Head of Planning Services Waterside Woking Borough Council 41a St Johns Road Civic Offices Woking Gloucester Square GU21 7SA Woking Surrey GU21 6YL 01483757681 [email protected] 17 July 2018 PLAN/2018/0645 – Land Adjacent to Camphill Industrial Estate, West Byfleet I am writing on behalf of The Basingstoke Canal Society with regard to the proposal to build an auxiliary gas-powered electricity generation station on the Camphill site in West Byfleet. We do not wish to object to this proposal but we would like to make a number of comments and highlight a few concerns. The Society is a charity with around 1000 members, formed in 1966 to campaign for the restoration of the then derelict Canal. This mostly volunteer effort returned the Canal to operation as a navigation. The Canal’s 31 miles were formally re-opened in a ceremony in 1991 by the Duke of Kent. Shortly after that, the canal waterway was designated a SSSI (with the exception of a short length to the west of Monument Bridge in Woking). The SSSI ends at Scotland Road Bridge which is within about 100m of the proposed site. The Basingstoke Canal provides a beautiful and tranquil environment for the local community to benefit physically and mentally from being beside or on the water and many people take advantage of this in Woking. There have been a number of studies (1) and articles (2) published recently about how canals and waterways can be a positive force for health and wellbeing providing opportunities for exercise and recreation. Indeed we have quite recently begun an initiative between the Canal Society and the Deputy Chief Executive of WBC and a number of his team. The aim of this collaboration is to work together to capitalise on the huge potential that the canal brings to the Borough and we meet regularly to identify opportunities that will benefit both sides. Above all we wish to protect the “Canal Corridor”, to enhance it and to prevent intrusion from environmental pollution caused by thoughtless development. The Basingstoke Canal Society Registered in England as The Surrey and Hampshire Canal Society Limited, No. 1296593 and as a Charity No. 273085 Registered office: Island House, Moor Road, Chesham, Bucks, HP5 1WA A non-profit distributing company limited by guarantee Chairman: Philip Riley Presidents: Tim and Elizabeth Dodwell. Vice Presidents: Paul Vine MA, Robin Higgs OBE, David Gerry, David Millett, Dieter Jebens, Lord Arbuthnot of Edrom, Rt Hon Philip Hammond MP, Sir Gerald Howarth, Jonathan Lord MP, Rt Hon. Maria Miller MP, Rt Hon Anne Milton MP, Ranil Jayawardena MP, Alan Rice TD I have spent some time looking at how the Basingstoke Canal fits in to your Local Plan and have been pleased to note that is figures really quite strongly in the Core Strategy (Chapters 2 and 5) and under Development Management Policies (Chapters 3 and 4) especially DM4 (Development in the Vicinity of the Basingstoke Canal). It seems that your aims are very much in line with ours in the preservation and protection of the canal in Woking. The Planning Application is well researched and does provide assurances over many of the potential worries. But there are some omissions and some areas that need to be clarified. I will cover these below. Also the studies were carried out as an internal (industry) activity and everything of importance should not be taken at face value and must be checked by your team. I feel confident that during the process your Officers will undertake a full review the proposal and impose certain appropriate conditions. Visual Impact The plans suggest that the perimeter fence will be at least 50m from the water – and the generators a further 10m inside the boundary. There are several layers of tall and mature tree screening and so the site will be far enough away not to be seen (significantly) from the canal. It will be essential that we retain this screening and indeed enhance it with landscaping behind the boundary fence. This must be a condition to be imposed by your Officers. The plans do not currently contain a “photomontage” of the buildings and surroundings (including landscaping and trees). It would be useful if there was one in order to provide context. A landscaping plan is also required. The levels are currently awkward with the old waste tip about 10m higher than the surrounding ground. We would hope that the ground will be levelled to minimise the vertical visual impact. Noise Start up of the generators is likely to be higher than the steady state. Landscaping could help to screen this as would the provision of a noise attenuating fence. It is expected that Officers will set down maximum levels and duration limits for operation. Traffic and Access Once built I understand that the plant will be unmanned (or minimally manned) and so there should not be a huge amount of maintenance traffic. However, building the site will provide a challenge with a narrow bridge (Scotland Road Bridge) over the canal and a railway bridge as the only access. Scotland Road Bridge, whilst not being listed, is historic. It is single track and controlled by traffic lights. It would probably be advisable to ask the SCC bridge engineers for a view on whether the bridge will be sufficiently robust. The only other viable access point is from the south via Camphill Road under the railway (also controlled by lights). There could also be a significant operation to clear the contamination on the site – a former waste tip. This would cause an even greater volume of trucks in the short term. There is currently no traffic or access plan suggested. Traffic volume will be a significant concern for the local householders and is likely to cause major congestion. Has anyone considered using the canal to barge materials in and take waste away? www.basingstoke-canal.org.uk Light The plans state that they do not require major external security illumination. However in the current security climate, I would expect some sort of active surveillance (maybe IR) to be installed. This needs to be made clear. If there was limited light escape the screening would protect the canal. Emissions There will be CO2 and NOX emissions but the surveys conclude that there will be no significant impact. I am sure that your Officers will confirm this. Power Extraction The plan is to use mains gas provided by the existing pipework. Electricity will be exported using current lines. I would like to make the point to the council that a new over ground line or underground pipe coming close to the canal would be very firmly resisted. CIL/S106 We are not sure where Woking stands on the CIL/S106 issue but is it expected that the developer will be required to provide any community funds/benefits in kind as a condition of receiving planning consent? (I understand that CIL money need not be spent on the area adjacent to the relevant site - it could be used for another project in the Borough). Conclusion The Basingstoke Canal Society has fully considered the Planning Application (2018/0645) and does not object. We would ask that the proposals and the conclusions of the environmental statements prepared by the company will be fully scrutinised and that the concerns raised above will be addressed. Richard Kelly On behalf of The Chairman Basingstoke Canal Society Notes: (1)https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/refresh/media/thumbnail/33802-canal-and-river-trust- outcomes-report-waterways-and-wellbeing-full-report.pdf (2)https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/22/canals-prescribed-gps-combat-depression/ www.basingstoke-canal.org.uk .