179 Agenda Item 11
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATORY BOARD
9TH OCTOBER 2014
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
COUNTY MATTER
PART A – SUMMARY REPORT
APP. NO. & DATE: 2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – 18 th August 2014
PROPOSAL: Proposed extension to existing recycling facility for the erection of a new Waste Transfer Station with additional vehicle parking area for HGVs, 2.4m high fencing to the site and additional lighting columns.
LOCATION: Waste recycling facility, off Linden Way, Coalville (North West Leicestershire District).
APPLICANT: Leicestershire County Council.
MAIN ISSUES: Highway safety, noise, odour, loss of local amenity and impacts upon Coalville Urban Forest Park.
RECOMMENDATION: PERMIT subject to the 8 conditions as set out in the appendix to the main report.
Circulation Under the Local Issues Alert Procedure
Dr. T. Eynon, CC
Officer to Contact
Mr. P. Bond (Tel. 0116 305 7325) Email: [email protected]
180
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
PART B – MAIN REPORT
Description of application site and proposed development
1. North West Leicestershire District Council (NWLDC) currently operates a facility off Linden Way for the bulking up of household recyclable waste. Linden Way is an industrial cul-de-sac accessed from Ashby Road. Many district council HGVs are also parked at the site when not in use. The site is located directly to the north of the County Council’s civic amenity site.
2. The existing site is bounded to the south by the County Council’s civic amenity site, to the north and west by the Coalville Urban Forest Park (UFP) and to the east by a vacant industrial plot of land. The nearest residential properties are located about 120 metres to the south along Ashby Road, with newer housing about 170 metres to the west, beyond the urban park, along Discovery Close. The houses to the south of the site are generally screened from the site by existing industrial development and those to the west are partially screened from the site by existing vegetation within the UFP. The Coalville Conservation Area is located about 100 metres to the east of the proposed site.
3. This proposal is for an extension to the existing site northwards in to the UFP to provide a new Waste Transfer Station (WTS) building, additional HGV parking and a new security fence around the extension. The UFP (and the existing site) has been created on the site of a former landfill site which was restored and opened up to the public.
4. It is proposed to erect a new building where household residual waste would be delivered by refuse collection vehicles (RCVs) and bulked up for onward treatment/disposal at appropriate sites. The building would consist of a steel portal frame and measure 31.5m by 23.5m and be 11.5m high at the ridge of its roof. It is proposed to clad the walls and the roof with a Goosewing Grey (10 A 05) finish with eight rooflights to be fitted to allow natural light into the building. There would be three vehicular entrances with roller shutter doors and a separate personnel door on the western elevation of the building. Pre-cast concrete wall units will form a ‘push wall’ around the base of the north, east and south-west sides of the new building and if required, 3m pre-cast concrete A- frames will be utilised within the proposed WTS to create designated tipping bays.
5. The erection of the new building would lead to the loss of several HGV parking bays on the existing site and it is proposed that additional HGV parking be provided as part of this application. NWLDC parks its RCVs and other public service vehicles at the site and wishes to ensure that this capability is carried forward. The current northern fence-line would also be moved northwards to accommodate the larger site. The new fence would be 2.4m high and be galvanised steel palisade fencing or similar.
6. The applicant states that the new WTS would be expected to manage an annual throughput of up to 35,000 tonnes of residual waste. This is likely to lead to an increase of 108 HGV movements to the site per week based on current waste arisings and housing stock.
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 181
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 182
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
7. The applicant predicts the following additional daily HGV movements: • 2 no. Recycling & Household Waste Site vehicle; • 10 no. HGV collections to transport the bulked up waste; and • 12 no. RCVs (4 days per week). It is also anticipated that some deliveries may occur on weekends, particularly on those weekends immediately prior to a bank holiday.
8. The applicant states that suitable piling/ground improvement techniques will be utilised beneath the building stanchion to provide appropriate support for the structure. Suitable control measures would be utilised to prevent contamination from gas and leachate.
9. All liquid generated from within the new building will be directed by the floor slab grading to a dish channel flowing to either a sump located within the building or the foul drainage system with appropriate interceptor. Surface water drainage would be connected to the local surface water system via an interceptor and drain the hard standing HGV parking provision area, together with the access/exit ramp area and water from the new WTS roof.
10. The applicant is proposing the following hours of use for the facility, which mirror the current operational hours on the existing site:
• Monday to Friday – 06:00 to 18:00 – throughout the year • Weekend and Bank Holidays – Deliveries of RHWS waste material and out of hours street sweepings deliveries.
11. The applicant states that presently, NWLDC delivers all of its kerbside residual waste (approximately 22,000 tonnes per annum (TPA)) to the New Albion Landfill site at Moira. However, the current planning permission for this facility expires at the end of 2014. The applicant is proposing the new facility in order to mitigate future landfill tax exposure, provide operational cost savings and provide better disposal options for residual waste in the light of the current situation at New Albion. The proposed facility is expected to provide the following benefits: • reduce the proportion of residual waste sent to landfill (in accordance with the Best Practicable Environmental Option); • provide LCC with the opportunity to transport residual waste to more cost effective and sustainable waste treatment/disposal facilities; • provide increased flexibility to meet future local waste management needs by providing a centrally located WTS for NWLDC refuse collection crews to use i.e. minimising time taken to travel to the disposal facility; • reduce overall vehicle emissions and resulting carbon footprint; • reduce transportation costs; and • reduce damage to NWLDC refuse collection vehicles (RCVs) caused by travelling over waste on active landfill sites.
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 183
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
12. The northerly extension of the current site would take mean encroaching 23 metres northwards on to the Coalville UFP. A Tree Survey has been undertaken which determined that the development would result in the loss of the following vegetation and trees: • Young trees on a bunded area on average 1.5 m tall and comprising of: • Ash ( Fraxinus excelsior ) no. 15 • Mountain Ash ( Sorbus aucuparia ) no. 6 • Hawthorn ( Crataegus monogyna ) no. 17 • Scots Pine ( Pinus sylvestris ) no. 8 • Pedunculate Oak ( Quercus robur ) no. 19 • Alder ( Alnus glutinosa ) no. 15. • Older trees (c. 20 years) on the larger, flatter area approximately 4.5 to 6 m tall and comprising of: • Silver Birch ( Betula pendula ) no. 14 • Ash no. 30 • Pedunculate Oak no. 17 • Scots Pine no. 27 • Alder no. 24. The applicant goes on to state that these figures are an estimate. The Ecological Assessment carried out for the proposed development recommended that compensatory planting should be carried out with further planting of individual native tree and shrub species. These should be equal to or greater than those lost in the development of the WTS.
13. An Extended Phase-1 habitat survey was carried out in and around the application site. This survey helped guide the production of an Ecological Assessment. There are no previous records for protected or notable species for the site; however, there are records of great crested newt for the 2 km study area. The survey provided the following results: • Plants No specially protected or non-native/highly invasive species were recorded on the site. • Amphibians Great crested newts were thought to be highly likely to be using the site due to the possible connectivity of ponds on this site to those of Nature Alive where great crested newts are present. Therefore it would seem reasonable to suggest that other amphibians would be present too. • Badger Badgers were not identified to be using the site, and the surrounding urban landscape did not exhibit good potential habitat. However, a badger survey was undertaken as part of the survey suite for this site. • Bats Woodlands, trees and hedgerows surrounding the site provided some habitat for insects and therefore have possible potential for bat foraging and commuting opportunities. • Birds Woodlands trees, shrubs and hedgerows surrounding the site provided potential bird nesting habitat.
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 184
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
14. The Ecological Assessment concludes that the habitats recorded on the site are common but are considered to be of medium ecological value and important locally within the context of this widely urban environment. A habitat to the north of the site , Nature Alive, showed the presence of a good number of great crested newts (GCN) and the two sites may be linked. In the light of the foregoing, a newt survey was undertaken on ponds and other habitats within the UFP and no GCN were noted.
15. Habitat loss specific to bats is proposed, however this is not considered to have a deleterious effect on local bat populations. Therefore no specific mitigation or compensation is recommended by the Ecological Assessment. A variety of bird species may nest in the woodlands, trees, shrubs and hedgerows on the site. All birds with the exception of certain pest species are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) (as amended) whilst breeding. This legislation protects nests, eggs and unfledged young from damage or destruction. As the site provides nesting habitat for birds, site clearance, removal of any tree, shrub or climbing plant would be constrained by the bird breeding season, which runs from March-September inclusive. Mitigation, compensation, enhancement and a further nesting bird check are recommended in the Ecological Assessment.
Planning Policy
National Policies
16. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in March 2012 and sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. At its heart is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, a key aspect of which is good design. The NPPF confirms the statutory status of the development plan, however, it is a material consideration in decisions on planning applications.
17. Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (March 2011) gives advice on the delivery of sustainable waste management by moving the management of waste up the waste hierarchy. Annex E lists those factors that planning authorities should consider in testing the suitability of sites. Planning applications for sites that have not been identified, or are not located in an area identified, in a development plan document as suitable for new or enhanced waste management facilities should be considered favourably when consistent with the policies of PPS10, and the waste planning authority’s core strategy.
18. Waste Management Plan for England (December 2013) and draft updated National Waste Planning Policy: Planning for sustainable waste management (July 2013). The Waste Management Plan for England replaces the Waste Strategy for England 2007. The new document is required to ensure compliance with the new Waste Framework Directive is attained; this includes measures for Member States to prepare for re-use or recycle at least 50% by weight of waste from households. The publication states that the Government supports efficient energy recovery from residual waste – of waste that cannot be reused or
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 185
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
recycled – to deliver environmental benefits, reduce carbon impact and provide economic benefits. The Government’s aim is to get to the most energy out of waste – not to get the most waste into energy recovery. The draft updated National Waste Planning Policy is a streamlining of the current PPS10. The updated policy lays out how the Government sees positive planning delivering sustainable development.
Development Plan
19. The development plan in this instance consists of the Leicestershire, Leicester and Rutland Waste Local Plan (saved policies) (September 2002), the adopted Waste Development Framework Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Document (October 2009) and the saved policies of the North West Leicestershire District Local Plan (August 2002). The relevant policies and proposals are set out below.
Leicestershire, Leicester and Rutland Waste Local Plan
20. Saved Policy WLP 7 of the Leicestershire, Leicester and Rutland Waste Local Plan states that the assessment of all proposals for waste management development will take account ( inter alia ) of the following factors where appropriate:
(i) the nature of the material to be managed; (ii) the effect on, and relationship to, sensitive nearby land uses by reason of noise, dust, odour, litter, fumes, or any other potential nuisance, including reference to national and local air quality standards; (iii) the visual impact on the landscape and the surrounding area; (v) the effect on woodlands and on topographical features; (vi) transportation implications including the nature and volume of traffic likely to be generated by the proposed operation; (vii) the effect on statutory nature conservation sites and other sites of more local scientific interest; (viii) the effect on known archaeological features, ancient monuments or other sites and buildings of archaeological, historical or architectural interest and their setting; (xiv) the contribution that the proposed development makes to the implementation of the waste hierarchy; and (xv) the land use planning implications of monitoring and managing any leachate generated; (xviii) the provisions of the development plan and other guidance, being policies and proposals of local planning authorities and any relevant strategies. (xix) The benefits of the proposal in terms of employment generation, economic benefit and regeneration of disturbed land; (xxiii) implications for any proven mineral reserves adversely affected by the proposal; (xxiv) the siting and visual appearance of the buildings, plant, machinery or operations; (xxvi) the potential energy recovery to which the development will contribute.
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 186
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
Leicestershire and Leicester Waste Development Framework Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Document
21. Policy WCS1 states that the strategy for waste management capacity is to provide sufficient waste management capacity to manage the equivalent of the waste arising in the framework area and as a minimum achieve the targets for recycling, composting, reuse and landfill diversion set in the RSS and the Leicestershire Municipal Waste Strategy.
22. Policy WCS3 states that the strategy for non-strategic waste sites is to locate them within the Broad Locations indicated in the Key Diagram, in or around the urban areas of Hinckley or Melton Mowbray, within SUEs or within or adjacent to an existing waste facility where it can be demonstrated that that transport, operational and environmental benefits arise from co-location.
23. Policy WCS4 sets out the site-specific strategy for locating waste sites, which should be to locate sites in accordance with the objectives of Policies WCS2 and the following sequential approach:-
(i) priority one will be given to land with an existing waste management use, where transport, operational and environmental benefits can be demonstrated as a consequence of the co-location of waste management facilities; (ii) thereafter, priority, in no order of preference, will be given to: a) land forming part of new major development proposals; b) existing industrial/employment land; c) other previously-developed land; d) contaminated or derelict land; e) existing mineral workings; f) unused and under-used agricultural and forestry buildings and their curtilages; • finally, consideration will be given to greenfield sites,
providing that there is no unacceptable harm to the environment or communities.
24. Policy WCS5 states that the strategy for reuse, recycling, waste transfer and composting facilities is to allow new waste management development, provided the proposal does not cause unacceptable harm to the environment.
25. Policy WCS10 states that the strategy for environmental protection is to protect and enhance the natural and built environment of the framework area by ensuring that: (inter alia ) (i) there are no unacceptable adverse impacts from waste developments on: a) natural resources including water, air and soil; b) the character and quality of the landscape; c) biodiversity, including nationally and internationally important sites and the key habitats and species identified in relevant Biodiversity Action Plans; d) historic and cultural features of acknowledged importance; e) sites of geological interest;
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 187
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
f) the distinctive character and setting of settlements within the framework area; and g) residential amenity;
(ii) the highest standards of operational practice for the management, working, and where appropriate restoration and aftercare of sites are adopted; and
(iii) development is designed to a high standard, incorporates sustainable construction principles and includes appropriate landscaping.
26. Policy WCS11 states that the strategy for waste development within the National Forest outside the Charnwood Forest area is to reflect the National Forest Strategy by making provision, where appropriate, for the planting of woodlands, habitat creation, the creation of new leisure and tourism facilities and/or for public access.
27. Policy WCS14 states that the strategy for the transportation of waste is to locate new waste management developments ( inter alia ): (i) in close proximity to arisings in order to minimise the need to transport waste; or (ii) in close proximity to the County’s lorry route network and where road traffic generated by the development can avoid residential areas and minor roads in order to minimise the impact of transporting waste by road.
28. Policy WDC1: states that proposals for waste management development will be required to demonstrate that they have been designed to ensure impact on the environment is minimised by appropriate measures to: (i) reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other forms of pollution;
(ii) minimise levels of energy and water consumption; (iv) minimise production of waste during construction and operation; (v) maximise the re-use or recycling of materials; and (vi) protect and contribute positively to the character and quality of an area.
29. Policy WDC2 states that planning permission will not be granted for waste management development that would have significant adverse effects on sites of national historic importance or on their character, appearance and/or setting of sites of national importance, including: (i) Scheduled Ancient Monuments and other nationally importance archaeological sites; (ii) Historic parks and gardens, battlefields and historic landscapes; and (iii) Listed buildings, unless there are overriding reasons of national importance for development in that location that clearly outweigh the impacts that it is likely to have on the features of interest.
30. Policy WDC3 states that planning permission will not be granted for waste management development which would have a significant adverse effect on the
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 188
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
character, appearance, ecological, geological or amenity value of Sites of Regional and Local Importance, including: (i) Local Wildlife Sites (LWS); (ii) Local Nature Reserves; (iii) priority habitats or species identified in relevant Biodiversity Action Plans; (iv) special landscape areas and landscape features of importance; (iv) Regionally Important Geological Sites (RIGS); (vi) protected woodland areas; (vii) country parks, common land, village greens and other important areas of open space or green areas within built-up areas; (viii) conservation areas and locally listed buildings (including their setting); (ix) land or buildings in sport, recreational or tourism use; and (x) land that is of regional or local importance for wildlife corridors or for the conservation of biodiversity,
unless it can be demonstrated that there is an overriding need for the development and any impacts can be mitigated or compensated for, such that there is a net gain or improvement to their condition.
31. Policy WDC8 states that planning permission will not be granted for waste management development which is likely to generate unacceptable adverse effects from noise, dust, vibration, odour, emissions, illumination, visual intrusion or traffic to adjoining land uses and users and those in close proximity to the waste management development.
32. Policy WDC10 states that planning permission will not be granted for waste management facilities involving the transport of waste by road where: (i) there is a practicable alternative to road transport which would be environmentally preferable; (ii) the proposed access arrangements would be unsafe and inappropriate to the proposed development and the impact of the traffic generated would be detrimental to road safety to an unacceptable degree; and (iii) the highway network is unable to accommodate the traffic that would be generated and have an unacceptable impact on the environment of local residents.
North West Leicestershire District Local Plan
33. Policy E3 states that ‘development will not be permitted which, by reason of its scale, height mass, design, oppressiveness, proximity, noise, vibration, smell, fumes, soot, ash, dust, grit or excessive traffic generation, would be significantly detrimental to the amenities enjoyed by the occupiers of existing nearby dwellings.’
34. Policy E4 seeks to ensure that new developments respect the character of their surroundings in terms of scale, design, density, height, massing and materials of construction.
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 189
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
35. Policy F1 states that ‘new development within the boundaries of the National Forest, as identified on the Proposal Map, should reflect the importance of the National Forest context by making appropriate provision for landscaping and tree planting.’
36. Policy F2 states that ‘in seeking to maximise the potential for tree planting under Policy F1, and in assessing the appropriateness of the landscaping and planting schemes for individual development proposal within the Forest, the planning authority will have regard to: (a) the existing landscape character of the site and the surrounding area; (b) the extent to which the proposal achieves the relevant level of planting as set out in the guidelines (c) any physical, ecological or environmental constraints affecting the site; and (d) the scale, type and value of the development.’
Consultations
LCC – Highways Authority Advice
37. Linden Way does not have the status of adopted highway and the site does not have a frontage onto the highway. Information on the existing HGV flows and the likely flows as a result of the proposal are contained in the submitted Supporting information. On the basis of that report, there are approximately 54 HGV trips per day at the junction of Linden Way and C7210 Ashby Road and as a result of the proposal there will be an additional approximately 24 HGV trips per day.
38. Refuse collection vehicles are leaving from and returning to the site already under the existing planning consents at the site. Under the status quo, Linden Way serves several other existing commercial uses and a recreational use. There is not an existing accident record at the junction of Linden Way and Ashby Road and in its vicinity. Ashby Road is not subject to any weight restrictions.
39. Taking into consideration the above, the proposed HGV flows will not lead to a significant increase in queuing and congestion at the junction of Linden Way and Ashby Road. The proposal could not be regarded as leading to demonstrable harm to highway safety at this junction. Having considered the proposal, including visiting the site, the Highway Authority has no comment on this proposal as there are no outstanding highway issues to be resolved.
North West Leicestershire District Council – Planning
40. No objection subject to replacement planting taking place.
North West Leicestershire District Council – Environmental Health
41. No objection, subject to the imposition of conditions to protect the integrity of the historic landfill below the site.
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 190
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
Dr. T. Eynon, CC (local Member)
42. Formally requested that this application be determined by the Development Control and Regulatory Board due to concerns regarding possible impacts on the local highway as a result of more heavy traffic along the Ashby Road, which has a weight limit on it to reduce such traffic. Dr. Eynon considers the site far too near the homes on Ashby Road and only 300 metres crow fly from the centre of town. Dr. Eynon also considers that siting a waste transfer site metres from a conservation area is hardly going to help to regenerate Coalville.
Environment Agency
43. No objection subject to a condition relating to a scheme being required to ensure that piling works do not affect ground water.
National Forest
44. Note the loss of 0.15ha of woodland from the UFP and that the supporting statement sets out plans for compensatory planting in accordance with National Forest planting guidelines, with firm details to be determined at a later date. The NFC welcomes the commitment to undertake replacement planting, however to compensate for the loss of established and mature trees and the replacement with new planting, the NFC expects that the area of replacement planting to be twice that lost, i.e. 0.3ha. This is the approach that has been taken elsewhere in Coalville when development has been proposed on existing woodlands and grassland, for example the development of 5 dwellings at Trent Bridge (North West Leicestershire Planning Application reference 12/00911/OUT).
45. The NFC therefore requests that 0.3ha of replacement planting is required by condition or is secured through the s106 Agreement. This planting should ideally be located within Coalville where it can contribute to the greening of the town in a similar manner to those trees to be removed. The NFC considers that replacement planting should not be undertaken within the Urban Forest Park. The NFC also requests that the retained trees are suitably protected during the construction period. The NFC’s Guide for Developers and Planners sets out that in exceptional circumstances where tree planting cannot be accommodated then a financial contribution may be acceptable in lieu. Should the County Council be minded to accept this approach, the NFC considers that this should be calculated at £20,000 per hectare and therefore equate to £6,000. These funds would be used in conjunction with NWLDC to fund urban tree planting within Coalville.
Leicestershire County Council – Ecology Advice
46. While accepting that the loss of habitat is minor, raises concerns about the loss of an area of well-established planted woodland and further intrusion in to the open space and woodland created in the last twenty years. Raises further concerns regarding light spill from the proposed artificial lighting and wishes to see light emissions limited to no more than 1lux at the site boundary.
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 191
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
Leicestershire County Council – Landscape Advice
47. No objection but notes the following: the proposal to extend the site by 23.0m into the woodland will result in the loss of 0.16ha of 5-6 year old woodland edge planting on a low bund and 20 year old woodland of oak, ash silver birch and alder. The clearance of 0.16ha of woodland is an estimated 2.0% loss of public open space and 4.0% loss of woodland. The 0.16ha of woodland clearance will be screened by the existing young woodland and consequently will have little detrimental visual impact on the Urban Forest Park. The steel cladding of the walls and roof are to be painted with Goosewing grey 10A05. The proposed building is not overlooked by residential properties and would be 200m from Ashby Road. The top of the 5.0m of the building will initially be viewed from the permissive footpaths within the Urban Forest Park however it will eventually be fully screened by the existing trees in about 10 years. The urban woodland site is currently 53% wooded with the rest of the area taken up by a car park, play areas, hard surfaced paths and grassland. The balance between woodland and open areas on the Urban park are in my view currently satisfactory and new tree planting on this site is unlikely to bring any further public benefits.
Leicestershire County Council – Rights of Way
48. No comment.
Publicity
49. The proposal has been advertised by several site notices posted around the site and Linden Way on 19 th August 2014 and by an advertisement in the Coalville Times on 22 nd August 2014. One representation has been received within the prescribed timescale raising concerns about the proposed increase in heavy vehicle movements servicing the site along an already congested Ashby Road. Notes that Ashby Road is the main road in to Coalville, with new housing and All Saints Primary School within 300 metres from the site. Concerns also raised that all the waste may not be cleared from the site at the end of each day which could lead to odour problems. Also concerned about diesel fumes from plant within the building affecting employees’ health.
Assessment of Proposal
50. This application is seeking an extension to the existing waste transfer station off Linden Way, Coalville. The purpose of the extension is to erect a building specifically to receive residual household waste from RCVs and store it prior to it being exported for disposal/recovery in bulk loaders off site. The extended site would also provide replacement lorry parking which would be lost through the new building, additional artificial lighting columns and a new 2.4 fence line would be erected to provide security to the site.
51. The site is considered to be ‘non-strategic’ and is considered to be located in accordance with Policy WSC3 as it is within the Broad Locations for Strategic Sites identified in the Waste Core Strategy document and there are also likely to be co-locational benefits from building the new WTS as an extension to the
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 192
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
existing waste recycling facility. Notwithstanding this, the proposed site is on greenfield land and therefore is in the lowest tier of the sequential approach for locating waste sites required by Policy WCS4. For the development to comply with Policies WCS4 and WCS5, which generally supports applications for waste transfer developments, there has to be no unacceptable harm to the environment or communities.
52. The extension would involve the removal of around 190 trees previous planted on the site of a historic landfill site that was restored approximately 20 years ago, with tipping ceasing at the site long before that. An Ecological Assessment has been carried out that has confirmed that, despite the application site having the potential for great crested newts and other notable species, none have been identified as a result of on-site surveys. From an ecology perspective, the main issue relates to the potential for artificial lighting to have an unacceptable impact on bats foraging in and around the proposed site. The applicant has failed to provide a lux diagram demonstrating that proposed artificial lighting would be acceptable and therefore it is considered that this element of the proposal should be restricted by condition. Overall, it is considered that, subject to appropriate conditions, the proposed loss of trees and the new development would not have an unacceptable impact on biodiversity and protected species.
53. The loss of the 190 or so trees would clearly have an impact on the local landscape and users of the adjacent UFP. The site falls within the National Forest and specific policies therefore apply. The removal of the trees is not strictly contrary to the National Forest or other development plan policies, although there is a request from the National Forest Company (NFC) to replace the trees lost on a 2 for 1 basis (or a commuted some to cover the same). The replacement planting should be located within the Coalville urban area, but the NFC has specifically requested that it does not take place with the UFP itself. No specific replacement planting scheme has been identified and in this instance it is considered that a financial contribution should be made to the NFC for offsite tree planting in lieu of trees that would be lost as a result of this development. The NFC considers that a sum of £6,000 is appropriate in this instance and this sum is considered reasonable and acceptable. A condition should be imposed requiring this sum to be paid to the NFC prior to the first use of the development. Subject to this being the case, it is considered that the proposed development would not conflict with Policy WCS11 of the Waste Core Strategy and local plan Policies F1 and F2.
54. In terms of landscape impact, clearly the loss of 190 or so trees will have an impact. However, the trees to be removed are not mature and it is considered likely that some would need to be removed anyway as part of good maintenance to thin the planting out and allow the best trees to develop. The site would be extended northwards, but not along the full width of the northern boundary. An area of existing trees about 25m wide would remain to the west of the extension area and therefore trees would surround the extension on all sides except to the south and the existing site.
55. Therefore, while there would be some negative impacts on the local landscape from the removal of the 190 or so trees, it is considered that the site would be
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 193
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
adequately screened after the development, in particular from residential views from the west. The top of the building may be visible from within the UFP, although this would be seen along with other large industrial buildings in the area and it is considered that this impact would not be unacceptable, would not have a significant impact upon the Coalville Conservation Area and would not conflict with Policies WCS10 and WDC3 of the Waste Core Strategy and F1 and F2 of the local plan.
56. There would be an increase in HGV numbers associated with the site as a result of this development, although the Highway Authority has assessed this increase as being acceptable. Linden Way is a busy industrial access road and the increase in HGV numbers would have a minimal impact on overall numbers using this road. Notwithstanding this increase in local HGV numbers, the main purpose of the WTS is to reduce overall HGV numbers and trip durations associated with the collection of municipal waste in the North West Leicestershire District by bulking up waste centrally. Overall it is considered that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on local highway safety and capacity and conforms with policies WSC14 and WDC 10 of the Waste Core Strategy.
57. An Ecological Assessment has been carried out which has concluded that the development proposed can take place without generating unacceptable impacts upon protected species and important habitats. Concern has been raised that the use of artificial lighting may have an impact upon bats and therefore a condition precluding such use until a scheme has been approved is considered appropriate. It is considered that, subject to appropriate conditions, the proposed development would not conflict with Policy WCS10 of the Waste Core Strategy.
58. The application site would extend an existing waste site over the top of a closed landfill. The applicant has undertaken a Ground Investigation at the site to assess any likely implications from laying the foundation of the site on to the restored landfill and implications from piling. The subsequent report has been consulted on and the EA and the EHO have raised no objection subject to appropriate conditions being imposed.
Conclusions
59. The proposed development would lead to the creation of a dedicated municipal waste transfer station located centrally within Coalville and therefore close to significant arisings. The new facility would enable bulk loads of waste to be transported for treatment and/or disposal which would improve the overall efficiency of the waste management process in the district, reduce overall travel by RCVs and produce considerable cost savings.
60. However, the proposed development would encroach on to the existing Coalville Urban Forest Park and lead to the loss of around 190 trees. There would be no direct impact upon public access routes within the park, although the new building would be partially visible from within the park and some other public viewpoints. There would also be an increase in HGV movements in the local area.
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 194
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
61. Notwithstanding the above, the site would continue to be well screened with only the upper part of the building being observable from outside the site due to the retention of the majority of trees that are maturing around the proposed site. There are no notable species or habitats likely to be affected directly by the proposals and subject to conditions, this scheme would not have any unacceptable indirect impacts either.
62. On balance it is considered that, notwithstanding the impacts created by the encroachment on to the Coalville Urban Forest Park, there are significant benefits that outweigh those impacts and, subject to the imposition of conditions contained in the appendix, the development does not conflict with the Development Plan and is considered to be acceptable.
Recommendation
A. Permit subject to the conditions, as set out in the appendix.
B. To endorse, as requested by The Town & Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) Order 2010 (as amended):
(i) How the County Planning Authority has worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner:
In dealing with the applications and reaching a decision account has been taken of paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 195
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued Appendix
Conditions
1. The development hereby permitted shall be commenced within three years of the date of this permission.
2. Unless expressly required by a condition below, the development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the details submitted under application number 2014/0844/07 including: • Drawing number 2762.17/S1/100 dated 11 th August 2014; • Drawing number 2762/001/A dated 29 th January 2014; • Report on Ground Investigation dated July 2014; • Planning Supporting Statement; and • Ecological Assessment dated July 2014.
3. Notwithstanding condition 2, no works associated with the erection of the Waste Transfer building hereby permitted shall take place until a schedule of all the materials to be used externally in the construction of the building and details of the proposed perimeter fencing have been submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The building shall thereafter be erected and maintained in accordance with the details approved under this condition.
4. The site shall not be occupied unless and until the applicant has entered into an agreement with, and paid a sum of not less than £6,000 to, the National Forest Company to secure urban tree planting within the Coalville area and such agreement has been approved by the County Planning Authority.
5. Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be undertaken other than with the express written consent of the County Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
6. No artificial lighting shall be erected on the site unless and until details of the location, height, design, sensors, hours of operation and luminance of all proposed lighting and a programme for its installation have been agreed in writing with the County Planning Authority. The lighting shall be designed to minimise the potential nuisance of light spillage to the locality and demonstrate that light spill on to adjacent woodland and other suitable bird/bat habitats will be no higher than 1 lux. The scheme shall be implemented in full accordance with the approved details.
7. No development (except any demolition permitted by this permission) shall commence on site until a Risk Based Land Contamination Assessment has been submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority, in order to ensure that the land is fit for use as the development proposes. The Risk Based Land Contamination Assessment shall be carried out in accordance with: • BS10175:2011+A1:2013 Investigation Of Potentially Contaminated Sites Code of Practice;
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 196
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
• BS 8576:2013 Guidance on Investigations for Ground Gas – Permanent Gases and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) • BS8485:2007 Code of Practice for the Characterisation and Remediation from Ground Gas in Affected Developments; and • CLR 11 Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, published by The Environment Agency 2004. Should any unacceptable risks be identified in the Risk Based Land Contamination Assessment, a Remedial Scheme and a Verification Plan must be prepared and submitted to and agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority. The Remedial Scheme shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of: • CLR 11 Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, published by The Environment Agency 2004.
The Verification Plan shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of: • Evidence Report on the Verification of Remediation of Land Contamination Report: SC030114/R1, published by the Environment Agency 2010; • CLR 11 Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, published by The Environment Agency 2004.
If, during the course of development, previously unidentified contamination is discovered, development must cease on that part of the site and it must be reported in writing to the County Solicitor within 10 working days. Prior to the recommencement of development on that part of the site, a Risk Based Land Contamination Assessment for the discovered contamination (to include any required amendments to the Remedial Scheme and Verification Plan) must be submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and retained as such in perpetuity, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority.
8. Prior to occupation of any part of the completed development, a Verification Investigation shall be undertaken in line with the agreed Verification Plan for any works outlined in the Remedial Scheme and a report showing the findings of the Verification Investigation relevant to either the whole development or that part of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The Verification Investigation Report shall: • Contain a full description of the works undertaken in accordance with the agreed Remedial Scheme and Verification Plan; • Contain results of any additional monitoring or testing carried out between the submission of the Remedial Scheme and the completion of remediation works; • Contain Movement Permits for all materials taken to and from the site and/or a copy of the completed site waste management plan if one was required; • Contain Test Certificates of imported material to show that it is suitable for its proposed use; • Demonstrate the effectiveness of the approved Remedial Scheme; and
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 197
2014/0844/07 (2014/REG3Mi/0175/LCC) – continued
• Include a statement signed by the developer, or the approved agent, confirming that all the works specified in the Remedial Scheme have been completed.
Reasons
1. To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
2. For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the details submitted with the planning application.
3. In the interests of local amenity and to ensure the proposed building has an acceptable external appearance.
4. To ensure that suitable replacement planting within the Coalville urban area takes place in accordance with Policies F1 and F2 of the North West Leicestershire District Council Local Plan and the National Forest Company’s ‘Guide for Developers and Planners’ document.
5. Piling or any other foundation using penetrative methods can result in risks to potable supplies from, for example, pollution / turbidity, risk of mobilising contamination, drilling through different aquifers and creating preferential pathways. Thus it should be demonstrated that any proposed piling will not result in contamination of groundwater.
6. To minimise the adverse impact of light generated by the operations on the local community and environment.
7. To ensure that the land is fit for purpose and to accord with the aims and objectives of paragraph 120 of the NPPF.
8. To ensure that the land is fit for purpose and to accord with the aims and objectives of paragraph 120 of the NPPF.
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014 198
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATORY BOARD
The considerations set out below apply to all the following applications.
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES IMPLICATIONS
Unless otherwise stated in the report there are no discernible equal opportunities implications.
IMPLICATIONS FOR DISABLED PERSONS
On all educational proposals the Director of Children and Young People's Service and the Director of Corporate Resources will be informed as follows:
Note to Applicant Department
Your attention is drawn to the provisions of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Person’s Act 1970 and the Design Note 18 “Access for the Disabled People to Educational Buildings” 1984 and to the Equality Act 2010. You are advised to contact the County Council’s Human Resources Department if you require further advice on this aspect of the proposal.
COMMUNITY SAFETY IMPLICATIONS
Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 places a very broad duty on all local authorities 'to exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions on, and the need to do all reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area'. Unless otherwise stated in the report, there are no discernible implications for crime reduction or community safety.
BACKGROUND PAPERS
Unless otherwise stated in the report the background papers used in the preparation of this report are available on the relevant planning application files.
SECTION 38(6) OF PLANNING AND COMPULSORY PURCHASE ACT 2004
Members are reminded that Section 38(6) of the 2004 Act requires that:
“If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.”
Any relevant provisions of the development plan (i.e. any approved Local Plans) are identified in the individual reports.
The circumstances in which the Board is required to “have regard” to the development plan are given in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990:
Section 70(2) : determination of applications; Section 77(4) : called-in applications (applying s. 70); Section 79(4) : planning appeals (applying s. 70); Section 81(3) : provisions relating to compensation directions by Secretary of State (this section is repealed by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991); Section 91(2) : power to vary period in statutory condition requiring development to be begun; Section 92(6) : power to vary applicable period for outline planning permission; Section 97(2) : revocation or modification of planning permission; Section 102(1) : discontinuance orders; Section 172(1) : enforcement notices; Section 177(2) : Secretary of State’s power to grant planning permission on enforcement appeal; Section 226(2) : compulsory acquisition of land for planning purposes; Section 294(3) : special enforcement notices in relation to Crown land; Sched. 9 para (1) : minerals discontinuance orders.
DC® BOARD 09/10/2014