Committee and Date Item/Paper
North Planning Committee (Oswestry) 6
26th April 2011 Public
Development Management Report
Application Number: 10/01784/EIA Parish: Hordley
Grid Ref: 339717 - 328495
Proposal: Construction of new abattoir and lairage buildings following demolition of existing abattoir and buildings; associated expansion of site road
Site Address: ABP Ellesmere Hordley Ellesmere Shropshire SY12 9BL
Applicant: Andrew Griffith
Case Officer: Joe Crook email: [email protected]
1.0 THE PROPOSAL 1.1 The submitted application seeks permission for the construction of new enlarged abattoir and lairage buildings following demolition of the existing abattoir. The redevelopment includes a new access with weighbridge to the south east of the site leading onto an expanded vehicular turning and loading area; alterations to the boiler room in order to include an additional boiler; an onsite fat melting plant; a new canteen and staff quarters; and an enlarged internal storage area for by-products. There will also be new tallow storage tanks located beside the new fat plant, two blood storage tanks adjacent to the lairage as well as an additional diesel tank and one alternative fuel oil tank. The proposed development also includes a 4.5 metre timber acoustic barrier to the southern boundary of the site and a security building adjacent to the new access.
2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION 2.1 ABP Ellesmere abattoir is a large site located 3.5 miles south of Ellesmere within the rural village of Hordley. The site is surrounded by agricultural land with a sporadic scattering of dwellings and farms within the immediate vicinity, the nearest of which is 50 metres from the southern extremity of the site and approximately 120 metres from the existing operational area of ABP.
2.2 The application site is approximately 7 hectares in size with the site frontage stretching 350 metres along the adjacent highway. The site has developed
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264 North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 piecemeal over a period of approximately 50 years and is made up of a variety of large industrial building with a relatively aged cluster of buildings and sheds making up the abattoir and lairage to the south of the operational area of the site. There is a large access to the north east corner of the site and a smaller access to the south east corner of the existing operational site.
3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 That the Development Management Area Manager be given delegated powers to issue planning permission subject to conditions and subject to the applicants entering into a Section 106 Legal Agreement to provide the following:
Agreed Travel Plan
The travel plan will set out the requirements and agreed targets expected of the development to include (but not exclusively): Reducing single occupancy vehicular trips to/from the site (staff and visitors) by promoting (and where necessary providing incentives for) alternative and more sustainable forms of transport; Management & Coordination of the Travel Plan; Monitoring vehicular movement ; Reviewing of Plan & Targets; Formalising the Liaison Group and its role; Formalise HGV Routing Agreement; Set base line traffic data; Set penalties and/or contingencies if agreed targets not achieved and transgression of routing agreement.
Construction Traffic Management Plan
A Construction Traffic Management Plan will be produced to include: Co-ordination of construction traffic with the day to day activities of the site ensuring there is no unacceptable adverse impact on the safe and free flow of traffic along the adjacent highway network; Management of construction traffic according with the Routing Agreement unless otherwise agreed; Possible layover for HGV’s away from the site to minimise localised congestion within the immediate vicinity of the site.
Routing Agreement
A Routing Agreement will form part of the Section 106 Agreement to ensure: All HGV’s associated with the site use an agreed route to and from the site via the Queens Head and A5; The use of this route is promoted and monitored as part of the Travel Plan, to include relevant penalties where vehicles transgress agreement. Arrangements to have suitable routing information available for Satellite Navigation purposes.
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 Financial Contributions
The applicant has agreed to provide a financial contribution of £30,000.00 to the Council for the purposes of: Implementing an enhanced route signing scheme; Providing highway infrastructure improvements and repairs in the vicinity of the site frontage and where appropriate along the agreed HGV route.
4.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE 4.1 Objection from the Parish Council.
5.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 NS/49/02907/FUL Proposed workshop at the mill GRANT 2nd January 1950
NS/50/04270/FUL Proposed pump house for water supply GRANT 30th October 1950
NS/57/13833/FUL Alterations and additions to abattoir, erection of office block and widening of existing access GRANT 4th June 1957
NS/60/02553/FUL Alteration and additions to process rooms GRANT 30th November 1960
NS/64/00966/FUL Installation of underground petroleum storage tanks GRANT 6th May 1964
NS/65/01270/FUL Proposed alterations to office block GRANT 2nd June 1965
NS/66/02212/FUL Alteration and additions to Hordley abattoir GRANT 30th November 1966
NS/71/02552/FUL Alteration and additions to existing office accommodation GRANT 8th October 1971
NS/72/04291/FUL Formation of vehicular access GRANT 6th November 1972
NS/73/04441/FUL Erection of four dwellings for the occupation by abatoir employees, installation of septic tank and alterations to existing vehicular access GRANT 5th December 1973
NS/74/00086/FUL Erection of 7 tanks (10 metres high x 2.74m diameter) for storage of tallow products GRANT 4th June 1974
NS/74/00714/FUL Erection of meal mixer / storage silo GRANT 4th February 1975
NS/75/00829/FUL Proposed erection of office accommodation GRANT 7th October 1975
NS/77/00150/FUL Alterations, additions and extensions (8560sq ft) to existing abattoir to form meat processing plant incorporating blast freezing and cold storage facilities and locker / mess room, accommodation and store rooms
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 GRANT 14th June 19
NS/80/00849/FUL Erection of tray wash and storage unit GRANT 5th December 1980
NS/83/00298/FUL Erection of lairage (aprrox 22m x 10m) and extensions to existing premises to provide additional slaughter area, offices and ladies rest room GRANT 5th July 1983
NS/85/00021/FUL Erection of extension to existing factory premises to provide boning, cutting, preparing, packing and dispatch facilities and construction of access road GRANT 20th March 1985
NS/85/00282/FUL Erection of extension to existing factory premises to provide boning, cutting, preparation and display facilities, alterations to existing access and extensions to existing sub station GRANT 20th June 1985
NS/85/00397/FUL Temporary use of land for the stationing of three portakabins to provide staff facilities GRANT 19th July 1985
NS/89/00348/FUL Change of use from workshop and stores to canteen, toilets and locker rooms GRANT 15th May 1989
NS/89/00355/FUL Erection of building for the storage of vacuum packed meat products GRANT 15th May 1989
NS/94/00331/FUL Change of use of lairage to boiler house and construction of 2 chimney stacks GRANT 22nd June 1994
NS/97/00333/FUL Erection of an extension to meat processing room, dry goods store and loading bay GRANT 21st March 2000
NS/98/00320/FUL Erection of a single storey extension to provide equipment wash and storage rooms, offices, labs and access corridor to new cap extension GRANT 13th January 1999
NS/99/10318/FUL Construction of earth bund to south of site GRANT 27th September 1999
NS/99/10320/FUL Construction of earth bund to north of site GRANT 7th September 1999
NS/01/01076/FUL Erection of dry goods store, tray wash, process room, finished product store and chiller rooms REFUSE 13th February 2002
09/03252/FUL Erection of aviation fuel tank within the grounds of ABP Ellesmere GRANT 6th January 2010
6.0 CONSULTEE RESPONSES 6.1 Following the initial consultation and three subsequent consultations on amended plans and updated information the following responses were received:
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 Hordley Parish Council – Object to the application on the following grounds: The scale of the proposed development is unacceptable and will increase the existing abattoir by 140% which will further dominate the landscape, be visually intrusive and have an adverse impact on the surrounding area. There is insufficient justification provided for the scale of development proposed or for the redevelopment of the site. The scale of the proposed development will allow for a doubling of the current slaughter rates and substantially increase the production of the abattoir. The abattoir is not in a suitable location and alternative sites should be considered where an industrial use is more appropriate. This has not been considered by ABP. The siting of the building is considered to be inappropriate. The proposal will have an adverse impact on the surrounding highway network which is unsuitable for the existing and proposed operation and will worsen the condition of the roads due to the inevitable increases in traffic movements. The noise levels created by the proposal will be unacceptable and will have a detrimental impact on the surrounding properties. The proposed levels exceed those stated within the World Health Organisation recommendations and also those previously conditioned by the Local Planning Authority. The proposed access to the south is unacceptable as it will lead to stacking of lorries onto the highway. The proposed access will destroy existing trees planted and maintained by the Parish Council which will have a significant impact on the amenity of the area. Any tree planting should be at a replacement ratio of 2:1. The proposed access crosses and removes an existing public right of way/footpath. Additional chiller facilities will lead to an increase in the production and slaughter of meat on the site. The proposed 4.5 metre high acoustic barrier to the south of the site will have an adverse visual impact on the surrounding area and should be reduced to 3 metres in height. ABP are not offering any provisions as part of the proposal such as public transport services or a shop. There are protected species within close proximity of the site and an abundance of wildlife and the proposal will have a detrimental impact on these species and their habitats. The existing site has no means of controlling light spillage and as such any new lighting should not contravene the Clean Neighbourhood and Environment Act and should be controlled appropriately. There will be a substantial amount of groundworks and movement of materials to and from the site and no proposals have been submitted as to how this will be carried out. The proposed fat plant will have an adverse impact on the surrounding area in terms of odour and the removal of the fat waste will increase transport movements. Full soil and ground water samples along with chemical analysis and gas monitoring should be undertaken prior to the application being considered.
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 There are no economic benefits of the development given that the majority of the operation will be closed when the temporary construction jobs are in place. Vehicular movements to and from the site are much higher than those stated by ABP within their Traffic Management and Travel Plan. Object to the proposed times of operation of the southern access (suggested as 6am to 10pm by ABP Ellesmere Manager and Veterinary Surgeon rather than 7am to 9pm).
Ellesmere Rural Parish Council – Object to the application on the following grounds: The surrounding highway network is unsuitable and is overloaded with light vehicles to which ABP is the biggest contributor. Do not want any increase in traffic from the site. Vehicles are deviating from the permitted route which has an adverse impact on the surrounding amenities. Any of the roads other than the permitted route are not suitable for the use of HGVs. Existing signage should be improved and altered to ensure they are not changed and are in more appropriate locations. Support the comments of Hordley Parish Council.
Baschurch Parish Council – Object to the application on the following grounds: The existing site has an adverse impact on the surrounding highway network and there are concerns that this will worsen following the proposed development. ABP should be restricted to the agreed access route to the A5 and the vehicles that exceed the height restrictions should be altered so that they are able to use the agreed route and not pass through Baschurch.
SC Highways – There has been no objection to the development from the Highways Authority when considering the impact of the proposed development on highway safety, the proposed access and given that vehicle movements from the loading bay onto the highway will be moved into the site. However, this is subject to appropriate conditions and a Section 106 agreement that includes financial contributions towards appropriate HGV routing signage and a scheme to improve the highway along the site frontage as well as a Travel Plan to include HGV movement targets and monitoring of vehicular movements, a Liaison Group, a routing agreement and a Construction Traffic Management Plan.
SC Economic Development – Support the application and refer to the wider economic importance of ABP within Shropshire and the UK as a whole. The comments refer to the fact that the food processing industry is one of the last manufacturing sectors still able to employ in large numbers and ABP is one of the Counties largest employers, with employment opportunities in the local area very limited. Concerns have also been raised that refusal of the proposed development could threaten both the Ellesmere and Shrewsbury sites which employs nearly 1000 people in total. Further concern is raised in respect of the relationship and links between ABP and Harper Adams University in respect of graduate employment and development within the meat industry, something which is in place purely due to the close proximity of the site to the university.
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011
Environment Agency – The Environment Agency initially objected to the proposed scheme on the basis of level of risk to controlled waters and that this risk hadn’t been fully considered and neither had the measures for dealing with this risk. Following submission of an updated Environmental Impact Assessment this objection was removed as sufficient assessment of the likely contamination and risk had been submitted. However, whilst there was no objection in this regard, the EA advised a number of conditions should be attached to any permission.
No other objections were raised in respect of the development although the EA also made the following comments:
That a variation to the Environmental Permit for the site will be required for the provision of the fat melting plant and associated boiler. The emissions from both these proposals are considered by the EA to be minor and the variation in the license has in fact now been granted. There is no formal comment on the proposed drainage scheme and this should be considered in consultation with the Shropshire Council drainage department. ABP are required under the terms of their Environmental Permit to use Best Available Techniques within the management of the site and this has been reflected within the Environmental Impact Assessment. The proposed drainage plan identifies storage tanks for rainwater harvesting and positioning of attenuation tanks. It is believed that the proposals could result in reduced hydraulic loading and in principle would appear to be beneficial. Routine effluent monitoring will continue to be carried out at the site under the conditions of the Permit to ensure this is satisfactory. EA are satisfied that the noise mitigation measures proposed through the application represent Best Available Techniques in accordance with the Permit. EA are satisfied that Best Available Techniques are applied in respect of odours through improved control measures, handling and storage of offal and blood.
SC Public Protection Environmental Health – Following assessment of the noise mitigation scheme submitted, Public Protection Officers confirmed that they were satisfied that the proposed development will significantly reduce noise emissions from the site and that noise levels at nearby residences will not exceed levels and values stated in the World Health Organisation’s ‘Guidelines for Community Noise’. This is subject to conditions restricting construction hours, satisfactory sound pressure levels as specified, details of the acoustic barrier and restriction of hours of the proposed access.
In addition they do not object in respect of odour or lighting given the improved cover and containment of material. These issues will be covered under the Environmental Permit issued by the Environment Agency. However, a condition has been recommended requiring full details of floodlighting in order to ensure that it is suitable and does not have an adverse impact on surrounding amenity. They have also requested that a condition is attached requiring construction
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 techniques to reduce dust.
SC Public Protection Land Contamination – Due to the site being identified as a site where past and current uses may have led to the contamination of the ground a number of conditions are recommended in order for the more detailed investigation of the land to be carried out prior to commencement of development. Following re-consultation, the Contaminated Land Officer advised that the further information supplied was only a desk based study and whilst there was no objection to the scheme, the conditions remain appropriate.
SC Trees – Initial objections were received from the Trees Officer in respect of the level of removal of Cherry Trees to the south of the site in order to accommodate the proposed access. This was due to there being an adverse impact on the distinct landscape feature and local visual amenity that the trees provide. A subsequent amendment to the access reduced substantially the number of trees to be removed. The objection from the Trees Officer was therefore removed and the proposal was considered acceptable subject to necessary protective measures for the trees to be retained and a suitable area of mitigation planting formally being provided.
SC Ecology – Following consideration of the submitted Ecological Assessment and Protected Species Survey there has been no objection from the Shropshire Council Planning Ecologist subject to informatives being attached to any permission. Further information provided by neighbouring properties in respect of badgers yielded no further comments due to this evidence relating to foraging of badgers and not badger setts.
SC Drainage – Following submission of a full drainage assessment including amended drainage plan, hydrobrake specification, storm drainage calculations and attenuation calculations there has been no objection from the Drainage Team to the drainage scheme proposed for the new development and hard surfacing.
SC Rights of Way – Confirmed that the proposed access does not affect the public right of way adjacent to the site (FP Hordley 2/1) as this begins further on from where the proposed vehicular access is located. SC Rights of Way therefore have no objection to the scheme subject to there being no interference with the right of way during the development.
SC Legal/Land Charges – Advised that the only Agreement on file was a Section 106 agreement from 17th March 2000 in respect of the 1997 application for an extension at the site (NS/97/00333/FUL).
SC Highways Information Officer – Confirmed that the Divisional Surveyor has inspected the site and he is of the opinion that the extent of the highway maintainable by public expense includes all of the land adjacent to the road including the Cherry Trees and path up to the Public Right of Way which begins on the adjacent land to the west.
Shropshire Fire and Rescue – Adequate water supply for fire fighting will be required and advise the provision of a fire hydrant, also recommend the use of sprinkler systems. Both of these matters will be considered under Building
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 Regulations.
7.0 PUBLIC REPRESENTATIONS 7.1 Objections to the proposal have been received from 102 households and 2 letters of support have been received. The objections have been made on the following grounds:
Any further expansion of the existing site is unacceptable due to the rural location and nature of the surrounding area. The proposal will have a further adverse impact on the surrounding highway network, which is unsuitable for the use of HGVs and is currently in a very poor state. The proposal will have an adverse impact on highway safety and the development will increase the number of HGVs and vehicles on the road. The HGVs create a lot of noise and vibration which has an adverse impact on both local amenities as well as damaging properties. The development will increase production and kill rates at the site to the further detriment of local amenities. The development will increase noise from the site. The proposal will increase odours from the site in particular due to the proposed fat plant. The proposed development will have an adverse visual impact on the surrounding rural area. The proposed development will include removing trees from the amenity area to the south and this is unacceptable. The proposal will be in contravention of human rights of the locals who have a right to live in peaceful enjoyment of their property. The proposal will increase light pollution from the site. The proposal will have an adverse impact on the status of protected species including badgers. The site should be moved to a more appropriate location next to a motorway. The proposal will increase surface water drainage which will drain onto adjacent land and increase flooding in the adjacent drain watercourse leading to the River Perry. The existing drainage lagoons are unsatisfactory and not maintained properly. The site will pollute further the adjacent watercourse.
Two letters of support were received. Of the two letters of support received, one commented that it was positive to see the company going forward and not laying people off, and the other provided no details or comments other than supporting the application.
8.0 PLANNING POLICY 8.1 Central Government Guidance: PPS1 – Delivering Sustainable Development PPS1 Supplement – Planning and Climate Change PPS4 - Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth PPS7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas PPS9 – Biodiversity and Geological Conservation
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 PPS23 – Planning and Pollution Control PPG24 – Planning and Noise PPS25 – Development and Flood Risk
8.2 West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy PA1 – Prosperity for All PA14 – Economic Development and the Rural Economy QE1 – Conserving and Enhancing the Environment
8.3 Shropshire Core Strategy: CS5 – Countryside and Green Belt CS6 – Sustainable Design and Development Principles CS7 – Communications and Transport CS8 – Facilities, Services and Infrastructure Provision CS9 – Infrastructure Contributions CS13 – Economic Development, Enterprise and Employment CS18 – Sustainable Water Management
8.4 Budget 2011:
The Plan for Growth, Vince Cable and George Osbourne, March 2011: The planning system should do everything it can to support growth and this is a material consideration in local planning decisions with immediate effect.
The document reinforces a pro-growth emphasis on plan-making and requires local authorities to work promptly to accept applications that comply with up to date plans and national planning policies.
Growth Review, Greg Clark Ministerial Statement March 2011: The growth review sets clear expectations that local planning authorities and other bodies involved in granting development consents should prioritise growth and jobs.
Planning and the Budget, March 2011 Local authorities can start immediately prioritising growth in the decisions they take locally and encourage and support growth.
9.0 THE MAIN PLANNING ISSUES Principle of Development Design, Scale and Impact on Surrounding Area Location and Siting Economy and Production Levels Traffic and Highway Safety Routing Agreement Noise, Smell and Impact on Neighbouring Amenities Ground Contamination Trees and Land Ownership Ecology Drainage Rights of Way Other Issues
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 10.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL
10.1 Principle of Development
10.1.1 The applicant Anglo Beef Processors has operated from the Ellesmere site since the early 1990s and currently operates within Shropshire from both the Ellesmere site and a further site in Shrewsbury. Both sites together employ approximately 900 people. Planning permission for a re-development of the lairage and abattoir facilities is sought in order to keep up with the high standards demanded by customers, regulatory bodies and ABP itself as well as to improve animal welfare standards, according to the Environmental Impact Assessment submitted as part of the application.
10.1.2 The proposed development relates to a substantial variety of national, regional and local planning policies. National policies in the form of PPS1, PPS4 and PPS7 all refer to the need for strong and sustainable economic growth with PPS4 directly commenting on the need for Local Planning Authorities to adopt a positive and constructive approach towards planning applications for economic development. PPS4 outlines further that planning applications for economic development should take into consideration local employment, climate change, transport implications, design and the impact on the character and quality of the surrounding area. The other Guidance and Statements referred to under paragraph 8.1 above must also be given due weight.
10.1.3 At a regional level the West Midlands RSS refers in policy PA14 to the support and development of growth to existing businesses with priority given to economic development with strong links to the rural area including food and drink processing. The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government has written to local planning authorities to request that the government’s intention to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies is taken into account when making decisions. However, at the time of this decision the RSS remains in force.
10.1.4 Core Strategy policy CS5 refers to development proposals on appropriate sites being permitted where they improve the sustainability of rural communities by bringing local economic benefits and community benefits and particularly where they relate to the retention and appropriate expansion of an existing established business, unless relocation to a more suitable site within a settlement would be more appropriate. Policy CS13 is more explicit in that it refers directly to the Council planning positively to develop and diversify the Shropshire Economy, supporting enterprise and sustainable economic growth with particular emphasis on supporting the development and growth of Shropshire’s key business sectors and clusters, particularly food and drink production and processing.
10.1.5 This has to be balanced against policy CS6 which, amongst others, seeks to ensure that development protects, restores, conserves and enhances the natural, built and historic environment and is appropriate in scale, density, pattern and design taking into account local context and character and contributes to the health and well-being of communities, including safeguarding residential and local amenity.
10.1.6 Regards should also be paid to recent central government announcements in
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 the 2011 Budget that reforms will be made to streamline the delivery of planning applications and in particular to ensure that a positive and speedy approach is taken towards applications relating to economic development and growth. The courts commenting on earlier announcements have confirmed that these statements are a material planning consideration. The ‘Planning and the Budget’ document produced on the 24th March 2011 states that local authorities can start immediately prioritising growth in the decisions they take locally, with Councils on the front foot in encouraging and supporting growth and ensuring they are not imposing any unnecessary burdens in the way of development. The ‘Plan for Growth’ and ‘Growth Review’ March 2011 have made very similar references to the need for prioritisation of economic growth and presumption in favour of development, stating that local authorities should take speedy decisions on applications relating to economic growth.
10.1.7 It is clear that the principle of the proposed extension to the business is accepted through planning policy from national to local level and in fact should be encouraged and prioritised on the basis of the significance of local economic growth. The proposal must therefore be considered against the more detailed considerations as set out below.
10.2 Design, Scale and Impact on Surrounding Area
10.2.1 The redevelopment of the site will see the demolition of the existing abattoir and lairage which has a footprint of approximately 1875 square metres, with the proposed structure increasing the footprint of this part of the site by 2650 square metres to a total of 4525 square metres. The existing abattoir and lairage is made up of a variety of buildings and structures approximately 13.4 metres to ridge at its highest point. The main structure of the proposed development will see a building constructed of profiled steel sheet cladding matching the colour of the existing buildings with a height to ridge of 11.5 metres reducing at an angle of 7 degrees to 9.1 metres at eaves level. This will project a further 35 metres to the south of the site and will have a width of 37.5 metres and a length of 90 metres.
10.2.2 The proposal will also include an increased area of hardstanding, approximately 1160 square metres, which will be wrapped around the proposed building to the south and west of the site and project a further 33 metres in a southerly direction. The proposed hardstanding area is also to include a 4.5 metre high timber and steel acoustic barrier running along the entire boundary of the proposed operational site area to the south. This will run from the existing south western extremity of the site to the proposed south east corner of the site which further proposes a new access and associated security building. The access will be approximately 18 metres in width and 15 metres in depth at its deepest point, widening out to the edges for visibility purposes. The proposed security building will be to the side of the entrance set back approximately a metre with a height of 3.8 metres, a length of 7.5 metres and a depth of 4 metres. It will be constructed of brick with a flat roof.
10.2.3 The Parish Council and objectors to the scheme have raised strong objections to the visual appearance of the development and have commented that it will be detrimental to the surrounding rural area, with its increase in size dominating the landscape and being inappropriate to the location. However, the proposal will be
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 of a similar height to the existing structures with some of the existing buildings exceeding the height of the proposed development. Whilst its visual appearance is not considered to be of particular architectural merit, it is considered that it will lead to an improvement over the existing appearance of the buildings to the south of site which are in poor condition and of somewhat ramshackle appearance. Further to this, it is accepted that the increase in footprint is significant when compared to the existing abattoir and lairage but it is also acknowledged that existing conditions are cramped and unsatisfactory for purpose and animal welfare in particular. When the net increase in footprint of 2650 square metres is put into the wider context of the site, with the existing buildings which have an overall footprint approximately 13,000 square metres and the overall site area approximately 6.1 hectares, the proposed extension is not considered to be excessive.
10.2.4 Policy CS6 of the Shropshire Core Strategy states that development should be appropriate in scale, density, pattern and design whilst respecting local character and context. Whilst the site is located within a notably rural area, the development produces a structure which is in keeping with the character of the site itself and allows for a more uniform and tidy appearance than existing. Further to this its construction will be as a continuation of the existing built development on site and not isolated or detached which would provide an unsatisfactory visual appearance in respect of the surrounding open countryside.
10.2.5 It should also be added that the site is well screened to the southern extremity immediately adjacent to a Public Right of Way with an earth bund just inside the designated path. The bund is also currently topped by thinly spaced leylandii trees which will be replaced with native planting which will provide improved screening and visual amenity. When considering the overall impact of the development from public vantage points and in respect of the surrounding area it is considered to be well screened and well associated with the current built development which sees the impact on the character of the surrounding area minimised in accordance with policies CS6 and CS5.
10.2.6 Policy CS6 also states that new development should be designed to a high quality using sustainable design principles and incorporate building standards to ensure energy efficiency where possible, and consideration of climate change. The proposed development seeks to improve energy efficiency and will be subject to Simplified Building Energy Model analysis to ensure the building control requirements are met or exceeded in terms of reducing carbon dioxide emissions and energy use. This also addresses a requirement of PPS4 policy EC 10.2 (a).
10.2.7 The associated development including the hardstanding, new access and security building will have a minimal visual impact given that they will be low in height in contrast to the main buildings. However, the Parish Council have made specific objections to the proposed 4.5 metre high acoustic fence on the basis that it will have a detrimental impact on the surrounding open countryside, and they have suggested that a 3 metre fence would be more suitable. The proposed fence will run along the southern boundary of the operational site area, inside the site and set back approximately 50 metres from the bund on the southern boundary at its furthest point, and 15 metres from the bund at its nearest point. Given that the acoustic fence will be screened from view from most public
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 vantage points due to the existing bund referred to above and will be read in conjunction with the site as proposed including the new abattoir building, it is not considered that the 4.5 metre height of the fence will have an adverse impact on the surrounding area. Further to this, it will be mostly constructed of timber and it is considered that the fence will soften the appearance of the development on the southern elevation.
10.2.8 Given the above and the substantial buildings that are currently present on the site, it is considered that the proposed development does not have an adverse impact on the character or visual appearance of the surrounding area and is appropriate in its scale, density and design when taking into account the existing design and use of the site. As such the proposed development is considered to accord with Shropshire Core Strategy policies CS5 and CS6 as well as national guidance in the form of PPS1, PPS4 and PPS7.
10.3 Location and Siting
10.3.1 A large number of objectors including the Parish Council have commented that the ABP site should be moved to another site on an industrial park or somewhere with more suitable access for the nature of the vehicles associated with the site. Whilst it is acknowledged that the site is not an allocated site for industrial or commercial development, the existing site could continue its authorised operation at its current level regardless of the decision of this application with no restriction or monitoring of HGV movements (the fall back position). Given that the HGV numbers will only be increased slightly by the proposal in order to facilitate the routing agreement, with the numbers of HGV movements being monitored through the proposed Travel Plan as part of the section 106 agreement, it is considered that there would be some betterment in respect of HGV movements associated with the site. The issues associated with HGV movements will be discussed in more detail later on in this report.
10.3.2 It is further considered that the cost implications of moving the site is likely to be restrictive to the applicant and could likely see the company look outside Shropshire and probably the UK should this scenario arise. On balance, consideration of the fall back position, potential economic costs as well as the level of development proposed, and the increased input from the Highways Authority into the monitoring of HGV movements determines that the location is suitable for the development proposed. Therefore consideration of other sites is unnecessary given that there is no proposed increase to the level of traffic movements associated with production. As such this accords with policy CS5 of the Shropshire Core Strategy which promotes the retention and expansion of existing authorised businesses unless relocation would be more appropriate.
10.3.3 Objectors including the Parish Council have also commented that the siting of the proposal is inappropriate as it expands the operational site area, which would be unnecessary if the proposed building was sited immediately adjacent to the existing factory and packing facility which runs from west to east in the centre of the site. However, the shape of the existing building will be replicated and extended therefore reducing the impact of the proposed extension both visually and in terms of functionality, ensuring that the elements of operation are sited appropriately in relation to each other, as existing. Further to this alternatives have been considered by the applicant but the location of the boiler
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 room to the rear of the abattoir rather restricts the options for redevelopment given the costs involved in demolition and reconstruction of this building. It is therefore considered that full consideration has been given to the siting of the development and its impact on the surrounding environment, and it therefore accords with policy CS6 of the Shropshire Core Strategy.
10.4 Economy and Production Levels
10.4.1 The Shropshire Council Head of Economic Development has made substantial comments in support of the application based on the economic importance of ABP in both Ellesmere and Shropshire as a whole. He has commented that it is clear that the location of the company within the County could be threatened if the abattoir conditions are not improved in accordance with customer, process and animal welfare demands due to the cost implications of relocation. Further to this the importance of such a company during the country’s fragile economic recovery and the supply of much needed employment within the local area cannot be understated and it is considered that any threat to the loss of the company should be fully considered as part of this application.
10.4.2 It is certainly considered that the economic importance of the company is considerable and given that the proposal is to redevelop and upgrade part of the site as opposed to vastly expanding the site for production purposes it is considered that the Local Authority should therefore take a positive and constructive approach towards the development in accordance with PPS4 and recent government guidance in the 2011 Budget. Further to this it is clearly supported within policy CS13 in terms of the principle of the development, as outlined above. A number of objectors to the scheme including the Parish Council have commented that the development will see an increase in production and kill levels, and that the proposed development is a precursor to a much larger redevelopment of the site. Any such expansion of the site would be the subject of a new planning application at which time the implications of such a scheme for the locality can be properly considered. However, in respect of the current application, ABP have stated that the proposed works are not required for expansion purposes and they are happy to enter into a legal agreement which would see a Travel Plan adopted which would include a variety of formal agreements such as monitoring of vehicular movements including HGVs.
10.4.3 The Council does not currently control the kill level at the site and would not be in a position to restrict or control the production and operation directly in this respect. The introduction of target vehicle numbers and monitoring of these targets in respect of the HGV movements to and from the site is considered to be the best method of working with the company to ensure the impact on neighbouring properties is minimised. The number of HGV movements has been the most consistent reason for objection to the proposed development and in this respect is the most direct method of abating the serious concerns over the interlinked issue of production levels and HGV movements. This will be discussed in more detail within the next section of this report.
10.5 Traffic, Access and Highway Safety
10.5.1 The vast majority of objections to the proposed development refer to the level of traffic associated with the site and the inherent highway safety implications. The
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 existing site is served by two accesses, the main access to the northern end of the site frontage and the smaller southern access which is predominantly used for HGV and delivery vehicles.
10.5.2 The proposed development will see a variety of alterations to the site layout which is intended to reduce the amount of traffic movement on the adjacent highway, primarily because of an existing loading dock which entails HGVs reversing off the highway onto the dock in a manner which restricts through traffic along the adjacent road. This docking will now take place inside the site, with vehicles parking and turning within the newly proposed hard surfacing area which stretches around the proposed extension. To allow for this there will be a new access provided further south of the existing, with the existing southern access being closed. The splay and size of the access has been reduced following objections in respect of the extent of tree removal required to facilitate this access (to be discussed in more detail later in this report). The access was amended to the specification of the Highways Authority to ensure that the access opening was widened in a northerly direction. This was done to improve the ease of manoeuvre of HGVs at the access, to allow for the passing of HGVs in both directions at the access and to ensure the layout encouraged all vehicles to move along the designated route from the site to the north via Queens Head and the A5.
10.5.3 The Highways Authority has considered the above proposed alterations and the submitted Traffic Management Plan and draft Travel Plan. They consider that the proposed development will improve highway safety in respect of minimising the HGV manoeuvres on the adjacent highway, with vehicles also able to park fully off the road in the access splay to the proposed southern access on arrival. This will minimise the number of vehicles waiting on the road when signing in. Further to this there has been some localised road widening agreed with the applicant which will be located opposite the proposed access and it is considered that this should further improve the safety and use of the adjacent highway.
10.5.4 However, there have been concerns raised by objectors and the Parish Council in respect of the reduced access in that there will not be sufficient distance within the proposed access for a HGV to pull fully off the road. The Highway Authority have asked that the gates at the entrance be set back in line with the longest length of HGV which will arrive at the access to ensure that there will be no encroachment onto the adjacent highway.
10.5.5 The Parish Council have also referred to the unsuitability of the proposed access following its amendments due to the lack of visibility in a southerly direction due to the adjacent trees. However, following consultation with the Highways Authority on this matter, including making reference to the submitted tree plan, there has been no objection to the proposed access and the Highways Authority have stated that they consider visibility in a southern direction to be sufficient.
10.5.6 The level of traffic movements associated with the site has been a major concern of the objectors to the scheme. The condition of the roads in the area is poor and this has been acknowledged by both the Highways Authority and the applicants themselves, with Highways confirming that the Authority has spent £125,000 in the last five years on this route alone. However, overall traffic
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 movements are not proposed to be increased by the development and most notably HGV movements will remain at their current level for operational purposes due to there being no actual increase in production levels or kill rates. This has been questioned by the objectors and the Parish Council but following detailed discussions with the applicant it was agreed they would enter into a Section 106 Agreement with a Travel Plan. The Travel Plan would include target levels being set for HGV movements to and from the site which would be monitored by the Highways Authority and would be considered by the Local Liaison Group which would be formalised as part of the Travel Plan. This would not only allow for improved monitoring and dialogue between ABP and the Local Authority in respect of vehicle numbers but could also include local resident representation and ensure there is not a sudden increase in HGVs following the development which would have wider reaching implications in terms of the condition of the highways and highway safety.
10.5.7 In order to monitor the HGV levels it was agreed that counters would be installed at the vehicular accesses and that these would be accessed and utilised by the Highways Authority. The Travel Plan would also include measures to reduce vehicular trips to and from the site through alternative transport measures; agree full management and coordination of the traffic to and from the site; agree review of plans and targets including agreed penalties where targets are not achieved; formalise the traffic liaison group; and agree the formalised routing (to be discussed further in the next section of this report).
10.5.8 The Highways Authority have also requested that as well as a Travel Plan, the legal agreement should include a Construction Traffic Management Plan to ensure that the associated traffic during construction of the proposed development is coordinated with the day to day activities of the site so as not to materially impact on the safe and free flow of traffic along the adjacent highway network, or negatively impact on the local community. This management plan would need to be submitted to and agreed by the Highways Authority.
10.5.9 Following discussions with the applicant and the Highways Authority it was further agreed that as part of the legal agreement a financial contribution of £30,000 would be made to the Council in respect of implementing an enhanced route signage scheme, providing highway infrastructure improvements and repairs in the vicinity of the site frontage and where appropriate along the HGV route. This money is to be used solely to improve HGV access to the site and ensure that the deterioration of the existing highway is not exacerbated by any increase in HGV movements, principally in respect to the construction phase of the development. The payment is in accordance with policy CS9 of the Shropshire Core Strategy which seeks contributions to local infrastructure necessary to secure safe access for the development in proportion to its scale and location.
10.5.10 Whilst it is acknowledged that the type and level of traffic at the site is not necessarily in keeping with the surrounding area, this is not a new development in open countryside and the proposal does not increase the existing level of vehicle movements other than the slight increase in HGV movements to ensure the required routing agreement can be met, with this discussed in more detail in the next section of this report. PPS4 and Shropshire Core Strategy policies CS6 and CS7 all refer to the need to assess the level of traffic associated with
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 development, encouraging sustainable transport methods and securing traffic management measures. Given the introduction of the measures referred to above as part of a legal agreement it is considered that there will be some betterment associated with the application brought about mainly by the Travel Plan and the proposal therefore satisfies the above criteria. As such it is considered that the proposal will not have an adverse impact on highway safety and accords with policies CS6, CS7 of the Shropshire Core Strategy as well as PPS4.
10.6 Routing Agreement
10.6.1 The existing routing agreement relates to the last major extension to the site approved in 2000 (97/00333/FUL). A section 106 legal agreement outlined that no HGVs of over 7.5 tonnes weight and less than 4.4 metres in height should be allowed to leave the land except by the northern access and should be directed to turn left towards Hordley and then to the A5 Trunk Road at Queens Head. A condition was also included to this effect.
10.6.2 A large number of the objections to the site refer to the HGVs associated with the site not using the designated route to the A5 at Queens Head and instead going through other routes, mainly Baschurch and Weston Lullingfields where vehicles turn right instead of left from the site. However, as detailed above the existing routing agreement does allow for larger vehicles to use this route where the height restrictions of the Rednal bridge will not allow them to travel along the designated route.
10.6.3 The original response from the Highways Authority referred to the need to revisit this routing agreement to see if improvements could be made. Following discussions with the applicant and the Highway Authority it was agreed that the designated route from the site to the A5 at Queens Head via Hordley could be the only route for all HGVs leaving the site. However, this could only be achieved by eliminating the use of double decker HGVs, which are restricted by Rednal Bridge. This will therefore lead to the use of single deckers instead of double decker vehicles and following receipt of an addendum to the submitted Traffic Management Report it was confirmed that this will slightly increase the number of HGVs movements by approximately 10 per week. Given that there will be a slight reduction associated with the waste movements in respect to fat and tallow (of approximately 3 per week) it is considered that a net increase of 7 vehicular movements can be justified based on all HGV vehicles utilising the designated route. This will be a betterment for the surrounding highway and local road users and will simplify the understanding and enforcement of the routing agreement.
10.6.4 The applicant has raised issues in respect of the impact that Satnavs have had on the delivery vehicles using alternative routes. Where a driver has not visited the site before and is using a Satnav they can be electronically directed to the site away from the designated routes. ABP have confirmed that there are fines for all vehicles which use the incorrect routes but it is acknowledged that there are difficulties inherent with the use of electronic navigation and designated routes. The applicant has therefore confirmed that they will approach all the Satnav companies in order to establish the designated route within the Satnav mapping systems and this will be included as part of the Travel Plan.
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011
10.7 Noise, Smell and Impact on Neighbours
10.7.1 A large number of the objections to the application, including those of the Parish Council, refer to existing issues at the site in respect of noise, smell and adverse impact on the amenities of surrounding neighbouring properties. Indeed the properties to the south of the site including Oak Villa and Oak Cottage have objected strongly to the application on the basis that there will be increased noise levels at their properties due to the proposed development.
10.7.2 Noise - It is acknowledged that the noise at the site is audible from locations surrounding the site and the development will move the operational site area further to the south. However, following discussions between the applicant and the Public Protection Noise Pollution Team it was considered that the best approach to the application was for the applicants to consider each noise source at the site, whether this could be eliminated and if not whether it could be enclosed. Where the noise source was external, acoustic screening and management controls would need to be considered as part of any mitigation scheme proposed. This is reflected in national guidance in the form of PPG24, which recommends control of noise sources and reduction at the point of generation.
10.7.3 Following receipt of the noise mitigation plan undertaken by Aecom Environmental Consultants there has been no objection from the Pollution Control Officer who has considered that the submitted proposal will reduce environmental noise emissions. Whilst the proposed lairage and southern site entrance will move further south the various mitigations included within the scheme are considered to negate these noise levels, with the introduction of a 4.5 metre acoustic barrier to the southern boundary reducing the noise levels at noise sensitive locations to the south of the site by 8 to 10 decibels. Further to this, use of the southern access will be restricted between the hours of 9pm and 7am with a separate building entrance created on the western elevation for occasional cattle deliveries later in the evening and night from the main northern access.
10.7.4 A wide variety of the existing external noise sources will be moved into the plant. This includes the process of storing and loading animal by-products into chillers and trailers inside the proposed building and this will significantly reduce the external noise sources at the southern end of the operational site area where this happens currently. The only noise sources which should be present at the southern end of the operational area will be HGVs with cattle and offal, and the HGV vehicle wash. Given that this area will only be utilised between the hours of 7am and 9pm, and given that there will be the acoustic barrier in place immediately adjacent to this area it is considered that the potential noise sources have been minimised or removed and there will be no adverse impact on the surrounding area in terms of noise levels, with the proposals in fact offering a betterment to the current situation.
10.7.5 An existing condition attached to the planning permission granted for the extension in 2000 (97/00333/FUL) restricted the decibel levels at the site at three locations. The condition reads as follows:
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 To safeguard the residential amenities of the locality the 15 minute Leaq noise level from all refrigerated trailer units parked on the site between the hours of 23:00 and 7:00 when measured from point A on the site boundary shall not exceed 35dB (A). When measured from point B they shall not exceed 52 dB (A) and at point C they shall not exceed 33db (A). The points A, B and C are shown on the attached plan.
10.7.6 The above condition refers to points A, B and C. A and C are located to the southern end of the operational site area with point B adjacent to the northern access. The levels to the southern boundary of the operational site area have been recorded as exceeding these levels but discussions with the Public Protection Noise Team have revealed that this is not considered to be surprising as these decibel levels are very low and are considered by Pollution Control Officers to be unachievable for such a use on the site when measured immediately adjacent to the noise sources.
10.7.7 Following review of the 2000 permission to which this condition was attached, it appears that there may have been a discrepancy between the decibel levels included in the condition and those actually advised by the Environmental Health department at that time. The electronic files of the application appear to show that the Director of Environmental Health advised the decibel levels as conditioned but positions A and C were to the south western and south eastern extremities of the site, much further from the operational boundaries of the site than those conditioned. This also corresponds with an earlier recommendation made by the Director of Environmental Health who advised that a condition should be attached restricting noise levels at the south of the operational site area to 55 decibels, where these locations (points A and C) were subsequently conditioned to levels of 35 and 33 decibels. This would explain to a large extent why subsequent consideration of the site by Pollution Control Officers suggested that the conditioned levels were unachievable.
10.7.8 Taking this into consideration and the comments from the Pollution Control Officer in respect of the application it is considered that the noise levels at the site will be much better controlled by the proposed development and will include significant mitigation in this regard. Further to this National Guidance in the form of PPG24 states that whilst there should not be unacceptable disturbances to neighbouring properties, the planning system should not place unjustifiable obstacles in the way of business development and jobs, something reiterated in recent government advice following the 2011 Budget.
10.7.9 The Parish Council have contested comments within the Noise Mitigation Plan and comments from the Pollution Control Officer that the reduced levels will accord with the World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines in respect of their ‘Guidelines for Community Noise’. The Parish Council have commented that the document refers to noise levels between 30 and 40 decibels potentially having an impact on vulnerable groups such as children, the chronically ill and the elderly. They also have commented that the guidelines state that vulnerable groups should be taken into account when considering noise levels in relation to planning matters.
10.7.10 In response the Pollution Control Officer has stated that the WHO guidelines and documents are one of the paramount considerations in the attempts of the
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 Environmental Health department to safeguard local residents and ensure a suitable standard is maintained. The two standards that the Environmental Health department seek to achieve as part of the WHO guidelines are ‘good’ and ‘reasonable’ within the living room and bedroom of any household. These are as following:
Good – Bedroom: 30 dB LAeq | Living Room: 35 dB LAeq Reasonable – Bedroom: 35 dB LAeq | Living Room: 40dB LAeq
10.7.11 The Pollution Control Officers have therefore stated that based on the detailed noise assessment submitted, the noise levels at the Noise Sensitive Receptors including the nearby residential dwellings will be within the above recommended levels. The noise assessment has indicated as part of the noise modelling that the levels would not increase beyond 48 decibels at Noise Sensitive Receptors around the site following the mitigation scheme and that this would be during the daytime. Levels at night when measured approximately 1 metre from the elevation of nearby Oak Villa at 1st floor level should not exceed 40.5 decibels and this is not taking into account the reduction in noise levels created internally by the walls and windows of the dwelling which is considered to account for a further 15 decibel reduction. As such the overall decibel levels within the bedrooms and living rooms of the nearby dwellings should therefore not exceed 32 decibels during the daytime and 25 decibels at night which would therefore be within the ‘Good’ range of the WHO guidelines.
10.7.12 It is further considered that the above levels are only achievable through the proposed development and given that the existing levels exceed these, it is considered that there is a substantial betterment in this respect associated with the development. Whilst it is appreciated that there is a current condition restricting the noise levels at the site, the industrial nature of the authorised use means these levels when measured immediately adjacent to the noise sources will always be higher than the conditioned levels. This is demonstrated by the assessment of noise sources and associated decibel levels included within the noise mitigation report which show how high some of the noise sources are. With the proposed development vastly reducing the number of these noise sources externally together with the introduction of mitigation measures including the acoustic noise barrier it is considered that the proposed development should be considered on its merits and as such is considered to be acceptable in accordance with policy CS6 and PPG24.
10.7.13 Odour - A number of objectors including the Parish Council have commented that the proposed development will increase the level of odour from the site to the detriment of neighbouring amenities, in particular due to the introduction of a fat melting plant at the site.
10.7.14 Following consultation with the Public Protection Department they have confirmed that odour issues should be adequately covered under the Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations 2000 which are enforced by the Environment Agency (EA). A permit is required from the EA in this regard to ensure control measures are imposed for the reduction of odour emissions from the site and to ensure Best Available Techniques (BAT) are implemented to control any odours. However, the Pollution Control Officer also commented that the proposed scheme provides improved cover and containment of material
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 likely to cause odour emissions. It is certainly notable that the animal by- products, much of which are currently stored outside in bins temporarily prior to being loaded onto vehicles, will be moved into the proposed building for storage and loading into vehicles for removal.
10.7.15 The Environment Agency have also considered odour issues as part of their responses to the application and they have raised no objection in this regard. They have commented that ABP have applied to vary the existing PPC permit with the main aspects of the variation the inclusion of the fat melting plant and the associated boiler. They have made reference to these variations utilising BAT standards and minimising fugitive emissions and consider that these will not cause any off site odour nuisance or emissions. Since their last response the EA have permitted the variation to the PPC license at the site.
10.7.16 Given the above factors and that the EA consider that the introduction of the fat melting plant will not cause off site odour nuisance and will be controlled as part of the PPC license, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable and will not have an adverse impact on odour in accordance with PPS23 and CS6 of the Shropshire Core Strategy.
10.7.17 Light Pollution - Comments have also been received from objectors and the Parish Council in respect of potential light pollution. They have stated that the current situation is unacceptable but nothing has been done to improve this and any new lighting should not contravene the Clean Neighbourhood and Environment Act and should be controlled appropriately. As part of the EIA a lighting report has been submitted and following consultation with the Public Protection Department they have commented that the principle of the lighting scheme is acceptable, being carried out in accordance with best practicable means with appropriate techniques to minimise the impact on the surrounding area. These techniques include use of full horizontal cut off luminaries installed with 0 degree tilt, back reflectors and internal baffles which will limit glare and direct the beam in a controlled manner. However, the actual layout and details of the lighting have not been submitted and as such the Pollution Control Officer has therefore asked for these details to be conditioned. PPS23 states that Local Planning Authorities should seek to limit and reduce the adverse impact of light pollution and in this case it is considered that this will be achieved as part of the proposal. As such the development is considered to accord with PPS23 and CS6 of the Shropshire Core Strategy.
10.7.18 A lighting condition was attached to a previous application for an extension at the site and this specified the lighting levels at the site in terms of sky glow, light into windows, source intensity and building luminance. Whilst this condition will remain in place, the new scheme of lighting proposed for the development will be considered against the Institute of Lighting Engineers Guidance. As a result the lighting levels to be achieved will be lower than those specified on the previous condition. It is therefore considered that there will be some betterment as part of the proposed lighting which will be further enhanced by the use of the appropriate techniques described above.
10.8 Ground Contamination
10.8.1 There has been an objection from the Parish Council in respect of ground
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 contamination and they have stated that a full assessment including samples of soil and ground water should be carried out prior to any decision being taken. There were also objections from the Environment Agency upon the initial submission of the application as it had not been demonstrated that the redevelopment of the site would not result in mobilisation of contamination to groundwater.
10.8.2 Following the updated Environmental Statement being submitted the Environment Agency were re-consulted and stated that, due to the historical and current uses of the site which includes the potential for installation of underground fuel storage tanks approved in 1964, there is the potential for the contamination of the ground and groundwater below. However, whilst the limited ground investigation was not considered to be sufficient given that the pollution risk to controlled waters is considered to be high, there has been enough detail submitted to remove the objection to the scheme and the EA Senior Planning Officer advised that conditions were attached to any permission that secure detailed site investigation works and any required remediation and verification.
10.8.3 This is in line with the comments received from the Public Protection Contaminated Land Officer at Shropshire Council who has not objected to the scheme but asked that a more detailed investigation and risk assessment be undertaken prior to development and that conditions should be attached accordingly. As such it is considered that the level of information submitted at this stage is sufficient and that conditions can be applied to any permission ensuring there will be no detriment or pollution risk to controlled waters.
10.9 Trees and Land Ownership issues
10.9.1 The proposed development seeks to remove a section of cherry trees and scrub which forms part of a larger area of amenity adjacent to the south eastern corner of the site. This removal is required in order to facilitate the new access, which is to be further south than that existing due to the siting of the proposed abattoir and lairage, which extends in a southerly direction due to the location of the boiler room. There have been strong objections from a large number of objectors including the Parish Council to the removal of any trees from this area and they have commented that the removal will have an adverse impact on the visual amenity of the area. They have also commented that there has been no compensation package proposed to the Parish Council for such a loss of the trees.
10.9.2 The Trees Officer objected to the initial scheme based on the level of tree removal that was proposed, with the access splay running across almost a third of the total area and removing a significant amount of the cherry trees. However, following discussions between the applicant and the Trees Officer it was agreed that a reduced scheme of tree and shrub removal may be acceptable where mitigation planting was included as part of the scheme within the area. The applicant subsequently submitted an amended and reduced access which only entails the removal of 7 trees and a section of scrub. The Trees Officer has considered the amended scheme and made no objection in principle based on the much reduced level of tree removal and inclusion of an area for mitigation planting. This area now forms part of the formally submitted plans and the Trees
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 Officer has no objections providing a condition is included for agreement of types, species and exact locations of the mitigation planting, which should be native species.
10.9.3 Whilst there have been strong objections from the neighbouring properties and Parish Council, it is considered that the reduction in tree removal is important and allows the majority of the trees to be retained, minimising the impact on the visual amenity that the trees provide. Further to this, the mitigation scheme will enhance the native species in and around the site particularly adjacent to the public right of way which runs to the south of the site. Whilst there have also been comments that this planting will have an adverse impact on the use of the right of way by making it darker and therefore less accessible, it is considered that the introduction of native species will improve its visual appearance and will restrict light to the right of way less than the existing approved bund with Leylandii planting on the top. As such it is considered that the proposed tree removal will not have an adverse impact on the visual amenity of the area and the proposed mitigation planting will provide an enhanced environment and include high quality and appropriate landscaping in accordance with policy CS6 of the Core Strategy.
10.9.4 The objections to the scheme have also referred to the issue of land ownership of this area of trees required for use as part of the proposed access. However, the Divisional Surveyor has confirmed that he considers the highway and land in this area controlled and maintained by the Highways Authority. Whilst it is certainly acknowledged that the Parish Council have been involved with the maintenance of this area of land, an access can be formed across land in the ownership of the Highways Authority in order for vehicles to access the adjacent highway and this is a regular occurrence. In this case it is therefore not considered to be ‘land grabbing’ since the land will remain in the ownership of the Highways Authority and will be used solely as an access to the site, with relevant controls and enforcement of this section of land still in the hands of the Highways Authority.
10.9.5 Whilst the Parish Council have argued that there has been no compensation proposed for the loss of this land, the amount of land within this area has been reduced following negotiations with the applicants as discussed above and the total area involved in not significant. Further to this the inclusion of the mitigation planting will further enhance the amenity of the area and as such it is considered that the impact on the amenity of the site in terms of the overall scale of land being included as part of the access does not merit any further compensation other than that already proposed.
10.10 Ecology
10.10.1 A number of objectors including the Parish Council have referred to the impact of the proposal on protected species and other wildlife within close proximity of the site, in particular in relation to the removal of part of the trees and shrubs to the south east of the site. An objector to the scheme has also provided evidence of badgers foraging within this area. However, the Shropshire Council Planning Ecologist has no objection to the scheme following consideration of the submitted Ecological and Protected Species Survey subject to informatives being attached to any permission in respect of bats and birds nests. These
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 informatives concern the period in which demolition, clearance and construction can take place and how external lighting should be positioned.
10.10.2 Following further consideration of the details provided in respect of foraging badgers within the amenity area to the south east of the site, it was confirmed by the Planning Ecologist that only badger setts are legally protected in respect of development and provided that there are no setts being affected by the proposal there are no restrictions to the development taking place in this regard. As such it is considered that there will be no adverse impact on statutorily protected species in accordance with CS6.
10.11 Drainage
10.11.1 A number of objections to the scheme have referred to the surface water drainage from the site with the objectors arguing that the surface water from ABP floods the stream that runs adjacent to the site as well as neighbouring land. The initial submission of surface water drainage details were deemed to be insufficient and further requests were made by the drainage department for more information. Following this a full drainage assessment was submitted on behalf of ABP by Moylan Drainage Consultants and this included a full drainage plan and details of a hydrobrake mechanism as a flow control device. This will entail a separate surface water drainage system to that existing which will serve the increase in surface area of approximately 0.6 hectares and has been designed to allow for a 30% increase in capacity for climate change.
10.11.2 The report demonstrates that the proposed drainage system will utilise the hydrobrake system set at a rate of 5 litres per second to ensure that the runoff from the proposed hardstanding is as per the existing Greenfield runoff rates. The proposed system also utilises a Sustainable Urban Drainage System to ensure that there is flow restriction and storage tanks that attenuate flows in storm conditions as well as an interceptor to remove pollutants. The storage attenuation tank has been designed to accommodate 260 cubic metres which is in excess of the 100 year winter storm inclusive of 30% allowance for climate change for the new area of hard standing. The existing site area will continue to be drained to the waste water treatment plant which is in place at the site. Following receipt of these details and the relevant calculations there has been no objection from the Shropshire Council Drainage department.
10.11.3 The adjacent landowner has made several objections to the scheme on the basis of the surface water drainage from the site being insufficient and often draining onto his land and flooding the adjacent drainage watercourse which leads to the River Perry to the west of the site. Following detailed correspondence with the SC drainage department they have responded to his comments and calculations confirming that the calculations provided by Moylan Drainage Consultants are correct and acceptable. In addition, Moylan Consultants have responded in respect of the adjacent land owner’s comments clarifying how the calculations have been undertaken and why these are correct for the proposed development. Both sets of drainage consultants consider that the drainage system is suitable for the proposed development and the proposed system accords with Core Strategy policy CS18 as well as national guidance in the form of PPS25 through inclusion of a Sustainable Urban Drainage System that ensures flow rates are no higher than as existing Greenfield runoff. It is
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 therefore considered that the drainage design for the proposed development is acceptable in accordance with policies CS6, CS18 and PPS25.
10.11.4 The objections in respect of existing flooding issues at the site are acknowledged but given that the proposed development and hard surfacing has been proven to be drained effectively by the hydrobrake and attenuation system proposed, any further issues in respect of the existing drainage system are outside the control of this application.
10.11.5 However, the proposed system will replace some of the existing drainage on the basis that the abattoir and lairage are being replaced and in this respect there will be some betterment and the Environment Agency have acknowledged that the proposals should result in some reduced hydraulic loading at the existing waste treatment plant and drain. It is therefore considered that the general flooding issues from the existing site referred to within objections are considered to be improved as part of the sophisticated drainage system proposed but existing drainage issues are not within the remit of considering this application in any case. Should there be a detrimental impact from the ABP site on adjacent land owners from the existing system it is considered that this would be a civil matter between the applicant and the complainant. If there are issues with respect to the water quality discharging from the site, the Environment Agency have acknowledged in their response that this is their responsibility under the Environmental Permit required for the site.
10.12 Rights of Way
10.12.1 A number of the objectors including those of the Parish Council have objected to the scheme on the basis that the proposed access cuts across an existing Public Right of Way. However, whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed access will cut across an existing path/walkway, this is not actually part of the designated Right of Way FP Hordley 2/1. The designated footpath is located the other side of the southern boundary of the ABP site, approximately 40 metres from the proposed access and runs off the amenity area in a westerly direction but does not actually include any of this amenity area. There will therefore be no adverse impact on a designated Right of Way as commented by objectors.
10.12.2 The Rights of Way Officer has no objection to the scheme on the basis that the proposal will not have any impact on the existing Public Right of Way. However, given that there is an existing path leading to the Public Right of Way the applicant has agreed to include a new pathway to the south of the proposed access which will lead through the existing trees and shrubs to the path and Public Right of Way. This will allow for an access from the northern side of the footpath, as well as to the south as existing. However, the Parish Council and other objectors have commented that the proposed footpath will increase the risks in accessing the area on foot. This is not considered to be the case given that both paths would be accessed directly off the road and not from a pavement therefore the risks of accessing the area on foot are considered to be no worse than as existing, with pedestrians also having to cross the existing southern vehicular access, as would be the case following the development in respect of the proposed access.
10.13 Other Issues
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011
10.13.1 A number of objectors have referred to the fact that the ABP factory does not allow them the human right to the peaceful enjoyment of their property and that there has been physical damage to the properties in the surrounding area due to the volume of HGVs. Whilst the latter would be a civil matter for residents to take up with the applicant, the consideration of human rights balanced with the orderly development of the country is something that is considered by planning authorities. This application has considered the impacts of the proposed development above in terms of noise, smell and the local highway infrastructure and based on the submitted information and the proposed legal agreement it is considered that the development is in line with national and local planning policies and other policy guidelines in respect of these matters. In this regard it is not considered that the proposed development will have an unacceptable impact on the objector’s peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
10.13.2 A number of objectors have referred to the construction phase of the development and that this will have an adverse impact on the surrounding area including the highway and neighbouring amenities. However, the section 106 agreement will require the applicant to submit a Construction Traffic Management Plan. This will ensure the applicant uses their best endeavours to ensure that any construction traffic associated with this development proposal is coordinated with the day to day activities of the site so as not to materially impact on the safe and free flow of traffic along the adjacent highway network, or negatively impact on the local community.
10.13.3 Further to this the applicant has submitted a detailed description of the construction and demolition activities and the procedures to ensure each aspect of this is dealt with accordingly by appropriate contractors, with particular reference to effective environmental management and a site specific plan including a Site Waste Management Plan. In terms of construction traffic it is expected that there will be 8 HGV movements a day associated with the development and 7 car movements though full details of this will be provided as part of the Construction Traffic Management Plan. Hours of operation will also be conditioned to ensure there is no activity during the late evenings and night time. As such it is considered that the construction and demolition has been designed to ensure any impact on the surrounding area and neighbouring amenities is minimised.
10.14 Conclusion 10.14.1 The principle of an expansion of an existing business is supported and encouraged through national and local planning policies, and it is considered that the applicant has demonstrated that there will be no unacceptable adverse impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties or the surrounding highway network created by the development. The scale and design of the structure is considered to be in keeping with the existing site and improves the visual appearance of the existing abattoir and lairage. It has further been satisfactorily demonstrated that the development is unlikely to have an adverse impact on statutorily protected species, surface water drainage or ground contamination. As such it is considered that the proposal accords with policies CS5, CS6, CS7, CS8, CS9, CS13 and CS18 of the Shropshire Core Strategy as well as PPS1, PPS4, PPS7, PPS9, PPS23, PPS24 and PPS25.
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011
LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS:
HUMAN RIGHTS
Article 8 give the right to respect for private and family life and First Protocol Article 1 allows for the peaceful enjoyment of possessions. These have to be balanced against the rights and freedoms of others and the orderly development of the County in the interests of the Community. These matters are considered in more detail above.
First Protocol Article 1 requires that the desires of landowners must be balanced against the impact of development upon nationally important features and the impact on residents.
This legislation has been taken into account in arriving at the above recommendation.
Environmental Appraisal Submitted with Environmental Impact Assessment in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 2 Part 7 (f) Installation for the Slaughter of Animals of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999. Risk Management Appraisal N/A Community / Consultations Appraisal Contained within report Member Champion Councillor Malcolm Price Local Member Councillor Caesar Homden Appendices N/A
Reason for Approval
The principle of an expansion of an existing business is supported and encouraged through national and local planning policies, and it is considered that the applicant has demonstrated that there will be no unacceptable adverse impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties or the surrounding highway network created by the development. The scale and design of the structure is considered to be in keeping with the existing site and improves the visual appearance of the existing abattoir and lairage. It has further been satisfactorily demonstrated that the development is unlikely to have an adverse impact on statutorily protected species, surface water drainage or ground contamination. As such it is considered that the proposal accords with policies CS5, CS6, CS7, CS8, CS9, CS13 and CS18 of the Shropshire Core Strategy as well as PPS1, PPS4, PPS7, PPS9, PPS23, PPS24 and PPS25.
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011
STANDARD CONDITION(S)
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 (As amended).
2. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the deposited and amended plans.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans and details.
CONDITION(S) THAT REQUIRE APPROVAL BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT COMMENCES
3. No built development shall commence until samples of all external materials including hard surfacing, have been first submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approval details.
Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the development is satisfactory.
4. No development shall be commenced until details of the means of access, including the construction, sightlines and any gates, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be fully implemented before the use hereby approved is commenced or the buildings occupied.
Reason: To ensure a satisfactory means of access to the highway.
5. No development shall be commenced until details for the parking, turning, loading and unloading of vehicles have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be laid out and surfaced in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the development and thereafter maintained and retained only for its intended purpose.
Reason: To provide for the parking loading and unloading of vehicles off the highway in the interest of highway safety.
6. No development shall be commenced until details for the pedestrian walkway and the localised road widening have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning. The approved scheme shall be laid out and surfaced in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the development and thereafter maintained and retained only for its intended purpose.
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011
Reason: To provide for safer pedestrian movement across the frontage of the site and to improve HGV turning manoeuvres at the new access point in the interest of highway safety.
7. No development shall take place until the details of the acoustic barrier have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The acoustic barrier shall be installed prior to the first use of the development hereby approved and thereafter retained and maintained in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbouring residents
8. An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include:
(i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination;
(ii) an assessment of the potential risks to:
• human health,
• property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes,
• adjoining land,
• groundwaters and surface waters,
• ecological systems,
• archeological sites and ancient monuments;
(iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s).
This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’.
Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
9. A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation.
Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
10. The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
11. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of condition 8, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of condition 9, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with condition 10.
Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
12. A monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period of time to be agreed in writing, and the provision of reports on the same must be prepared, both of which are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of the measures identified in that scheme and when the remediation objectives have been achieved, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced, and submitted to the
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 Local Planning Authority. This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’.
Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
13. No trees, large shrubs or hedgerows shown as retained on the approved plans and particulars shall be uprooted, felled, lopped, topped, or cut back in any way until a scheme has been approved that specifically allows such works. The works shall then take place in accordance with the agreed scheme.
Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to consider the scheme of development and the landscaping proposals in relation to the existing trees and hedges.
14. No work, including site clearance work, associated with the development granted by this planning permission will commence nor will any equipment, machinery, plant or materials be brought on to site for the purpose of undertaking such work until the following requirements have been complied with:
(i) All tree protection measures detailed in the submitted tree protection scheme ref: TPP-01 Rev C have been fully implemented on site and that this has been reported in writing to the Local Planning Authority.
(ii) A person with sufficient control over site operations has been appointed to inspect the tree protection measures and ensure that they are maintained intact and in place throughout the construction of the development and that the Local Planning Authority are informed in writing of this appointment and provided with contact details for the person named.
In addition all tree protection measures detailed in the approved tree protection scheme are to be maintained in place and in good condition until all construction work, including landscaping work has been completed and / or consent has been given in writing by the Local Planning Authority to allow for the removal of the tree protection measures.
Reason: To ensure trees, hedges, shrubs and other arboricultural features that are to be retained or created on or adjacent to the development site are properly protected from any construction activity.
15. No work, including site clearance work, associated with the development granted by this planning permission will commence nor will any equipment, machinery, plant or materials be brought on to site for the purpose of undertaking such work until full details of the landscape planting to be undertaken in the areas indicated on drawing ref: 60162755/LSC/002/Rev. B have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details must include; written specifications for cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment; schedules of
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate; implementation and maintenance program.
Any plants or trees that are removed or die or become seriously damaged or diseased within a period of 5 years from the date of planting shall be replaced with others of similar size and species in the next planting season, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.
Reason: In the interests of amenity and to ensure a satisfactory form of development.
CONDITION(S) THAT REQUIRE APPROVAL DURING THE CONSTRUCTION/PRIOR TO THE OCCUPATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT
16. Before the use commences the vehicular access to the site shall be limited to the new southern access and existing northern access shown on approved plan CADX677/001 Rev G and the existing southern access shall be permanently stopped up in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the development should not prejudice the free flow of traffic and conditions of safety on the highway nor cause inconvenience to other highway users.
17. Details of the floodlighting and/or external lighting for the building and open areas, including car parking and service areas shall be submitted and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority before the building is occupied. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and no additional external lights shall be erected.
Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.
18. Prior to the first use of the development hereby approved the surface water drainage shall be carried out strictly in accordance with plan number P001 Rev B received on 8th April 2011 and the submitted Further Information Report and drainage calculations December 2010 undertaken by Moylan Drainage Consultants.
Reason: To ensure satisfactory drainage of the site and to avoid flooding.
19. Prior to the first use of the development the foul water drainage will be carried out strictly in accordance with amended drawing number CADX677/008 rev C received on 4th April 2011.
Reason: To ensure satisfactory drainage of the site.
CONDITION(S) THAT ARE RELEVANT FOR THE LIFETIME OF THE DEVELOPMENT
20. Construction works shall not take place outside 07.30 - 18.00 hours Monday - Friday and 08.00 - 13.00 on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays or Bank Holidays
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011
Reason: In order to maintain the amenities of the area
21. All practicable steps shall be taken to prevent dust arising during construction operations hereby permitted which may lead to wind entrainment and/or deposition of dust beyond the site boundary hereby permitted including: i. the regular sweeping or cleaning of internal roadways, storage areas and hardsurfaces so as to maintain them free of mud or debris likely to give rise to dust; ii. confining the storage of dry materials to approved containers and bays : iii. the employment of a water mist dust suppression system where necessary; iv. dampening outside areas in dry weather; v. ensuring bulk loads arriving at or leaving the site are carried in enclosed or sheeted containers;
Reason: In order to maintain the amenities of the area
22. Fixed items of the plant as identified on page 13, Table 4.1 of the Noise Mitigation Plan (AECOM, September 2010) shall be installed to achieve the sound pressure levels specified within the Noise Mitigation Plan and maintained thereafter at these levels.
Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbouring residents
23. The southern vehicular access hereby approved shall not be used between the hours of 21:00 and 07:00 the following morning.
Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbouring residents.
24. Deliveries of cattle arriving between 21:00 hours and 07:00 hours at the northern access shall be unloaded through the entrance to the lairage on the western façade only.
Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbouring residents
25. No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground is permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local 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 controlled waters. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approval details.
Reason: To protect ground and surface waters (‘controlled waters’ as defined under the Water Resources Act 1991).
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011
Informatives
1. The active nests of all wild birds are protected under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (As amended). An active nest is one being built, containing eggs or chicks, or on which fledged chicks are still dependent.
In order to protect the biodiversity interest of the site, all clearance, conversion and demolition work should be carried out outside of the bird nesting season which runs from March to September inclusive if possible. If it is necessary for work to commence in the nesting season then a pre-commencement inspection of the vegetation and buildings for active bird nests should be carried out. If vegetation cannot be clearly seen to be clear of bird’s nests then an experienced ecologist will be required to carry out the check. Only if there are no active nests present should work commence.
2. All species of bats found in the UK are European Protected Species under the Habitats Directive 1992, the Conservation of Species and Habitats Regulations 2010 and the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended).
In the interest of protection of biodiversity any external lighting on the site should point downwards, should not be erected above 2.5m and should not remain constantly on overnight. Lighting should also especially avoid pointing towards the south and south west boundaries of the site.
If a bat should be discovered on site at any point during the development then work must halt and Natural England should be contacted for advice.
3. The Environment Agency recommends that the developers should:
1) Follow the risk management framework provided in CLR11, Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, when dealing with land affected by contamination.
2) Refer to our Guidance on Requirements for Land Contamination Reports for the type of information that we require in order to assess risks to controlled waters from the site. The Local Authority can advise on risk to other receptors, e.g. human health.
4. Informative Highway Notes:
HN1. Mud on highway The applicant is responsible for keeping the highway free from any mud or other material emanating from the application site or any works pertaining thereto.
HN7. No drainage to discharge to highway Drainage arrangements shall be provided to ensure that surface water from the driveway and/or vehicular turning area does not discharge onto the public highway. No drainage or effluent from the proposed development shall be allowed to discharge into any highway drain or over any part of the public highway.
HN13. Section 278 Agreement
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264
North Planning Committee (Oswestry): 26th April 2011 No work on the site should commence until engineering details of the improvements to the public highway (new access, pedestrian walkway and road widening) have been approved by the Highway Authority and an agreement under Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980 entered into. Please contact: Highways Development Control, Shropshire Council, Shirehall, Abbey Foregate, Shrewsbury, SY2 6ND to progress the agreement. No works on the site of the development shall be commenced until these details have been approved and an Agreement under Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980 entered into
HN12. Extraordinary maintenance The attention of the applicant is drawn to Section 59 of the Highways Act 1980 which allows the Highway Authority to recover additional costs of road maintenance due to damage by extraordinary traffic.
Contact: Edwina Smart on 01691 677264