AGENDA ITEM NO. 8 MAIN CASE Proposal: Development of partially covered recycling centre

Location: County Council - East Highways Division Highways Depot Stirling Way Ely Cambridgeshire CB6 3NR

Applicant: Cambridgeshire County Council

Agent: Capita Symonds

Reference No: 08/03009/CCA

Case Officer: Lucie Turnell

Parish: Ely Ward: Ely South Ward Councillor/s: Councillor J Friend-Smith Councillor Derek Wilcox

Date Received: 1 December 2008 Expiry Date: 5 January 2009 [H262]

1.0 ISSUES

1.1 The District Council has been consulted on a planning application for the development of a partially covered recycling centre at Stirling Way, Ely. An application relating to household waste is defined as a “county matter”, and the County Council are therefore the Local Planning Authority responsible for determining the application. The District Council is able to make comments on the planning merits of the proposal.

1.2 Under the Constitution, this consultation response has been delegated to the Executive Director (Development Services)/ Head of Planning & sustainable Development.

1.3 The current consultation has been referred to the Planning Committee to provide an opportunity for Members to formulate a corporate response that will be relayed by the relevant officer to the County Council, who will ultimately make a decision on the application.

2.0 THE APPLICATION

2.1 The application seeks to develop a household waste recycling centre on land off Road. The proposed development would receive and segregate recyclable materials as far as possible, thereby diverting waste materials away from

Agenda Item 8 – Page 1 landfill, contributing to recycling and recovery targets and providing a sustainable, long term solution for local waste.

2.2 ECDC is currently served by the Grunty Fen Recycling Centre, which is a comparatively small site with an annual throughput of less than 7000 tonnes per annum. Grunty Fen occupies a small area of a larger landfill site, which is approaching completion. The centre is linked to the Environmental Permit / Planning Permission which expires in 2009.

2.3 The proposed development would be a modern, accessible, sustainable recycling centre with the capacity to process up to 15000 tonnes of waste per annum in the long term.

2.4 All traffic would access via Stirling Way; the junction with Witchford Road would be upgraded as part of the proposed development and a separate entrance to, and exit from, the site from Stirling Way would be created.

2.5 The proposed development is of a ‘split-level’ design, which provides an upper area where householders can deposit their recyclables and wastes into the containers below, and also provides a natural, physical separation between the operational area and the zones that are accessed by members of the public.

2.6 It is anticipated that the County Council’s Waste Management PFI Contactor (Donarbon) will take over management of the facility and operate it directly, or in the short term, via a sub-contract.

3.0 THE APPLICANT’S CASE

3.1 A copy of the Design and Access Statement is attached at Appendix 1. The application was also accompanied by numerous supporting documents, which can be viewed in the casefile.

4.0 THE SITE AND ITS ENVIRONMENT

4.1 The site, which extends to 1.65 hectares, is located off Stirling Way which in turn is off Witchford Road and is currently agricultural land (grade 2). The surrounding area is predominantly rural. The Lancaster Way Business Park lies to the south and east of the site.

5.0 PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 No planning history.

6.0 RECOMMENDATION

6.1 That Members recommend a response to the Executive Director / Head of Planning & Sustainable Development.

Agenda Item 8 – Page 2 APPENDICES

 Appendix 1 - Design and Access Statement  Appendix 2 - Report & minutes from Strategic Development Committee 1/9/08

Background Documents Location(s) Contact Officer(s)

08/03009/CCA Room No. 011 Lucie Turnell The Grange Team Leader Development Ely Control 01353 665555 [email protected]

Agenda Item 8 – Page 3 APPENDIX 2 REPORT& MINUTES FROM STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE 1/9/08

TITLE: CAMBRIDGESHIRE AND PETERBOROUGH MINERALS AND WASTE PLAN - CONSULTATION ON PREFERRED OPTIONS

Committee: Strategic Development Committee

Date: 1 September 2008

Author: Executive Director, Development Services

1.0 ISSUES

1.1 To formulate this Council’s response to consultation on the draft Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste Plan (Preferred Options).

1.2 The consultation documents are due to be published on 8 September 2008 for a six-week period of consultation with the public and stakeholders. However, due to Committee timetables it will not be possible to take a full report to Committee during this period – and it is therefore proposed that the Council’s response is formulated in line with previous comments made by , and in conjunction with the Chair/Vice Chairman and Spokesperson of this Committee.

2.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 It is recommended that:

i. Previous comments made by this Council (see Appendix 1 to this report) are used to form the basis of the Council’s response to the forthcoming draft Minerals and Waste Plan

ii. This Council’s response to the draft Minerals and Waste Plan is delegated to the Executive Director Development Services in consultation with the Chair/Vice Chairman and Spokesperson of the Strategic Development Committee

3.0 COSTS

3.1 None identified.

4.0 OPTIONS

4.1 To approve the recommendations or not.

Agenda Item 8 – page 39 5.0 ARGUMENT AND CONCLUSIONS

Production of the Minerals and Waste Plan

5.1 Cambridgeshire County Council and Peterborough City Council are in the process of producing a new Minerals and Waste Plan for the county. This Plan will set the framework for all minerals and waste developments over the next 15 to 20 years. The Plan will help to ensure that sufficient construction materials are available to support growth, and that sustainable waste management is in place for existing and new communities.

5.2 The County Council and Peterborough City Council first consulted on a series of preferred options for the Minerals and Waste Development Documents at the end of 2006. This Council’s response is attached at Appendix 1 to this report. The proposals proved to be contentious, and a number of significant technical issues were raised by stakeholders. Subsequently, an extended timetable was agreed, allowing time for the preparation of new technical studies – and consultation on preferred options is now being undertaken again. The forthcoming consultation papers will consist of:

 Core Strategy (Preferred Options) – setting out the strategic vision and objectives and a range of development control policies to guide minerals and waste development

 Site Specific Policies (Preferred Options) - setting out site specific proposals and policies for minerals and waste development

 Earith/ Area Action Plan (Preferred Options) – setting out a comprehensive strategy for minerals and waste activity in this area, and other strategic objectives which can be delivered through these activities (e.g. sustainable flood management and large scale habitat creation to complement the Ouse Washes)

 Draft Earith/Mepal Masterplan – providing additional detail to the Area Action Plan, and which will eventually be adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document to the Minerals and Waste Plan.

5.3 The above papers are due to be published for consultation with stakeholders and the public on 8 September 2008, for a six-week period. The remainder of the Plan timetable is summarised below:

 Submission to Government - September/October 2009  Examination in Public - May 2010  Receipt of Inspectors Report – October 2010  Adoption - December 2010.

Agenda Item 8 – page 40 East Cambridgeshire District Council’s response

5.4 This Councils’ response to the preferred options consultation in 2006 is attached as Appendix 1 to this report. In summary, whilst the Council gave general support to the emerging Core Strategy, concerns were raised about site-specific issues relating to:

 Potential traffic and environmental implications of minerals proposals in the draft Earith/Mepal Area Action Plan  Amenity implications of proposed bulk waste facility at Lancaster Way Business Park, and at the inert waste landfill at Kennett and Mepal Airfield  Traffic implications of proposed sand and gravel extraction in Cottenham area

5.5 It is proposed that this Council’s consultation response to the forthcoming draft Minerals and Waste Plan (Preferred Options) should be informed by these previous comments, and developed by officers as recommended at para 2.1 to meet the County’s consultation deadline.

6.0 APPENDICES

6.1 Appendix A - Report F248 – The Cambridgeshire And Peterborough Waste and Minerals Plan - Preferred Options Consultation considered by the Strategic Development Committee on 12 December 2006 containing this Council’s response.

Background Documents Location Contact Officer

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Room 009 Katie Child Minerals and Waste Plan documents The Grange Principal Forward Planning available at the following link to the Ely Officer County’s website: (01353) 616245 E-mail: http://www.Cambridgeshire.gov.uk/ [email protected] envionrment/planning/policies/minerals/ mineralsandwastedevelopmentscheme.htm

Agenda Item 8 – page 41 APPENDIX A THE CAMBRIDGESHIRE AND PETERBOROUGH WASTE AND MINERALS PLAN - PREFERRED OPTIONS CONSULTATION

To: Strategic Development Committee

Date: 12th December 2006

From: David Archer, Executive Director, Development Services [F248]

1.0 ISSUE

1.1 To formulate our response to the consultation on the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Waste and Minerals Plan. Full details of the Plan are available at the Council offices and local libraries and at the County’s web site link:

http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/environment/planning/policies/minerals/preferred optionsconsultation.htm

1.2 Cambridgeshire County Council and Peterborough City Council have now jointly prepared a new draft of the Minerals and Waste Plan. This Plan will be vital in ensuring that construction materials are available to support planned growth in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, and that sustainable waste management is in place for existing and planned new communities. It sets out the Councils’ preferred options in terms of policies which will guide minerals and waste development until 2021, and includes site specific proposals.

1.3 A presentation will be made to the Committee by County Council’s lead officers including a brief update of the responses received following the public exhibitions and meetings across the District.

1.4 The consultation period ends on the 18th December.

2.0 RECOMMENDATION

2.1 That this Council:

Supports the Core Strategy setting out the strategic vision, objectives and development control policies to guide the future management of Waste and Minerals across the County.

Express concerns about site-specific issues relating to the Earith/Mepal Action Area Plan, primarily the potential traffic impact on the local road network passing through Sutton, Haddenham and and the environmental impact on the internationally recognised Ouse Washes.

Routing agreements should be sought as part of a wider package of measures to safeguard residential amenity. Such agreements must however be realistic and enforceable if they are to maintain public credibility. Agreements should also restrict times of movement (avoiding weekends and evenings). If this proposal is Agenda Item 8 – page 42 considered to be acceptable, then opportunities for securing habitat improvement including recreational uses must be given priority over restoration to agricultural use.

Support the development of a “state-of-the-art” Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC) at Witchford (App 3 refers) but express concerns about the proposed bulk transfer facility because of the possible adverse impact on the adjacent Business Park and local residents.

The proposals for inert waste landfill at Kennet and at the former Mepal airfield at Sutton will impact on local residents and this needs mitigation.

The Ely railhead is understandably being safeguarded but concerns must be expressed if this results in waste and minerals imports or exports and especially if this generates significant Heavy Commercial Vehicle (HCV) traffic on the congested local road network along the A142 Causeway and across the railway crossing to Station Road and Angel Drove to the A10 south of Ely.

Finally, the District Council is concerned about proposals at Cottenham for sand and gravel extraction. Although this site lies in South Cambridgeshire, it adjoins this District and would be likely to access the A10 via the existing quarry access. The A10 is an important gateway to Ely and the north of the District as well as a busy commuting route. The A10 is currently operating far beyond its design capacity particularly during peak periods. This Council would be extremely concerned to see any significant increase in HCV movements along the A10 without significant improvements to this congested road. A point that also applies to the Earith/Mepal proposals if HCVs are routed via the A142 and the A10.

3.0 OPTIONS

 To approve the recommendations at para 2 above, and  To capture any views Members have, and  To make additional comments in the context of emerging views from Parish Councils and the local communities affected by the site-specific proposals.

4.0 BACKGROUND

4.1 Attached at App 1 is a brief summary of the proposals.

4.2 Attached at App 2 is the list and maps of the preferred sites with those in our District highlighted.

4.3 Attached at App 3 is a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) briefing note about the proposed HWRC facility at Witchford.

4.4 Briefly, the Cambridgeshire County Council and Peterborough City Council Minerals and Waste Plan comprises three Development Plan Documents (DPDs): Core Strategy: a document setting out the strategic vision and objectives, and including a suite of development control policies to guide minerals and waste development.

Agenda Item 8 – page 43 Site Specific Policies: Document setting out site specific proposals for mineral and waste development and supporting site specific policies.

Earith / Mepal Area Action Plan: this sets proposals for the Earith / Mepal area, where there are interrelated minerals and waste issues to consider. There are also other issues such as transport, flood protection, and opportunities to make sustainable use of land and water resources, including improving the quality of the Ouse Washes through providing flood alleviation, mineral extraction and comprehensive quarry restoration.

There are also a number of supporting background documents:

Sustainability Appraisals: one for each of the 3 main Plan documents. These reports, undertaken by independent consultants, appraise the Plans against a set of sustainability objectives - economic, social and environmental.

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Proposed Minerals and Waste Sites Issues and Options stage – Landscape Assessment: This study undertaken by LDA Design includes an assessment of likely landscape capacity i.e. the extent to which each suggested site could accommodate minerals and waste development without significant effect to its character or that of the wider area. It also takes into account the practice of mitigation and reinstatement. There are two supporting maps showing environmental constraints for suggested minerals & waste sites.

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste Development Plan Document Ecological Appraisal of Potential Sites: This study, undertaken by RPS is an ecological appraisal of suggested sites put forward for the Minerals and Waste Plan. Stage 1: is a desktop ecological appraisal of records available Stage 2: is a report of site visits to assess the potential of sites to support habitats and species of conservation importance. (Appendix 4 contains Phase 1 Survey Maps of the sites) Stage 1&2 Conclusions: presents a summary and qualitative assessment of data presented in stages 1 & 2.

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals Background Paper – Minerals Statistics: This background paper explains the source of statistics and the methodology that has been used to forecast mineral requirements over the Plan period, which is 2003 to 2021 (inclusive).

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Statistical Basis for the Waste Development Document: This report, undertaken by Jacobs Babtie, models agreed assumptions and scenarios for waste provisions against national and regional targets, to determine the type and quantities of waste that will be arising over the Plan period, the amount that will need to be managed, and indicative numbers and types of facilities required.

Appropriate Assessment: A report which examines the potential impact of preferred options for minerals and waste development on internationally designated wildlife sites (Natura 2000 sites). This is the preliminary stage of an Appropriate Assessment; further work may be required at later stage as the Plan progresses.

Agenda Item 8 – page 44 5.0 ARGUMENTS/CONCLUSIONS

5.1 Briefly, in and around our District there are proposals for sand and gravel extraction at Block Fen/Langwood Fen Mepal including inert waste landfill at Block Fen and also at the former Mepal Airfield at Sutton and Kennet, specialist clay extraction at Burwell brick pits and specialist limestone extraction at Dimmock's Cote Quarry Wicken. There are proposals for recycling facilities at Station Road Fordham and household waste recycling facilities and bulk transfer at Witchford Road Witchford. Finally, there are proposals for safeguarding railheads at the European Metal Recycling site at Snailwell and at the Queen Adelaide railhead at Ely.

5.2 The Core Strategy sets out the strategic vision, objectives and the development control policies to guide the future management of waste and minerals across the County and in the context of managing the growth agenda this is supported.

5.3 However, there are understandable concerns about site-specific issues relating to the Earith/Mepal Action Area Plan, primarily the potential traffic impact on the local road network passing through Sutton, Haddenham and Wilburton and the environmental impact on the internationally recognised Ouse Washes. Routing agreements should be sought as part of a wider package of measures to safeguard residential amenity. Such agreements must be realistic and enforceable if they are to maintain public credibility. Agreements should also restrict times of movement (avoiding weekends and evenings). If this proposal is considered to be acceptable, then opportunities for securing habitat improvement including recreational uses must be given priority over restoration to agricultural use.

5.4 In the context of growth in and around Ely and the closure of the Grunty Fen site, it is necessary to have a “state-of-the-art” household waste recycling centre in the vicinity and in response to the guiding proximity principle a site at Witchford next to the Lancaster way Business Park is the preferred solution (App 3 refers). This is supported provided that it is of such quality so that it does not detract from the existing nearby businesses or the marketing of the Business Park and nearby residents of Witchford. Concerns must also be expressed about the impact of the proposed bulk transfer facility on this area.

5.5 The proposals for inert waste landfill at Kennet and at the former Mepal airfield at Sutton will have to be sensitively managed in close proximity to nearby residents.

5.6 Finally, the District Council is concerned about proposals at Cottenham for Sand and Gravel/Clay extraction. Although this site lies in South Cambridgeshire, it adjoins this District and would be likely to access the A10 via the existing quarry access. The A10 is an important gateway to Ely and the north of the District as well as a busy commuting route. The A10 is currently operating far beyond its design capacity particularly during peak periods. This Council would be extremely concerned to see any significant increase in HCV movements along the A10 without significant improvements to this congested road. A point that also applies to the Earith/Mepal proposals if HCVs are routed via the A142 and the A10.

5.7 It is recommended that these issues form the basis of the District Council’s response to this consultation.

Agenda Item 8 – page 45 Background Documents Location Contact Officer

The Cambridgeshire and Room 007 David Archer Peterborough Waste and The Grange Executive Director Development Minerals Plan – Preferred Ely Services Options Consultation (01353) 616225 documents. E-mail: [email protected]

Agenda Item 8 – page 46 APP 1: Executive Summary of Main Proposals: i) Background

The new Minerals and Waste Local Development Framework will consist of a number of Local development Documents. The three documents, which are the subject of this report, relate to officer recommendations initially seeking Member feedback in respect of the Preferred Options for the Core Strategy, Site Specific Proposals Plan and the Earith / Mepal Action Area Plan Documents. In preparing the new minerals and waste documents officers have had regard to national, regional and local planning policies and the views of stakeholders and the public following comments received on the Issues and Options consultations. ii) Public Consultation on Issues and Options:

There was a substantial response to the public consultation, which highlighted a number of controversial issues. In particular the suggested Area of Search for a replacement Waste Water Treatment Works for Cambridge at Honey Hill (Fen Ditton/Horningsea) and the potential siting of a Household Waste Recycling Centre at Glebe Farm on the Cambridge Southern Fringe generated considerable local concerns. All representations have been taken into account in drafting the preferred options. iii) Overall Proposals:

The proposals in the Preferred Options plan will meet all anticipated needs for minerals and waste management facilities up to 2021. The proposals seek to achieve the best balance of environmental, social and economic factors in the interests of sustainable development. In the interests of sustainable transport the plan suggests that wider use should be made of existing freight transport infrastructure (railheads and port) for the movement of minerals and waste in the future iv) Mineral Extraction Proposals:

In respect of the future extraction of aggregate minerals for the construction industry it is recommended that some 30 million tonnes of sand and gravel bearing land be released for mineral extraction to meet the needs of the growth agenda in the Plan area. Future gravel extraction is to be primarily concentrated in fen areas notably near Whittlesey (in association with brick clay), Block Fen, Mepal and Cottenham. One site at Little Paxton is also included, as the last extension to an existing quarry, which once completed will become a large nature conservation area with public access Given that there are adequate reserves of limestone, no additional allocations for limestone extraction are being made. v) Block Fen, Mepal:

Very significant levels of future mineral extraction are expected to be undertaken at Block Fen, Mepal where officers are advocating a unique approach to quarry restoration, which would result in the creation of large water storage areas adjacent to the internationally recognised nature conservation area of the Ouse Washes. Creation of water storage reservoirs through mineral extraction is being

Agenda Item 8 – page 47 recommended as the means of managing future flooding so that the ecological value of the Ouse Washes can be safeguarded and improved in the long term. vi) Minerals – Barrington:

Cement is another essential commodity in the construction industry and following the withdrawal of a much larger controversial scheme for a new kiln and related major quarry, a small extension to the Barrington Quarry is being recommended for inclusion in the plan in order to balance the chemical properties of the wider long- term mineral reserve. vii) Minerals – Other specialist requirements:

Other extensions to specialist mineral operations at Steeple Morden, Burwell and near Wicken are recommended for inclusion in the plan to maintain a steady supply of mineral to end users over the lifetime of the plan. viii) Minerals – Phasing out of extraction in Earith/Somersham area:

Whilst meeting the future needs of the construction industry from other parts of the County it is recommended that sand and gravel operations in the Earith/Somersham areas be phased out due to access difficulties, which are unlikely to be resolved. ix) Waste Management Proposals:

With over 80 million tonnes of waste predicted to be managed over the next 15 years it is clear that the future management of waste will be a major challenge. Despite the increasing pressure for effective management of nonhazardous waste, officers are recommending that no new provision need be made for landfill. Instead a major shift in favour of new network of waste recycling and recovery plants is suggested to deal with waste generated within the county. The Site Specific Proposals plan identifies 25 new sites to deliver more sustainable waste management across a range of waste streams. A number of temporary recycling sites, notably at Flint Cross and Warboys, are recommended to become permanent facilities whilst a number of smaller facilities should be also be expanded so that they can recycle more or a wider range of material in the future e.g. Whitemoor Yard, March. x) Apportionment of London’s Waste:

The precise requirement to accommodate waste from London has yet to be confirmed through the Regional planning process. However, initial studies suggest that the requirement could be increased from the current assumption of 3 million tonnes to 5.7 million tonnes over the plan period. There is sufficient capacity to accommodate such levels but there will need to be very clear safeguards ensuring sustainable transport is available and that only treated residues are imported for landfill. xi) Household Waste Recycling Centres:

Agenda Item 8 – page 48 To encourage more recycling of household waste the establishment of an enhanced network of Household Waste Recycling Centres to serve existing and future population is recommended. These should be sited in major areas of new development, the majority of which would involve the use of brownfield land. xii) Waste Management in Cambridge Southern Fringe/ Glebe Farm and other major developments:

To serve the Cambridge Southern fringe development area the reuse of a former water treatment works off A10 near Hauxton is recommended. If this site can be secured it would mean that Glebe Farm would not be required for waste management purposes and could be allocated for residential or other urban uses. For other major development areas suitable sites for household waste recycling should be identified through the master planning process. xiii) Hazardous Waste:

Whilst Cambridgeshire is not a large-scale producer of waste with hazardous properties for some wastes such as asbestos, recycling or treatment is not an option and consequently an extension of the existing hazardous waste landfill site taking stable and non-reactive waste as part of quarry restoration near Thornhaugh, Peterborough has been suggested. Dealing with other difficult wastes such as infectious clinical waste this is best done close to the source and the plan would make provision for replacement on-site at Addenbrookes Hospital of the existing energy to waste plant, which incinerates clinical waste and provides heating for the hospital. xiv) Relocation of Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Works:

The approval of the Cambridge City Local Plan has confirmed that a new location will be required for the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Works if the planned redevelopment of the Cambridge Northern Fringe is to proceed. The very high level of local concern has been taken into account, but it was not possible to find a more favourable Area of Search than Honey Hill. However the detailed location identified within the Area of search is at the eastern edge, the most distant from either Fen Ditton or Horningsea villages. Any new works will need to be modern, high quality, integrated into the landscape and with full environmental mitigation. xv) Inert Waste:

The construction sector is expected to generate significant volumes of inert waste from new house building and the plan proposes that after recycling, residues can assist in quarry restoration, particularly in the Block Fen, Mepal area.

Agenda Item 8 – page 49 APP 2 : Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste Plan Preferred Sites

Minerals:

Sand & Gravel Extraction:

Wimblington Little Paxton * Cottenham Pode Hole, Thorney Maxey * Block Fen / Langwood Fen, Mepal Kings Delph, Whittlesey Must Farm, Whittlesey * * resolution to grant consent has already been given, subject to completion of a legal agreement.

Brick Clay Extraction:

Must Farm / Crick’s Farm, Whittlesey Kings Delph, Whittlesey

Chalk Marl Extraction:

Barrington Quarry, Barrington

Specialist Chalk Extraction:

Station Quarry, Steeple Morden

Specialist Clay Extraction: Burwell Brickpits, Burwell

Specialist Limestone Extraction:

Dimmock’s Cote Quarry, Wicken

Waste:

Mixed Waste Stream Recycling Facilities:

ADAS, Woodhurst, Huntingdon

Adjacent A1, Alconbury Alconbury Airfield, Alconbury Cambridge North West Cambridge Northern Fringe (East) Former Dogsthorpe Brickworks, Dogsthorpe Hampton, Peterborough Kings Dyke / Saxon Brickpits, Whittlesey

Agenda Item 8 – page 50 Land off Storey’s Bar Road, Fengate London Road, Peterborough March Trading Park, March Puddock Hill, Warboys Station Road, Fordham South of Newmarket Road, Cambridge Station Farm, Buckden The Carrops, Red Lodge

Single Stream Recycling Facilities:

Alconbury Airfield, Alconbury Cambridge North West Cambridge Northern Fringe (East) Former Dogsthorpe Brickworks, Dogsthorpe Hampton, Peterborough Kings Dyke / Saxon Brickpits, Whittlesey Land off Storey’s Bar Road, Fengate London Road, Peterborough March Trading Park, March Station Farm, Buckden Station Road, Fordham South of Newmarket Road, Cambridge The Carrops, Red Lodge Whitemoor, March

In Vessel Composting Facilities:

ADAS, Woodhurst, Huntingdon Adjacent A1, Alconbury Alconbury Airfield, Alconbury Former Dogsthorpe Brickworks, Dogsthorpe Hampton, Peterborough Kings Dyke / Saxon Brickpits, Whittlesey Land off Storey’s Bar Road, Fengate London Road, Peterborough March Trading Park, March Puddock Hill, Warboys Station Farm, Buckden The Carrops, Red Lodge

Inert Waste Recycling Facilities:

ADAS, Woodhurst, Huntingdon Adjacent A1, Alconbury Bridgefoot Quarry, Flint Cross Former Dogsthorpe Brickworks, Dogsthorpe Great Wilbraham Kings Dyke / Saxon Brickpits, Whittlesey Langwood Fen Farm, Mepal London Road, Peterborough Needingworth Quarry (temporary facility linked to quarry)

Agenda Item 8 – page 51 Puddock Hill, Warboys Station Road, Fordham The Carrops, Red Lodge Whitemoor, March

Energy from Waste facilities (if Waste Scenario 3 is developed):

Former Dogsthorpe Brickworks, Dogsthorpe Hampton, Peterborough Kings Dyke / Saxon Brickpits, Whittlesey Land off Storey’s Bar Road, Fengate London Road, Peterborough March Trading Park

Specialist Facilities (dealing with hazardous waste):

Addenbrookes Hospital (Clinical waste management facility, incorporating energy from waste) Brookfield Business Centre, Cottenham (Malary Environmental - facility managing waste oils and fuel)

HWRC (& Bulking up transfer facility):

Cambridge North West Cambridge Northern Fringe Former Bayer Crop Science (West), Hauxton Northstowe Station Road, Fordham St Neots (it has not possible to identify a suitable site) South of Newmarket Road, Cambridge South Peterborough (no specific site identified, though a need exists within the southern part of Peterborough. The preferred options allocations at London Road and Hampton would potentially be suitable) Witchford Road, Witchford New Technology :

The accommodation of new technology is not precluded, but until the nature of any technology is known potential sites cannot be identified

Stable Non-Reactive Hazardous Waste Landfill:

Thornhaugh I, Thornhaugh

Inert Waste Landfill:

Former Mepal Airfield, Sutton Great Wilbraham Woolpack Farm, Hemingford Grey Kennet Block Fen, Mepal (Area of search identified in the Earith / Mepal Area Action Plan)

Agenda Item 8 – page 52 Waste Water Treatment Works:

Honey Hill, Horningsea / Fen Ditton

Safeguarded Railheads / Transport Protection Zones:

Barrington Cement Works Railhead Bourges Boulevard Rail Sidings, Peterborough Cambridge Northern Fringe (Aggregates Railheads) European Metal Recycling, Snailwell Queen Adelaide Railhead, Ely Whitemoor, March Wisbech Port

Notes: • In some instances these sites will be new and others will be extensions to existing sites

• Safeguarded areas and consultation zones may be used around existing and new sites.

Agenda Item 8 – page 53 APP 3: Witchford – Household Waste Recycling Centre – Your questions answered

Find out more about the proposals for a new Household Waste Recycling Centre to serve Ely and nearby villages

The information below has been drawn up to help you in formulating your response to the Minerals and Waste Plan – preferred Options Consultation. As part of this Plan, the County Council proposes to allocate Witchford for a new household waste recycling facility. This would be sited on land situated adjacent to the County Council’s highways depot, near Witchford.

Your views must be received by 18th December 2006, 5 pm, on the suggested proposals, as this is a formal process specified by the Government.

Important Note: No decision will be made on the content of the final minerals and waste plan until views from the current consultation have been fully considered.

Q1. What is a Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC)?

An HWRC is a facility provided by the County Council for residents to take bulky items of waste that cannot be included in the normal kerbside rubbish collection. This can include surplus furniture, beds, electrical goods, large cardboard boxes, tree roots and similar garden waste, car batteries etc.

The waste is separated and sorted, ready for transfer for processing and recycling elsewhere. Such sites help make local recycling easier and more efficient. It helps to minimise the risk of the environmental impacts associated with fly tipping.

Q2. Why do we need a new recycling facility here?

To meet the needs of the existing and future population a number of new household waste recycling centres are needed throughout the County. One of these needs to be sited so as to be convenient for users in the Ely area and outlying settlements as there is significant planned housing growth in the district, and because our only existing site at Grunty Fen is a temporary facility and will eventually close.

Q3. Have other sites for a new recycling facility been considered ?

The search for new permanent recycling facilities in the area commenced in 1998, with the initial stages of the preparation of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Waste Local Plan. During the consideration of the plan consideration was given to the suitability of industrial land for new recycling facilities at the following sites : Land at Angel Drove, near Ely

Lancaster Way Business Park and adjacent land

Elean Business Park, near Sutton

Due to concerns raised by the District Council that land at Angel Drove was only earmarked for light industrial/research and development uses this option was not pursued further, as the character of a HWRC is a general industrial use.

Agenda Item 8 – page 54 It was discovered that land near Sutton could not be developed for waste uses due to legal restrictions agreed between the owner and the District Council.

The land at Lancaster Way Business Park and adjacent land was the subject of consideration at the independent Examination of the Waste Local Plan in 2002. After reviewing the evidence the independent Inspector recommended that the land be allocated in the plan. The approved plan was published in 2003, which indicates that the land at Lancaster Way Business Park and adjacent land would be suitable in principle for use as a Household Waste Recycling Centre.

Q4. How does the new Preferred Option plan differ from the land allocation in 2003 Waste Local Plan?

In the new Preferred Options plan the earlier allocation to site new recycling facilities within the Lancaster Way Business Park has been recommended to be dropped due to deliverability issues.

However an area of land adjacent to the Business Park lying adjacent to the Council’s Highway depot near Witchford, has been identified in the Preferred Option plan by the County Council as the best location for a new Household Waste Recycling Centre to serve the needs of the Ely area and surrounding villages.

The site selection process indicated that this was on balance, the best site for this use in relation to a number of key factors including:

A good proximity to existing future demand for a waste recycling service for existing and new households. Part of the site is already in industrial use and close to an established industrial area Minimising conflicts with planning policies of the local council designed to restrict development in the open countryside The land is already identified for this purpose in an existing waste plan Avoiding major residential areas as immediate neighbours Easy access from an A class road (A142) for car and lorry traffic avoiding routes through local villages Capability of the site to support new landscaping to minimise visual impact No adverse impact on Public Rights of Way Site not located on an aquifer or within land liable to flood

Q5. What is proposed at Witchford?

Site - The area of land needed for a new Household Waste Recycling Centre building, vehicle circulation areas and extensive landscaping could occupy an area of approximately 1-2 hectares in size

Design - A new household waste recycling facility would be provided within a modern building. This is in contrast to the open-air concreted areas with waste skips and stairs provided in the past. The design is likely to feature a drive through area with access to areas to deposit household waste. These would be separated from areas used by lorries collecting the filled skips. Such a facility would reflect the Council’s new design guide for high quality, modern waste management facilities. An enclosed building will mean that there will be fully effective controls to prevent odour and minimise noise.

Agenda Item 8 – page 55 Operation - The operations on-site would be limited to the range of recycling facilities found on current household waste recycling centres (see Q1). No odour producing processes or composting or burning of waste would be carried out on the site.

Q6. Who would use this facility?

The site would only be used by current and future local residents of Ely and nearby villages in East Cambridgeshire wishing to dispose of bulky household waste. As a local recycling facility the site would not be used to handle imported waste from places like London.

Q7. Who would run the facility?

The County Council as the Waste Disposal Authority would own and build the facility whilst an approved contractor would manage the site on a day-to-day basis. The Council would be accountable to the community for operations at the facility.

Q8. When would it be open?

At present, most household waste recycling facilities are open during daylight hours (8am- 8pm), and more limited times during the winter months. As a modern indoor facility would be provided with low visual impact lighting and there may be less need for opening hours to be limited during winter months. However, the site would not operate overnight.

Q9. Will the impact of traffic and access be a major problem?

The only traffic that would visit the site are cars/vans owned by local residents and lorries accessing the site to collect the skips full of segregated waste materials. Council refuse collection vehicles would not use the site to deposit general household waste. The Council has assessed the potential traffic impacts on a future “worse case scenario” based on a maximum of 1,200 traffic movements (up to 600 deliveries) to the site on a daily basis. It is however very unlikely that, even with the future population increase, that such level of traffic usage would be experienced. As most traffic will use the site outside peak hours, there should be minimal risk of congestion.

Q10. Is anything else proposed on this site, such as a waste transfer building for waste awaiting long distance transport to treatment facilities elsewhere?

There would be no waste treatment on this site and there would be no separate waste transfer building. The County Council is in negotiation for an arrangement enabling waste to be treated elsewhere, possibly at a site near Waterbeach. Assuming this negotiation is successful, waste collected at the site would be taken direct to Waterbeach for treatment without the need for a bulking/transfer facility at the site. In the event that materials need to be taken further away for treatment and a waste transfer facility was required, the household waste recycling centre building would be enlarged to accommodate the additional operation. Therefore, only one building will be required in any circumstances.

Q11. How can I find out more?

Agenda Item 8 – page 56 Supporting documentation to the new minerals and waste plan has been prepared by the County Council. These documents can be inspected in Cambridge Central Library, council offices or can be viewed on the County Council’s website www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk.

For general enquiries please contact by telephone the County Council’s mineral and waste planning team on Cambridge (01223) 718723.

Q12. How do I make my views known?

This can be done using the online response forms on our website and send it to: [email protected]. Alternatively, you can print the response form from our web site and send it to:

Cambridgeshire County Council Development Control ET 1011 Castle Court Shire Hall Castle Hill Cambridge CB3 OAP

Agenda Item 8 – page 57 MINUTE FROM STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE 1/9/08

28. CAMBRIDGESHIRE AND PETERBOROUGH MINERALS AND WASTE PLAN – CONSULTATION ON PREFERRED OPTIONS

The Executive Director, Development Services, presented a report (H117), previously circulated, to formulate the Council’s response to consultation on the draft Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste Plan (Preferred Options).

The County Council and Peterborough City Council first consulted on a series of preferred options for the Minerals and Waste Development Documents at the end of 2006. The Councils’ response to the previous preferred options consultation in 2006 was attached to the officers report as Appendix 1. In summary, whilst the Council had given general support to the emerging Core Strategy, concerns were raised about site-specific issues relating to:

Potential traffic and environmental implications of minerals proposals in the draft Earith/Mepal Area Action Plan. Amenity implications of proposed bulk waste facility at Lancaster Way Business Park, and at the inert waste landfill at Kennett and Mepal Airfield. Traffic implications of proposed sand and gravel extraction in Cottenham area.

The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste Plan (Preferred Options) consultation documents were due to be published on 8 September 2008 for a six-week period. However, due to the Committee timetable it was not possible to take a full report to Committee during the consultation period. It was therefore proposed that the Council’s consultation response to the forthcoming draft Minerals and Waste Plan (Preferred Options) would be informed by those previous comments, including the issues raised during the Member Seminar, and developed by officers in consultation with the Chairman and the Vice Chairman of the Strategic Development Committee, and the Liberal Democrat spokesperson of the Strategic Development Committee.

Cllr Allen clarified that bullet point 3 of Paragraph 2.1 of the Appendix; regarding bulk transfer facility was no longer applicable. Cllr Allen requested that the consultation response include that lorry movement transporting inert waste to the Grunty Fen, Wilburton site, be routed via the A10 not through Witchford.

Cllr F Brown stated that to assist with the alleviation of road traffic there should be emphasis on delivering alternate methods of transportation of waste and that the waste should not solely be transported via road.

Cllr D Brown requested that the consultation response include that agricultural restoration should be given overriding weight in the restoration of the quarries and that support be expressed for the specialist mineral extraction operations in Burwell.

Cllr G Wilson expressed strong concerns regarding the potential impact of gravel and landfill traffic passing through East Cambridgeshire villages en route to the growth sites around Cambridge and the affect this would have on the residents living in the villages.

Agenda Item 8 – page 58 Cllr Allen explained that the Planning Committee would be considering an application for the extension of Lancaster Way Business Park at its next meeting. County Council Highways had objected to the application for reasons including that the scale of traffic generated would be similar to Mereham. When such applications were submitted the local planning authority should be insisting on financial contributions to improve local highway infrastructure.

The recommendations as set in the report were accepted, with the inclusion of the Member comments.

It was resolved:

i. That previous comments made by the Council (see Appendix 1 of the officers report) be used to form the basis of the Council’s response to the forthcoming draft Minerals and Waste Plan, with the inclusion of the following:

Earith- Mepal Action Area Plan

Strong concern expressed on potential impact of gravel and landfill traffic passing through East Cambridgeshire villages en route to the growth sites around Cambridge.

Consider that agricultural restoration should be given overriding weight in the restoration of the quarries. Sceptical of biodiversity or recreational objectives and more wetlands.

Consideration should be given to more sustainable forms of transport

 Gravel/waste companies should pay levy to improve local highway infrastructure

Site Specific

Support offered to operations of Burwell Brick and Tile near Burwell

Any deliveries to stable non reactive hazardous waste to Grunty Fen should be via direct link to A10 north of . No Heavy Commercial Vehicle access via Witchford village.

ii. The Strategic Development Committee delegated the Council’s response to the draft Minerals and Waste Plan to the Executive Director, Development Services, in consultation with the Chairman and the Vice Chairman of the Strategic Development Committee, and the Liberal Democrat spokesperson of the Strategic Development Committee.

The Chairman expressed appreciation to David Atkinson and Emma Fitch of Cambridgeshire County Council for the presentation to the Member Seminar and for attending the meeting for the relating agenda item.

Agenda Item 8 – page 59