Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Application Number 10/01491/AS
Location Land West of Thimble Hall between CTRL and M20, Leacon Lane Charing
Grid Reference 95006/47458
Parish Council Charing
Ward Charing
Application Renewable Energy unit facility which will comprise of plant Description and structures for the storage of material for production of biogas, together with ancillary structures and buildings
Applicant Future Biogas Ltd
Agent Golder Associates, 1 Alie Street London E1 8DE
Site Area 3.9 Hectares
(a) 54/28R (b) Charing R (c) KH X, EA X, KPROW X, SEW X, Little Chart R CPRE X, WKPS R, RPL X Westwell R Amends (a) 81/30R (b) Little Chart R, (c) KH X, KPROW X, EA X, HS1 X, petition 517 Westwell R EH (EPM) X, Charing Design signatories Egerton R, Group R Pluckley R
Introduction
1. This application is reported to the Planning Committee because this is a major proposal. It was last reported to Committee on 9 March 2011 when Members deferred making a decision in order for Officers to obtain further information as requested by consultees and in particular to obtain further evidence of the proposed traffic generation and the impact of that traffic on the road network of the proposed catchment area of the plant. Site and Surroundings
2. The site lies approximately 1 km west of Westwell Leacon and 1.5 km south of Charing. It is bounded to the north by the Channel Tunnel Rail Link which lies on an embankment and to the south by Leacon Lane and a woodland strip which screens the M20 motorway, which lies to the south of the lane. On 2.1 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
the eastern boundary is a tributary of the River Great Stour. Access to this site is from Leacon Lane which runs from A20 at Westwell Leacon exiting at The Pincushion on the Pluckley Road just north of the M20 motorway.
3. The site which is grade 3 agricultural land, is at present under cultivation. The nearest residential property is approximately 220 m to the east, this being Thimble Hall, a Grade II listed building. This lies on higher land than the application site.
4. The application site itself slopes from the north west towards a low point in the south-west corner and there is a difference in levels across the site of approximately 10 m.
5. Close to the site is an underground electricity cable and connection to the National Grid is possible.
6. The site lies in the open countryside forming the Charing Heath Farm landscape character area. The land owner of the site is a local farmer. A location plan is attached as appendix 1. Proposal
Process
Original Scheme
7. Originally the application was for full planning permission for a renewable energy facility of 2MW capacity that uses silage feedstock to produce biogas that will be used to generate electricity to be exported to the national grid.
8. The proposed facility will convert up to 43,000 tonnes per annum (tpa) of locally sourced maize, grass silage and sugar beet energy crops into biogas using a closed loop process. The biogas will be collected and used as fuel to produce renewable energy. In addition to the production of renewable energy, approximately 30,000 tpa bio fertiliser will be produced from the digestion process. This bio fertiliser (or digestate) will be returned to the land and used as fertiliser and soil improver by local farmers for the following year’s energy crop. The bio fertiliser would have the potential to remove the need for existing industrial fertilisers to be delivered to the farms and distributed on the land. The facility will only receive energy crops grown and sourced locally for the purpose of biogas.
9. The process will be fully automated by computer-controlled systems to maintain optimum energy production and efficiency. Biogas production is a continuous process but relies on the seasonal production of energy crops which are stored in the silage clamps. These clamps have sufficient capacity 2.2 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
to supply feedstock for the unit’s year - round operation. A series of sealed liners will cover the feedstock materials stored in the clamp to eliminate odour and particulate emissions during storage and prevent deterioration that may affect the quality of the feedstock during storage. Surface water run-off will be passed through a drainage system while the leachate produced from the clamp will be drained and collected separately and will be fed to the biogas digester.
10. The silage will be stored in the clamp until required and then loaded into the feed hopper. Once in the digester, the feedstock will be stirred with large paddles to allow the digester to operate. The digestive process is anaerobic; i.e. it operates in the absence of air, so the digester will be sealed to eliminate air from the process. Naturally occurring micro organisms within the feedstock are activated in the digester to break down the feedstock material into methane gas and a compost like digestate. The digestate (or bio fertiliser) is continually removed from the process and stored on-site in a tank until it is taken to be spread on agricultural land as a fertiliser for the following year’s energy crops.
11. The methane from the digester is collected and stored in a gas holder. A regulated flow of methane is fed to the biogas engine to produce renewable electricity which will be fed to the national grid by an underground service trench and duct to the substation at Little Chart. The plant is expected to produce in excess of 16,000MWh of electricity per year. This is sufficient for over 4,500 houses, i.e. it would export enough electricity to supply the villages of Westwell Leacon, Hothfield, Little Chart and Charing. Total CO² emissions avoided (based on the UK average 0.6 2 kg CO² per k Wh conventional electricity) are estimated by the applicants to be 9,900 tonnes per annum.
Amended Scheme
12. The scheme now has been reduced in size with an operating capacity of 1.5 MW; this is because there is a capacity limit of the grid connection at Little Chart. The proposed facility now has the capacity to process up to 25,000 tonnes of input biomass per annum. This would produce 12,000 MWh per year of renewable electricity and provide electricity for the equivalent of 3,375 homes saving 7,425 tonnes of CO² per annum. It is proposed to accommodate 5,000 tonnes of silage on site in just one clamp with the remaining 20,000 tonnes stored at the farms which are producing the crops within 10 mile radius of the plant. This silage will be transported to the biogas site when required. The resulting output fertiliser will be in the order of 18,000 tonnes- down from 30,000. It is expected that 4,000 tonnes of liquid biofertiliser will be piped and irrigated using the existing irrigation system by the host farm. It is predicted that this will in effect reduce the original transportation requirement by over 47%. 2.3 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Development on site
13. The following buildings are now proposed: • Main Fermenter 23m in diameter 8.5m high (3,300m³ capacity) • Storage Tank 36m diameter 6m high, with a conical roof up to 14m • Gas Engine Container 12.5 x 3.2 x 3.2 (L x W x H) with an exhaust stack of 12m together with a smaller auxiliary flare • Silage Clamps – originally 3 were proposed 60 x 24.5 x 3.5 (L x W x H), now 1 is proposed 90 x 24.5 x 3.5 • Control Building 12.8 x 6 x 2.97 m (L x W x H)
• Office/Shed 12 x 4 x 3.2 m (L x W x H)
14. All silage liquids will be captured in a 30m³ underground tank at the lowest point of the clamp and used in the process as a feedstock to generate biogas.
Figure 1: Proposed Layout and Site Sections
2.4 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Layout
15. The main fermenter, storage tank, controls building and gas engine container, including exhaust stack, would be located close to the southern site boundary, the lowest part of the site. Since the original submission the plant has moved slightly further away from the southern boundary, and at its closest point it is now 10m from the road. The 12 m high stack would sit on the 68 m contour, making the top of the stack approximately 80 m Above Ordnance Datum (AOD) compared with the level of the CTRL railway line that runs between 76.28 and 76.88 m AOD. The tallest structure on the site, the storage tank, would sit between the 68 and 69 m contour and the tip of the conical roof would be approximately 82.5 m AOD however the vast majority of the building will be significantly below the level of the CTRL line.
16. The silage clamp will be located between the storage tanks and the railway line on the northern side of the site. The total developable footprint (i.e. the areas of hardstanding and structures) is approximately 0.98 ha of the 4.5 ha site. The rest of the land will be laid down to planting. Areas of landscaping around the plant including a wildflower meadow and new woodland planting are indicated as part of the proposal.
Access and Traffic
Original proposal
17. The proposed access to this site will be from Leacon Road, which is unclassified and runs along the southern boundary of the site. During the construction phase of the plan which is likely to take 4 to 6 months, it is estimated that there would be 188 two way movements of HGV traffic together with concrete and tarmac lorries i.e. 94 arrivals and 94 departures of components, materials and tools. On the basis of the minimum four month construction period this equates to an average of two construction movements per day plus staff vehicle movements.
18. During the operational phase of the development the supply of energy crops for the facility will come from local farms and will be delivered to the site by road, resulting in a seasonal pattern of deliveries based on harvesting and growing season for the crops. As such, these vehicle movements, mainly by tractor and 15 tonne capacity trailer, would already be on the local road network. Although the biogas processor is a 24-hour process, deliveries will be limited to the normal working hours or daylight hours according to the season. Bio fertiliser would be removed from the facility using a tractor and 15 tonne capacity trailer and used to fertilise the following year’s energy crop, which will have the potential to remove existing artificial fertiliser delivery movements from the local road network.
2.5 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
19. During harvest (June to November) 43,000 tons of energy crops will be delivered to the site. This will depend on seasonal conditions and weather patterns which influence when the harvest takes place. At a constant rate 5.5 days per week throughout the year it is anticipated that 30,000 tons of bio fertiliser will be exported from the site. The likely traffic movements between June and November for harvest are 19 arrivals and 19 departures daily approximately 2 hourly movements each way. For the fertiliser movements it is anticipated that there will be seven arrivals and seven departures, one hourly movements in each direction per day.
20. The unit will have a regular workforce of one person though this may increase at a delivery period to 2 to 4 persons. In addition there will be occasional site visitors comprising the future biogas management team, maintenance vehicles and local interest groups.
Amended Scheme
21. The applicants have employed a further highway consultant. The scheme now expects that the transportation of newly harvested bio-mass to the on-site clamp will take place over a two month period in September/October. The rest of the biomass would be stored in the origin farms in their own clamps. These would then be emptied when called upon by Future Biogas. The clamp would be emptied at a steady rate in accordance with the clamp capacity.
22. At harvest time input crops will be transported to the site either using a 14 tonne trailer pulled by agricultural tractors or vehicles with 18 tonne capacity. The solid fertiliser will be hauled in the same vehicles and the liquid fertiliser in a 13 tonne capacity tanker using the same tractor/trailer unit.
23. Routing of the input biomass and output fertiliser will be from land to the south - via Pluckley Road and Leacon Lane west, from the west, north and east- A20, Station Road and Pluckley Road lorry route to Leacon Road west.
24. Access will not be permitted via Leacon Lane to the east and the applicant is willing to enter a Section 106 agreement to fund the installation of a Traffic Regulation Order restricting HGV access through Westwell Leacon from A28 (except for access) therefore preventing vehicles associated with the proposed renewable energy facility using this route.
25. In order to reduce the likelihood of conflicts on the 90 metre section of Leacon Lane immediately to the west of the site access, it is proposed to widen the carriageway on the inside of the eastbound bend to allow additional space for vehicles to wait should another vehicle be travelling westbound.
26. The traffic movements generated by the plan have been split into 3 parts:-
2.6 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
I - input movements from 5,000 tonnes storage clamp on-site
ii - input movements from the 20,000 tonnes storage clamp off-site
iii - Output movements from the 14,000 tonnes biofertiliser leaving the site (9,840 tonnes liquid and 4,020 tonnes solid)
27. The input movements associated with the on-site clamp storage are assumed, as a worst case scenario to take place during September and October over a period of 45 days in total
28. The input movements associated with the off site clamp storage are assumed to take place October – July assuming a 5.5 day working week (Monday- Saturday morning).
29. Output fertiliser movements would take place over the 12 month period assuming a 5.5 day working week. The 4,020 tonnes of solid biofertiliser can be backhauled using the same trailer units as for the inputs and would be returned to the originating farm. The liquid biofertiliser would be in separate movements.
30. The plant would be using crops within a 10 mile radius. It is assumed that 20% of all inputs/outputs would be from the south along Pluckley Road, 30% would travel along A20 to the east of Station Road junction at Charing, and 50% from the west of Station Road junction, therefore 80% travelling from the north.
31. On the worst case assumption of a peak crop September/October, the daily number of full loads at that time, would be 7, with returns rounding up the figure to 15, which equates to less than 1.5 one-way vehicle movements an hour over a typical working day.
32. For the rest of the year when the plant is using crops from farmer’s silage clamps the daily number of full loads to the site would be 4 with the return journey rounded up to 9. This return journey would backhaul biofertiliser from the plant to the originating farm. This equates to 0.9 one way vehicle movements per hour over a typical working day.
33. It is also expected that there will be a year round bio fertiliser movement of 2 full loads per day, which equates to 5 one way movements(rounding up), which equates to 1 one way vehicle movement every 2 hours over a typical working day. See the table below.
2.7 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Period Input Output Total
Car Goods Car Goods Car Goods
Peak (2 Months) 4 15 0 5 4 20 Off-Peak 4 9 0 5 4 14 (10 Months)
Odours/Emission
34. Odour from the process will be contained within a sealed and airtight system and no odour release is anticipated. The silage clamp will be enclosed and designed to be to Environment Agency standards. A small area of the silage will be exposed when lifting up the cover to load the feed hopper each day for 1 to 2 hours. The biogas engine has a lean burn combustion control system which ensures the correct air/gas ratio under all operating conditions to minimise exhaust gas emissions through post-combustion.
Ecology
35. As part of the application an Ecological Appraisal has been submitted giving details of the survey work undertaken for protected species, mammals, reptiles and amphibians together with birds and flora. Planning History
36. 10/00004/EIA/AS - Screening opinion for an Environmental Impact Assessment. An EIA was not required as the proposal did not fall within the specified threshold. Consultations
Original Proposal
Ward Members: No comments received
Portfolio Holder – Development Management: comments
“This is a major and significant proposal which I regard as being appropriate in principle subject to its environmental impacts being acceptable. It seems to me that traffic impacts will be the single most important issue to consider. Given the position of the Environment Agency, our Environmental Health Officer, Rural Planning Ltd, and Kent Highways, it appears that the development would be acceptable and should therefore be permitted “ 2.8 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Charing Parish Council: Object on the grounds of access to the site.
The road infrastructure is unsuitable to access through Westwell Lane; also access from the Pluckey Road via Charing is unsuitable due to tight bends, narrow lanes, emergency motorway access point, steep hills etc. Access from the A20 at Westwell Leacon is a single lane road past residential dwellings and playing field. Access via Pluckley Road/Pincushion Hill will encourage more traffic to use the Pluckley Road junction with the A20 Charing this is a tight junction and accident blackspot.
Little Chart Parish Council: adjoining parish, Object on the grounds that Future Biogas currently operates no other plant in the UK or elsewhere and has no direct experience on which to base its projections.
There are huge concerns about the number of traffic movements on the narrow country lanes. Any increase would have a serious impact on the quality of life, health and safety of those living in surrounding villages as well as the impact upon road users and traffic flow on major routes such as the A20. DEFRA is currently seeking submissions for a new ' Aerobic Digestion Framework Document’ that will not be published until March 2011.
The site is in a valley which attracts prevailing winds. They are concerned about the smell whenever the covers of the silos are lifted. This must happen as crops are taken out to feed the anaerobic digester and every time crops are added to the silos. There is also concern about the increase in diesel particulates from the increased diesel fuelled traffic. They object to the development of this industrial operation on a greenfield site and the impact this will have on the rich local wildlife and water sources.
Westwell Parish Council: the adjoining parish, comment that there is insufficient information in the application for a decision to be taken; clarification on a number of details is required; mitigation measures should be addressed.
WKPS: Object, concern is expressed about the size of the feeds facility, the storage and the wider farming impact. Traffic and access problems are also significant. The effect upon adjacent villages seems to be considerable. Leacon Lane itself is very narrow, with ditches on either side and no definitive passing places, so that at present its use by numbers of heavy lorries will create a potentially grave health and safety hazard.
CPRE: Object - by growing crops for the production of biogas the arable area, 2000 acres is suggested, is effectively sterilised for food production. This negates much of the claimed environmental benefits of the scheme. The exact area to be used is difficult to ascertain, but it seems to be within a 10 mile radius. If the farmers involved decide that the agricultural food crops are more profitable and the site loses its supply of feedstock what is plan B? Would waste products have to be imported? The site is not suitable for the incineration of waste of any type. The facility will be 2.9 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______very visible in the landscape and impinge on the AoNB. No mention is made of how the electricity produced on the site will be transported to the grid. The immediate access route to the site is very narrow with inadequate passing places. There is no footpath along the road, and destruction of the verges by lorries would deprive pedestrians of a safe area to walk, it would destroy the rural ambience of the road and biodiversity of the verges.
Environment Agency: no objection subject to conditions. They state that an Environmental Permit maybe required from the E.A, under the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010. The proposal includes anaerobic digestion and burning of resultant biogas which can be subject to the need for a permit. The storage and spreading of digestate is also subject to an environmental permit in most situations.
They go on to state ‘The proposal states it ‘will only be fuelled on biomass and no waste material will be used; it is not a waste development’. We need to be satisfied that the biomass being processed under this proposal is not a waste material and therefore not attracting waste planning permission or an environmental permit. It is not clear from the application where the biomass will come from and if it would be classified as waste or not.’
Kent Highways: No objection subject to conditions.
CTRL: Have yet to comment
South East Water: Initially raised concern unless the E.A supported the proposal.
Public Rights of Way Officer: No public footpaths are affected by the proposal
Environment Health Manager: Raises no objection.
He considers that the technical assessments relating to air quality, noise and local amenity impacts (i.e. odour, bio-aerosols and pest control) are robust. At this stage the applicant has specified two possible engine suppliers for the plant. Both companies are believed to be leading suppliers of efficient systems for energy production. Indeed a similar plant that has been approved by Broadland District Council will be using a Jenbacher engine this is designed to achieve both efficient biogas combustion and lower emissions to air. The engine will have an auxiliary flare to it, in case of emergency.
With regard to noise, using the worst-case scenario, it is clear that the noise impact is insignificant when account is taken of the prevailing noise climate and the separation distance to sensitive receptors (dwellings) and other intervening features. In his opinion the engine is therefore unlikely to cause any justified complaint when operating at night.
2.10 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
He goes on to state that the construction of facilities for producing and storing silage and storing silage effluent are controlled by law and enforced by the Environment Agency. The applicant has confirmed that this part of development will comply with the relevant 2010 regulations. E.A. will normally sign off the design and construction works before it is capable of storing energy crops such as maize and grass. The biogas production processes is derived from bacterial action in the absence of oxygen (i.e. anaerobic conditions). This means it will be essential to ensure that any fugitive loss of odour is kept to a minimum. However, it will be necessary to uncover part of the silage clamps to load the feedstock into the digester and there will be a characteristically sweet smelling emission from the disturbed area. Although he would not expect this to be a source of justified complaint, it is important to acknowledge that some odour will be released into the local neighbourhood.
From a regulatory viewpoint it is important to be aware that any crop which is grown specifically for digestion in an AD plant to produce energy is not a waste. If the input materials to an AD plant are non-wastes, the status of each of the output materials as a waste or non waste will depend on the circumstances. Assuming that the main purpose of the plant is to recover energy from the biogas produced, the bio gas will always be a non-waste. In order to be considered as a non-waste the other output material (e.g. digestsate) must meet three tests. These tests are that it must be certain to be used, without any prior processing and as part of a continuing process of production. In those circumstances an environmental permit or waste exemption would not be required.
Rural Planning: - Initially raised concerns/queries; however he has since confirmed that there appears to be cogent technical reasons whereby the specific plant sought here could not be used for the disposal of slurry and waste as it stands. A sustainable farming statement has also been submitted which includes and explains the wider benefits of growing feedstock maize as a break-crop such as to mitigate concerns that the crop would replace valuable food crop production. There are also two submissions which indicate support from, and advanced discussions with, local farm businesses such as to suggest that there should not be a difficulty in obtaining sufficient local feedstock for the plant. Beyond this, it will not be possible reasonably to identify exactly where feedstock would be transported from in any one year.
Neighbours: 54/28R
The concerns from neighbours are:- • Increase in HGV traffic using Leacon Lane from Westwell Leacon onto the site causing a substantial risk to the community. The lane is very narrow with no passing places. In addition traffic would need to drive past the existing play park and recreation ground. • The impact on the countryside of the growing of bio crops • devaluation of property
2.11 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
• vibration from the lorries and the effect on the dwellings • exposure to odour, risk of pollution and noise • the biogas can explode and is hazardous • light pollution • impact on wildlife • the plant will be used to dispose of slurry and abattoir waste • height and scale of the proposed buildings is out of scale with local vernacular
Amended Proposal
Little Chart PC: objects on the grounds:
1. The huge uncertainties over the volume and direction of the traffic in the original application remain despite the applicant claiming its amended application will "substantially reduce our potential traffic impact". During the course of the Open Weekend, for example, a member of the applicants' team made it clear that the original transport figures had been deliberately over- estimated. This wholly undermines the foundation for these claims of so- called "improvements" trumpeted in the amended application, in particular the graph of Monthly Vehicle Movements laid out in the Supplementary Statements at page 3.
2. The applicants' traffic projections are unreliable and unsubstantiated. The amended application gives the barest details of where traffic will be coming from. Farm traffic moving silage between clamps will be free to travel through villages as necessary. Moreover, farm traffic is not included in the traffic estimates given. The muddied picture remains.
3. The applicant admits that the plant has been reduced in scale to 1.5MW "which we have been informed is now the capacity limit of the grid connection on the site". Such a fundamental oversight on the company's part suggests its proposals are poorly prepared and throws doubt on many other assumptions made, including estimates of the plant's effectiveness.
4. The remodelled application emphasises that the bulk of the silage will be stored at crop origin farms in temporary silage clamps operated by an array of different farmers. The storage and transport of this silage is likely to produce odour problems for those living nearby.
5. The "underground on-site fertiliser pipe network to feed the host estate farm" with 4000 tonnes of bio-fertiliser each year is mentioned for the first time in
2.12 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
the amended application (at 3.2.5) The dispersal of this bio-fertiliser will have a negative impact on those in the local vicinity.
6. The Government's newly-released Anaerobic Digestion Strategy and Action Plan for England (June 2011) favours waste for anaerobic digestion projects. More relevantly it strikes a note of caution regarding growing crops specifically for the purpose and cites recent German experience in this regard. The report stresses that there should be no detrimental environmental impact nor an impact on the price of food or security of supply. It states "it is not the Government's policy to encourage solely purpose-grown crop-based AD systems" and in order to better understand what the implications are, is developing a Bio energy Strategy for publication later this year.
7. The applicant claims the rural community will be "strengthened" in the local area by the payment of up to £750,000 a year in revenue for local farms. Any benefits are unlikely to trickle down to the wider community. People living within the 10-mile radius around Westwell Leacon face higher energy bills in the future, not reductions. The Surrey-based company and its venture capitalists stand to make millions from a project they freely admit is only contemplated because of the Government's generous feed-in tariff arrangements
Westwell PC: Concerned that there may be a lack of attention to detail, it suggests that the operation be adapted as needed to minimise the impact on residents and other road users.
Egerton PC: Shares the concerns expressed by other Parishes and objects stating:-
“There is insufficient clarity as to the guarantees the applicants may have had from local farmers as to the growth and supply of the biomass/anaerobic crops and material to generate the energy anticipated. If it is the case that local farmers in the immediate vicinity are definitely able to supply the raw material that in itself will create higher levels of traffic movement than the local roads (some being at the lowest highway classification) can reasonably take. This is not just a highway capacity or suitability or road safety issue, it is an environmental issue. Large lorries make noise, not just ruts in the edges of roads; and they will be carrying material that can spill onto roads (as evidenced by existing farming activities). Yet if there is an inadequate supply of crops from the immediate vicinity, the journey lengths will need to increase further and affect a wider area.
This would create a bigger carbon footprint and calls into question the sustainability and the green credentials of the proposed operation. The amount of energy used to transport the crops could outweigh the energy generated.
2.13 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Whilst it may be the case in theory that the energy expected to be generated would be enough to supply several villages, it is not the case that this will be a free energy resource to the villages. The energy would go into the National Grid and it would be the applicants who would derive the benefit of the feed-in tariffs, not the local population. In principle, it is understood that there is a need to consider many options for greener energy production but not every method is automatically greener than existing methods when all aspects of its production are taken into account.
The other issue of concern is that if farmers are being encouraged to grow different crops for energy production, and there may be incentives for this, it can have a radical and detrimental impact on the landscape as well as have a chain reaction in the local economy. There will still be a need for crops for food as well as pasture for grazing and hay for silage; if this changes rapidly with little forward planning, a whole section of the rural economy could suffer and have far-reaching consequences for village life and beyond.
EPC does not believe that the case put forward by the applicants is robust enough to justify taking a risk with this proposal. The alleged environmental benefits to be derived from the proposal are not sound enough to overwhelm the environmental disbenefits that are more evident.”
Pluckley PC object: On the basis of the impact of traffic on Pluckley.
“It remains the case that this industrial facility would generate several thousand HGV and farm vehicle movements a year, all channelled along the Charing-Pluckley Road.”
The road is unsuitable to take this traffic. Comment is made over an appeal decision in 2009 for application 07/01558/AS which related to Stanford Bridge Farm, Station Road Pluckley.
(DCM Comments- There were 3 appeals at this site, 2 enforcement, 1 planning, 2 of the appeals were allowed, the appeal relating to the use as the site as an agricultural contractors was dismissed. In determining the appeals the Inspector stated that
“It is noteworthy in this case that local residents have no objection, and in my view they could not have any objection, to farming vehicles using the roads around the appeal site for farming purposes or the disturbance that they cause. Local residents, however, have a reasonable expectation that at some times of the year, such as the winter months, the farming activities and therefore the roads would be less busy. Nor could there be any objection to the hours these vehicles operate, especially during harvest. Also, it has to be accepted that with current technology and working practices some of the vehicles used in agriculture are extremely large.”)
Kent Highways: Have reviewed the case and state that there is no sound basis for an objection being raised on highway grounds. 2.14 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
The expected daily traffic flows are modest and are well within the capacity of the main approach routes. The vehicles in question may well be on parts of the local road network even if this particular site is not used, and even if this wasn't the case the addition to existing traffic in Pluckley and Charing would be negligible.
The proposed access, and localised improvements between the CTRL - upgraded section of road to Pluckley Road, are considered to be acceptable. There is no objection to the proposal subject to conditions restricting in particular the number of vehicle movements between September and October to that specified in the application, and also a passing place and also subject to a contribution for the Traffic Regulation Order in Leacon Lane.
The reason why Kent Highway Services have requested this TRO is to ensure that site traffic uses the most appropriate route to the site on Leacon Lane from the C Class Pluckley Road, which is a signposted Kent County Council HGV route. The route along Leacon Lane from Pluckley Road is acceptable for HGV's as it was widened considerably as part of the CTRL works. Leacon Lane up to the railway bridge is in excess of 5.5m which allows two large goods vehicles to pass one another safely.
Kent Highway Services have also agreed that a passing place can be installed on Leacon Lane close to the site entrance in order to allow two vehicles to safely pass one another if one vehicle is exiting the site and meets another vehicle on Leacon Lane.
KCC Footpaths: - No objection as the footpath passes north of the railway
Environmental Health Manager: states
“Having read the supplementary statement together with section 3 of the updated transport statement (report ref. JSL/T0153) it would seem that the operation has been scaled down to reflect some of the concerns expressed by Members of the planning committee on 9 March 2011.
From an environmental viewpoint the potential impact of producing all the silage feedstock on site has been reduced by using ‘off site’ silage clamps at individual farms who would be supplying the AD plant at Future Biogas. Furthermore the overall capacity of the plant has been reduced to reflect the capacity limit of the grid connection.
However, my previous comments remain relevant to the revised proposal and the conditions suggested are equally applicable. It is also worth bearing in mind that if ‘off site’ silage clamps are established then haulage of the silage feedstock from individual farms to the AD plant at Future Biogas may introduce another potential source of odour. This will depend to a large extent upon the type of vehicle used and whether it is effectively sealed.” 2.15 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Environment Agency: Confirm that an Environmental Permit will not be required for this process as long as the feedstock to the plant comprises of purpose grown crops and not waste material. Furthermore the digestate both solid and liquid will not be classed as waste. They welcome the use of an attenuation lagoon for surface water storage.
High Speed 1: no objection subject to conditions
Charing Parish Design Group: Object-Increase in traffic along Station Road. Local representations in the Charing Parish Design Statement include respecting the character of existing roads.
Neighbours: 81/30 R and a petition with 517 signatories from 278 homes. The comments are that the previous objections still stand
The traffic regulation order will be unenforceable and may even fail to be upheld
The revised level of output will make the plant unsustainable
The access through Station Road Charing from A20 is unsuitable as the properties, many of which are historic, are so close to the road, and traffic may also go through other villages such as Little Chart which will impact on road safety. There is no control over the route taken by vehicles to the plant. The assessment that farm vehicles already on the roads carrying the material further afield is flawed. Danger of additional traffic to pedestrians, bike users etc
KCC are currently carrying out consultations on their Minerals and Waste Document which identifies a further 72 possible vehicle movements per day
(DCM comments: - This is currently out to consultation)
It is vital that the corridor of countryside between Ashford and Maidstone is protected against industry and any further development
Odour from silage and fertiliser
Unclear whether other waste will be used in the plant
Noise from traffic and the plant operating 24 hrs a day
No firm ideas where the crops will be grown and there would be a change of use from productive agricultural land to an industrial process, it would be better sited on an industrial site
The plant will have no benefit to the local community
2.16 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Concern about the amount of traffic that is predicted to use the local narrow lanes, the recent appeal decision at Stanford Bridge is referred to.
Concern that the company did not realise that they could not connect their original plant into the grid because of the size of the generator
Concern that any conditions attached to a planning permission will be unenforceable, or will be too difficult to enforce.
This is not farm diversification it is an industrial plant
Problems of pollution of the local waterways from the liquid biogas
The following are not planning issues:-
Traffic already speeds along Pluckley Road
There is a need to grow more food not crops for fuel
Not enough crops will be produced to produce electricity and the building may become redundant in 20 years time
There maybe more greenhouse gas emissions in this type of plant
Effect on house prices
The Company has no experience in operating a biodigester
(DCM comments: - Whilst this is not relevant to the current planning application the company have a plant running in Norfolk)
Planning Policy
37. The Development Plan comprises the Regional Spatial Strategy (The South East Plan, May 2009), the saved policies in the adopted Ashford Borough Local Plan 2000, the adopted LDF Core Strategy 2008, the adopted Ashford Town Centre Area Action Plan 2010 and the Tenterden & Rural Sites DPD 2010.
38. The relevant policies from the Development Plan relating to this application are as follows:-
South East Plan 2009
CC1 - Sustainable development
2.17 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
CC4 - Sustainable design and construction
W11 - Biomass
W17 - Location of waste management facilities
C4 - Landscape and countryside management
NRM15 - Location of renewable energy development
Ashford Borough Local Plan 2000
GP 12 - Protecting the countryside and managing change
ET7 - Bad neighbour developments
CF8 - Renewable energy
Local Development Framework Core Strategy 2008
CS1 - Guiding principles
CS9 - Design quality
CS11 - Biodiversity and geological conservation
CS15 - Transport
CS20 - Sustainable drainage
Tenterden & Rural Sites DPD
TRS14 - Diversify existing agricultural businesses
TRS17 - Landscape character and design
TRS18 - Important rural features
39. The following are also material to the determination of this application:-
Village Design Statements
Charing Parish design statement
Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents
2.18 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Sustainable Drainage SPD adopted 2010
Sustainable Design and Construction SPD 2009
Landscape Character Area DPD 2011
Government Advice
PPS 1 - Delivering Sustainable Growth
PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment
PPS7 - Sustainable Development in the Countryside
PPS 9 - Biodiversity and Geological Conservation
PPS 10 - Planning for Sustainable Waste Management
PPG 13 - Transport (as amended January 2011)
PPS 22 - Renewable Energy
PPS 23 - Planning and Pollution Control
PPS 24 - Planning and Noise
40. Members should note that the determination must be made in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Assessment
41. The main issues for consideration are:
• Principle • Access to the site and highway implications • Impact on residential amenity • Effect on the landscape • Agricultural diversification • Sustainability • Odour/emissions/noise and air quality • Biodiversity • Design Quality
2.19 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Principle
42. This is a countryside location and Government Policies are aimed at protecting the environment whilst promoting sustainable development and ensuring efficient uses of resources. PPS22 ‘Renewable Energy’ states that the development of renewable energy alongside improvements in energy efficiency and the development of combined heat and power will make a vital contribution to these aims. It goes on to state that renewable energy developments should be capable of being accommodated throughout England in locations where technology is viable and environmental, economic, and social impacts can be addressed satisfactorily.
43. On Biomass projects and energy crops PPS22 states:” the need to transport crops to the energy production plant does have the potential to lead to increases in traffic. Local planning authorities should make sure that the effects of such increases are minimised by ensuring that generation plants are located in as close a proximity as possible to the sources of fuel that have been identified. But in determining planning applications, planning authorities should recognise that there are other considerations (such as connections to the Grid and the potential to use heat generated from the project) which may influence the most suitable locations for such projects”.
44. Policy CF8 of the Ashford Borough Local Plan states:
Proposals to harness renewable energy sources will be permitted where:
a) there would be no significant adverse impact on the landscape or features of natural, historical, cultural or archaeological interest, and
b) there would be no significant adverse impact on existing uses, for example, through visual impact, noise or traffic generation
45. The impacts and benefits will be discussed in the next sections
Access and highway implications
46. The site has access from Leacon Lane which is unclassified. This lane is currently lightly used by the farm and local traffic. Pluckley Road approximately 550m to the west is a designated lorry route. The proposal would be served principally by tractors with 14 tonne agricultural trailers from local farms. The imported maize, grass silage and sugar beet will be brought on site to be put into the storage clamp in September and October over a period of 45 days with an average of 20 vehicle movements (in and out) per day. For the rest of the year the when the silage is being transported from clamps on other farms the vehicle movements would be 14 per day.
2.20 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
47. The Transport Statement accompanying the application points out that the vehicle movements associated with the inputs at the facility would already be on the surrounding local road network as they would originate from the surrounding farms and fields, crops being taken from fields to the farmyards. In addition, the fertiliser output that is produced by the facility would have the potential to remove existing delivery movements by HGV’s of artificial fertiliser to farms from the local road network.
48. The access to the site is located towards the western end of the field, closer to the widest section of road, and the junction with Pluckley Road where the width is sufficient for tractors and trailers to pass without mounting the verge. Whilst the traffic on the lane will be higher than is currently the case, it is considered that the proposal would not have a material impact on the local road network in highway capacity terms. In addition the type of traffic that would using the site would be agricultural in nature rather than HGV’s lorries. This view is accepted by Kent Highway Services.
49. It is suggested that there be a condition routing all construction traffic from Pluckley Road in order to minimise the impact upon local residents in Leacon Lane. Kent Highways are also suggesting that a Traffic Regulation Order be imposed on Leacon Lane to A20 to provide enforceable control to prevent any HGV’s accessing the lane as a ‘cut through’. This will improve the current situation for local residents.
50. The road is a designated lorry route. In terms of capacity of a road such as this there would normally be approximately 750 one way hourly movements in each direction or 12.5 movements a minute, which equates to 9000 vehicle movements a day based on a 12 hour period 7am to 7pm. Currently the road is operating at approximately 50% of capacity.
51. Kent Highways are suggesting a condition should planning permission be granted limiting the daily vehicular movements in and out of the site during the harvest period, when the silage clamp is being filled, and for the rest of the year. During November to March it is suggested that there be only 14 goods vehicle movements per day, however during September to October a monthly figure has been given. The reason why Kent Highway Services have suggested a total number of movements for these 2 months rather than a daily number of movements is to give the applicants flexibility during the harvest period for fluctuations in the weather when there may be more movements on one day than another. It should be noted that 428 good vehicle movements over a 22.5 working day period works out at approximately 20 vehicle movements a day.
Impact on residential amenity
2.21 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
52. Access to the Leacon Lane/Pluckley Road junction from farms in a 10 mile radius will necessitate vehicles using Pluckley Road/Station Road as it passes through Charing from the A20 and through Pluckley from the west. In these village locations the road is narrow with on street parking and with many houses and listed buildings situated very close to the carriageway. The residents of houses, in the narrow parts of these routes, report that they suffer from significant levels of noise and disturbance from vehicles using the road. Surveys, that had been carried out in Charing and presented to the previous committee, showed large numbers of HGV vehicles using this route with some mounting pavements to avoid oncoming vehicles. It is clear therefore that the amenity of local residents is already affected adversely by current traffic conditions. In my estimation however the additional traffic generated by this development will not make this situation materially worse, although I recognise that this is a matter of fine judgement.
53. This impact and its effect on local people is a material consideration.
Effect on the landscape
54. The site lies within the Charing Heath Farmlands Landscape Character area. This is characterised by mixed farmland, varied field patterns, small woodland copses and major transport links. Enclosure is provided by small broadleaf woodland copses and native hedgerows enclose fields. Arable intensification has led to the removal of traditional field boundaries in some areas. The settlement pattern is scattered across a landscape, with a number of farms positioned along the narrow lanes. Large corrugated farm barns and machinery are located directly along the lanes in places which promotes the rural character.
55. The landscape is dissected by the A20 to the east, the M20 to the south with the Channel Tunnel Rail Link lining the M20 corridor for much of its length, increasing the width of the transport corridor. Whilst not highly visible from throughout much of the surrounding landscape, vehicular movement is extensively audible and the infrastructure includes on the small-scale and tranquil character of the many minor lanes it runs beneath.
56. The boundary of the AONB lies to the east of the A20.
57. The application site lies in a hollow with the CTRL line directly along the northern boundary on an embankment and the motorway on the southern boundary extremely well screened by high mature vegetation. It is proposed to enhance the existing landscaping by means of substantial screen planting along all boundaries of the site including approximately 3 acres of woodland.
58. In my opinion, due to the position of the existing transport corridors, the plant will not be readily visible from the south side of the M20 and the north side of 2.22 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
the railway line apart from possible glimpses of the tallest elements. It will however be visible from Thimble Hall, a Grade II listed building, which lies approximately 200 m to the east on higher ground and also by passing traffic along Leacon Lane and a glimpse from Pluckley Road at the Pincushion.
59. Agricultural buildings vary in size and design, and a 9 m high building is not unusual. The tallest of the proposed buildings will be 14 m in height. This is the gas holder which has a domed roof. However; it is proposed that this is cut into the land so that the resultant height is 12.5 m. The other buildings rise to a height of 8.7 m and the exhaust stack 12 m. The majority of the buildings will be below the level of the CTRL Line making them visible from the railway line, but not clearly visible from the other side of the track, and only visible from The Pincushion and when driving past along Leacon Lane. The buildings will therefore not breach the horizon.
60. Photomontages of the site will be on display at Committee in order to give a representation of the plant in the landscape.
Agricultural diversification
61. There is concern over the loss of agricultural food production should planning permission be granted and the surrounding land be converted to the production of biocrops. Whilst this is not a planning matter, the agent has stated that the Biomass plant uses maize, grass silage and sugar beet. Maize provides a break crop for arable farmers and benefits from excellent yields in Kent. Maize crop rotation can provide enhanced soil fertility and higher food crop yields in the following year; improved soil structure; longer periods of land cover with subsequent lower erosion; increased biodiversity and a reduction in monoculture yields deficiency. Using maize as a break crop helps increase the organic content of soils. The use of organic digestate rather than mineral fertilisers in the growing of maize also helps increase the soils organic content.
Sustainability
62. There is concern that the plant will use other waste such as food, rather than the energy crop. There are a number of features within the design of the proposed facility that will only allow it to be used for energy crops; other materials will not be technically, or financially possible to use. The concerns raised therefore appear to be unfounded .
63. The plant will only be dealing with agricultural crops; this is the reason why it is proposed to locate the plant in the countryside rather than on an industrial estate. The crops can be brought to the site by tractor and trailer from adjacent farms and the fertiliser can be removed in the same way. The land owner is a local farmer with a considerable land holding. In addition, the 2.23 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
attraction of this site is that it is possible to tap into the existing underground electricity cable and hence the Little Chart electricity substation close by.
Odour, noise and air quality
64. Concern was initially raised in relation to odour from the plant, however it has been clarified by the agent that the plant proposed for this site is not capable of processing manure or other waste and can only deal with agricultural crops.
65. The Environmental Health Manager has contacted colleagues nationally who have dealt with similar applications and has done further research to be able to assess the proposed scheme. He considers that the technical assessments relating to air quality, noise and local amenity impacts are robust. With regard to noise from the proposed engine, bearing in mind the closeness of the site to M20 motorway and also CTRL it is his opinion that it is unlikely to cause any justified complaints when operating at night.
66. There may be an issue of smell from the silage; this is described as a sweet smelling emission, although again he would not expect this to be a source of justified complaint as it will only be uncovered for a short period of time. Having spoken to his colleague, there were some initial reports of odour however this has been controlled. He is therefore satisfied that the plant will not cause issues of odour noise pollution subject to a number of conditions. A condition to ensure that the silage is covered as it is being transported to the site is however considered to be appropriate to ensure that this is not a problem.
Biodiversity
67. As part of the application, surveys were carried out into the ecological issues on and adjoining the site. As the site is mainly a cultivated field, the number of species is limited. However it is possible that the existing hedgerows and the oak tree on site does provide some habitat for bats and birds. On the eastern boundary is a stream, there are no records of any amphibians within the study area and there are no ponds within 500 m of the site and therefore great crested newts will not be impacted.
68. As part of the scheme, trees and shrubs are to be planted to form a wooded screen to the north and east of the facility. It is suggested that these trees should be native and locally sourced. A pond will also be created towards the south western corner of the site to receive surface water run-off from the facility. This to be planted with native local species. The existing hedges will be allowed to grow to between 2.5 to 4 m in width to a height of at least 2 m. It is considered that this will create a diverse habitat on the site.
Design Quality 2.24 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
69. The facility is not dissimilar in appearance to a large mechanised farm unit with large grain silos. The colours of the external cladding to the building facades, tanks and structures will be a non-reflective muted tone designed to conceal the buildings into the local landscape aided by the fact that no structure would break the horizon from any vantage point. I therefore do not consider that the plant will be out of keeping in the landscape.
Other Matters
70. DEFRA produced a consultation paper in 2010 on 'Accelerating the uptake of anaerobic digestion in England; An Implementation Plan‘. In June they published an Anaerobic Digestion Strategy and Action Plan ‘It states that AD is a flexible technology and plants can be built on many different scales, from large facilities treating sewage sludge or municipal waste or to smaller ones handling materials from a particular farm or small community. The technology will remain simple. Crops used in the system can be grown as part of, and indeed can support, a normal agricultural cropping rotation. Encouragement of rotation can also result in enhanced yields from wheat and subsequent crops by replenishing nutrients, conditioning the soil, reducing the occurrence of soil-borne diseases and improving soil and water quality. Likewise, the land which is not suitable for the production of food crops maybe suitable to provide biomass to AD plants. It also recognises that AD can help mitigate green house gas emissions from farming. However it is not the Government’s policy to encourage solely purpose grown crop based AD systems, particularly when these are grown to the exclusion of food producing crops or where the growth of these crops might adversely affect biodiversity.
71. For information planning permission was granted in 2010 for a similar unit at Taverham, Norwich. This has now been completed. In addition there is a further plant at Stoke Bardolph however this also deals with sewage waste, and therefore is not directly compatible with this current application.
72. Policy CS10 requires all development to include appropriate sustainable drainage systems for the disposal of surface water, in order to avoid any increase in flood risk or adverse impact on water quality. The surface water run off from the access road will be collected in a verge filter drain which will discharge into an infiltration lagoon. The remainder of the run-off will be collected into a gulley system that will discharge into the lagoon, which is designed to contain 1 in 100 year storm event plus climate change. There will be no off site surface water drainage.
73. Thimble Hall is the closest property to the proposed plant, and lies approximately 200m to the west on higher ground. In my opinion because of the separation of the building from the site, the proposal will not materially affect the setting of the listed building. In addition the applicant has indicated
2.25 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
further landscaping on the western boundary of the site in order to provide additional screening.
Whether planning obligations are necessary
74. Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Regulations 2010 states that a planning obligation may only constitute a reason for granting planning permission for a development if the obligation is:
a) Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms, b) Directly related to the development, and c) Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.
75. I recommend the planning obligations in Table 1, below, be required should the Committee resolve to grant planning permission. I have assessed them against Regulation 122 and for the reasons given consider they are necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms, are directly related to the development and are fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. Accordingly, they may be a reason to grant planning permission.
Table 1
Planning Obligation
Detail Amount Trigger Point Regulation 122 Assessment Traffic To be agreed Prior to the Necessary in order to Regulation with KCC commencement prohibit goods vehicles in Order Highways of the Biogas excess of 7.5 tonnes (except plant for access) from using Leacon Lane from the junction with A20 to the junction of Hurtsford Lane, in the interests of Highway safety
Human Rights Issues
76. I have also taken into account the human rights issues relevant to this application. In my view the “Assessment” section above and the Recommendation below represent an appropriate balance between the interests and rights of the applicant (to enjoy his land subject only to reasonable and proportionate controls by a public authority) and the interests and rights of those potentially affected by the proposal (to respect for private life and the home and peaceful enjoyment of their properties). 2.26 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Summary
77. The main issues in this case are:-
(a) The development would not be harmful to the visual amenity of the countryside.
(b) The development would preserve the setting of the listed building nearby. The development would subsequently comply with policies CC1, C4, CS1, CS9, TRS17, PPS1, and PPS7.
(c) Impact upon residential amenity. The development would not be harmful to the residential amenity of the occupiers of the nearest residential dwellings through overbearing development, loss of privacy or unreasonable levels of noise and disturbance. (Policies ET7, PPS23 and PPS24)
(d) There will be some increase in impact on residential amenity from the additional traffic using Pluckley and Station Roads in Charing and Pluckley.
(e) Whilst there would be an increase in traffic using the lane, the development as proposed would not result in such a material increase in vehicular movements at and to the site to be harmful to highway safety. (Policies CS15 and PPG13) Conclusion
78. The landscape, biodiversity, drainage, odour, noise and listed building impacts raised by this application are either small scale or capable of being mitigated by appropriate conditions. The key issues are the need for such a development and the highway implications of locating it here. It is important that the issues raised about the track record of the applicant are not taken into account in reaching a decision as they are not material planning issues.
79. There is strong support from current government and Development Plan policy for the provision of renewable energy developments. This support must be given considerable weight in any decision. Balanced against that is the impact, particularly of the traffic that would be generated on local roads in a 10 mile radius. The highway authority has examined the predictions put forward by the applicant and a senior officer of that authority has also reviewed them. The advice from the highway authority is that the impact of the additional movements on highway safety is not significant and they advise against refusal.
2.27 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
80. The highway authority has however reviewed the application on a relatively narrow base, namely highway safety. Residential amenity is outside their remit in this case but it is a relevant consideration for this committee. There will undoubtedly be some impact and it is a decision for the committee whether this is sufficient to outweigh the benefits that have been identified in the report. On balance I have concluded that the impacts do not outweigh the benefits and that a recommendation of permission is appropriate. Recommendation-
A. That for the following reasons the Planning Committee Permit this application:
1. The development would be sited in a small valley enclosed on 2 sides by major infrastructure, where the wider impact will be limited.
2. The works would not significantly impact upon the setting of the nearby listed building.
3. The development would not be harmful to the residential amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings.
4. The development does not result in significant harm to highway safety.
5. The additional traffic would impact on the amenities of local people but this impact is not sufficient to outweigh the benefits of providing renewable energy at the site.
6. Other impacts can be adequately mitigated by appropriate conditions or agreements.
B. Subject to the applicant first entering into a Section 106 agreement in respect of planning obligations relating to a Traffic Regulation Order as detailed in Table 1 and in terms agreeable to the Head of Legal Democratic Services, with delegated authority to either the Development Control Manager or Strategic Sites Manager to make or approve minor changes to the planning obligations and conditions, as they see fit.
C. Permit
Subject to the following conditions and notes:
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this decision.
2.28 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
2. The buildings hereby permitted shall be finished in a colour, details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any works are commenced. The approved colour scheme shall be fully implemented before the development is occupied and thereafter maintained.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
3. No development shall take place until details of the construction works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. All construction shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Construction shall not take place on Sundays, Bank Holidays or outside the hours of 0800 to 1800 on Monday to Saturday.
Reason: To protect the amenity of local residents in accordance with Policy CS1 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy.
4. Prior to works commencing on site, details of parking for site personnel as well as details of loading and turning areas for construction traffic shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter shall be provided and retained throughout the development. The approved parking, loading and turning areas shall be provided prior to the commencement of development.
Reason: To ensure provision of adequate parking, loading and turning facilities for vehicles in the interests of highway safety and to protect the amenities of local residents in accordance with policy.
5. Prior to development commencing, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority which shows the location of the proposed site compound and construction lorry routing to the site from A20. The site compound and lorry routing shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and shall be retained as such for the duration of the works hereby approved.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the amenities of neighbouring residents.
6. Prior to the commencement of development, details of facilities, by which vehicles will have their wheels, chassis and bodywork effectively cleaned and washed free of mud and similar substances at the application site, shall be 2.29 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved facilities shall then be provided prior to the works commencing on site and thereafter shall be maintained in an effective working condition and used before vehicles exit the site and enter onto the adopted highway for the duration of the construction works.
Reason: To ensure that no mud or other material is taken from the site onto the neighbouring highway by wheels of vehicles leaving the site to the detriment of highway safety and the amenities of local residents.
7. No gates or barriers shall be erected across the access within 5.5 metres from the back of the carriageway used by vehicular traffic.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
8. The access shown on drawing no T0153/SK001 shall be completed prior to the commencement of any other works authorised by this permission and the access shall thereafter be maintained.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
9. Visibility splays as indicated on drawing no T0153/SK001 within which there shall be no obstruction in excess of 1.05m in height above the carriageway edge shall be provided at the access before the development commences together with pedestrian visibility splays 2m x 2m with no obstruction over 0.6m above the boundary level and the splays shall be so maintained at all times.
Reason: In the interests of highway and pedestrian safety.
10. No external lighting shall be installed on the site without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of amenity of adjoining residents.
11. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking, re-enacting or modifying that order), no building, structure, plant or machinery, other than that permitted in accordance with this decision and identified on drawing no 15955/007 Rev C, shall be erected on the site without the consent of the Local Planning Authority
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area and in order to control emissions and noise
2.30 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
12. No development shall take place until the following details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority,
(i) drainage details, incorporating sustainable drainage principles and pollution controls, including details of impermeable surfacing for hard- standing, with oil interceptors (as necessary), along with provisions to ensure that roof water shall not pass through oil interceptors, and (ii) details of the proposed foul water storage, treatment and disposal.
The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drainage infrastructure and completed before ensilage proceeds and the CHP plant is brought into operation. The approved drainage infrastructure which has been provided shall thereafter be retained/maintained.
Reason: In order to ensure the appropriate disposal of surface water, and to ensure the risks of surface water flooding are sufficiently managed, together with the prevention of pollution of groundwater and local surface water bodies as the site lies in a sensitive area with regard to groundwater.
13. No development shall take place until a noise mitigation scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The noise mitigation scheme shall include sufficient information to demonstrate that the CHP plant is capable of complying with the noise levels specified in Table 5 of Appendix G of the Planning Application Statement dated October 2010.
[Note that Table 5 refers to predicted daytime and night time noise levels at Raywood Complex, Thimble Hall and Broadmead]. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved noise mitigation scheme and completed before the CHP plant is brought into operation. The approved noise mitigation scheme which has been provided shall thereafter be retained/maintained.
Reason: In the interests of noise protection for the adjacent residential properties
14. Non-intrusive broadband reversing alarms only shall be used when necessary to minimise disturbance from vehicle movements on the site.
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the nearby residents
15. Only biogas derived from the ensilage and fermentation of energy crops shall be combusted in the CHP plant. No waste material [or plastic wrapping] shall added to the feedstock and any material delivered to the site which is
2.31 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
considered to be unsuitable for ensilage shall be quarantined and removed from the site within 48 hours of delivery.
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area.
16. All emissions to air from the silage clamp (including liquid effluent), CHP plant (including auxiliary flare), fermentation tank, biogas storage and bio-fertiliser shall be free from offensive odours which are capable of perception by a duly authorised officer of the local planning authority beyond the boundary of the site.
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the adjoining residents
17. All emissions from the combustion of biogas shall be discharged vertically at a height of 12 metres above the ground level and there shall be no leakage of combustion gases to air from the primary or secondary combustion chamber, casings, ductwork or ancillary equipment. A minimum stack exit velocity of 15 m/s shall be achieved to ensure effective plume breakaway.
Combustion of biogas shall only take place when the CHP plant is operating in accordance with the manufacturer’s emission and temperature control specification. In the event of any malfunction or breakdown the operator shall ensure that the combustion process is shutdown in a controlled manner to minimise the emission of pollutants to air.
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the adjoining neighbours
18. Emissions to air during combustion of biogas by the CHP plant, except when biogas is diverted to an auxiliary flare, shall not exceed the following concentration limits, unless otherwise previously agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Parameter...... Limit (including units) Oxides of nitrogen ...... 500 mg/m3 Carbon monoxide ...... 1400 mg/m3 Sulphur dioxide...... 350 mg/m3 Total volatile organic compounds (including methane)... 1000 mg/m3 Non methane volatile organic compounds...... 75 mg/m3 The emission limits specified are at standard temperature and pressure and 5% oxygen, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
2.32 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Emissions of unburned biogas and the operation of an auxiliary flare shall be minimised. Any significant emissions of unburned biogas (including the operation of the pressure relief valves associated with biogas storage) and the operation of an auxiliary flare shall be recorded by the operator and the record made available on request by an authorised officer of the Local Planning Authority.
As part of the commissioning of the CHP plant, the operator shall demonstrate compliance with the emission limits specified in the table above and the minimum efflux velocity of 15 m/s. Any monitoring equipment, techniques, personnel and organisations employed for stack emission testing (including the measurement of exhaust gas temperature) shall have either MCERTS certification or MCERTS accreditation (as appropriate).. A written report confirming compliance shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority within 6 weeks of completion of emission monitoring.
Note 1 the emission limits and minimum efflux velocity are taken from Table 3.1 of EA Standard Rules Permit No.16.
Note 2 significant emissions of unburned biogas (including the operation of the pressure relief valves associated with biogas storage) shall be judged in terms of the overall requirement to maintain a safe system of operation.
Reason: In the interests of pollution control and the amenity of adjoining neighbours.
19. Development shall not begin until a detailed surface water drainage scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in full in accordance with the approved details before the development is completed. The scheme shall then be retained and maintained to provide an effective surface water drainage system for the site.
Reason: To prevent pollution of groundwater and local surface water bodies. The site lies in a sensitive area with regard to groundwater, underlain by a principal aquifer and located within Source Protection Zone.
20. Work shall be carried out in accordance with the details and levels stated on drawing no 15955/007 Rev C and there shall be no deviation without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the development is sensitively sited in the landscape
2.33 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
21. A landscaping scheme for the site (which may include entirely new planting, retention of existing planting or a combination of both) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development is commenced. Thereafter, the approved landscaping/tree planting scheme shall be carried out fully within 12 months of the completion of the development. Any trees or other plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority give prior written consent to any variation.
Reason: In order to protect and enhance the amenity of the area.
22. There shall be no storage on the site other than within the buildings or within the silage clamp.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area.
23. There shall be no deliveries to the site of the crops outside daylight hours during the months of September to October, Monday to Saturday. Between November and August there shall be no deliveries outside the hours of 07.00 and 19.00 Monday to Friday and 07.00 to 13.00 Saturday. Products from the plant removed by lorry shall only occur between 07.00 to 19.00 Monday to Friday and 07.00 to 13.00 Saturday.
Reason: To protect the residential amenity of the locality.
24. Prior to the commencement of works details of the height and location of the auxiliary flare shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: No such details have been submitted.
25. The facility shall only be operated in accordance with the scheme submitted in Table 5-1 of the Transport Statement –Development Traffic Levels. The number of vehicular movements into and out of the site shall not exceed the details set out in the Table as follows:
November to August – A total of 18 daily movements (14 good vehicle movements and 4 car movements)
September to October- A total of 428 goods vehicles per month and 4 car movements a day.
2.34 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
A written record shall be kept on site of all vehicle movements and times which shall be available for inspection by the Local Planning Authority
Reason: Leacon Lane is lightly traffic and any increase in vehicular movements to this plant may be detrimental to highway safety
26. Prior to the commencement of works details shall be submitted and approved in writing to the Local Planning Authority of any surface water drainage onto the highway and the works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: No such details have been submitted and in order to prevent water onto the highway
27. The area shown on the submitted layout plan T0153/SK001 as vehicle parking spaces shall be provided, surfaced and drained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority before the facility commences operation, and shall be retained for the use of the occupiers of, and visitors to, the facility, and no permanent development, whether or not permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order), shall be carried out on that area of land so shown or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to these reserved parking spaces.
Reason: In order to provide adequate car parking and turning space on site in the interests of Highway Safety
28. Prior to the start of construction details of the plant and equipment proposed which are likely to give rise to vibration (such as pile driving, demolition and vibro-compaction of the ground) together with predicted vibration levels, shall be submitted in writing and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with HS1. Activities likely to cause vibration in the vicinity of HighSpeed1 infrastructure such that a peak particle velocity (PPV) of 5mm/s may be exceeded at the railway boundary will be subject to agreement in advance.
Where activities could give rise to PPV of 5mm/s or greater, a vibration and settlement monitoring regime shall be submitted in writing to for approval by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with HS1. It shall be put in place prior to the start of works. HS1 shall be provided reasonable access to the results of monitoring
Reason: No details of vibration have been provided. To ensure that vibration does not prejudice safety, operation and structural integrity of HighSpeed1.
2.35 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
29. Prior to the commencement of works details of the materials and arrangements for the storage of combustible gases or hazardous materials within 200m of HighSpeed1 infrastructure shall be submitted in writing and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with HS1. No such materials should be introduced to the site without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority in consultation with HS1.
Reason: In the event of fire, combustible gases present an immediate and catastrophic risk to HighSpeed1. Exclusion zones which may be required around the gas containers or hazardous materials could prevent the running of trains and incur punitive delay costs.
30. Prior to the commencement of works a risk assessment to determine if permanent errant vehicle protection measures are required. The details of these shall be submitted in writing and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with HS1. These errant vehicle protection measures shall be installed prior to the occupation of the site and shall be retained in working condition unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority in consultation with HS1.
Reason: No such barriers exist and none are proposed in the development. Activity associated with the development poses a new risk to the safety, operation and maintenance of HighSpeed1 as a result of vehicles breaching the railway boundary fence.
31. Prior to the commencement of works a risk assessment is to be carried out by the developer to determine if additional fencing is required at the High Speed 1 boundary. The details of this shall be submitted in writing and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with HS1. This fencing shall be installed prior to the occupation of the site and shall be retained as an effective barrier unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority in consultation with HS1.
Reason: To maintain the security of HighSpeed1 and comply with HS1 security requirements. No adequate fencing exists and the development proposed introduces a risk trespass and vandalism on HighSpeed1.
32. All vehicles transporting silage/feedstock to be converted to biogas to the plant shall have their loads fully covered to prevent smells emanating from the crops as they are transported to the site.
Reason: To protect the residential amenity of the locality.
2.36 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Notes to Applicant
1. The applicant’s attention is drawn to the provision of Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
2. This permission does not convey any approval for the required vehicular crossing, passing place or any other works within the highway which will require a Section 278 Highway Agreement, permission must be obtained from Kent Highways Services, on 08458 247800.
3. With regards to the surface water drainage further information will be necessary as there is contradictory information provided thus far within the application documents. On page 12, section 4.1.18, of the Planning Statement it is suggested that all surface water drainage from the site will pass to an ‘infiltration lagoon’. On page 9 of Appendix C it is indicated that drainage will pass to a ‘lined’ lagoon, which will collect water rather than allowing it to pass to ground. In Appendix K (Flood Risk Assessment), page 5 states that surface water will pass to a watercourse via an attenuation lagoon.
Only clean uncontaminated water should drain to the surface water system. Roof drainage shall drain directly to the surface water system (entering after the pollution prevention measures). Appropriate pollution control methods (such as trapped gullies and interceptors) should be used for drainage from access roads and car parking areas to prevent hydrocarbons from entering the surface water system.
It will not be acceptable for drainage from contaminated areas such as the silage storage areas to pass to ground, either directly or via infiltration drainage features such as soakaways or infiltration lagoons. Such drainage must be collected and either recycled or disposed/treated at an appropriate facility.
4. The Environment Agency has stated that "care should be taken during and after construction to ensure that all fuels, oils and any other potentially contaminating materials should be stored (for example in bunded areas secured from public access) so as to prevent accidental/ unauthorised discharge to ground. The areas for storage should not drain to any surface water system.
Where it is proposed to store more than 200 litres (45 gallon drum = 205litres) of any type of oil on site it must be stored in accordance with the Control of Pollution (oil storage) (England) Regulations 2001. Drums and barrels can be kept in drip trays if the drip tray is capable of retaining 25% of the total capacity of all oil stored.
2.37 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
The Environment Agency Guide for Developers is designed to give practical advice on the environmental issues that may affect your site and provides some examples of sites where good practice has already been applied. Some of the topics covered in the guide include, managing the risk of flooding, using water wisely, wildlife & green space, managing waste and land affected by contamination. You can find this guide and links to further information at www.environment-agency.gov.uk/developers." Background Papers
Letter from C Pickett 4/11/2010 Letter from J Stonehewer 4//11/2010, 08/07/2011 Letter from N Perkins 8/11/2010 Comments from Kent Highways 9/11/2010 Letter from KCC Public Rights of Way 9/11/2010, 05/072011 Letter from S Gavin 15/11/2010 Letter from G Field 17/11/2010 Letter from D Blandford 18/11/2010, 15/06/2011 Comments from Rural Planning 18/11/2010, 30/11/2010 Comments from S E Water 18/11/2010 Letter from Mr & Mrs Gentle 22/11/2010,12/07/2011 Comments from WKPS 23/11/2010 Letter from Mr & Mrs Jolly 24/11/2010, 08/07/2011 Letter from R Pinnock 24/11/2010 Letter from C King 24/11/2010 Letter from M Peek 25//11/2010 Comments from Charing P.C 25/11/2010, 13/07/2011 Letter from C Asteraki-Speer 26//11/2010, 14/06/2011 Letter from G Field 26/11/2010 Letter from G Shaw 26/11/2010 Letter from K Ansell 26/11/2010 Letter from L Turner 26/11/2010 Letter from Leeward House 26/11/2010 Letter from R Theobold 26/11/2010
2.38 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Letter from V Ruane 26//11/2010 Letter from Cosy Lodge 29/11/2010 Letter from J Morley 29//11/2010 Letter from J Scott 29/11/2010 Letter from A Parsons 1/12/2010, 17/1/2011, 11/07/2011 Letter from J Elvidge 30/11/2010, 6/12/2010, 11/07/2011 Comments from Environmental Health 8/12/2010, 16/06/2011 Comments from E.A 10/12/2010, 24/06/2011, 19/08/2011 Comments from Little Chart P.C. 20/12/2010 Comments from N Perkins 5/1/2011, 27/06/2011 Comments from A Parker 5/1/2011 Comments from D Steed 10/1/2011 Comments from D Spain 12/1/2011 Comments from CPRE 12/1/2011 Comments from D Gentle 24/1/2011 Comments from Little Chart P.C 24//1/2011, 05/07/2011 Comments from Westwell P.C 25/1/2011, 29/03/2011, 06/07/2011 Comments from P Boyd 1//03/2011 Comments from High Speed 1 1//03/2011, 05/07/2011 Comments from Pluckley Parish Council 4/3/2011, 08/07/2011 Comment from M Byles 08/03/2011 Comments from N Perkins 17/03/2011 Comments from S Gavin 28/03/2011 Comments from N Armitage 04/04/2011 Comments from Mr & Mrs Joy 15/04/2011, 07/07/2011 Comments from P Taunton 21/04/2011 Comment from C Wetz 27/04/ 2011 Comments from A Wetz 25/05/2011 Comments from L McCullough 04/07/2011 Comments from C Bozeat 05/11/2011 Comments from I Gorman 06/07/2011 Comments from A & J Diebel 07/07/2011 2.39 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 19 October 2011 ______
Comments from E Boyle 07/07/2011 Comments from M Whatman 07/07/2011 Comments from Mr & Mrs Salisbury Comments from P Taunton 07/07/2011 Petition 07/07/2011 Comments from R Hayward 07/07/2011 Comments from S Pullen 07/07/2011 Comments from Egerton PC 07/07/2011 Letter from C & K McCall 08/07/2011 Letter from C Wetz 08/07/2011 Letter from J Denman 08/07/2011 Letter from J Ladds 08/07/2011 Letter from L Love 08/07/2011 Letter from MByles 08/07/2011 Comments from Charing Parish Design Group 11/07/2011 Letter from S Cryer 11./07/2011 Letter from S Turton 12/07/2011 Letter from S Smith 18/07/2011 Letter from M Chambers 19/07/2011 Letter from N Gowers 27/07/2011
Contact Officer: Carol Ridings - Telephone: (01233) 330247
2.40 ______Page 1ofAnnex1atoReport10/01491/AS Planning Committee19October2011 Ashford BoroughCouncil
______2.41 ______
______Page 1ofAnnex1btoReport10/01491/AS Planning Committee19October2011 Ashford BoroughCouncil
______2.42 ______