Agenda Item No: 7a
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
5 FEBRUARY 2013
REPORT BY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING
Subject: Change of use to a recycling facility to manage waste electrical and electronic equipment, ELVs, cardboard, plastics and tyres at Earlstrees Road, Earlstrees Industrial Estate, Corby NN17 4AZ
Applicant: WEEE Environmental GB Ltd
Recommendations: That the application be granted planning permission subject to the conditions in Appendix A.
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 The purpose of this report is to provide the Committee with professional planning advice on ay issues, Development Plan Policies and other material considerations relevant to the determination of a planning application.
2. Relevant Priority Outcomes
The content of this report supports the delivery of the following corporate outcomes:
Perspective Outcome
Customers - to achieve our A cleaner, greener and more prosperous county vision, what will our customers see?
3. Background
3.1 The application site is a large plot of vacant industrial land covering a total area of 2.2 hectares and is located within the established Earlstrees Industrial Estate on the northern outskirts of Corby. The application site is situated to the south side of Earlstrees Road and is bordered by Weetabix to the east, Ceva Logistics to the west, and residential properties on Hubble Road to the south. Avon Cosmetics and another Weetabix building occupy sites to the north on the opposite side of Earlstrees Road.
3.2 The site currently has planning permission to operate as a B8 (storage/distribution) use and was last used as a car storage facility, although the site is currently vacant. Most of the site comprises hardstanding, and there are two existing buildings located to the north and east comprising a total of 1,858 square metres. Access is from Earlstrees Road.
3.3 The applicant, WEEE Environmental GB Ltd, currently operates a recycling facility for Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEEE) at premises in Mill Road, Wellingborough (and has done for the last three years). Planning permission has recently been gained on the site to recycle End of Life Vehicles (ELV’s) but has not yet been implemented. The applicant is looking to relocate operations from Wellingborough to the application site in order to gain a secure tenancy to expand its current operations into other recycling ventures.
4. Proposal
4.1 The applicant, WEEE Environmental GB Ltd, is seeking planning permission for the change of use of land to:
Manage a recycling operation – principally a WEEE (waste electrical and electronic equipment) and ELV (end of life vehicles) depolluting facility.
Store, sort and recycle plastics, paper and tyres, cardboard and other packaging waste.
Sort batteries for treatment at other suitably licensed facilities.
4.2 It is intended that the site will deal with waste from the commercial sector and handle up to 25,000 tonnes of waste per year. The site would not accept domestic, liquid or food waste, and the processes would not involve any chemical or heat treatment. All waste delivered to the site will be directed to the appropriate area for storage (as shown on Drawing Earls 44) prior to being sorted and/or processed depending on the type of waste. ELV’s (pre and post de-pollution) and commercial refrigeration will be stored outside and all other wastes including products reclaimed from de-polluted vehicles and other waste electrical equipment will be stored inside the buildings. The ELV and WEEE de-pollution operations will also be carried out inside the buildings. A mobile baler will be brought to the site once a week on average to bale the de-polluted ELV’s.
5. Consultation
5.1 An initial consultation on the original information submitted with the planning application was undertaken in October 2012. However, further assessment information was required by the WPA and also as a result of comments received during the consultation period. The applicant submitted the following additional information: Updated Planning Statement; Noise Impact Assessment; External Lighting Report and Plan; Fire Scheme; Security Scheme; and Revised Site Layout. Further consultation was undertaken on the additional information in December 2012.
5.2 The following is a summary of the responses received during consultation on this application. Full copies can be made available to the committee members on request.
Corby Borough Council (CBC)
5.3 No objection subject to noise issues being fully addressed prior to permission being issued and conditions being imposed relating to hours of operation, lighting, visual impact and contamination. Also requested that consideration be given to whether removal of ‘Permitted Development’ rights to extend the buildings would be reasonable in this case given the relationship between the site and residential properties on Hubble Road.
5.4 In response to the re-consultation, notably the Noise Impact Assessment, CBC’s Environmental Protection Officer (EPO) requested further information in light of insufficient data to confirm the suitability of the suggested noise mitigation controls. Further information was submitted and the EPO has stated that although this department does not consider the site as ideal for a waste operation, directly backing onto residential properties, in light of lighting and noise reports propose the following conditions to safeguard and reflect the comments:
1 The overall night time operations will not increase the background noise levels over the night time period.
2. The overall light environment when the site is in use after dark will not be increased at the residential buildings
Environment Agency (EA)
5.5 No objection to the proposed development but advises that Anglian Water should confirm that they are satisfied that all surface water is able to be discharged via the surface water sewer. The EA made several informative comments for the applicant’s attention regarding taking reasonable precautions to mitigate against potential noise and dust from the proposed development on nearby receptors and the Environmental Permit application process. This information is included as informatives to the recommended planning conditions.
Highway Authority
5.6 Commented initially that the applicant had failed to demonstrate or give adequate information in order for a full assessment to be given and therefore, in its initial form the proposals were unacceptable to the Highway Authority for highway safety reasons.
5.7 Following the submission of revised information, the Highway Authority has no objection in principle to the proposed development subject to a condition being imposed requiring the applicant to ensure that sufficient turning and manoeuvrability and adequate on site parking will be maintained within the development site.
5.8 Having considered the additional documents, the Highway Authority notes the revised site layout identifies vehicle turning and the ELV parking area being some 50m in length to address previous observations. The Highway Authority has no objection in principle to the proposal on highway related issues, although on site parking and turning manoeuvrability shall be retained for its long term use.
5.9 Additional comments from Terry 7/1/2013 Following the applicants proposals to install acoustic barriers inside the site the Highway Authority has asked for further information in the form of swept path analysis for HGV’s to demonstrate that the barriers will not interfere with the free flow of HGV’s in and out of the site in a forward gear. An oral update on this matter will be provided.
Crime Prevention Design Advisor (CPDA)
5.10 Following a site visit accompanied by the applicant, the CPDA reported that Northamptonshire Police had no formal objections to the planning application. At the site visit the CPDA made recommendations with regards any upgrade to the existing intruder
alarm and CCTV that would enhance the systems. The CPDA also inspected the perimeter security of the site from the western end of Hubble Road and does not feel that the site or business has any particular risk in terms of security/crime or anti social behaviour and the proposed measures are considered risk commensurate. The CPDA also discussed the proposal with two members of the police Safer Community Team which cover the area. The two officers are also of the opinion that the business will not be detrimental to the area. The Northamptonshire Police Community Safety Department would visit the site to provide more specific crime prevention advice in terms of utilising the CCTV and intruder alarm system to their best advantage if the application is approved.
5.11 Following the submission of a Security Scheme, the CPDA has no outstanding concerns regarding the security of the site taking into consideration the vulnerability of goods stored and the proposed level of crime prevention measures taken.
Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue Service (FRS)
5.12 No adverse comments. No objection to the site as whilst vacant the Fire Safety Order (FSO) 2005 does not apply. Should the company put into place the items mentioned in the Fire Scheme and address the issues raised it is likely they will comply with the FSO when occupied. As and when the company occupies the site it will fall into the FRS risk based inspection programme and would be subject to an inspection.
Anglian Water (AW)
5.13 There are no assets owned by AW or those subject to an adoption agreement within the development site boundary. AW commented on wastewater services as follows:
The foul drainage from this development is in the catchment of Corby STW that at present has available capacity for these flows.
The sewerage system at present has available capacity for these flows. If the developer wishes to connect to AW’s sewerage network they should serve notice under Section 106 of the Water Industry Act 1991.
The preferred method of surface water disposal would be to a sustainable drainage system (SUDS) with connection to sewer seen as the last option. Building Regulations (Part H) on Drainage and Waste Disposal for England includes a surface water drainage hierarchy, with infiltration on site as the preferred disposal option, followed by discharge to watercourse and then connection to a sewer. The flood risk assessment submitted with the planning application is acceptable in principle as it is understood that flows will not increase from the previous use. There is an opportunity to introduce some source control measures within the site boundary which will in effect clean the surface water prior to it impacting on the surface water system. AW have requested a condition requiring works to be carried out in accordance with the surface water strategy as approved before the premises are occupied to prevent environmental and amenity problems arising from flooding.
The planning application includes employment/commercial use. To discharge trade effluent from trade premises to a public sewer vested in AW requires AW’s consent.
AW has provided information regarding trade effluent which is included as an informative to the recommended planning conditions.
County Councillor Julie Brookfield
5.14 Concerned about traffic using Rockingham Road and the approach to Earlstrees Road. Waste is to be transported to the site, resulting in an increase in traffic on an already busy route. Since previous applications of this nature, new housing development has taken place at Babbage Crescent, Dewar Close and Pascal Close. Also concerned about the impact on these residential areas and Hubble Road and Stanier Road.
5.15 Having considered the additional documents, Councillor Brookfield remains concerned that the proposed site is too close to what have become large residential areas including Hubble Road, Babbage Crescent and Hook Close. Councillor Brookfield does not accept that because residents will use the items to be recycled in their everyday life that they should accept them being recycled so close to their homes. The two metre fence proposed at the boundary with Hubble Road does not constitute screening. Councillor Brookfield’s previous comments regarding traffic and vehicle movements still apply.
County Councillor Bob Scott
5.16 Objects to the proposal for a recycling facility due to its vicinity to housing and for the following reasons:
Physical impact – concerned that contaminated surface water will naturally run off into the gardens of Hubble Road properties due the sloping site and lower level gardens or through the cracks in the surface of the application site. Also concerned about the issue of airborne odours and contaminants from the stockpiles of pre and post- recycled material.
Fridges – concerned that the delivery of fridges at 2 or 3am will cause noise disturbance to residents. Moving fridges into the building to be stripped will also cause a great deal of noise as well as moving parts to be stored. Fridges piled 2 or 3 high will be unsightly and unacceptable. Also the sight of mounds of plastic, cardboard and metal is not a pleasant outlook for residents and there is a risk of flying pieces of cardboard and plastic.
ELV’s – concerned that the storage of scrap cars usually attracts vermin and no information is given as to how this will be addressed to ensure there will be no problem to residents or Weetabix next door. Scrap cars are notorious for leaking fluids but no bunding is proposed. The scrap cars present a fire hazard until the fluids are drained, which is unacceptable next to a housing estate. The noise associated with unloading and moving ELV’s will be fairly high and unacceptable to residents. Also, the visual impact of mounds of ELV’s is not an acceptable outlook for the residents of Hubble Road. The use of a baler to crush the steel from the ELV’s will create an enormous amount of noise which is likely to be unacceptable near a residential area especially before 9am. Also the use of a baler in the open air will give rise to noise and airborne material.
Tyres – concerned that there is no date relating to the noise levels created by the granulator either in the building or when the doors are open. The recycling/storage of
tyres are renowned for incidents of fires, the smoke from which is toxic and would result in residents being asked to vacate their property. We do not want to take the chance of that happening on this site.
Cardboard – there have been a number of fires on the east side of the industrial estate as a result of arson attacks, but none adjacent to residential areas. The storage of cardboard and plastic on this site would increase the likelihood of an arson attack.
Landscaping – while landscaping the bottom of the site to hide the visual impact of the operation would be desirable, it would not affect the issues of noise, odour, infestation or contamination.
Traffic – the proposal states up to 21 articulated lorries could visit the site in a 24 hour period. The route they will take is unknown, but articulated lorries have tried to reach the industrial estate via Hubble Road in the past and there is concern that this will increase.
Community – the application has had a big impact on the community with about 60 people attending a public meeting to hear the applicant, planning officer and EA officer prior to forming an action committee. All points made could have an adverse impact on the environment in terms of noise, pollution, blight and stress to those living next to or near the site.
Alternative sites – there are a number of alternative sites in the Corby area that would be suitable for the proposed recycling operation being away from residential areas and largely on brownfield sites.
District Councillors L Goult, S Kettle and M Pengelly
5.17 Strongly object to the proposed development due to loss of amenity in the neighbouring residential area i.e. noise, smells and fumes, days and hours of operation, unsightly open storage of materials, height of open stored materials, intrusive lighting from the yard area and potential fire risk in proximity to housing.
6. Public Advertisement and Neighbour Notification
6.1 The application was advertised by way of a site notice and advertisement in the Northamptonshire Telegraph on 20 September 2012. Direct notifications were sent to 101 properties in the vicinity of the application site.
6.2 As at 21 November 2012 (before the re-consultation) objections had been received from 279 individuals or groups. Included in this number are 253 objectors who signed a duplicated letter which raised issues around noise, especially given the proximity to residential dwellings, pollution, fire risk, dust and vermin, visual impact and security concerns.
6.3 Full copies of responses can be made available to committee members on request. A summary of the main points of objection are listed below.
Principle of development – Need and location
Inappropriate business to be carried out in such close proximity to residential properties.
There are other areas in Corby which would be suitable for this type of industry that are not near residential properties.
There is another scrap yard in close proximity so there is no need for an additional facility.
Inappropriate to site a scrap yard next to a factory producing food products i.e. Weetabix.
Government report produced in 1995 on used tyre safety suggested that sites close to residential areas were not regarded as suitable for tyre recycling plants.
Previous use of car storage does not present risks to the surrounding sites and are easy to move around the site with very little noise.
Amenity
Noise impacts from the processes used will greatly impact on residents in the surrounding area. The proposed hours of business means the potential for noise is continuous on a 24/7 basis. The application states that some operations will take place inside buildings but this will not stop the noise as roller shutter doors will not be shut as it would not be viable to do so.
Business hours of 6am to 6pm Monday to Friday and 6am to 12noon on weekends and bank holidays together with 24/7 vehicular access in unacceptable.
ELV baling to be done outside the buildings so noise from the operation will not be contained.
Vibration impacts from the machinery to be used on site.
Dust and small items of cardboard and insulation material blowing around the site and neighbouring properties which could cause breathing problems such as asthma.
Odour from tyres, fuels etc. Concerns raised whether oxy acetylene cutting equipment will be used in connection with the ELV’s.
Health risks from hazardous components and substances including highly flammable cyclopentane as well as other fuels, plus other noxious materials including asbestos and mercury-containing items.
Lighting impacts.
Visual Impact
Current fencing around the site will not give residents any screening from the recycling facilities.
The view of up to 125 ELV’s and 2,000 refrigerators will be an unsightly view for residents. There are no controls as to how high some materials will be stored.
New sound proofing fencing and planting (evergreens) to screen the view of the site from the properties on Hubble Road.
Traffic and access
Incidents when articulated lorries try using Hubble Road to reach Earlstrees Road will inevitably increase.
Extra HGV’s will approach the site from the Corby village end of Rockingham Road, a road that is not built to take on more HGV traffic especially as there are schools at the end of Rockingham Road.
Environmental
Surface of the application site is not adequate to prevent the ingress of fluids and chemicals into the ground. Any spillage which did not penetrate the surface would due to the fall in the land travel towards and onto the land at the rear of the site where there is no bund or catchment to prevent this, endangering the tree belt and gardens.
Call for a full environmental impact assessment to be undertaken if planning permission were to be granted.
A full tree survey should be submitted.
Risk of water pollution draining from the site could enter the brook running not far from the site boundary.
Biodiversity
Impact on wildlife often seen at the top of Hubble Road.
Willow Brook North Arm is approximately 100m from the boundary of the proposed waste facility.
Consideration should be given to the animal and plant life directly adjacent to the proposed site and the necessary surveys conducted.
Other matters
The storage of large volumes of different flammable liquids, tyres, cardboard and packaging materials is of great concern especially for the potential of poisonous gases released into the atmosphere over many days should a fire occur. Tall trees on the
edge of the unit boundary are directly linked to the rear gardens of properties on Hubble Road and should a fire spread to the trees, the results would be catastrophic.
Risk of flooding of adjacent residential properties should a fire take place, given the volume of water required to extinguish a tyre fire.
Vermin attracted to the site.
Potential for theft is high in the current economic climate and the most obvious access is through Hubble Road either from common ground at the end of the road of residents gardens.
Reduction in property values.
Concern that the applicant could expand into the area of land at the rear of Ceva.
Inaccuracies in the application and inadequate information submitted.
The applicant’s decision to locate the operation so close to a residential area is purely based on financial motives.
Limited consultation.
Re-consultation on additional documents
6.4 Further responses were received from the Member of Parliament for Corby and East Northamptonshire, two residents associations and one local resident to the re- consultation on additional documents. A summary of their comments follows. Full copies of responses can be made available to committee members on request.
Andy Sawford MP
6.5 The MP re-iterated concerns expressed to him by concerned local residents of Hubble Road relating to noise, screening, pollution, potential fire risk and security implications. The MP expressed the residents concern that there has not been sufficient time and opportunity for their concerns to be fully aired and addressed and asked for clarification of timescales and further opportunities for residents to comment and participate in the planning process.
Lloyds West Residents Association
6.6 The amendments made by the applicant in light of the objections are not sufficient to allay the residents’ fears. The following points remain major concerns:
Starting the working day at 7am is still too early. The applicant acknowledges that its activity will cause increased and unacceptable noise levels to local residents. Night time deliveries will impact on residents’ sleep patterns. Proposed sound barrier of 4 x 12ft containers will not be sufficient to cover a standard articulated vehicle that will be delivering the freezers. Also, there is no
indication of what material will be inside the containers to absorb the noise. Left empty they could act as echo chambers. Do not agree that four or more deliveries through the night will be lost among other noises. Whatever background noise there is in the area is at a predominantly constant level, but the delivery of freezers will cause major spikes in that background noise. Attempt to pressurise NCC into granting permission based on a theoretical job creation for possibly 17 people.
Residents Against WEEE Recycling (RAWR)
6.7 Having studied the additional documents RAWR still considers noise to be a major issue with this development. They draw attention to the following issues:
The applicant states that all material entering the site will be weighed, although the plan does not show a weighbridge. The acoustic barrier described in the noise report (12 ft long) would not screen an articulated lorry of 50 feet. The submitted drawings are not to scale and show the acoustic barriers to measure 60 ft long, which is in excess of what is written in the noise assessment. No noise acoustic readings have been given regarding using containers in the manor described. Regarding night time unloading the residents see no reason as to why scrap refrigeration units could not be left on a vehicle and unloaded during normal operating hours. The proposed hours of work are excessive with potential for 11 hours a day of noise disturbance especially while bailing cars. Regarding employment and the possible employment of up to 12 new employees, the residents look at this as 18 current employees being forced into either relocating or having to commute 30 miles a day to work in order to keep a job. The residents do not consider their original concerns have been met regarding noise, operating hours, proximity to housing, risk of fire, environmental concerns and security and their original objection letters remain valid.
Local Householder
6.8 Opposes the application based on impacts on the local community’s residential amenities as follows:
Physical impacts: impulsive (banging) noises that can be felt through the ground over a considerable distance occur from time to time when cars are compressed in a powerful baler. Physical and psychological impacts: significantly increased noise levels. The resident made detailed comments in relation to the noise assessment and concluded that the proposed car crushing operations will create too much noise to be acceptable so close to a residential area, therefore it should not be permitted on the proposed site.
7. Development Plan Policies
7.1 The most relevant development plan documents and policies are listed below.
Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy Development Plan Document (DPD) (2010):
Policy CS1 Northamptonshire’s Waste Management Capacity Policy CS2 Spatial Strategy for Waste Management Policy CS14 Addressing the impact of proposed Minerals and Waste Development
Northamptonshire MWDF Locations for Waste Development DPD (2011):
Policy W3 Industrial area locations for waste management uses
Northamptonshire MWDF Control and Management of Development DPD (2011):
Policy CMD1 Development Criteria for Waste
North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008):
Policy 13 General Sustainable Development Principles
8. Assessment
8.1 The main issues to consider in determining this application are:
i) Whether the principle of the development accords with the development plan, particularly the need for the facility and the site location.
ii) Whether there are any amenity, visual impact, traffic and access, environmental or safety and security issues to justify refusal of the application.
The Development Plan
Principle of proposed waste development
Need
8.2 The Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD establishes that there is a need for waste recycling facilities in the County and sets out the broad strategy for waste management in the county to 2026. Policy CS1 of the Core Strategy addresses Northamptonshire’s waste management capacity and identifies an indicative recycling capacity gap of 439,000 and 516,000 tonnes per annum (tpa) for 2016 and 2026 respectively. The proposed facility is to relocate the applicants operations from the current premises in Mill Road, Wellingborough. The existing facility contributes to the existing waste recycling capacity in the County and this application would relocate this to a new site. The development would therefore continue contributing to the future waste recycling targets as set out in Policy CS1.
Location
8.3 The need for waste management facilities is widely accepted, however it is often the location for these facilities that is contentious. In determining this application the Waste Planning Authority (WPA) is initially required to assess whether this site meets the spatial strategy set out in the local development plan. The WPA is not tasked with assessing other sites across the county and whether there are potentially more suitable sites for the development.
8.4 Core Strategy Policy CS2 deals with the spatial strategy for waste and states that waste management facilities should be focused within the central spine. The central spine is defined as an area extending from Northampton in the west to Corby in the north-east and including Wellingborough, Rushden, Higham Ferrers, Kettering, Irthlingborough, Burton Latimer, Rothwell and Desborough. The proposal is located on an existing industrial estate in Corby and therefore in this respect the proposed location meets the spatial strategy in Policy CS2.
8.5 It is also stated in the Core Strategy that the preferred locations for urban-located waste management uses will be general industrial areas or areas of significant residential and commercial development. Policy W3 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Locations for Waste DPD provides more policy guidance on this subject and in particular identifies these general industrial areas within which waste management uses would be acceptable in principle. The application site at Earlstrees Road is identified in Policy W3 (WL 16: Corby – Earlstrees) as a general industrial area location which is acceptable in principle for those waste management uses appropriate to be located in an urban area.
8.6 Policy CMD1 lists development criteria for assessing waste management facilities including: compliance with the spatial strategy; the need for the facility: its functional role: its general sustainability and compliance with the catchment area for waste; and that the facility facilitates the efficient collection and recovery of waste. The site is within the central spine and an identified industrial area suitable for waste management facilities. Also as this is a relocation of an existing facility it is considered that its functional role and existing catchment area for wastes demonstrate that it is acceptable when considered against Policy CMD1.
8.7 Much is made in representations that this facility would be better located further away from sensitive receptors, particularly residential development and objections and concerns are expressed primarily around amenity, pollution and risk of fire. The site forms part of the established Earlstrees Industrial Estate and currently has an unrestricted consent for B8 (storage/distribution). The residential development to the south of the site on Hubble Road was built after the industrial estate. The principle therefore of an employment use on an established employment site is considered to be acceptable. It is however necessary to assess the specific impacts of this proposal and whether any specific impacts from the development could be appropriately mitigated and controlled.
Pollution Control
8.8 The site will require an Environmental Permit to operate and the emissions will be assessed in detail by the EA as part of the pollution control permitting process. This assessment will include consideration of the storage of oils/fuels/chemicals, measures to minimise the risk of fire on site, preparation of a Site Condition Report and surface water drainage. The applicant has already engaged in discussions with the EA and is in the
course of preparing an application to the EA for an Environmental Permit. The distinction between land use planning and pollution control is clearly set out in Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (PPS10). Under PPS10 the WPA is required to assume that the relevant pollution control regime will be properly applied and enforced by the EA which has legal powers to fulfil this role
Amenity Impacts
8.9 Core Strategy Policy CS14 requires proposals for minerals and waste development to demonstrate that local amenity is protected and Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy also requires development to not result in an unacceptable impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties.. Central Government Planning Policy Statement 10 (PPS10) includes as Annex E a list of factors to be considered when assessing waste applications. This list includes air emissions (including dust), noise, odours and visual intrusion. Along with matters relating to traffic and access, vermin, and contamination which are dealt with separately in this report, impacts around dust, noise, odour, lighting and visual intrusion are the amenity impacts that cause the most local concern and these need to be assessed.
8.10 In respect of amenity disturbance it should be noted that in response to the concerns of residential occupiers the applicant has agreed to not utilise in connection with this waste proposal an area of the site measuring a minimum of 67 metres from the boundaries of Hubble Road properties shown on Drawing EARLS 44, which is a significant part of the southern end of the site. Prevention of waste processing or storage activities in this part of the site can be controlled by planning condition (see Appendix A, condition 4). It should be noted this area would still benefit from the B8 storage use.
Noise
8.11 Noise is one of the main concerns raised in objections with particular reference made to internal and external proposed operations and deliveries of waste commercial refrigeration to the site outside of normal operational hours. The applicant originally proposed working from 06.00 to 1800hrs Monday to Friday and 06.00 to 1200 noon on certain Saturdays, Sundays and Public Holidays. The delivery of fridges is proposed on a 24/7 basis. Following the objections received from local residents the applicant has re- assessed the business needs and has amended to working hours to 07.00-18.00 Monday to Friday with no recycling operations on Saturdays, Sundays or Public Holidays. However the applicant still needs to deliver fridges outside these proposed normal operating hours i.e. 24/7.
8.12 With the exception of a mobile crusher and baler for use with de-polluted vehicles (ELV’s) which will be used on site for one day per week on average, all processing operations will be carried out inside the existing buildings. A large portion of the products delivered to the site will be redundant refrigeration units from the main supermarket chains. (The applicant currently has contracts with 2 major supermarkets). Due to the nature of refitting supermarkets, these contracts require a need for redundant fridges to be capable of being delivered to the site at any time of the day or night. Such deliveries are likely to occur during the months of April to October when the majority of supermarket refits occur. The applicant proposes that the refrigeration units will be unloaded and left in the appropriate area indicated on the Site Layout Plan, (ELV 44) at the northwest part of the site as far as possible away from the residential properties. Processing of these
refrigeration units will only occur during the normal operational hours. (07.00 – 1800hrs Monday to Friday).
8.13 To assist in the assessment of noise impacts, the applicant has commissioned a Noise Impact Assessment prepared by Noise and Vibration Consultants Ltd. Existing background noise levels have been measured from the nearest sensitive receptors (the rear boundaries of 66 and 64 Hubble Road) and the report also assesses the noise levels likely to be generated by the various activities proposed at the site. The other industrial uses on the Earlstrees Industrial Estate contribute to the background noise levels. In particular there are two Weetabix factories which manufacture cereals, one is immediately to the east of the application site and this also abuts the boundary of the residential properties on Hubble Road. The other Weetabix factory is to the north of the application site on the north side of Earlstrees Road. To the west of the application site is a large food distribution warehouse unit operated by Ceva. Both Weetabix and Ceva operate on a 24/7 basis.
8.14 The noise assessment report assesses the predicted noise impacts based on empirical measurements of plant at the applicants existing Wellingborough site and the ELV crusher and bailer at a site in Peterborough whilst that plant was working with a full load. The assessment has then gone on to predict the daytime and night-time noise impacts at the Hubble Road residential boundaries. Noise mitigation barriers have been proposed to screen the crushing and bailing plant and the area for night-time deliveries of fridges. The acoustic barriers proposed are shipping containers which are 40 feet (12.2metres) long, and 8ft (2.4 metres) wide, 9ft 6inches (2.9 metres) high. Two of these would be placed end to end and 2 containers high immediately south of the intended crushing/bailing and fridge unloading area (shown on Drawing EARLS 44). With the use of these physical acoustic barriers the noise assessment has a demonstrated that noise levels would be in accordance with BS 4142: 1997 and sleep disturbance criteria in World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines and BS8233: 1999 ‘good design range within bedrooms’.
8.15 The noise consultant has proposed the following noise limits for both daytime and night-time in Table 4.1 of the noise assessment report:.
Table 4.1: Time Period Baseline Proposed Baseline (average & Noise levels & typical) Criteria proposed LA90 dB Limit noise LAeq1hr dB criteria limit Position 1. Hubble Daytime 54 54* Road (weekday) Night-time 41-54 40** 1. Hubble (weekday or Road weekend)
*Noise limit allows for +5dB for noise character correction (i.e. discrete noise)
**Noise limit allows for +5dB for noise character and WHO night-time limits to prevent sleep disturbance
8.16 The Corby Borough Council EPO has considered the consultants noise assessment including revised information submitted and advised that although the site is not ideal for a waste operation, in the light of the noise report, the noise can be adequately controlled by the imposition of suitable planning conditions. Conditions 16-20 in Appendix A are therefore proposed and these put an obligation on the applicant to submit a scheme for controlling and monitoring noise levels to demonstrate compliance with specified daytime and night-time noise levels, within the conditions and require complaints to be investigated and further mitigation provided if necessary. With the imposition of the noise conditions it is considered that there would be no justification for refusing the night-time operations involving the delivery of fridge units. These controls would be an improvement on the current permission for a B8 use on the site does not have any conditions or controls on site operations, including hours of working or noise limits.
Lighting
8.17 The site currently has floodlights around the boundary of the site and residents have raised objections regarding the risk of light pollution from these lights. The applicant has engaged a lighting consultant to prepare an external lighting report. This has demonstrated that the light pollution would be in accordance with BS EN 12464-2, Lighting to Outdoor Places of Work. Nevertheless, the applicant has agreed to only operate the lights when they are required for health and safety reasons within the main site operational hours (07.00- 1800hrs Monday to Friday) and the light columns in the southern part of the site around the area excluded from the waste development will not normally be used. The applicant has requested to utilise several of the lights adjacent to the area for the night time fridge unloading area. These would be manually turned on and only used whilst the unloading takes place. These lights are not adjacent to the residential boundaries and the lighting consultants report has demonstrated that there will be no light pollution from these to the residential occupiers. The use of the floodlighting can be controlled by planning condition (see Appendix A, Condition 22).
Vibration
8.18 Objections have been raised of the impacts of vibration from the machinery to operate on site particularly the ELV crusher/bailer to be used. The applicant proposes that this would operate one day per week and it would be located 130 Metres from the boundary of residential properties and behind an acoustic screen comprising shipping containers. This will mitigate air vibration and given the distance any ground vibration is not considered to be likely to be significant. Vibration is a matter which can be controlled under the Environmental Permit and therefore not considered to be a justifiable planning reason for refusal.
Odour, Dust, and Air Quality
8.19 Concerns have been raised regarding potential odour, dust and air quality impacts on residential amenity. The proposed use will not involve the processing of organic matter. Organic matter can sometimes remain in old fridges if taken directly from residential properties, however all refrigeration units will be sourced from commercial operators which will be clean of organic matter when received on the site. The applicant does not intend to accept domestic waste from private individuals. The process involved in taking
apart refrigeration units and other waste electronic products does not generate any dust and in any case these activities will be occurring within the existing buildings on the site. Any cardboard or paper recovered from the recycling operations will be stored inside building one. Cardboard and tyre shredding will not be undertaken on the site. Granulation and shredding of plastics and metals will take place inside building one and the machinery involved has a built in dust capture facility. Similarly, the treatment of end of life vehicles does not have the potential to create dust. The Environmental Permit will set pollution controls relating to odour, dust and air quality and there are considered to be no land use planning reasons to refuse the application on these grounds.
Visual Impact
8.20 Objections have been raised by local residents on grounds of visual impact from the stored fridges and ELV’s and that these may be stacked high. The applicant has confirmed that no waste storage would take place in the southern part of the site (67 metres from the properties) and that there will not be any stacking of fridges or ELV’s. The proposed acoustic barriers involve shipping containers to be stacked two high at a height of 5.8 Metres, and the nearest of these would be 130 metres from the boundary with the residential properties. The site is currently vacant but it is a B8 industrial site and therefore can lawfully be used for storage including up to the property boundaries with no restriction on what is stored or to what height. Nevertheless, the applicant is willing to exclude waste storage in the southern part of the site in response to the concerns expressed by residents.
8.21 The residential properties currently have wooden fencing at the rear of the gardens and there are a number of trees and other scrub on the southern boundary of the site. A mesh security fence also exists along this southern boundary. In response to the concerns raised the applicant has also agreed to install a new 2 metre high close boarded fence along the boundary with Hubble Road properties. To assist with screening from views from the ground floor. Given the existing lawful permission at the site and the applicants proposed mitigation measures to restrict the storage of waste and provide a new fence, it is considered that there is no justifiable reason to refuse the application having regard to visual impact.
Odour and Vermin
8.22 Objections have been raised regarding concern about odour particularly from any food waste in fridges, fuels and tyres. The applicant deals with commercial fridges and not domestic fridges and these are empty of any food when they arrive at the site. Fuels are kept within sealed containers and these are not released to the ground.
8.23 Concerns about vermin have also been raised and the applicant has confirmed that the site will not deal with organic matter which could attract vermin. The Environmental Permit would control odour and vermin as deemed necessary by the Environment Agency.
Other Matters
Contamination/Drainage/Flooding
8.24 The site has existing hard surfacing and drainage systems. The hard surfaces would need some repairs and the drainage would need appropriate maintenance, and a bunded area would be required around the ELV storage area. A water pollution separator would
also need to be installed for the ELV area. Water pollution is controlled under the Environmental Permit and this would ensure that the provision of the appropriate protection measures for groundwater. Anglian Water control foul drainage and have confirmed that there is capacity in the sewerage system Local residents have expressed concern about the risk of pollution to groundwater and possible run off towards the residential properties, including flood risk and this will be safeguarded under the Permit.
Traffic and Access
8.25 Access to the site is off Earlstrees Road and given that this is an industrial estate the Highway Authority has no objection in principle to the vehicular traffic associated with this application. There is no access to the site via Hubble Road and therefore no reason for HGV’s to enter the housing estate. The applicant estimates that the site could generate a maximum of 25 HGV loads per day (50 movements) with an average of 14 loads per day (28 movements).
8.26 Following the submission of the revised site plan EARLS 44 showing the shipping container acoustic barrier locations the Highway Authority requires further swept path analysis information to demonstrate that the location of the containers nearest the access point would not impede the free flow of HGV’s on the site. The applicants engineering consultant is addressing this requirement and an oral update on this will be provided at the committee meeting.
Fire Risk and Site Security
8.27 Concerns were raised by local residents in response to the initial consultation exercise that the presence of oils and fuels from ELV’s and tyres would give rise to risk of fires and that the site would be vulnerable to security breaches and theft and/or possible arson. The applicant responded by meeting with the Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) and the police Crime Prevention Design Advisor (CPDA) and by submitting a Fire Scheme and a Security Scheme. These schemes are considered acceptable by the FRS and the CPDA.
8.28 In respect of some of the main concerns, oils and fuel has to be stored in appropriate bunded containers which meet the appropriate safety standards. Tyres will not be stored out in the open, but within a lockable container. The site is not proposing to shred and recycle but to remove them from ELV’s and send them on for processing elsewhere. The Environmental Permit will control oil, fuel, and tyre storage.
8.29 In respect of site security, the site already has mesh fencing on the boundaries and the applicant is proposing a 24/7 manned security and CCTV which will be monitored in the security hut.
Health Concerns
8.30 Residents have raised objections of possible health risks from hazardous components and substances which relate to WEEE, fridge and ELV de-pollution and recycling. The operator has a health and safety responsibility for workers on the site and will need to operate in accordance with health and safety standards and safe handling procedures including the pollution controls in the environmental Permit. The applicant already recycles fridges at the Wellingborough site and has contracts with large supermarkets that require contractors to operate at high standards. ELV’s, WEEE and fridges are de- polluted and recycled at other site in the county. There has been no evidence brought
forward of any direct health risks associated with appropriately managed and controlled sites dealing with these type of materials. Accordingly it is considered that there are pollution control and health and safety regimes and controls which will properly apply and there is no land use planning reason to justify refusal of the application on grounds of concern about health risks.
Employment
8.31 The applicant currently employs 12 full time staff at its current recycling facility in Wellingborough. The applicant states that if approved the site would increase employment by 18 full time workers.
Biodiversity
8.32 Concerns were raised regarding the impacts on biodiversity. The site is largely hard surfaced although some scrub and vegetation has developed on the site boundaries. There are no habitats of principle importance on or adjacent to the site and there are no proposals for removal of vegetation or trees and no new construction work is planned that might have any impact on habitat or protected species. Pollution control will be controlled by the Environmental Permit including any impacts on surface water. Therefore, there are not considered to be any impacts on biodiversity which would justify refusal of the application.
9. Conclusion
9.1 The site currently has planning permission to operate as a B8 (storage/distribution) use and was last used as a car storage facility. The applicant currently operates a WEEE recycling facility in Wellingborough and is seeking permission to change the use of the Earlstrees Road site to a recycling operation (WEEE, plastics, paper, cardboard, packaging and tyres) and an ELV depolluting facility.
9.2 There are no objections in principle from the Corby Borough Council, Environment Agency, Highway Authority, Anglian Water, Fire and Rescue Service, and the Crime Prevention Advisor subject to appropriate planning conditions being imposed to mitigate and control any impacts from the development. However, objections have been received from local residents including the Lloyds West Residents Association, an action group ‘Residents against WEEE Recycling’ and the local county councillors. Grounds of objection include ; the principle of the development relating to need and location; amenity impacts (noise, dust , odour, health risks, visual impact) impacts; pollution concerns; biodiversity impact; and traffic
9.3 Policy CS1 of the MWDF Core Strategy DPD identifies a capacity gap for recycling facilities. The existing facility contributes to the existing waste recycling capacity in the County and this application would relocate this to a new site. The development would therefore continue contributing to the future waste recycling targets as set out in Policy CS1. Core Strategy Policy CS2 deals with the spatial strategy for waste and states that waste management facilities should be focused within the central spine and this site complies with this requirement. Policy W3 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Locations for Waste DPD identifies these general industrial areas within which waste management uses would be acceptable in principle and the Earlstrees Industrial Estate is identified in Policy W3 (WL 16: Corby – Earlstrees). Policy CMD1 of the Control and Management of Development DPD lists development criteria for assessing waste management facilities
and this development is considered acceptable when assessed against these requirements.
9.4 The objections raised by the local community residents and local councillors have been carefully considered. The application excludes any waste recycling or storage operations in the southern part of the site within 67 metres of residential property boundaries. Reports have been submitted relating to; noise impact; lighting impacts; fire prevention; and site security. The amenity impacts of the development in particular, noise can be controlled and mitigated and the Corby Borough Council EPO considers that these can be controlled by planning condition. There is no evidence that the development will result in any health impacts and the site will require an Environmental Permit from the Environment Agency and this will control pollution, which is one of the concerns those objecting to the application. The site operations and management will also have to comply with relevant Health and Safety regime requirements. In line with Planning Policy Statement 10; Planning and Waste, the Waste Planning Authority is required to assume that the relevant pollution control regime will be properly applied and enforced and the Environment Agency has legal powers to fulfil this role. Where the potential land use planning impacts of a development can adequately mitigated and controlled by the imposition of suitable planning conditions then permission should be granted. Overall, it is considered that the amenity and environmental impacts of the development can be adequately and appropriately mitigated and controlled and the development is acceptable having regard to Core Strategy Policy CS14 and Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.
9.5 There are considered to be no justifiable planning reasons to refuse the development which should be approved subject to appropriate planning conditions as outlined in Appendix A.
10. List of Appendices
Appendix A: Recommended Planning Conditions
Author: Name: Phil Watson Team: Planning Services Contact details: Tel: 01604 366638 Fax: 01604 366065 Email: [email protected] Background Papers: None Does the report propose a key decision is NO taken? If yes, is the decision in the Forward N/A Plan? Will further decisions be required? If so, NO please outline the timetable here Is this report proposing an amendment to NO the budget and/or policy framework? Have the financial implications been NO. There are none relevant to the cleared by the Strategic Finance determination of the planning application Manager (SFM)? Name of SFM: N/A Have any capital spend implications been N/A cleared by the Capital Asset Investment Group (CAIG)
Has the report been cleared by the NO but cleared by Assistant Director relevant Corporate Director or ACE? Environment and Planning Has the relevant Cabinet Member been NO consulted? Has the relevant scrutiny committee been NO consulted? Has the report been cleared by Legal NO Services? Have any communications issues been N/A cleared by Communications and Marketing? Has an Equalities Impact Assessment NO. There are no equal opportunity been carried out in relation to this report? implications relevant to this application. Are there any community safety These are considered in the report. implications? Are there any environmental implications: These are considered in the report.
Are there any Health & Safety Implications: NO
Are there any Human Resources NO Implications: Are there any human rights implications: This planning application has been processed in accordance with the prescribed Town and Country Planning legislation and regulations. These afford individuals the rights to have their say on the development proposed and for the impacts of the development to be assessed having regard to the potential for impact on any individual, and the decision to be made taking into account any views expressed. The most relevant parts of the Human Rights Act are: Article 6 (Right to a Fair Trial); Article 8 (Right to Privacy); Article 10 (Freedom of Expression); and Protocol No1 which entitles every person to peaceful enjoyment of his/her possessions. Constituency Interest: NCC Wards: Shire Lodge and Lloyds
Agenda Item No: 7a - Appendix A
Conditions
Commencement
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiry of three years from the date of this permission. Written notification of the date of commencement shall be sent to the Waste Planning Authority within 7 days of such commencement.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Scope of Permission
2. Except as otherwise required by conditions attached to this planning permission the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved documents:
(a) Application Forms dated 23rd August 2012; (b) Planning Statement prepared by Phillips Planning Services Ltd, dated November 2012; (c) Supporting Statement (Ref. Earls 2); (d) Design and Access Statement (Ref. Earls 1); (e) Noise Impact Assessment prepared by Noise & Vibration Consultants Ltd Ref. R12.1104/DRK, dated 30th November 2012; (f) External Lighting Report (Ref. 12-979 Rev A), dated 20th November 2012; (g) Fire Scheme (Ref. Earls 31), dated 1st November 2012; (h) Security Scheme (Ref. Earls 30); (i) Flood Risk Assessment Checklist; (j) Site Condition Report Template (Ref. Earls 15); (k) Catchment Area Statement (Ref. Earls 7); (l) Catchment Area Map; (m) Drainage and Water Report, dated 3rd April 2012; (n) Earls 44 Site Layout; (o) Earls 4 Site Location (Scale 1:10,000); (p) Earls 5B Building 2 Front and Side Elevation (Scale 1:240); (q) Earls 5A Building 1 Front and Side Elevation (Scale 1:240); (r) Earls 6 Building 1 Internal Layout (Scale 1:240); and (s) Earls 9 External Lighting.
Reason: To specify the approved documents in the interests of amenity having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010).
Operation Limits
3. The annual amount of imported waste shall not exceed an annual throughput of 25,000 tonnes per annum.
Reason: To define the scope of the permission and in the interest of clarity, amenity protection and highway safety having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010).
4. The development hereby permitted shall be restricted to the area shown on the Site Layout Plan (Ref. EARLS 44) and shall exclude the area hatched red on the Site Layout Plan. All waste paper, cardboard, plastic and packaging shall be stored within the building.
Reason: To define the scope of the permission and in the interest of clarity and amenity protection having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010).
5. All deliveries of WEEE outside of the operational hours referred to in condition 8 of this permission shall be restricted to commercial fridges which shall only be delivered and unloaded in the out of hours storage area identified on the Site Layout Plan (EARLS 44). No processing of these fridges shall be undertaken whatsoever during the out of hours period.
6. All waste tyres imported to the site shall be obtained from the imported ELV’s and all tyres once removed from the vehicles shall be stored in containers which are sealed at the end of daily operational hours,
7. No waste other than those waste materials defined in the application details shall enter the site.
Reason: To restrict the waste types to those specified in the application in the interests of amenity and the environment having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010).
Hours of Working
8. All operations at the site, other than the delivery of commercial refrigeration units, shall be carried out between the following times:
07:00 to 18:00 hours Monday to Fridays
and at no other times or on Saturdays, Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays.
Reason: In the interests of limiting the effects on local amenity, to control the impacts of the development and having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010).
Contaminated Land
9. Prior to the commencement of development, the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Waste Planning Authority. That scheme shall include all of the following elements unless specifically excluded, in writing, by the Waste Planning Authority:
1. A preliminary risk assessment/desk study identifying:
(i) All previous uses (ii) Potential contaminants associated with those uses (iii) A conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors (iv) Potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site.
2. A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.
3. The site investigation results and the detailed risk assessment (2) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken.
4. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in (3) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.
Any changes to these components require the express consent of the Waste Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.
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 having regard to Policy CMD7 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Control and Management of Development DPD (2011).
10. If, during development (making repairs to tarmac etc), contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Waste Planning Authority for a remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. The remediation strategy shall thereafter be implemented.
Reason: To ensure that if previously undetected contamination is encountered during the redevelopment, it is dealt with in an appropriate manner and in the interests of minimising environmental impacts in accordance with Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010).
Highway and Access
11. Prior to the commencement of the development an internal traffic management plan for Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV’s) with swept path analysis shall be submitted to the Waste Planning authority for agreement in writing to demonstrate that all HGV’s can enter the site in a forward gear with no obstructions to free flow which could cause any obstruction or queuing on the public highway. Operations at the site shall be managed and maintained in accordance with the plan as agreed.
12. The total number of Heavy Goods Vehicle movements associated with this development hereby permitted shall not exceed 50 movements per day (25 in and 25 out).
13. All operational vehicles leaving the site in connection with this development shall be controlled to ensure that there is no nuisance dust and no mud, debris or contaminants deposited on the public highway.
14. All loaded operational vehicles arriving at and leaving the site shall be appropriately sealed or covered so as to prevent material spillage, wind blow and odour nuisance.
Reason for conditions 10 to 13: In the interests of highway safety and safeguarding local amenity having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010).
Height of Stockpiles
15. No commercial refrigeration units or end of life vehicles shall be stacked and no other materials shall be stockpiled or stored at a height greater than two metres when measured from adjacent ground level and shall then only be in the locations identified on the Site Layout Plan (Ref. Earls 40).
Reason: To minimise the visual impact of the development in the interests of visual amenity and having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010).
Noise
16. Prior to the commencement of the development a Noise Management Scheme shall be submitted to control noise from the site incorporating the noise mitigation measures in the section 7.3 of the revised submitted Noise Impact Assessment dated 30th November 2012 and received by the Waste Planning Authority on the10th January 2013 and identified on submitted Site Plan Earls 44. The scheme shall also incorporate the following:
(i) Proposals for day time and night time noise monitoring at a location to be agreed adjacent to the Hubble Road receptors;
(ii) Monitoring to be taken within the first 4 weeks of operations on site commencing and thereafter at not les than three monthly intervals, or such other intervals as may be agreed in writing with the Waste Planning Authority in consultation with the Corby Environmental Protection Officer;
(iii) Details of equipment proposed to be used for monitoring;
(iv) Monitoring to be undertaken during typical working hours with the all items of plant and machinery (including the crushing plant) in operation and during night time deliveries;
(v) The logging of all weather conditions, approximate wind speed and direction;
(vi) Monitoring results to be forwarded to the Waste Planning Authority within 14 days of measurement.
The scheme as approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority shall be implemented throughout the life of the site operations.
Reason: In the interests of amenity, to enable the effects of the development to be adequately monitored during the course of the operations and having regard to policy CS 14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy Development Plan Document (Adopted May 2010)
17. Noise levels from day time and night time operations at the site shall be controlled to ensure that site noise contribution to background noise levels measured in accordance with BS 4142: 1997 are not increased as a result of the operations on site and the following shall not be exceeded:
a. Daytime site noise contribution shall not exceed 54 dB LAeq 1hr
b. Night-time site noise contribution shall not exceed 40dB LAeq 5mins
18. In the event that complaints regarding noise are received by the Waste Planning Authority from any sensitive receptor, and thereafter notified to the operator, an assessment of the complaint shall be undertaken by the operator. A report on the findings, with proposals for removing, reducing or mitigating identified adverse effects resulting from the operation, and a programme for the implementation of remedial measures and works to be undertaken shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority no later than five working days from the receipt of the complaint, unless a later date is otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority. If complaints relate to noise and complaints continue after remedial measures have been implemented noise monitoring shall be undertaken to verify whether the requirements of condition 16 are being met following receipt of written notification from the Waste Planning Authority.
19. No vehicles and mobile plant used exclusively on site shall be operated unless they have been fitted with “white” noise reversing alarm or an alternative system following written agreement from the Waste Planning Authority.
20. No vehicle, plant, equipment or machinery used exclusively on site shall be operated at the site unless it has been fitted with and uses an effective silencer. All vehicles, plant, equipment and machinery shall be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s specification.
Reason for conditions 16 to 19: To protect the interests of local amenity having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010).
Visual Amenity
21. Prior to bringing the site into operation a 2m high close boarded fence shall be erected along the boundary with Hubble Road.
Lighting
22. Floodlighting at the site shall be operated in accordance with the proposals on Drawing E500 Rev P1 as submitted with the External Lighting Report dated 20th November 2012 and other than for those lights identified for temporary use during night time deliveries all lights shall be switched off outside of the operational hours of Monday to Friday 07.00 hrs to 18.00 hrs.
Complaints
23. In the event that complaints regarding odour, noise, lighting and/or dust (including bioaerosols) are received by the Waste Planning Authority from any sensitive receptor, and thereafter notified to the operator, an assessment of the complaint shall be undertaken by the operator. A report on the findings, with proposals for removing, reducing or mitigating identified adverse effects resulting from the operation, and a programme for the implementation of remedial measures and works to be undertaken shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority no later than five working days from the receipt of the complaint, unless a later date is otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect the interests of local amenity having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010).
Water Protection
24. Any fuel, lubricant and/or chemical storage vessel shall be placed or installed within an impermeable container with a sealed sump and capable of holding at least 110% of the vessel’s capacity. All fill, draw and overflow pipes shall be properly housed within the bunded area to avoid spillage. The storage vessel, impermeable container and pipes shall be maintained.
Reason: To minimise the risk of pollution to water courses and aquifers to comply with Policy CMD7 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Control and Management of Development DPD (2011).
25. No premises ELV’s shall be imported to the site until the drainage maintenance and oil interceptor installation works have been carried out in accordance with the proposals in the submitted Flood Risk Assessment.
Reason: To prevent environmental and amenity problems arising from flooding to comply with Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010) and Policy CMD7 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Control and Management of Development DPD (2011).
Catchment Area
26. All waste materials to be processed on the site shall originate from locations within the area shown on the catchment area plan submitted to the Waste Planning Authority on 12th September 2012.
Reason: To ensure that waste materials are dealt with as close to their source as possible in the interests of self sufficiency and sustainability, having regard to Policies
CS9 of the Northamptonshire MWDF Core Strategy DPD (2010) and CMD1 and 4 of MWDF Control and Management of Development DPD (2011).
Monitoring
27. The operating company shall submit an annual report in writing to the Waste Planning Authority within one month of the first anniversary of operations commencing and at 12 monthly intervals thereafter. The report shall include detailed information on the types, quantities and sources of all waste materials brought on to the site and taken off the site, including records of vehicle movements demonstrating compliance with condition 11. The annual report shall also incorporate records that demonstrate compliance with the catchment area plan, condition 24. This information required by this condition shall also be supplied at any other time on request by the Waste Planning Authority.
Reason: To enable the Waste Planning Authority to monitor progress towards achieving the principles in Policy CS1 of the Core Strategy DPD (2010) and to ensure that waste materials are dealt with close to their source in accordance with Policy CS9 of the Core Strategy DPD (2010) and Policies CMD1 and CMD14 of the Control and Management of Development DPD (2011).
Informatives
The development will require an Environmental Permit under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010 from the Environment Agency. Discussions are already taking place and we strongly advise that these discussions continue. (The following will need to be addressed as part of the application for the Environmental Permit:
1. Fire. Facilities should be provided within the site drainage systems for the interception and storage of contaminated water used in fire fighting. Advice on suitable means will be given by the Environment Agency in conjunction with the Fire Authority. 2. Noise. In the event that the proposed noise control measures (7.3.2 Noise Impact Assessment) are insufficient and complaints are made to the Operator and/or the Environment Agency further measures should be introduced. Considering the available free space on site the construction of a noise bund between the main site and the nearest receptors could be considered. This could also be grassed to improve the visual impact. 3. Waste. Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) must be treated using “Best available treatment, recovery and recycling techniques” (BATRRT) under Article 6 of the WEEE Directive (2000/96/EC). Treatment must as a minimum include removal of all fluids and appropriate selective treatments for WEEE and components as End 2
specifed in Annex II of the Directive. The treatments must not breach the “relevant objectives” of the Waste Framework in that the operator “shall take the necessary measures to ensure that waste management is carried out without endangering human health, without harming the environment and, in particular: (a) without risk to water, air, soil, plants or animals; (b) without causing a nuisance through noise or odours; and (c) without adversely affecting the countryside or places of special interest.” In 2006 Defra produced guidance on the “Best Available Treatment Recovery and Recycling Techniques” (BATRRT) for WEEE. BATRRT is an extension of the principles of Best Available Techniques (BAT) under the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive. BATRRT applies to all sites treating WEEE. As identified in the planning application the proposed site will require an appropriate Environmental Permit to undertake the activities mentioned. The use of BATRRT is a permit condition requirement. As noted in the application vehicles & WEEE awaiting treatment must be stored, even temporarily, on an impermeable surface. A surface will not be impermeable and therefore will be unacceptable if, for example, ot properly joined or sealed
Surfaces made of tarmac may be considered to be impermeable, depending on the grade of tarmac provided and the method by which it was laid. Appropriate evidence will need to be retained to demonstrate that the surface is impermeable for the activities taking place.
4. Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels and/ or chemicals shall be provided with secondary containment that is impermeable to both the oil, fuel and/or chemical and water, for example a bund, details of which shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval. The minimum volume of the secondary containment should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is more than one tank in the secondary containment the capacity of the containment should be at least the capacity of the largest tank plus 10% or 25% of the total tank capacity, whichever is greatest. All fill points, vents, gauges and sight gauge must be located within the secondary containment. The secondary containment shall have no opening used to drain the system. Associated above ground pipework should be protected from accidental damage. Below ground pipework should have no mechanical joints, except at inspection hatches and either leak detection equipment installed or regular leak checks. All fill points and tank vent pipe outlets should be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund. This is a requirement of the Control of Pollution (Oil Storage) (England) Regulations 2001. More information on the minimum legal requirements is available in ‘Above ground oil storage: PPG 2’ on the Environment Agency website.
5. Measures need to be investigated to minimise the risk of fire on site, due in part to the potential storage of a large volume of tyres. The proximity of local housing would result in a significant impact if such a fire occurred, including firewater run-off reaching these properties. Environment Agency and local Fire Rescue Service guidance should be sought in this regard.
6. The current condition of the land needs to be ascertained. The site is a former garage and is proposed to be a recycling centre. We recommend that site specific data is gathered to ascertain the current condition of the land. This information would be
beneficial during the Environmental Permit application process as part of the Site Condition Report (SCR) to demonstrate the baseline conditions at the site. If background data is collected it will be considerably easier to enable surrender of the Environmental Permit at a later date if required (Please contact Jim Branson on Tel. 01522785818).
i) Prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway system, all surface water drainage from impermeable parking areas and hard standings shall be passed through trapped gullies with an overall capacity compatible with the site being drained. The current impermeable surface is to be brought up to standard prior to commencement of any activities.
7. An application to discharge trade effluent must be made to Anglian Water and must have been obtained before any discharge of trade effluent can be made to the public sewer.
8. Anglian Water recommends that petrol/oil interceptors be fitted in all car parking/ washing/repair facilities. Failure to enforce the effective use of such facilities could result in pollution of the local watercourse and may constitute an offence.
9. Anglian Water recommends the installation of a properly maintained fat traps on all catering establishments. Failure to do so may result in this and other properties suffering blocked drains, sewage flooding and consequential environmental and amenity impact and may also constitute an offence under section 111 of the Water Industry Act 1991.