. Access to the proposal site is gained via the estate road which serves the

Business Park and which has two access points directly onto the A631 to the south. Both of these junctions are of an appropriate size and specification for use by HGV traffic. Approximately 700m to the west of the site runs the B1398 (Middle Street) where clear views of the Business Park and the proposal site can be obtained.

11. Finally, approximately 1.2km north of the proposal site and 850m north of

the existing Eco Plastics building, a planning application for ten wind turbines is currently being considered by West Lindsey District Council (WLDC ref: 128940). The proposed turbines would each have a maximum height of 126.5m to the blade tip and the proposal includes ancillary development comprising of the erection of a permanent and temporary anemometer mast, substation and control building, temporary construction compound and new access tracks and the upgrade of existing access tracks and site access points from the A15 and Middle Street. The turbines would have an installed capacity of 25MW which would export energy to the

Page 5

National Grid and are proposed to be retained for a 25 year period. At the time of writing this report a decision on the planning application had not been made.

Main Planning Considerations National Guidance 12. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) sets out the

Government’s planning policies for England and is a material planning consideration in the determination of planning applications. At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking. For decision taking this means:

approving development proposals that accord with the Development Plan

without delay; and where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-

of-date, granting permission unless:

- any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF as a whole; or

- specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted.

The NPPF does not contain specific waste policies as these will be published as part of the National Waste Management Plan for England. In the interim, national waste planning policy continues to be set out in Planning Policy Statement 10 ‘Planning for Sustainable Waste Management’ and decisions on waste applications should have regard to policies in the NPPF so far as they are relevant.

The main policies/statements set out in the NPPF which are relevant to this proposal are as follows (summarised):

“To promote a strong rural economy, local and neighbourhood plans should:

support the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business

and enterprise in rural areas, both through the conversion of existing buildings and well-designed new buildings;

promote the development and diversification of agricultural and other land based rural business...” (Para.28; pg.9)

“When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should:

not require applicants for energy development to demonstrate the overall

need for renewable or low carbon energy and also recognise that even small-scale projects provide a valuable contribution to cutting greenhouse gas emissions; and

Page 6

approve the application if its impacts are (or can be made) acceptable” (Para.98; pg.23)

“When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should ensure flood risk is not increased elsewhere and only consider development appropriate in areas at risk of flooding where, informed by a site-specific flood risk assessment following the Sequential and Exception Test, it can be demonstrated that: within the site, the most vulnerable development is located in areas of

lowest flood risk unless there are overriding reasons to prefer a different location; and

development is appropriately flood resilient and resistant, including safe access and escape routes where required, and that any residual risk can be safely managed, including emergency planning; and it gives priority to the use of sustainable drainage systems”. (Para. 103; pg.24)

“The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:

protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation

interests and soils. preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or

being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability...” (Para.109; pg.25)

“Where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, local planning authorities should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of a higher quality”. (Para.112; pg. 26)

“To prevent unacceptable risks from pollution and land stability, planning policies and decisions should ensure that new development is appropriate for its location. The effects (including cumulative effects) of pollution on health, the natural environment or general amenity, and the potential sensitivity of the areas or proposed development to adverse effects from pollution, should be taken into account”. (Para.120; pg.28)

“...local planning authorities should focus on whether the development itself is an acceptable use of land, and the impact of the use, rather than the control of processes or emissions themselves where they are subject to approval under pollution control regimes. Local planning authorities should assume that these regimes will operate effectively.” (Para.122; p.29)

“Local planning authorities should approach decision-taking in a positive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development. The relationship between decision-taking and plan-making should be seamless, translating plans into high quality development on the ground.” (Paras.186; pg.45)

Page 7

“Local planning authorities should look for solutions rather than problems, and decision-takers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible. Local planning authorities should work proactively with applicant to secure developments that improve the economic, social and environmental conditions in the area.” (Paras.187; pg.45)

Planning Policy Statement 10 (PPS10) “Planning for Sustainable Waste Management” remains in force despite the recent introduction of the NPPF (above). PPS10 reiterates the principles of sustainable waste management and the waste hierarchy and states that in considering planning applications for new or enhanced waste management facilities, waste planning authorities should consider the likely impact of the development on the local environment and amenity.

Paragraph 27 of PPS10 states that the planning and pollution control regimes are separate but complementary. Pollution control is concerned with preventing pollution through the use of measures to prohibit or limit the release of substances to the environment to the lowest practicable level. It also ensures that ambient air and water quality meet standards that guard against impacts to the environment and human health. The planning system controls the development and use of land in the public interest and should focus on whether development is an acceptable use of the land, and the impacts of those uses on the development and use of land. Waste planning authorities should work on the assumption that the relevant pollution control regime will be properly applied and enforced.

Paragraph 32 indicates that it should not be necessary to use planning conditions to control the pollution aspects of a waste management facility where the facility requires a permit from the pollution control authority (i.e. Environment Agency).

Annex E of PPS10 sets out the locational criteria which must be considered in relation to the suitability of proposed sites. Of particular relevance to this application are the issues relating to the protection of the visual intrusion, traffic and access, air emissions (including dust), odour, vermin and birds, noise and vibration and potential land use conflict with neighbouring development.

Regional Planning Guidance 13. The East Midlands Regional Plan (RSS8) (2009) still forms part of the

Statutory Development Plan for the County although the Government has announced that Regional Plans are to be abolished. In the interim, the impending abolition is a material consideration particularly where the policies of RSS8 conflict with those of the NPPF or an up-to-date Local Plan.

Page 8

The following policies are of most relevance to this proposal (summarised):

Policy 3 (Distribution of New Development) seeks to direct major new development and economic proposals towards Principal Urban Areas, Growth Towns, Sub-Regional Centres and finally other settlements and rural areas.

Policy 38 (Regional Priorities for Waste Management) promotes policies and proposals that will result in zero growth in all forms of controlled waste by 2016 and which have a focus on waste being treated higher up waste hierarchy.

For the Eastern Sub-area, it states that the future pattern of provision should combine larger facilities in and around Lincoln and the Sub-Regional Centres, with a dispersed pattern of smaller facilities in the more rural areas. The Sub-Regional Centres for Lincolnshire are identified as Boston, Grantham and Spalding and the development lies outside of these defined areas.

Policy 40 (Regional Priorities for Local Carbon Energy Generation) seeks to promote the development of combined heat and power and district heating infrastructure and the development of a distributed energy network using low carbon and renewable resources.

In order to help meet national targets low carbon energy proposals in locations where environmental, economic and social impacts can be addressed satisfactorily should be supported and as a result, Local Planning Authorities should (relevant criterion cited):

identify suitable sites for CHP plants well related to existing or proposed

development and encourage their provision in large scale schemes; support the development of distributed local energy generation networks;

and

In establishing criteria for new facilities required for other forms of renewable energy, Local Planning Authorities should give particular consideration to: the proximity to the renewable energy resource; the relationship with the existing natural and built environment; the availability of existing surplus industrial land in close proximity to the

transport network; and the benefits of grid and non-grid connected ‘micro-generation’.

Local Plan Context 14. Lincolnshire Waste Local Plan 2006 (WLP) the following policies are of

relevance to this proposal (summarised):

Page 9

Policy WLP1 (Objective of the Plan) states that waste management proposals shall be considered in relation to their contribution towards the waste management hierarchy and assessed in terms of their accordance with the proximity principle, regional self-sufficiency, waste planning policies and their compatibility with neighbouring land uses and any environmental implications of the development on its setting.

Policy WLP11 (Anaerobic Digestion and Mechanical Biological Treatment) states that planning permission will be granted for anaerobic digestion and mechanical biological treatment plants provided the following criteria are met:-

(i) any digestate produce as a residue of the process can be satisfactorily managed and disposed of; AND;

(ii) that the site is located so as to minimise the traffic impact on the

highway network. Favourable consideration will be given to those developments that propose multi-modal transportation, for example, waste movement by rail; AND;

(iii) such facilities will be permitted on land identified for general industrial

use (B2) or form an integral part of: (A) sewage treatment plants; (B) intensive livestock units; (C) other waste management facilities; (D) associated with food processing facilities; AND; (iv) the proposal meets the criteria set out in Policy WLP21; AND; (v) that the proposal is located at a distance from an occupied building

(hotels, educational establishments, residential properties and institutions; other than properties in the same ownership as the proposed facility), that will allow any odour impacts upon the use of the occupied building(s) to be sufficiently mitigated against. The distance will be no less than 250 metres; AND;

(vi) self-sufficiency for operational energy and exportable energy recovery

is maximised where appropriate; AND; (vii) that with respect to anaerobic digestion plants, methane gas shall be

utilised in all but specific circumstances; AND; (viii) the application is accompanied by a satisfactory Odour Impact

Assessment.

Policy WLP21 (Environmental Considerations) states that planning permission for waste management facilities will be granted where a number of environmental considerations are met. Of particular relevance to this application are:

Page 10

(i) Agricultural Land - supports proposals but only where previously developed land or land of a lower agricultural grade is not available to accommodate the proposed development and where the proposal is on the lowest possible grade in that locality;

(ii) Airfield Safeguarding – where there would not be significant risk to aircraft movement from bird strike;

(v) Drainage, Flood Protection and Water Resources – supports proposals which would not adversely affect local land drainage systems, groundwater resources or be at an unacceptable risk of flooding or create an unacceptable risk of flooding elsewhere;

(viii) Archaeology, Historic Buildings, Historic Parks and Gardens, Registered Battlefield – supports development that would not adversely affect;

- a scheduled ancient monument or other nationally important

archaeological site or its setting or amenity value; - a building listed as being of architectural or historic interest or its

setting; - the character or appearance of a conservation area; or registered

historic park and garden or its setting; - the integrity or setting of a historic landscape or potential significant

archaeological remains. With respect to archaeological remains the approach will be dependent upon the significance of the potential remains;

(x) Public Rights of Way - where the development would not adversely

affect public rights of way unless adequate arrangements can be made to safeguard the existing routes or to provide acceptable alternatives;

(xi) Dust, Odour, etc – supports proposals where they would not have an

adverse impact on local amenity including air quality and/or other land uses as a result of traffic movements, visual impact, noise, dust, odour, litter and;

(xii) Transport System - where sufficient capacity is available on the local or

wider road system for the traffic that is expected to be generated. Improvements or alternative modes of transport can be implemented and/or where there would not be an adverse effect on road safety;

(xvii) Recovery of Materials – supports proposals where they contribute to

the potential recovery of materials and energy via recycling, energy recovery and composting in reducing the amount of waste for final disposal.

The West Lindsey Local Plan (First Review) 2006 (WLLP) forms part of the Development Plan and therefore, due weight should be given to relevant policies within the Plan according to their degree of consistency with the policies of the NPPF (i.e. the closer the policies in the WLLP to the policies in the NPPF, the greater the weight that may be given). The following

Page 11

policies are considered to be generally consistent with the NPPF and of relevance to this proposal (summarised):

Policy STRAT1 (Development Requiring Planning Permission) states all development must take full account of the need to protect the environment so that present demands do not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their own needs and enjoy a high quality environment. Development must reflect the need to safeguard and improve the quality of life of residents, conserve energy resources and protect the Plan area’s character and be satisfactory with regard to a range of criteria as set out in the policy. The criteria/issues identified which are relevant to this proposal are as follows: (i) The number, size, layout, siting, design and external appearance of

buildings and structures; (ii) The provision of adequate and safe access to the road network to

prevent the creation or aggravation of highway problems; (v) The provision of vehicular and cycle parking facilities; (vi) The impact on the character, appearance and amenities of

neighbouring, and where relevant, other land, including visual encroachment into the countryside;

(viii) The impact of the proposal on neighbouring and, where relevant, other

uses; (ix) The availability and capacity of infrastructure and social/community

facilities to adequately serve the development; (x) The retention and safeguarding of existing trees, woodlands and

hedgerows where feasible and the incorporation of landscape measures and/or the utilisation of natural screening in order to maintain the ecological value of the site and the wider environment;

(xii) Any other material considerations properly related to regulating the use

and development of land, including: - Protecting general water quality and the quality of groundwater; - Protecting land quality from contamination; - Maximising the use of previously developed land; - Avoiding utilising land subject to flood risk;

Adequate information must be supplied with all applications so that the effects of development proposals in relation to the policies contained in the Local Plan can be properly judged. Where in sensitive locations new development will have an impact on the character of the area by virtue of its location or scale, planning permission will not be granted unless detailed plans are submitted with the planning application.

Page 12

Policy STRAT3 (Settlement Hierarchy) lists the settlements of West Lindsey in a hierarchy so that new development can be appropriately located and focused on existing settlements thus promoting sustainable development by strengthening villages and market towns, protecting open space, sustaining local services and reducing the need to travel. In this case, the proposal site lies outside the settlement boundary of Hemswell Cliff (as defined on the Proposals Map) and therefore is classed as lying within the open countryside.

Policy STRAT12 (Development in the Open Countryside) states that planning permission will not be granted for development proposals in the open countryside that is, outside of the settlements listed in Policy STRAT 3, unless the development is essential to the needs of agriculture, horticulture, forestry, mineral extraction or other land use which necessarily requires a countryside location, or otherwise meets an objective supported by other Plan policies.

Policy STRAT15 (Employment Allocations) identifies sites within the District that are allocated for employment development/uses. One of these sites (i.e. HC(E)1) includes the former aircraft hangars which lie immediately east of the proposal site and are identified as suitable for A2, B1, B2 and B8 uses.

Policy SUS11 (Energy Generation/Renewable Energy) states that development of energy generating operations even which maximise the efficient use of fossil fuels or renewable energy sources will not be permitted where they would result in significant harm to local amenities, the environment or to the character of the countryside or landscape.

In assessing any renewable energy proposal regard will be had to all of the following factors: (a) The sustainable benefits associated with the renewable energy

proposal; (b) The impacts of the proposal on the landscape character, the

countryside generally, amenity, quality of life, the built environment, the highway network and the natural environment including wildlife interests;

(c) The potential impact upon civil aviation and military safeguarding zones, NATS Radar, Meteorological Radar and Telecommunications;

(d) The availability of a realistic and practical connection to the electricity network;

(e) The cumulative impact of proposals; (f) Regard to National and Regional targets for Renewable Energy.

Policy SUS14 (Flood Risk Areas) seeks to ensure that new development, including the intensification of existing land or proposals to raise the level of the land, are appropriately located so as not to be at risk of flooding or increase the risk of flooding elsewhere and that surface water run-off is appropriately managed so as not to result in adverse effects.

Page 13

ECON1 (Employment Development Provision) states that employment-generating development or the construction of buildings for businesses, general industry, storage or distribution, port and wharfage development will be permitted on sites not allocated for any of these uses provided that the proposal meets all the following criteria: (i) There is no available allocated site within the nearby settlements or an

established employment area in existence within the locality; (ii) It would not generate traffic of a type or amount inappropriate for the

character of access roads or require improvements which would damage the character of those roads;

(iii) It would not harm the character or appearance of the countryside; (iv) It would not harm the character, appearance or setting of the local

settlement or the amenity of nearby or adjoining residents or other land uses;

(v) It would not harm any site of nature conservation value or

archaeological importance or any building of architectural or historic interest, conservation area or historic landscape of their setting;

(vi) It would blend into the landscape in design, siting and choice of

materials; (vii) It is not sited in a Green Wedge, AONB, protected settlement break or

other protected landscape area or feature; (viii) The site can adequately accommodate the proposal in terms of size

and shape for the layout incorporating suitable access, parking, landscaping or any other requirements of the proposed development;

(ix) The proposed development should be in scale with the size of the

settlement within which it is proposed. Priority will be given to previously developed sites over the release of greenfield sites.

Policy ECON3 (Protection of Agricultural Land) states that development will not be permitted if it would result in the irreversible loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land unless the following criteria is met: (i) There is a lack of development opportunities on previously developed

land or on land in existing urban areas, towns or settlements; (ii) There is little land in grades below 3A of little lower grade land which

does not have a recognised environmental, nature conservation, landscape, historic or archaeological value;

(iii) The development is proposed on land of the lowest practicable grade.

Unless there is an overriding need for the development.

Page 14

NBE17 (Control of Potentially Polluting uses) states that planning permission that may be liable to cause pollution of water, air or soil, or pollution through noise, dust, vibration, light, heat or radiation will only be permitted if the health and safety and amenity of users of the site or surrounding land are not put at risk, the quality and enjoyment of the environment would not be damaged and, adequate protection and mitigation measures are implemented to ensure that any potential environmental receptors are not put at risk.

Policy NBE20 (Development on the Edge of Settlements) states that development will not be permitted which detracts from the rural character of the settlement edge and the countryside beyond. Where development on the edge of settlements is permitted the Council will require: (i) Design proposals which respect and maintain the existing character

and appearance of the boundary of the settlement footprint, or result in the improvement of an unattractive approach;

(ii) An agreed scheme of landscape treatment and/or open space

provision. Results of Consultation and Publicity 15. (a) Local County Council Member, Councillor C L Strange – was notified of

the application on 12 October 2012 but no comments had been received at the time of writing this report.

(b) Hemswell Cliff Parish Council – were consulted on the application on

12 October 2012 but no comments had been received at the time of writing this report.

(c) Environmental Health Officer (West Lindsey District Council) – in

principle raises no objection to the development but did initially request clarification on certain aspects of the draft Odour Management Plan, in particular the proposed means of controlling air from the technical building, the odour levels of the final digestate and details of the proposed spreading areas for the final digestate.

The applicant provided a response to the EHO’s comments which confirms that air from the technical building would be treated via a bio-scrubber prior to being released, clarifies the anticipated odour level of the treated final digestate and also identifies the proposed spreading areas for the digestate to demonstrate that it can be safely accommodated without adversely impacting upon environment. This information was forwarded onto the EHO and they have confirmed that they have no further comments/observations to make on the proposals.

(d) Highways Officer (Lincolnshire County Council) – no objection to the

development.

Page 15

(e) Historic Environment Team (Lincolnshire County Council) – was consulted on the 12 October 2012 but no comment has been received at the time of wiring this report.

(f) Arboricultural Officer (Lincolnshire County Council) - was consulted on

the application on 12 October 2012 but no comments had been received at the time of writing this report.

(g) Environment Agency – no objection subject to the imposition of

conditions requiring surface water drainage details to be submitted for approval and, (given the sites former use as an RAF base) in the event that contaminated materials are found during the development, that a remediation strategy be submitted for the approval of the Waste Planning Authority which sets out the measures to be taken to manage and dispose of such materials.

The EA also comment that whilst the application refers to the proposed

feedstocks for the plant comprising of food wastes collected from households within the West Lindsey district, it is noted that currently food wastes are not collected separately and to achieve the quantities proposed changes to the collection arrangements would be necessary. These decisions are, however, outside the applicant’s control and so proportions/quantities of potential feedstock’s may vary.

(h) Lincolnshire Fire & Rescue – no objection subject to the applicant

installing a fire hydrant within the site in order to ensure that there is suitable access to water resources for fire fighting purposes. The applicant has confirmed that they would be willing to install such a hydrant and details of the location and specification could be secured by way of a planning condition.

(i) Health & Safety Executive – has confirmed the development does not

fall within the consultation distance for any explosive facility and therefore have not comments to make on the proposal.

(j) Ministry of Defence (Safeguarding) – were consulted on the application

on 12 October 2012 but no comments had been received at the time of writing this report.

16. The application has been publicised by notices posted at the site and in the

local press (Gainsborough Standard on 25 October 2012) and letters of notification were sent to the nearest neighbouring businesses and local residents to the site.

Two letters of objection have been received in response to consultation/publicity and the comments/issues raised by these representations are summarised as follows:

Page 16

Noise & Smell - concerns that noise and smells arising from the development would be detrimental to local residents who live downwind of the proposals site.

Fire Risk/Safety - concerns raised regarding proximity of development

and potential increased risk and dangers to residents from potential gas leaks or pollution from fire or explosion.

Traffic - question whether 7-9 HGVs per day is realistic to make the

development economically viable. The AD plant would also run 24 hours a day and so concerns regarding traffic (and associated noise) impacts on local residents.

Misc - large, high industrial plant & buildings which would be constructed

very close to a proposed 10 turbine wind farm, 2 of which are on land by this same applicant. Concerns therefore raised regarding the potential proximity of the facility and risk of fire if a blade from the proposed turbines were to break.

Four letters of support have also been received and the comments/issues raised by these representations are summarised as follows: Energy Supply - an adjoining business (Eco Plastics Limited) supports

the proposal, in particular the potential for the development to provide a reliable and economic power supply which has historically restricted their businesses growth. Access to a reliable electricity supply would assist their future growth and help achieve their long-term carbon reduction goals and further bolster their credentials as a sustainable recycler of plastic.

Other comments support the developments ability to produce clean and

affordable energy whilst diverting waste from landfill and producing a nutrient rich digestate for local agriculture. It is stated that such technology should be embraced.

Employment - further creation of employment from this project is

welcomed, however, need to ensure that the appropriate safeguards are in place to ensure that there are no serious issues concerning emissions or any foul smells from the facility.

District Council’s Recommendations 17. West Lindsey District Council have confirmed that they have no

observations to make on the proposed development. Conclusions  

18. The key issues to be considered in relation to this proposal are the potential environmental and amenity impacts arising from the development and

Page 17

whether the need for this development is sufficient to justify and outweigh any impacts on the open countryside and local landscape.

Waste Planning Policy Context 19. Anaerobic digestion represents a sustainable waste management practice

as it treats waste in a way which is closer to the top of the waste management hierarchy, seeks to treat waste as a resource and thereby reduce the amount of biodegradable waste being landfilled. Anaerobic digestion also offers added environmental benefits in terms of energy generation and the production of digestate which can be used as an alternative to chemical fertilisers.

20. In this case, the proposed development has the potential to treat up to

40,000 tonnes of materials per annum. Given the technologies and treatment processes proposed, a wider range of waste materials could be handled by this development when compared to other waste management processes/operations (i.e. open windrow composting). The potential feedstocks/wastes to be used by this facility would include materials sourced from nearby farms (i.e. silage, crop residues and animal slurries) and/or household and commercial wastes arising from within the District (i.e. household and commercial food wastes, etc). Digestate produced by the plant would be used on surrounding farmland and the power generated by the development used to supply other businesses on the adjoining Business Park with any surplus being exported to the National Grid for use elsewhere.

21. Given the potential throughput of the site the development would make a

contribution towards achieving national, regional and sub-regional targets for the recycling/composting of wastes as well as help in achieving local and regional self-sufficiency in terms of the management of waste. Therefore, in principle at least, the proposed development is considered to generally accord with the ethos and policies for sustainable waste management set out in PPS10, the East Midlands Regional Plan and Lincolnshire Waste Local Plan.

Locational Factors 22. EMRP Policy 3 seeks to direct major new development proposals towards

established urban areas/settlements and EMRP Policy 38 states that in the eastern-sub area the future pattern for the provision of large-scale waste management facilities should aim to combine such facilities in and around Lincoln and the sub-regional centres, with a dispersed pattern of smaller facilities in rural areas. The purpose of this approach is to ensure that large-scale facilities are located close to the markets/populations that they serve thus reducing the distance wastes have to travel for treatment. In this case the proposal site lies approx. 17km north of Lincoln and whilst is not located near to one of the sub-regional centres as identified in the Regional Plan, it is close to Gainsborough which is identified as a regional priority area for future growth/regeneration. As a result, the proposal site is considered to be in close proximity to both already large and growing centres of population

Page 18

and therefore, in broad locational terms, does not fundamentally conflict with the objectives and locations for siting such a large-scale facility/development as advocated by Policies 3 and 38 of the East Midlands Regional Plan.

23. The proposal site lies immediately adjacent to, but outside of, the existing

boundaries of the Hemswell Business Park and the defined settlement boundary of Hemswell Cliff (identified by Policy STRAT3). As such it does not form part of the land allocated by WLLP Policy STRAT15 as suitable for industrial/commercial uses and instead is classed as being within the open countryside. WLLP Policy STRAT12 advocates a general presumption against siting development in the open countryside unless it is essential to the needs of agriculture, horticulture, forestry, mineral extraction or other land that requires a countryside location, or otherwise meets and objective supported by other Plan policies (which could include those contained within the Waste Local Plan). Policy NBE20 seeks to ensure that developments on the edge of settlements respect and maintain the existing character and appearance of their surroundings and include appropriate landscape treatment and/or open space provision. Policy ECON1 supports employment generating development on sites which are not allocated for any of these uses provided they meet certain criteria.

24. With regard the Waste Local Plan, Policy WLP11 acknowledges that

anaerobic digestion facilities need to be located at distances away from occupied buildings/sensitive receptors due to the potential nuisance/impacts that such facilities can have such as odours and noise. In terms of suitable locations, these are identified as being “on land identified for general industrial use (B2) or form an integral part of:

(A) sewage treatment plants; (B) intensive livestock units; (C) other waste management facilities; (D) associated with food processing facilities”.

25. Although the applicant has indicated that power generated by the AD facility

could be used to supply the nearby Eco Plastics recycling plant, there is no direct relationship or connection between the operations/activities of the Eco Plastics development and those proposed by this facility. Therefore your Officers do not consider this proposal to fall within the remit of locational criterion (c) of Policy WLP11. Additionally, the proposal site is not considered to meet any of the other locational criteria cited by Policy WLP11, however, the Waste Planning Authority has accepted that it is not always possible to locate such facilities within or close to urban settlements and therefore the open countryside and rural locations may offer the only feasible site in terms of location. Accordingly, where such facilities utilise feedstocks from the immediate surrounding area, can dispose of the resultant digestate on the surrounding area and have a national grid connection, the Waste Planning Authority has, in principle, previously accepted such locations as acceptable so long as other potential environmental and amenity impacts can be satisfactorily addressed.

Page 19

26. In this case, the proposed AD plant would have the potential to accept a range of different feedstocks, some of which could include wastes derived from nearby farms and/or household and commercial wastes sourced from within the District. The final digestate produced by the plant would also be used on surrounding farmland and the power generated by the development used to supply other businesses on the adjoining Business Park with any surplus being exported to the National Grid. Given the bespoke nature of this development it is accepted that there is not sufficient land or suitable buildings available within the existing Business Park boundaries which could be developed or readily converted to accommodate this type of facility. Therefore, whilst the proposed development lies outside the allocated boundaries of the Business Park and would not therefore be located on or within land identified or allocated in the Local Plans as suitable for siting such developments, it does immediately abut the Business Park and therefore would be seen as a natural extension to it. The existing Eco Plastics facility (which is a similar large-scale industrial building/waste management facility) has recently been granted planning permission and this development also sits outside the allocated boundaries of the Business Park. The Eco Plastics facility was considered to accord with the objectives of WLLP Policy ECON1 and therefore sets a precedent that development outside of the allocated industrial park can be capable of being deemed acceptable and need not necessarily compromise or undermine the objectives of WLLP Policy STRAT15. However, for this development to also be considered acceptable in this location, and therefore to accord with the criteria of WLLP Policy STRAT3 and STRAT12, the development must also accord or meet an objective supported by other policies within the Development Plan. Consequently, an assessment of the environmental and amenity considerations arising from this development and its compliance with other planning policies within the development plan is given below.

Environmental & Amenity Considerations Landscape & Visual Impacts 27. The proposal site and the land immediately to the west, north and south

comprises of open agricultural fields whilst to the east lies the hangars and buildings associated with the existing Business Park. Given the topography of the surrounding area, the hangars and industrial buildings within the Business Park (including the new Eco Plastics building) already form prominent features within the local landscape. Although this development would introduce additional significant, large-scale buildings and structures into the local landscape none of these elements would be taller than the existing buildings, structures and silos/tanks already present in the area. The new building proposed by this development would be of a similar design, appearance and location to that of the recently constructed Eco Plastics building which has been deemed acceptable. Although the six digestion tanks associated with this development differ in their size and appearance to other tanks/silos in the area (e.g. large grain storage tanks located to the north and those associated with the Eco Plastics facility) none of these are taller than the existing buildings already present within the

Page 20

Business Park and given their location would be viewed against this backdrop, especially from views along the B1398 to the west. Consequently, whilst the development would have an impact on the existing visual appearance of the area, when considered in context of the existing Business Park, such impacts are unlikely to be any more than that of the Eco Plastics facility which has previously been deemed acceptable.

28. Consequently, on balance, the proposed location for siting this development

is not considered to conflict with the wider objectives and purposes of WLLP Policies STRAT3 and STRAT15 and WLP Policy WLP11 and accords with WLLP Policy ECON1. Whilst the development would impact on the existing visual appearance of the area, such an impact is not considered significant given the context and existing backdrop of the site and taking into account that a similar large-scale waste management facility has previously been granted planning permission and deemed acceptable within close proximity to this development. Therefore the development would not fundamentally conflict with WLLP Policies STRAT1, STRAT12 and NBE20 or WLP Policy WLP21(iii).

Odours 29. In relation to odour, WLP Policy WLP11 sets out two specific requirements;

one is that the application should be accompanied by a satisfactory Odour Impact Assessment; the other is that the proposal should be located at a distance of no less than 250 metres from an occupied building (including residential properties) to ensure any odour impacts upon the use of the occupied buildings are sufficiently mitigated against. WLP Policy WLP21 also requires that there be no adverse impact as a result of odour. WLLP Policies STRAT1 and NBE17 seek to protect the environment and amenities of people living or working near to proposed development.

30. There are a number of business premises within 250m of the proposal site

due to its close proximity to the Business Park. Such premises do not, however, fall within the definition of ‘occupied buildings’ as cited by WLP Policy WLP21 and instead the nearest such ‘occupied buildings’ are the residential properties which lie within the nearby settlement of Hemswell Cliff. The closest dwelling to the proposal site is approx. 335m and therefore is outside of the 250m distance criterion advocated by WLP Policy WLP21. Despite this objections have still been received from local residents regarding potential odours from the site and whilst the other business premises within the Business Park are not specifically referred to in the wording of the Policy, it is still necessary to ensure that suitable measures and controls are adopted as part of the development to ensure that any odours arising from the development do not have an impact of nearby users to an unacceptable degree.

31. The Odour Management Plan submitted in support of the application states

that a number of mitigation measures and operational processes would be incorporated into the development to minimise and prevent such impacts from occurring. These include wastes being received, de-packaged,

Page 21

screened and processed within the enclosed building which would operate under negative air pressure and be fitted with roller shutter doors so as to reduce the risk of odours escaping into the environment. The application indicates that air from within the building would be treated either by passing it through an odour control system such as a bio-filter/scrubber or by diverting it to the CHP engines where it would be combusted and therefore deodorised prior to its release into the atmosphere. However, no specific details of the design or specification of this proposed system are included within the application and so should planning permission be granted details of this could be secured by way of a planning condition. Notwithstanding this, it is also acknowledged that an Environmental Permit (issued by the Environment Agency) would be required before the development could become operational. The Permit would impose its own controls and conditions to ensure the site is appropriately operated and managed is the appropriate mechanism for securing detailed operational controls relating to (amongst other things) odour. Any Environmental Permit controls would also be complemented by those available through planning and environmental health legislation and together these are considered to be sufficient to ensure that any potential harm can be minimised and adequately controlled.

32. With regard the AD operation itself, the digestion process is carried out in

hermetically sealed tanks whose temperatures and levels would be carefully controlled and monitored to maintain the specific conditions that are necessary to maximise the efficiency of the digestion process. The AD process relies on anaerobic conditions and so the protective membrane covers fitted to the tanks both prevent air from entering the system and also prevent the release of odours. The tanks would be interconnected with sealed pipelines to allow the transferal of wastes between each tank and to ensure the optimal conditions are maintained at all times. Gasses produced during the digestion process would be drawn off and directed towards the CHP engines where they would be burned to produce power and heat or, in the event of a breakdown or excess gas pressure/levels being produced, would be diverted to a flare stack. Once processed, the final digestate would be piped from the storage tanks via sealed connections and then transported off site and spread onto surrounding farmland not dissimilar to usual farming practices.

33. Subject to the implementation of the odour control measures and effective

management of the site as per the details/practices cited in the Odour Management Plan, and given the distance of the facility from the residential properties and general existing agricultural nature of the surrounding area, residential amenity is unlikely to be significantly harmed as a result of this development and therefore would not be contrary to the objectives of the NPPF, WLP Policies WLP11 and WLP21(xi) and accords with WLLP Policies STRAT1, ECON1 and NBE17.

Page 22

Noise 34. WLP Policy WLP21 requires that there be no adverse impact as a result of

noise and WLLP Policies STRAT1, ECON1 and NBE17 seek to protect the amenities of people living or working near to proposed development.

35. A site specific noise assessment has not been submitted in support of the

application, however, the main potential sources of noise associated with this development are considered to be those associated with the movement of vehicles when accessing and leaving the site, the operation of plant and machinery within the buildings and any noise arising from the operation of the emergency flare and fans associated with CHP engines.

36. As described previously, all wastes received at the site would be handled

and processed within the Technical Building. The Technical Building is orientated such that the main doors (and potential escape routes for noise) are directed along the northern and southern elevations of the building and therefore away from the direction of the residential properties located to the east. The doors of the building would remain closed at all times (except when required for access) and as such any noise arising from the operation of plant and machinery inside it would be partly soundproofed and attenuated by the buildings fabric. The CHP engines would also be housed within the Technical Building and contained in soundproofed rooms to ensure a safe working environment for people within the building. With regard the gas flare and fans, these would only operate sporadically and as such any noise arising from their operation would be limited.

37. With regard vehicular traffic, the development sits adjacent to an established

Business Park and vehicles associated with this development would access the site via the Business Park’s existing access. This access is located to the west of the residential properties and is already used at all times of day by traffic associated with the existing businesses/premises. The number of vehicle movements associated with this development would be relatively small (7-9 per day) and therefore unlikely to result in a significant increase in noise over that already experienced. However, to minimise any potential increased disturbance or cumulative impacts in terms of traffic noise, a condition could be imposed which would restrict the times for the delivery of wastes/export of digestate to between the hours of 06:00 and 18:00 as indicated in the application.

38. Overall therefore, whilst there may be a minor increase in noise levels as a

result of this development, taking into account the existing industrial/commercial nature of the uses immediately surrounding the site, the enclosed nature of the site operations and the distance of the site from any noise sensitive receptors it is considered that the development is unlikely to have an unacceptable impact on the area or nearby users/residents in respect of noise. Consequently, in respect of noise impacts, the development would not conflict with the objectives of WLP Policy WLP21(xi) and accords with relevant criterion of WLLP Policies STRAT1, ECON1 and NBE17.

Page 23

Highways & Traffic 39. WLP Policy WLP21(xii) and (xiii) and STRAT1 (ii), (iii), (iv) and (v) set out

the issues relating to traffic generated by proposals which must be considered when assessing a planning application, such as access, parking, impact on highway safety, increase in vehicle movements, capacity of the highway network. The proposal site immediately adjoins the allocated boundaries of the Hemswell Cliff Business Park (which has a mix of commercial and industrial uses) and is close to the major urban areas of Gainsborough and Lincoln and the main traffic routes of the A15 and the A631. It is considered that the sites location, means of access and proposed traffic movements associated with the development are capable of being accommodated without having an adverse impact as the Highways Officer has raised no objections to the proposal on these grounds.

40. In terms of sustainable transport, the applicant argues that some of the

wastes and potential feedstock/materials to be used by the facility are already on the highway network and in some cases already pass the Business Park as they are transported for treatment by similar facilities near Boston as well as outside of the County at facilities in Hull and Doncaster. The facility could therefore potentially reduce the distance and number of vehicle journeys that would otherwise be required if the material’s where to be treated at an alternative site. The proposed development would therefore accords with the objectives of policies WLP Policy WLP21 and WLLP Policies STRAT1 and ECON1(ii).

Flood Risk and Drainage 41. The proposal site lies within Flood Zone 1 which is defined as land assessed

as having a less than 1 in 1000 annual probability of river or sea flooding (<0.1%). Therefore development within this zone is classed as being of low probability of flooding and therefore all uses of land are appropriate within this zone. However, as the proposal site exceeds one hectare in size and proposes the creation of new hard surfaces which could increase surface water run-off and thus the potential for flooding elsewhere, a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been submitted in support of the application.

42. The FRA confirms that the development is an acceptable use/form of

development within Flood Zone 1 (as classified by the NPPF and Technical Guidance) and includes details of the measures to be taken to manage surface waters from the site so as to ensure that they do not generate or exacerbate the risks of flooding within the site or elsewhere. In terms of surface water drainage, all waters within the site are proposed to be drained towards a storage/attenuation lagoon which would be constructed within the site where these would be allowed to naturally infiltrate into the underlying ground. The proposed lagoon has been designed to provide storage up to and including the 1 in 100 year plus climate change event and would therefore ensure that surface waters from the site can be managed so as not to increase risks of flooding either within the site or elsewhere. With

Page 24

regard foul waters, these would be connected to the existing sewer which serves the Business Park.

43. The Environment Agency, who has direct responsibility for the protection of

the water environment and who provides advice with regard development and flood risk, has raised no objections to the proposals. The proposed site drainage arrangements put forward within the applications supporting Flood Risk Assessment are, in principle, acceptable however, the Environment Agency has requested that a planning condition be imposed which requires further details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme to be submitted for the written approval of the Waste Planning Authority. Subject to the inclusion of such a condition so as to ensure that the surface waters from the development can be appropriately managed, it is considered that the development would not have an unacceptable adverse impact on the water environment or flood risk and therefore accords the policies contained within the NPPF and the objectives of WLP Policy WLP21(v) and WLLP Policy SUS14.

Energy Generation & Sustainability 44. The NPPF, EMRP Policy 40 and WLLP Policy SUS11 all support renewable

and low carbon energy developments including small-scale projects which can contribute towards the development of a distributed energy network. WLP Policy WLP11 also supports AD facilities which are self-sufficient in terms of energy use and which seek to export any surplus energy (criterion vi) and which also utilise gasses produced in all be special circumstances (criterion vii).

45. The proposed development is capable of producing approximately 3MW of

electricity per annum. The applicant states that the significant power requirements of the nearby Eco Plastics facility (which uses between 7-9MW per annum) has the potential to adversely affect other users of the Business Park and the current lack of network capacity has necessitated Eco Plastics to introduce 2 diesel generators at their site to support the plant’s operations during peak periods. These engines are both expensive to operate and are not considered a long-term sustainable solution to the energy needs for the facility. The applicant therefore argues that the proposed AD facility not only represents a sustainable waste management operation but also offers other significant benefits in terms of its potential to supply and contribute towards the energy needs and requirements of the nearby Eco Plastics facility and, although not part of this proposal, potentially supply heat and/or hot water which could be converted to steam which is used in the recycling operations. Any surplus power not utilised by the plant itself or the nearby adjoining businesses could also be exported to the National Grid for consumption elsewhere which would make an important contribution towards delivering a low carbon and distributed energy network as advocated and supported by the NPPF and EMRP Policy 40 as well as WLLP Policy SUS11 and criterion contained in WLP Policy WLP11.

Page 25

Protection of Agricultural Land 46. Waste Local Plan Policy WLP21 and WLLP Policy ECON3 seek to protect

the best and most versatile agricultural land and requires the lowest possible grade of agricultural land within the vicinity to be used. This reflects the approach of the NPPF.

47. The application site is currently in agricultural use but is understood to have

once formed part of the concrete apron and taxiing area associated with the former RAF airfield. Whilst this development would result in the loss of existing agricultural land according to DEFRA’s Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) the site does not constitute high grade agricultural land (i.e. Grade 1 or 2). Furthermore, as the land is being used for agricultural purposes it is not considered likely to be contaminated despite its former use. However, in the event that contaminated materials are found during the development the Environment Agency has recommended that a remediation strategy be submitted for the approval of the Waste Planning Authority which sets out the measures to be taken to manage and dispose of such materials. This could be secured by condition.

48. Consequently, in respect of impacts on agricultural land the development

would not conflict with the relevant policies/statements contained in the NPPF or WLP Policy WLP21(i) or WLLP Policy ECON3.

Soil Quality & Nitrate Vulnerable Zone Designation 49. Waste Local Plan Policy WLP11 requires that any digestate produced as a

residue of the process can be satisfactorily managed and disposed of. The application states that digestate produced by the plant would be spread on the applicants own farmland as well as being supplied to local farmers where it would be spread on surrounding farmland as a substitute for chemical fertilisers. However, the land surrounding Hemswell is designated as lying within a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ) and this designation means that only a limited quantity of nitrogen can be spread per hectare of land in any rolling 12 month period. This restriction is in place to ensure that the surrounding soil and water quality is not adversely affected by agricultural practices.

50. The application estimates that between 80-90% of the feedstock product

entering the AD facility would be returned in the form of digestate (dry compost and liquid) which approx. equates to between 32-36,000 tonnes. The NVZ restriction means only a limited quantity of nitrogen (e.g. 170kg or 0.17 tonnes) can be spread per hectare of land in any rolling 12 month period. The application proposes to utilise the digestate by spreading it on local farmland. The applicant himself owns a substantial area of farmland immediately surrounding the proposal site (e.g. equating to over 534ha). If all of the digestate produced by the AD plant were to be spread within a single 12 month period then the land owned solely by the applicant would not be sufficient to safely accommodate the digestate without conflicting with the NVZ spreading restrictions. However, the application indicates that the

Page 26

digestate would also be utilised by local farmers and therefore spread on land in the local area which is not within the applicants control. Given the predominant agricultural nature of the land surrounding the site, your Officers are satisfied that there would be sufficient land available in the vicinity of the site which could be available to ensure that the digestate produced by the development can be safely accommodated into the landscape without having and adverse impact or requiring it to be transported long distances for use elsewhere. Notwithstanding this, it is unlikely that all the digestate produced by the facility would be spread within a single 12 month period and as such would be retained and stored on site. The 4 large storage tanks make provision for this and would provide storage capacity equivalent to around 180 days production thus ensuring that the digestate produced can be safely retained and accommodated on site during the periods it cannot be applied to the land.

51. Overall therefore, Officers are satisfied that the digestate produced by the

development could be safely accommodated within the local landscape and that adequate storage capacity has been provided as part of the development to cover periods when it cannot be spread on the land and therefore the development would not be likely to have an adverse impact on soil and water quality (in accordance with the relevant policies/statements contained in the NPPF, WLP Policy WLP21 and WLLP Policy NBE17).

Final Conclusions 52. The development has the potential to treat up to 40,000 tonnes of materials

per annum which includes a range of different waste streams derived from nearby farms and/or household and commercial wastes sourced from within the District. Anaerobic digestion not only represents a sustainable waste management practice and therefore, in accordance with Policy WLP1 of the Waste Local Plan, contributes towards driving the management of waste up the waste hierarchy but it also offers added environmental benefits in terms of energy generation and the production of digestate which can be used as an alternative to chemical fertilisers. In this case, digestate produced by the plant would be used on surrounding farmland and the power generated by the development used to supply other businesses on the adjoining Business Park with any surplus being exported to the National Grid (as supported by Policy 40 of the East Midlands Regional Plan, Policy SUS11 of the West Lindsey Local Plan and Policy WLP11(vi) of the Waste Local Plan).

53. Given the bespoke nature of this development it is accepted that there is not

sufficient land or suitable buildings available within the existing boundaries of the adjoining Hemswell Business Park which could be developed or readily converted to accommodate this type of facility. Whilst the development therefore falls within the open countryside and it is accepted that it would introduce new large-scale buildings/structures which would affect the existing visual appearance of the area. However, given that the developments location and close proximity to the existing Business Park it would be seen against the backdrop of the existing large-scale buildings which are already present in the area and therefore the visual impacts of the

Page 27

development would be viewed in this context. Furthermore, given the sites easy access to the highway network, close proximity to the potential feedstock/waste sources and the final application areas for the digestate, the proposal site is considered acceptable and, in locational terms, would not compromise or undermine the objectives of Policies 3 and 38 of the East Midlands Regional Plan, Policies STRAT3, STRAT12 and STRAT15 and NBE20 of the West Lindsey Local Plan or Policy WLP11 of the Waste Local Plan and accords with Policy ECON1 of the West Lindsey Local Plan.

54. Finally, whilst the development is close to the settlement of Hemswell Cliff,

subject to the development being carried out as proposed and the inclusion of suitable conditions the development would not give rise to significant adverse environmental or amenity impacts and therefore, on balance, is in general conformity and accords with Policies WLP11 and WLP21 of the Waste Local Plan and Policies STRAT1, SUS14, ECON3 and NBE17 of the West Lindsey Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions: Definition of Permission and Approved Documents/Plans 1. The development must be begun no later than the expiration of three years

beginning with the date of this permission. Written notification of the date of commencement of development shall be sent to the Waste Planning Authority within seven days of commencement.

2. The development hereby permitted shall only be carried out in accordance

with the following documents and plans, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Waste Planning Authority (WPA), or where modified by the conditions attached to this planning permission or details subsequently approved pursuant to those conditions. The approved documents and plans are as follows:

Planning Application Form, Design & Access Statement, Justification Statement, Draft Odour Management Plan and Flood Risk Assessment (date stamped received 6 July 2012) as supplemented by the information contained in the emails from G J Perry dated 1 November 2012, 10 January 2012 and 12 January 2012 and the following drawings:

Drawing No. P12-TBHC-001 (Revision A): Location Plan Drawing No. P12-TBHC-002: Existing Site Layout Drawing No. P12-TBHC-003 (Revision D): Proposed Site Layout Plan Drawing No. P12-TBHC-004: Technical Building Plan & Elevations Drawing No. P12-TBHC-005 (Revision B): Site Scene Elevations

Page 28

Permitted Wastes and Quantities 3. The total quantity of feedstock materials handled by the development shall

not exceed 40,000 tonnes per annum. All materials brought to the site shall be weighed at a weighbridge and weighbridge records shall be retained for at least two years and be available for inspection by the Waste Planning Authority upon request.

Visual Appearance of Buildings 4. The external wall cladding of all new buildings to be constructed as part of

the development hereby permitted shall be ‘dark olive green’ in colour and shall thereafter be maintained in a good condition for the duration that the development hereby permitted subsists.

Hours of Operation 5. Except in emergencies to maintain safe working conditions (which shall be

notified to the Waste Planning Authority as soon as practicable) no vehicles associated with the delivery and input of feedstock materials and export of final digestate shall take place except between 06:00 and 18:00 hours Monday to Saturday.

The anaerobic digestion plant is permitted to operate continuously 24 hours a day.

Access and Traffic 6. All laden vehicles carrying feedstocks/waste materials entering or leaving

the site shall be sheeted or netted or carry their load in an otherwise enclosed load space.

7. The arrangements shown on Drawing No. P12-TBHC-003 (Revision D) for

the parking, turning and manoeuvring of vehicles shall be available for use at all times whilst ever the development hereby permitted subsists.

Environmental Protection Odour and Noise 8. All vehicles, plant and machinery operated at the site shall be maintained in

accordance with the manufacturer’s specification at all times, and shall be fitted with and use effective silencers. Any breakdown or malfunction of silencing equipment or screening shall be treated as an emergency and should be dealt with immediately.

Where a repair cannot be effected within a reasonable period, the equipment affected should be taken out of service.

Page 29

9. The roller shutter doors and windows of all buildings used to carry operations associated with the handling, processing and storage of wastes shall be kept closed at all times except when required to be opened in connection with the movement of mobile plant and the delivery and dispatch and transferral of materials to and from the buildings.

10. No development shall take place until details of the air ventilation and odour

control systems to be installed within the Technical Building have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority. Such details shall include the type and specification of the plant and equipment proposed to be installed (e.g. bio-filter/scrubber) and contain details of the methodology and scheme for the routine monitoring of odours from the site (including emissions from the Technical Buildings approved ventilation system). The ventilation and odour control systems shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details and the odour monitoring scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved methodology and the results of the survey submitted to the Waste Planning Authority within the first two months of the site becoming operational. The report shall identify the recorded odour concentration levels from the development and include, where necessary, details of any remedial measures to be implemented to address and mitigate any other identified adverse odour effects resulting from the operations. Subsequent monitoring surveys shall thereafter be carried out annually (or as otherwise may be required at the written request of the Waste Planning Authority) and the results submitted to the Waste Planning Authority whilst ever the development hereby permitted subsists.

11. No wastes or feedstock materials to be used or processed by the

development hereby permitted shall be stored outside of the Technical Building or the digestion tanks.

Surface and Groundwater Protection 12. No development shall take place until a surface water drainage scheme for

the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority. The drainage strategy should demonstrate the surface water run-off generated will not exceed the run-off from the undeveloped site following the corresponding rainfall event. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is completed.

13. Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on

impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded compound shall be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is multiple tankage, the compound shall be at least equivalent to the capacity of the largest tank, or the capacity of interconnected tanks, plus 10%. All filling points, vents, gauges and site glasses must be located within the bund. The drainage system of the bund

Page 30

shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework shall be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipe outlets shall be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund.

14. If, during the development, contamination not previously identified is found

present at the site then no further development shall be carried out until the developers has submitted a remediation strategy to the Waste Planning Authority detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with and obtained written approval from the Waste Planning Authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved.

Miscellaneous 15. No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and

approved in writing by Waste Planning Authority relating to the proposed position and specification of the fire hydrant to be installed within the development site hereby permitted. The fire hydrant shall thereafter be installed in accordance with the approved details and be operational before the development is brought into use.

16. The means of connection to the National Grid shall be by underground

cable. Reasons 1. To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country

Planning Act 1990 (as amended). 2. To define the permission and to ensure the development is implemented in

all respects in accordance with the approved details. 3. To correspond with the waste feedstock materials and quantities for which

planning permission was applied for. 4. To minimise the impact of the development on the visual appearance and

character of the surrounding area. 5. In the interests of limiting the effects of the development on local amenity

and to define the permitted hours of operation. 6 & 7

To ensure that the means of access to the site and vehicular circulation and parking spaces are provided in the interests of highways safety.

8 – 11

In order to ensure that odour emissions arising from the development are in line with the levels cited in the application and to protect the residential amenity of local residents.

Page 31

12 – 14 To ensure if unsuspected contamination is encountered during the development it is dealt with in an appropriate manner and to prevent the risk of pollution of ground waters and ensure the provision of a satisfactory means of surface water disposal is secured.

15. In the interests of fire safety and amenity of the area. 16. In the interests of visual amenity. Reasons for Granting Planning Permission The development has the potential to treat up to 40,000 tonnes of materials per annum which includes a range of different waste streams derived from nearby farms and/or household and commercial wastes sourced from within the District. Anaerobic digestion not only represents a sustainable waste management practice and therefore, in accordance with Policy WLP1 of the Waste Local Plan, contributes towards driving the management of waste up the waste hierarchy but it also offers added environmental benefits in terms of energy generation and the production of digestate which can be used as an alternative to chemical fertilisers. In this case, digestate produced by the plant would be used on surrounding farmland and the power generated by the development used to supply other businesses on the adjoining Business Park with any surplus being exported to the National Grid (as supported by Policy 40 of the East Midlands Regional Plan, Policy SUS11 of the West Lindsey Local Plan and Policy WLP11(vi) of the Waste Local Plan). Given the bespoke nature of this development it is accepted that there is not sufficient land or suitable buildings available within the existing boundaries of the adjoining Hemswell Business Park which could be developed or readily converted to accommodate this type of facility. Whilst the development therefore falls within the open countryside and it is accepted that it would introduce new large-scale buildings/structures which would affect the existing visual appearance of the area. However, given that the developments location and close proximity to the existing Business Park it would be seen against the backdrop of the existing large-scale buildings which are already present in the area and therefore the visual impacts of the development would be viewed in this context. Furthermore, given the sites easy access to the highway network, close proximity to the potential feedstock/waste sources and the final application areas for the digestate, the proposal site is considered acceptable and, in locational terms, would not compromise or undermine the objectives of Policies 3 and 38 of the East Midlands Regional Plan, Policies STRAT3, STRAT12 and STRAT15 and NBE20 of the West Lindsey Local Plan or Policy WLP11 of the Waste Local Plan and accords with Policy ECON1 of the West Lindsey Local Plan. Finally, whilst the development is close to the settlement of Hemswell Cliff, subject to the development being carried out as proposed and the inclusion of suitable conditions the development would not give rise to significant adverse environmental or amenity impacts and therefore, on balance, is in general

Page 32

conformity and accords with Policies WLP11 and WLP21 of the Waste Local Plan and Policies STRAT1, SUS14, ECON3 and NBE17 of the West Lindsey Local Plan. The Waste Planning Authority has worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner by seeking further information and requesting revisions to the application in order to seek solutions and address issues raised during the consideration of this application. This approach ensures the application is handled in a positive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development and is consistent with the requirements of paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Policies Referred To National Guidance

National Planning Policy Framework - March 2012 Planning Policy Statement 10 – Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (2011)

East Midlands Regional Plan (2009) Policy 3 - Distribution of New Development Policy 38 - Regional Priorities for Waste Management Policy 40 - Regional Priorities for Local Carbon Energy Generation Lincolnshire Waste Local Plan (2006)

WLP1 – Objective of the Plan WLP11 – Anaerobic Digestion and Mechanical Biological Treatment WLP21 – Environmental Considerations

West Lindsey Local Plan (First Review) 2006 STRAT1 – Development Requiring Planning Permission STRAT3 – Settlement Hierarchy STRAT12 – Development in the Open Countryside STRAT15 – Employment Allocations SUS11 – Energy Generation/Renewable Energy SUS14 – Flood Risk Areas ECON1 – Employment Development Provision ECON3 – Protection of Agricultural Land NBE17 – Control of Potentially Polluting Uses NBE20 – Development on the Edge of Settlements Appendix

These are listed below and attached at the back of the report

Appendix A Committee Plan

Page 33

Page 34

Background Papers The following background papers as defined in the Local Government Act 1972 were relied upon in the writing of this report.

Document title Where the document can be viewed

Planning Application File W127/129257/12

Lincolnshire County Council, Planning, Witham Park House, Waterside South, Lincoln

National Guidance -National Planning Policy Framework

Planning Policy Statement 10 - Planning for Sustainable Waste Management

Communities and Local Government website www.gov.uk

East Midland Regional Plan (2009)

Lincolnshire County Council, Planning, Witham Park House, Waterside South, Lincoln

Lincolnshire Waste Local Plan (2006)

Lincolnshire County Council website www.lincolnshire.gov.uk

West Lindsey Local Plan (First Review) 2006

West Lindsey District Council website www.west-lindsey.gov.uk

This report was written by Marc Willis, who can be contacted on 01522 782070 or dev_pcg@lincolnshire.gov.uk

Boundary of Business Use Allocation

Boundary of Business Use Allocation

Eco Plastics Facility(Permission Ref: W127/126948/11)

Boundary of Business Use Allocation

Site of Application

LINCOLNSHIRE COUNTY COUNCILPLANNING

Location: Description:

LINCOLNSHIRE COUNTY COUNCILReproduced from the 1996 Os Mapping with the permission

of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office (C) CrownCopyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown

Copyright and may lead to civil proceedings.

OS LICENCE 1000025370

Prevailing Wind Direction from the south-west

Application No:Scale: 1:5000 Planning and Regulation Committee 4 February 2013

For an anaerobic digestion plant comprising of atechnical building, digester and storage tanks andancillary equipment

Land located adjacent to Hemswell Cliff Industrial EstateHemswell Cliff

W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12W127/129257/12