DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATION COMMITTEE 26 January 2010 A Report by the Head of Environment

______

Application No 2/09/9031 District

Applicant CoRE North West Parish Workington Date of Receipt 3 November 2009 ______

PROPOSAL Anaerobic Digestion (AD) Plant

Blackdyke Industrial Estate, , Wigton, ______

RECOMMENDATION

1.1 That planning permission is granted for the reasons stated in Appendix 1 and subject to the conditions listed in Appendix 2.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 CORE (Community Renewable Energy) North West proposes to develop an Anaerobic Digestion Plant at Blackdyke Industrial Estate near Silloth. Anaerobic Digestion is a process that recovers biogas (mainly methane) from biological material within a sealed oxygen-free tank. It produces a residue, called digestate which can be used as a fertiliser. The application is to process up to 27,000 tonnes per annum of agricultural waste, including chicken litter, farm slurry and manure, and also grass silage produced on local farms. It is anticipated that the development would create 7 full time jobs.

2.2 The AD plant, following completion, would be part-owned by a co-operative of local farmers who would contribute input materials and benefit from digestate, heat and power outputs. The outputs from the process would include1MW electricity supplied to the National Grid, heat to be used in the development and adjacent businesses, and liquid and solid digestates to be used as fertiliser by member farmers. The development if granted planning consent would also be subject to regulation by the Environment Agency.

2.3 The proposed development would comprise:

• two metal clad concrete tanks 38.5m diameter x 6m tall, one the digester tank; and the other the digestate storage tank which would have a 5m gas cone on top of the 6m high cylinder; • 12.5m diameter, 2m tall, sealed liquid reception tank • Pitched roof, brick building (approximately 8.7m x 15.5m and 3.5m to the eaves) housing two combined heat and power gas engines • Weighbridge • 4m high concrete sileage clamp (20m x 87m at the longest point) • transformer building approximately 5m x 11m and 3.4m high, and • pipework and electrical grid connection. • additional vehicular circulation space, parking, and hardstandings • landscaping to include planted earth bunds around the digestion tanks and silage clamp, and enhanced hedgerow planting 2.4 The proposed development would access the highway via the existing access used by the adjacent concrete block factory. No alterations to this access are proposed.

3.0 CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

3.1 Allerdale Borough Council have no objections subject to conditions on materials, boundary treatment and lighting.

3.2 Holme Low Parish Council have no objections subject to reservations on increased traffic and the maintenance of the road.

3.3 Natural have no objections.

3.4 The Environment Agency have no objections.

3.5 United Utilities(UU) have no objections.

3.6 The Highway Authority have no objections.

3.7 Environmental Health have no objections as the plant will be subject to control by the Environment Agency under a permit.

3.8 The AONB Staff Unit - Solway Coast support the application.

3.9 The local Member Mr AJ Markley has been notified.

3.10 Nineteen representations had been received when this report was prepared. Two are objections from the two nearest neighbours, Blackdyke and The Yard. The first cites the “general unneighbourliness of the development and specifically: flood risk, noise nuisance, odour nuisance, visual impact, highway safety and site selection.

3.11 These issues are considered in the planning assessment below. The second is from the owner of “The Yard”, south of the site, but no details of the grounds of the objection had been submitted at the time this report was prepared.

3.12 Nineteen expressions of support have also been received. Five are from members of the public supporting the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and diversification for farmers, while four are from local farmers who support the principle for the same reasons.

3.13 Three are from local businesses. The two adjacent businesses support the application, as they would benefit from the outputs.

• The adjacent poultry farmer, who is a potential member of the co-operative and currently grows cereals as well writes that growing grass for silage to feed the digestor would promise a much better income. • The manager of the adjacent concrete block plant states: “I am emailing our company’s support today for the anaerobic digester because the renewable heat it generates will play a valuable part in reducing our production costs, therefore helping to safeguard the employees jobs and the company as well in these difficult times and create some much needed employment for the area.” • A food and agribusiness in Penrith also wrote to support the application on the grounds that harnessing the gas given off by animal slurries and grass crops and creating renewable electricity from it reduces greenhouse gas emissions, and provides a stable and consistent income to farmers. 3.14 Two co-operative organisations support the proposal. The Board of Co- operatives North West write that it would create sustainable and good quality employment opportunities in the area; maintain/sustain farms as viable entities

and reduce the environmental impacts of farming. C-operative and Mutual Solutions in Lancashire have also written to support the proposal.

3.15 Cumbria Vision’s Strategic Director and Director have submitted a letter and an email respectively, supporting the principle of the proposal, it’s contribution to Cumbria’s renewable energy targets, benefits to the rural economy and the value of the project as an exemplar and demonstration plant. Cumbria Vision have supported the feasibility funding of the proposal.

3.16 The University of Cumbria School of Sustainable Engineering at Newton Rigg Campus supports the sustainability and effectiveness of the process. Students and researchers would hope to work with the AD plant if consent is granted.

3.17 Letters of support have also been received from Envirolink North West and The Solway Coast AONB Staff Unit.

4.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT

4.1 The proposal is primarily an energy from waste development, but would also use forage crops (initially grass silage) from neighbouring farms. The proposed plant would convert a number of problem materials into useful outputs, i.e. low carbon and renewable electricity, heat and fertilisers.

Sustainability and carbon reduction

4.2 The contribution to combating climate change and developing energy security includes harnessing methane emissions from animal slurry and bedding; the replacement of synthetic fertilisers derived from natural gas; as well as displacement of fossil fuel by low carbon and renewable sources. Defra support the development of the technology as “a well proven renewable energy and waste management technology”; and state “We are committed to making the most of the potential of anaerobic digestion to contribute to our climate change, waste management and wider environmental objectives.”

4.3 The project was selected for funding support by the NWDA out of over 60 low carbon projects across the whole NW region on the basis of its strategic, technical, employment and CO2 significance. I consider that this plant would help to establish Cumbria as a leading sub region in anaerobic digestion as well as demonstrating the opportunity to other farmers of the economic benefit and carbon reduction capacity of this process.

4.4 The paragraphs below set out the specifics of the site and how the Development Plan translates the general national policy support for the process into relevant planning policy.

Site description

4.5 The 2.3 hectare site is just over 800m from the Solway Firth Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). It is however adjacent to a concrete block factory, housed within an aircraft hangar but with a large amount of external storage, and includes a section of a second aircraft hangar and its associated concrete hardstanding. The majority of the site consists of fields which extend beyond the site boundary to an unclassified minor road that links to the B5302. This road bounds the fields to the north and east and is edged with close trimmed hedges

with the occasional hedgerow tree. A similar hedge, part of which would need to be removed for the proposal, runs through the site.

4.6 South of the aircraft hangar are two chicken sheds occupied by Pearson’s Poultry Farm, which has a separate highway access on to the unclassified road mentioned above. South and east of that, with the nearest boundary approximately 125 m from the application site boundary, there is a property known as “The Yard”. This comprises a private house and an associated area that has previously been a coal yard and a waste operation. The surrounding agricultural landscape also contains other residential and business properties, the closest being “Blackdyke” immediately north of the minor road.

Policy background.

4.7 The most relevant planning policies to the consideration of the principle of this application are contained in the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) (policies DP9 and EM17); the saved Joint Structure Plan (JSP) Policy R44; and the Minerals and Waste Development Framework (MWDF) - Core Strategy Policies 1 and 2, and Development Control Policies 4 and 12.

4.8 RSS Policy DP9 supports the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, and EM17 encourages the installation of renewable energy generation, especially with combined heat and power. MWDF policies do not refer specifically to agricultural waste, but Core Strategy Policy 1 – Sustainable Development supports the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, and the management of waste close to its source. In addition to the 7 jobs directly created, the proposal would support local farmers economically by providing low cost fertilisers, additional income to those still engaged in dairy farming and to silage producers, and heat to the adjacent poultry farm, and thus conform to Core Strategy Policy 2 – Economic Benefit which encourages proposals that provide employment and support other industries and developments.

4.9 The co-operative nature of the development, involving 11 farms, does not fall neatly into the categories envisaged in JSP R44 – “Renewable Energy outside the LDNPA and AONB” in that it is neither AD with agricultural waste on an individual farm, nor a commercial biomass development. However I consider that the location on the edge of an industrial area, where the waste heat will be used to support adjoining businesses, but also in the centre of an agricultural area, is supported by this policy.

4.10 The inclusion of a greenfield site within the proposed location is not contrary to policy, as Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 22, and its Companion Guide PPS 22, specifically states that where the renewable energy resource exists and where economically feasible, local planning authorities should not use a sequential approach by giving priority to the re-use of previously developed land.

4.11 Planning Policy Statement (PPS) paragraph 7 also requires local planning authorities to (i) support development that delivers diverse and sustainable farming enterprises; and (iv) provide for the sensitive exploitation of renewable energy sources in accordance with the policies set out in PPS22.

4.12 The proposal is a combined heat and power plant close to the source of the wastes in a location where waste heat can be used and thus conforms to the

relevant paragraph (g) of MWDF Development Control Policy 4.

4.13 I therefore consider that the principle of the development in this location conforms to the Development Plan and to national planning policy. The site specific potentially adverse impacts and whether they can be adequately mitigated are considered below. In response to the above application there are potential concerns over odour and noise, however as the plant will be subject to control by the Environment Agency under a permit and these being dealt with by permit conditions there are no environmental health objections. The application should bring are obvious benefits for sustainable use and disposal of agricultural waste.

Traffic Impacts

4.14 The Highway Authority supports the proposal subject to a condition requiring an approved haulage route to minimise the volumes of traffic on the unclassified road serving the site. The Parish Council do not object but express reservations on the condition of the road, and this view is supported by an objection from the owner of Blackdyke. He states that travelling on the unclassified road is already difficult due to the behaviour of HGV drivers from the concrete block factory and he has been forced into the verge on two occasions and is concerned about any additional tractors and trailers using the road. The trip generation data investigates these concerns by calculating the material generated and consumed by each of the co-operative members whose farms are the sources of material. This data plus a “Supply Routes” plan have been submitted and form the basis of a Traffic Routing Agreement.

4.15 The nearest co-operative member, the poultry farm, is the source of 48% of the predicted trips and would approach the proposed plant through an internal access without accessing the public highway as indicated on the submitted site plan.

4.16 Park House Farm is approximately 150m west of the proposed access and would generate an average of 2 trips per week. Of the other 10 farms, 7 would approach from the west (average of 34 trips/week) and two from the south east. These two would be the only sources using the most sensitive section of road (average 7 trips per week). At the 4 week period from mid May to mid June when forage material would be cut and brought to the plant, the additional traffic on this section of road would be 12 trips/week (i.e. 24 vehicle movements). The second “cut” between mid July to mid August would generate 9-10 trips/week. In some cases fewer movements would be made as vehicles delivering input would also take digestate away.

4.17 The Routeing Scheme is supported by the Highway Authority and I recommend that it be included as an approved document. Suggested condition 3 would also place a maximum on the throughput, and therefore traffic movements associated with the plant.

4.18 Condition 8 would ensure that there was no access via the poultry farm’s highway access for other members’ vehicles.

Flood Risk and Drainage

4.19 The site lies within Flood Zone 3 and a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) was undertaken as part of the site selection process in September 2008. A summary of this was submitted within the Design and Access Statement for the application, and the full FRA submitted subsequently. The Environment Agency have no objection to the development as it is a “less vulnerable” development, that would not be affected in the event of flooding, and any potential for off site flooding caused by the development would be addressed by the proposed sustainable drainage scheme (SuDS). The detailed design of this would be required under suggested condition 4.

4.20 UU originally objected due to inadequate easement for the water main crossing the site. The proposed position of the sileage clamp was amended and UU removed the objection.

Landscape and Visual Impact.

4.21 The structures associated with the development are large, with a 4m high silage clamp and tanks 6m high rather than the 4 or 5m high storage tanks common on individual farms. The gas cone on the digestate storage tank also rises to an additional 5m at its central point. However this central height is set back from the edge of the tank, significantly reducing the visual impact, and the structures are not out of scale with the existing 12m tall aircraft hangars.

4.22 The two issues to consider are, would the proposed development have any adverse impact on the Solway Firth AONB, and are there unacceptable impacts on neighbouring residents?

4.23 The Solway Coast AONB staff unit originally had concerns about the proposals, however these were amended to reduce the size of the sileage clamp, move it further from the road, and develop the hedges with additional native hedgerow trees. They now support the proposals and I consider that there would be no adverse impact on the AONB.

4.24 The objection from the owner of Blackdyke includes grounds of landscape and visual impact, while the neighbour to the south east has raised these issues in telephone conversations without putting the specific grounds of objection in writing. Blackdyke faces in a south easterly direction away from the proposed development, and there are two mature oak trees one 7m and one 6 m tall between this property and the silage clamp.

4.25 The hedge on the northern boundary with the road would be augmented by an additional line of hedge planting and additional native trees in any gaps. The submitted landscape plan also includes management proposals to allow a natural increase in height and width over several seasons to increase the screening and biodiversity value of the hedge. I consider that this screening, in addition to the planted bund proposed around the silage clamp and the new hedgerow described below, would mitigate any adverse visual impact from the property in question.

4.26 One 108m section of existing hedgerow within the site would be removed. This section is not an “important” hedgerow under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997, although it does meet some of the criteria for such a designation. In mitigation for its loss a new parallel hedgerow is proposed at the western boundary that

would also curve around the southern boundary of the site. This would assist in screening the development from “The Yard”, the property on the south east of the application site, which also has a concrete boundary wall approximately 2m high.

4.27 Other residential properties in the area are adequately screened from the proposed development, and most of them are potential members of the co- operative.

Odour

4.28 The potential for odour is raised by the objector, and by Environmental Health. However Environmental Health comment that as the plant will be subject to control by the Environment Agency under a permit and both noise and odour would be dealt with by permit conditions there are no environmental health objections.

4.29 The potential sources of odour in the proposed development are: the digestate tanks and slurry reception tank; the spreading of digestate; silage clamp, poultry litter; and lorries and trailers.

• The tanks, including the slurry reception tank, would be fully sealed and therefore would not be an odour source. • The anaerobically treated digestate material is a nutrient rich but stable fertiliser and Defra confirms that odour from spreading this material is 80% less than odour from untreated material. The surrounding environment, where untreated poultry waste has been spread, would therefore be improved by this process. • The silage clamp would contain only forage material, be covered with plastic sheeting, and cut uniformly by silage cutters when needed as input to the digester. This procedure reduces potential for shredding, secondary fermentation, and secondary odours. • The poultry litter is currently stored in the open air prior to spreading, but the proposal establishes an internal storage area inside the hangar building, and proposed condition 6 would ensure that no input material is stored outside the approved areas. • Any additional odour from lorries and trailers would be minimised by being adequately covered as required under suggested condition 10. 4.30 I consider that the proposals, including the Odour Management Plan, that has been submitted to support the application, would ensure that the potential for odour nuisance to neighbouring residents would be reduced by the development.

Noise

4.31 The noise sources identified in the submitted design and access statement are the two Combined Heat and Power gas engines, noise level at source 121 Lw, their exhausts, 99Lw , and vehicle movements ,111dB(A) for a 4 axel lorry or tractor and trailer. The gas engines and their exhausts would continue through the night, while the vehicles would be moving on site approximately 25% of the time – but in working hours only.

4.32 The objection from the owner of Blackdyke cites noise as a potential problem and says the noise data supplied with the original application was insufficient; a full Acoustic Report should be provided; and appropriate conditions should be attached to any consent that might be granted. Additional information has been sought from the applicant and three conditions 11, 12 and 13 are suggested to mitigate against this potential impact.

4.33 The site is adjacent to a number of industrial units and a certain amount of noise is to be anticipated during working hours. However there are a number of residential properties in the area, the two nearest being Blackdyke (125m to boundary) and “the Yard” (215m south-east). Condition 11 would impose a maximum noise level for the night time period, to be no more than 10 dB (A) above the background level. This background level would be established by a survey that would be required under suggested condition 12.

4.34 Additional proposals to attenuate the noise of the gas engines have been submitted as Noise Management Proposals in a letter from the agent dated 7 January 2010. These proposals give the technical data for the specific gas engines, and also demonstrate that 40-45 dB(A) attenuation could be provided by the measures proposed within the proposed engine building. Attenuation would be achieved by using a cavity brick and block construction with mineral wool cavity insulation, and internal dry lining with high density plaster board. No windows would be placed in the engine room unless acoustically treated, and all doors to the building would be self closing high performance. The external doors to the engine room would be kept closed in normal operations as monitoring access would be via internal doors from the control room. External doors would only be required for installation and major maintenance. Attenuation of exhaust noise would be provided by a silencer specific to the exhaust.

4.35 The proposed location of the engine building has also been selected to ensure that a consistent screen of higher structures would provide additional noise attenuation and reduce noise levels at Blackdyke and all other residential properties to the west, north and east. The poultry sheds to the south and the digestate storage tank provide a considerable screen to “The Yard”, and additional acoustic fencing could be provided within the Noise Management Scheme (required under recommended condition 12) if the background survey and technical study shows it is necessary. The Scheme would also provide a process by which additional measures would have to be provided if the maximum noise levels were breached as a result of activities within the development.

4.36 I also recommend that operational hours for loading and transportation of materials be restricted to 07.00 to 20.00 - recommended condition (9). This

would be 7 days a week as the activity is essentially agricultural and would be linked to suitable harvesting conditions. It is not unusual for farms to work such hours during harvest but this condition would prevent very late deliveries of waste or silage materials. As farmers will have some storage on their own farms, I consider this a reasonable restriction to reduce noise from late evening traffic both on and moving to and from the site.

Biodiversity

4.37 Natural England do not consider that the proposals would adversely affect any designated areas, but raised the issue of nesting birds. The revised proposals include enhancing and replacing hedgerows, and management to avoid hedge removal or cutting within the nesting season, and the proposal is now supported by Natural England. I recommend that this is regulated under conditions 5 and 14.

Human Rights Act 1998

4.38 The proposal will have a limited impact on the environmental amenity of the area. Any impacts on the rights of local property owners to a private and family life and peaceful enjoyment of their possessions (Article 8 and Article 1 of Protocol 1) are minimal and proportionate to the wider social and economic interests of the community.

Conclusion

4.39 The proposed development would have a significant economic benefit through job creation and support for participating farmers, and also make a significant contribution to Cumbria’s greenhouse gas reduction targets. The proposal would not have an adverse impact on the AONB, and the localised landscape and other impacts would be adequately mitigated by the measures proposed.

Shaun Gorman Head of Environment

Contact Mrs Maggie Mason, Kendal, tel: 01539 713548, email: [email protected]

Background Papers Planning Application File Reference No. 2/09/9031

Electoral Division Identification Solway Coast Mr AJ Markley

* \\ccc-prdc-fp05\kendal\filing\planning\applications\allerdale\2009\2099031

Appendix 1 Ref No. 2/09/9031 Development Control and Regulation Committee - 26 January 2010

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURE) ORDER 1995 (AS AMENDED)

SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION

1 This application has been determined in accordance with the Town and Country Planning Acts, in the context of national and regional planning policy guidance and advice and the relevant development plan policies.

2 The key development plan policies taken into account by the County Council before granting permission were as follows:

Cumbria Minerals and Waste Development Framework - Core Strategy and Generic Development Control Policies - April 2009

Core Strategy Policy 1: Sustainable Location and Design

Proposals for minerals and waste management developments should demonstrate that:-

• energy management, environmental performance and carbon reduction have been determining design factors. • their location will minimise, as far as is practicable, the "minerals or waste road miles" involved in supplying the minerals or managing the wastes unless other environmental/sustainability and, for minerals, geological considerations override this aim. • all proposed waste management developments with gross floor space of over 1000 square metres gain at least 10% of energy supply, annually or over the design life of the development, from decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy supplies. Any exceptions to this should demonstrate that this would not be feasible or viable for the specific development and that the development would form part of an integrated process for reducing greenhouse gas emissions or for carbon-offsetting measures. • where appropriate, the restoration proposals have a role in helping to combat climate change. • mineral working proposals should demonstrate a life cycle ("cradle to grave") analysis of product and process carbon emissions. • construction of buildings minimises waste production and use of primary aggregates and makes best use of products made from recycled/re-used materials.

Work will be undertaken, in conjunction with stakeholders, to develop life cycle analysis criteria that are relevant for minerals developments.

Core Strategy Policy 2: Economic Benefit

Proposals for new minerals and waste developments should demonstrate that they would realise their potential to provide economic benefit. This will include such matters as the number of jobs directly or indirectly created or safeguarded and the support that proposals give to other industries and developments. It will also be important to ensure that minerals and waste developments would not prejudice other regeneration and development initiatives.

Development Control Policies DC 4: Criteria for Waste Management Facilities

Waste management facilities that accord with Core Strategy Policies 2, 8 and 9, and which do not have adverse environmental impacts, will be permitted if they conform to the locational and other criteria below. g. In considering energy from waste proposals preference will be given to combined heat and power providers. Proposals located on an industrial site or premises where the waste arises or heat can be used will be favoured,

Development Control Policies DC 12: Landscape

Proposals for development should be compatible with the distinctive characteristics and features of Cumbria's landscapes and should: a. avoid significant adverse impacts on the natural and historic landscape, b. use Landscape Character Assessment to assess the capacity of landscapes to accept development, to inform the appropriate scale and character of such development, and guide restoration where development is permitted, c. in appropriate cases use the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment to assess and integrate these issues into the development process, d. ensure that development proposals consider the effects on: locally distinctive natural or built features; scale in relation to landscape features; public access and community value of the landscape; historic patterns and attributes; and openness, remoteness and tranquillity, e. ensure high quality design of modern waste facilities to minimise their impact on the landscape, or views from sensitive areas, and to contribute to the built environment, f. direct minerals and waste developments to less sensitive locations, wherever this is possible, and ensure that sensitive siting and high quality design prevent significant adverse impacts on the principal local characteristics of the landscape including views from, and the setting of, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the Heritage Coast or National Parks.

North West Regional Spatial Strategy (September 2008)

Policy DP 9: Reduce Emissions and Adapt to Climate Change

As an urgent regional priority, plans, strategies, proposals, schemes and investment decisions should:

• contribute to reductions in the Region's carbon dioxide emissions from all sources, including energy generation and supply, buildings and transport in line with national targets to reduce emissions to 60% below 1990 levels by 2050; in

particular, for residential and commercial development, by developing trajectories or other yardsticks for identifying trends in carbon performance; • take into account future changes to national targets for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions; • identify, assess and apply measures to ensure effective adaptation to likely environmental, social and economic impacts of climate change.

Measures to reduce emissions might include as examples:

• increasing urban density; • encouraging better built homes and energy efficiency, eco-friendly and adaptable buildings, with good thermal insulation, green roofs and microgeneration; • reducing traffic growth, promoting walking, cycling and public transport; • facilitating effective waste management; • increasing renewable energy capacity; • focusing substantial new development on locations where energy can be gained from decentralised supply systems; • the improved management and rewetting of the regions blanket and raised bog resource.

Adaptation measures might include, for example:

• minimising threats from, and the impact of, increased coastal erosion, increased storminess and flood risk, habitat disturbance, fragmentation and increased pressure on water supply and drainage systems; • protection of the most versatile agricultural land; • Sustainable Urban Drainage.

Policy makers should use the North West Integrated Appraisal Toolkit as a basis to assess and strengthen the climate change mitigation and adaptation elements of their plans and strategies. Exceptionally, other comparable and robust methodologies might be used.

Applicants and local planning authorities should ensure that all developments meet at least the minimum standards set out in the North West Sustainability Checklist for

Developments (33), and should apply ‘good’ or ‘best practice’ standards wherever practicable.

Policy EM 17: Renewable Energy

In line with the North West Sustainable Energy Strategy, by 2010 at least 10% (rising to at least 15% by 2015 and at least 20% by 2020) of the electricity which is supplied within the Region should be provided from renewable energy sources. To achieve this new renewable energy capacity should be developed which will contribute towards the delivery of the indicative capacity targets set out in Tables 9.6 and 9.7a-c. In accordance with PPS22, meeting these targets is not a reason to refuse otherwise acceptable development proposals.

Local authorities should work with stakeholders in the preparation of sub regional studies of renewable energy resources so as to gain a thorough understanding of the supplies available and network improvements, and how they can best be used to meet national, regional and local targets. These studies should form the basis for:

informing a future review of RSS to identify broad locations where development of particular types of renewable energy may be considered appropriate (119); and establishing local strategies for dealing with renewable resources, setting targets for their use which can replace existing sub regional targets for the relevant authorities.

Plans and strategies should seek to promote and encourage, rather than restrict, the use of renewable energy resources. Local planning authorities should give significant weight to the wider environmental, community and economic benefits of proposals for renewable energy schemes to:

• contribute towards the capacities set out in tables 9.6 and 9.7 a-c; and • mitigate the causes of climate change and minimise the need to consume finite natural resources.

Opportunities should be sought to identify proposals and schemes for renewable energy. The following criteria should be taken into account but should not be used to rule out or place constraints on the development of all, or specific types of, renewable energy technologies:

• anticipated effects on local amenity resulting from development, construction and operation of schemes (e.g. air quality, atmospheric emissions, noise, odour, water pollution and disposal of waste). Measures to mitigate these impacts should be employed where possible and necessary to make them acceptable; • acceptability of the location/scale of the proposal and its visual impact in relation to the character and sensitivity of the surrounding landscape, including cumulative impact. Stringent requirements for minimising impact on landscape and townscape would not be appropriate if these effectively preclude the supply of certain types of renewable energy, other than in the most exceptional circumstances such as within nationally recognised designations as set out in PPS22 paragraph 11; • effect on the region’s World Heritage Sites and other national and internationally designated sites or areas, and their settings but avoiding the creation of buffer zones and noting that small scale developments may be permitted in such areas provided there is no significant environmental detriment; • effect of development on nature conservation features, biodiversity and geodiversity, including sites, habitats and species, and which avoid significant adverse effects on sites of international nature conservation importance by assessment under the Habitats Regulations; • maintenance of the openness of the Region’s Green Belt; • potential benefits of development to the local economy and the local community; • accessibility (where necessary) by the local transport network; • effect on agriculture and other land based industries; • ability to make connections to the electricity distribution network which takes account of visual impact (as qualified above);

• integration of the proposal with existing or new development where appropriate; • proximity to the renewable fuel source where relevant – e.g. wood-fuel biomass processing plants within or in close proximity to the region’s major woodlands and forests; • encourage the integration of combined heat and power (CHP), including micro CHP into development.

Developers must engage with local communities at an early stage of the development process prior to submission of any proposals and schemes for approval under the appropriate legislation.

Cumbria and Lake District Joint Structure Plan – Adopted Plan - Saved Policies (2001 – 2016)

Policy R44: Renewable Energy outside the Lake District National Park and AONB

“Outside the Lake District National Park and AONBs proposals for renewable energy including any ancillary infrastructure or buildings will be favourably considered if:

1. there is no significant adverse effect on the landscape character biodiversity and the natural and built heritage of the area either individually or cumulatively through their relationship with other utility infrastructure, 2. there is no significant adverse effect on local amenity, the local economy, highways, aircraft operations or telecommunications, 3. the proposal takes all practicable measures to reduce any adverse impact on landscape, environmental, nature conservation, historical and local community interests.

In considering applications for planning permission in relation to the above criteria, and other policies in this plan, the environmental, economic and energy benefits of renewable energy proposals should be given significant weight.

There are additional requirements in the following cases:”

“Proposals for the recovery of energy from agriculture waste within existing farm units or sewage sludge.

6. shall be well related to the activity, scale and character of the existing business/enterprise and /or setting”.

3 In summary, the reasons for granting permission are that the County Council is of the opinion that the proposed development is in accordance with the development plan, in particular with MWDF Core Strategy Policy 1 and 2 and DC Policies 4 and 12. There are no material considerations that indicate the decision should be made otherwise and with the planning conditions included in the notice of planning consent, any harm would reasonably by mitigated. Furthermore, any potential harm to interests of acknowledged importance is likely to be negligible and would be outweighed by the benefits of the development.

Appendix 2 Ref No. 2/0/9031 Development Control and Regulation Committee - 26 January 2010

Conditions

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2 The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. which shall comprise the following documents: 2.1 the planning application form, dated 17 August 2009 2.2 the design and access statement 2.3 site location plan CNW-BD- 08/1 2.4 planning application plan CNW BD- 01/1 1.4mk108a 2.5 proposed site plan CNW BD – 01/2 v 1.4mk 142a 2.6 elevations proposed CNW BD -04/3 v 1.4mk116b 2.7 proposed landscape plan CNW BD- 05/3 v1.4mk156c 2.8 the Arboricultural Report - Capita Symonds 14/12/09 2.9 the Tree Protection Plan TPP -01- REV1 2.10 the Arboricultural Method Statement – Capita Symonds 2.11 the Odour and Noise Management Plan as detailed in letter from the agent dated 7 January 2010 2.12 Traffic Routeing Scheme as contained in letter from the agent dated 12/01/10; “Blackdyke Transport Trips 08-01-10d” and drawing “Supply Routes 7/01/2010”. 2.13 the decision notice Any variations to the approved scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to being carried out.

Reason: To ensure the development is carried out to an approved appropriate standard.

3 No more than 30,000 tonnes of material shall be processed on the site in any 12 month period. Details of the total annual throughput of the site for each calendar year shall be made available to the Local Planning Authority on request by the end of January the following year.

Reason: To keep to acceptable levels the impact of traffic on the amenity of local residents and other road users in accordance with MWDF Policy DC1.

4 No development shall take place on the site until a Scheme for provision of surface water drainage has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The Scheme shall include:

• details of the design, implementation, maintenance and management of the sustainable urban drainage scheme and discharge to Blea Gutter,

• and arrangements to secure the operation of the sustainable drainage scheme throughout its lifetime. The scheme shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure that drainage is to an approved appropriate standard in accordance with NWRSS Policy EM5.

5 No development shall take place on the site until a detailed Landscape and Planting Scheme has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The Scheme shall accord with amended drawing number CNW BD- 05/3 and shall include :

• Species, size and location of all trees hedges and shrubs to be planted • seed mixture for grassed areas • layout and details of surface materials of all access roads and hardstandings • location and design of any boundary fences When approved the planting shall be implemented within the first available planting season. Any trees or shrubs that die or become diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced with plants of a similar size and species unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason To secure the satisfactory establishment and maintenance of trees, hedges and shrubs in the interests of local and residential amenity.

7 No development shall take place on the site above foundation level until samples of all external materials and finishes to be used on the engine building, transformer building, and cladding for the digestate tanks, have been submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. Once approved the external finishes should be applied as detailed in the approved documents.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

6 No waste, other feedstock, or digestate shall be stored on site except where shown in the approved plan except with the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To minimise the environmental impact of the development in accordance with MWDF Policy DC 2 and 3.

7 Construction works shall not take place outside 08.00 hours to 18.00 hours Mondays to Fridays and 08.00 hours to 13.00 hours on Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays except with the written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that no operations take place during the construction period outside normal working hours which would lead to an unacceptable impact upon the amenity of local residents.

8 There shall be no vehicular access to or egress from the site other than via the accesses shown on drawing CNW BD -01/2 v 1.4mk 142a, except with the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To avoid vehicles entering or leaving the site by an unsatisfactory access or route, in the interests of road safety. To support Local Transport Plan Policies: LD7, LD8

9 No loading or transportation of any materials shall take place on site outside the hours 07.00 to 20.00 hours except with the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that no operations take place outside normal working hours which would lead to an unacceptable impact upon the amenity of local residents.

10 All loads of waste materials into or from the site onto the public highway shall be sheeted or otherwise covered.

Reason: In the interest of local amenity and to prevent release of odourous material.

11 The noise at the boundary of the two nearest noise sensitive properties, “Blackdyke” and “The Yard”, shall not exceed the night time background level (LAeq(1 hour) ).by more than 10dB(A) between the hours of 20.00 hours to 07.00 hours

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of local residents by ensuring that the noise generated in their operation is minimised and so does not constitute a nuisance outside the boundaries of the site.

12 No development shall take place on the site until a Noise Management Scheme has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The Scheme shall comply with the approved Noise Management Proposals listed in condition 2 and shall include :

• a survey of night time background noise in accordance with BS4142 1997 “Method of rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas” at the boundaries of the two nearest noise sensitive properties; “Blackdyke” and “The Yard” • details of sound attenuation measures to ensure compliance with condition 11 above; • an action plan detailing measures to be undertaken if noise exceeds the maximum level The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. When approved all vehicles in the operator’s control shall adhere to the scheme. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of local residents by ensuring that the noise generated in their operation is minimised and so does not constitute a nuisance outside the boundaries of the site.

13 All vehicles under the site operator’s control that are fitted with reversing alarms

shall use a white noise type unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of local residents by ensuring that the noise generated in their operation is minimised and so does not constitute a nuisance outside the boundaries of the site.

14 No tree felling or hedge shall take place within the bird breeding season March - July inclusive unless measures have previously been taken to exclude nesting birds.

Reason: For the protection of nesting birds.