Planning Committee 10/12/2013 APPLICATION NO: P/2013/0475

Planning Committee 10/12/2013

P/2013/0475

APPLICATION NO: P/2013/0475 LOCATION: FORMER RAVENHEAD WAREHOUSE, LOCK

STREET, ST HELENS PROPOSAL: Hybrid application for full planning permission for

change of use of warehouse building (to the west of Lock Street) and installation of plant and machinery including 39m high flue to form 10.6MW energy from waste plant that will be powered by refuse derived fuel, together with the relocation of existing materials reclamation and waste recycling facility to accept non-hazardous wastes, currently located on Merton Street, demolition of the facility; outline permission for industrial development of the Merton Street site (all matters reserved for future consideration).

WARD: Town Centre PARISH: N/A CASE OFFICER: Joanne Sheridan AGENT(S) / APPLICANT(S):

OAKTREE ENVIRONMENTAL LIMITED MR JOHN WILLIAMS UNIT 5, OASIS PARK

DEVELOPMENT PLAN ALLOCATION: National Planning Policy St Helens Core Strategy (2012) St Helens Unitary Development Plan (1998) Waste Local Plan

National Planning Policy Framework PPS 10 'Planning for Sustainable Waste Management' CP 1 Ensuring Quality Development in St Helens CQL 2 Trees and Woodlands CQL 3 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation CE 1 A Strong and Sustainable Economy CR 2 Waste ENV 9 Species Protection Policy ENV 11 Tree Surveys ENV 12A and 12B Development Affecting Existing Trees ENV 13 New Tree Planting on Development Sites WM 1 Guide to Site Prioritisation WM 2 Sub-regional Site Allocations WM 3 Allocations for District level Sites WM 5 Areas of Search for Additional Small Scale Waste Management Operations and Re-processing sites WM 7 Protecting Existing Waste Management Capacity for Built Facilities and Landfill WM 10 High Quality Design and Operation of Waste Management Facilities WM 11 Sustainable Waste Transport WM 12 Criteria for Waste Management DevelopmentWM 13 Planning Applications for New Waste Management Facilities on Unallocated Sites WM 14 Energy from Waste

BACKGROUND PAPERS: See Section 3 Policy Context See Section 4 Consultations


P/2013/0475

See Section 5 Representations REPRESENTATIONS: 101 letters of objection RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions

THE APPLICATION WAS DEFERRED FROM 5TH NOVEMBER 2013 PLANNING COMMITTEE PENDING FURTHER CLARIFICATION AND CONSIDERATION WITH REGARD TO THE LOW CARBON AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PERFORMANCE OF THE PROPOSED ENERGY FROM WASTE PLANT /1.0 Application Site 1.1 The application site relates to a site that is unallocated in the St Helens

Unitary Development Plan. The site itself is within Merton Bank Road Industrial Estate and therefore industrial in nature, however, when exiting the site onto Merton Bank Road, the local character changes to residential. The site contains a large building that was last used as a distribution depot (B8).

1.2 The site is bounded by a canal to the north and east, an industrial estate

containing a recycling facility operated by the co-applicants is approximately 200m to the east. To the north are ‘burgy banks’ a Site of Community Wildlife Interest left over from historic glass making. To the south is St Helens Technology College’s Campus.

1.3 The site is unallocated on the current proposals map but has several

designations on its boundaries, including: - Site of Community Wildlife Interest 2W6 (UDP Policy ENV 5) - Environmental Improvements within Transport Corridor (UDP Policy ENV 21) - Strategic Footpath and Cycleway (UDP Policy REC 5)

2.0 The Application 2.1 The application is a hybrid application for planning permission for change of

use of warehouse building (to the west of Lock Street) and installation of plant and machinery including 39m high flue to form 10.6MW energy from waste plant that will be powered by Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF), together with the relocation of existing materials reclamation and waste recycling facility (MRWRF) to accept non-hazardous wastes, currently located on Merton Street, demolition of the existing facility; outline permission for industrial development of the Merton Street site (all matters reserved for future consideration).

2.2 The proposed site contains an existing building which will provide the

necessary accommodation and space for the internal infrastructure associated with the fully developed plant and for the external infrastructure required (cooling towers, diesel generator, silos and emissions stack). The site would receive up to 150,000 tonnes/annum of non hazardous domestic, industrial and commercial waste which will be processed to produce up to 90,000 tonnes/annum of Refuse Derived Fuel which will be used to generate up to 10.6MW of sustainable electrical energy per hour for export to the National Grid, using gasifcation and steam turbine based technology.

2.3 As stated above, the waste types to be accepted are non hazardous.

Hazardous waste is defined in legislation and its use would be prohibited by the Environmental Permit. Non hazardous wastes are dry residual wastes,


P/2013/0475

arising from household, commercial and industrial sources and would consist of paper, plastics, card, wood fractions which have no recycling potential. The site would not handle putrescible waste.

2.4 The application is essentially a resubmission of an application for the

operation of a energy plant to receive up to 90,000 tonnes/annum of Refuse Derived Fuel from an adjacent Materials Reclamation and Waste Recycling Facility to generate up to 10.6MW of electrical energy for export to the National Grid each hour. The earlier application was refused (see section 6.7).

2.5 The applicant summarises the changes between the two applications as

follows: - Relocation of exising Material Reclamation and Wase Recycling Faciltiy on Merton Street to the proposed site on Lock Street and extinguishment of the existing waste facility on Merton Street; and - Reduction in stack height to 39m (from 49m)

2.6 It is proposed that the existing Merton Street site would be demolished and

would be redeveloped as industrial starter units. This is in the form of an outline planning application.

2.7 The proposed hours of operation of the facility for the receipt of waste, raw

materials and recyclable materials to and from the site are: Monday to Friday 07:00 to 21:00 Saturday 07:00 to 18:00 Sunday 08:00 to 16:00

Otherwise the plant is proposed to operate as a 24 hour process. 2.8 The site would create up to 40 new local jobs at the site. The total staff

complement would be 65, which includes those currently employed in the Merton Street facility who will be transferred across to the proposed facility.

2.9 There is an existing sub station to the north east of Lock Street which is to be

used to connect to the national grid. 2.10 How the plant works:

The internal configuration of the plant will be subject to detailed design and will be confirmed at the permitting stage. The specific plant to be installed is detailed in the table below.

Energy Plant/Infrastructure and Function Plant Item/Equipment Function Primary Gasification Chambers Processes the RDF to evolve syngas,

under controlled conditions in a limited oxygen environment, at relatively low temperatures

Secondary Combustion Chambers Full Combustion of syngas producing heat

Heat Recovery System Generates steam from heat Steam Turbine Generator Generates electricity from steam Cooling Towers Cooling


P/2013/0475

Bag Filters Control of particulate matter in flue gases Reaction Towers (scrubber systems) Control of acid gases by neutralisation

with sodium bicarbonate and control of dioxins and furans using activated carbon

Urea Injection systems Control of NO x emissions in flue gases Emissions Stack Emits controlled, residual exhaust gases

to atmosphere, following abatement Supporting Systems Various water treatment systems to

support process List of Materials Reclamation and Waste Recycling Facility Plant and Equipment/Infrastructure and Function Plant Item/Equipment Function Trommel screens Material separation Feeder Hoppers Feed material into plant Conveyors Movement of unsorted and sorted waste

streams Shredders Shredding of appropriate material Eddy current separators Metal separation Storage bays Storage of separated materials

The fully developed plant will consist of three process streams each with dedicated gasifiers, secondary combustion chambers, heat recovery system and pollution abatement means that the plant can continue to operate should one process stream be off-line for maintenance or due to malfunction/failure of abatement plant, ensuring a constant production of energy.

Below is an overview of the proposed energy generation process (thisi is illustrated in a plan at the end of this report: 1) RDF is loaded into receiving Primary Gasification Chambers (PGCs) by telescopic handler. 2) Within the primary gasifiers, the fuel is slowly gasified at relatively low temperature (<800ºC) and in a limited oxygen environment to produce syngas, which comprises predominantly of carbon monoxide (CO), methane (CH4) and hydrogen (H). The gasification cycle lasts for approximately 23 hours for each chamber, after which time, the chamber doors are re-opened and further RDF fuel is loaded in. The loading of each gasification chamber is staggered to ensure continuous production of syngas, to ensure continuous generation of electricity and heat. 3) The evolved syngas is transported to a secondary combustion chamber where it is burnt at a temperature of at least 850ºC for at least 2 seconds, producing hot flue gases. The temperature and residence time achieved ensure that the plant would meet the requirements of the EA Permit. 4) In addition to the flue gases, an ash residue will also result from the gasification process, anticipated to be approximately 8% of the fuel gasified. 5) The heat from the flue gases are converted to steam in speclialised boilers. 6) The steam is used to drive a turbine, which generates electrical power. 7) Dedicated abatement systems are used to control airborne emissions. Residual exhaust gases from the secondary combustion chamber/waste heat boiler are released, via abatement plant, to atmosphere via a 39m stack.


P/2013/0475

The process is known as a Batch Oxidation System (BOSTM), consisting of batch gasification and syngas combustion processes. The plant will operate for approximately 330 days per annum as a 24 hour process (7,920 operational hours out of 8,760 hours per year).

All wastes, such as residual ash and spent reagents will be stored prior to disposal or export from site in accordance with Duty of Care requirements. Waste storage areas will be designed to minimize risk of leak/spillages.

2.11 The applicant states that there is a need for the Energy from Waste plant due

to the lack of operational capacity, which results in Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) being exported to mainland Europe. The applicant states that the main reason for exporting RDF is that it is the cheapest waste management alternative due to prohibitive gate fees at the relatively few operational facilities in the area. With the dwindling supply of landfill void, it is inevitable that something will have to be done to address this situation. Exporting RDF is unsustainable in terms of current waste planning policy and the provision of additional facilities to handle RDF, such as that proposed at Lock Street are essential to contribute towards meeting current and future demand and can therefore be justified.

2.12 The applicant submitted further information (12th November 2013 and 14th

November 2013) regarding the low carbon nature of the proposal which is summarised below:

- Document 2589-529-Q Low carbon credentials of proposed energy from

waste plant: - The consideration of the calorific value of the feedstock is over

simplistic and to it is more appropriate to consider the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions savings that the plant would achieve through a reduced need for fossil fuel combustion and reduced exportation of Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) abroad; - The proposal will contribute to a reduced need for fossil fuel combustion for energy generation and a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions associated with the transportation of RDF to European mainland;

- For the foreseeable future, there is no alternative to transporting the RDF abroad other than landfill as there is a major shortfall in the UK of energy waste capacity for RDF, which will continue to be the case even if all planned facilities are built;

- Total GHG emission saving should the energy plant to ahead, calculated on the basis of the sum of potential GHG emission from fossil fuel combustion for the generation of 10.6MW of power and export of RDF abroad would be 36,287.31 tonnes CO2/annum.

- Low carbon credentials of proposed energy from waste plant (addendum to Document No. 2589-529-Q):

- National government recognises the recovery of energy from residual waste as a form of low carbon energy, including the publication 'Energy from Waste - A Guide to the Debate (Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, Feb 2013); - The RDF produced at the Merton Street site results from locally collected waste, from within the region and locations outside the region. The recyclable element is removed and the residual waste is


P/2013/0475

used to produce RDF of an appropriate calorific value to enable its combustion to generate electricity and heat - The export of RDF to mainland Europe is unsustainable

3.0 Policy Context 3.1 The application has been considered having regard to Article 1 of the First

Protocol of the Human Rights Act 1998, which sets out a persons rights to the peaceful enjoyment of property and Article 8 of the Convention of the same Act which sets out his/her rights in respect for private and family life and for the home. Officers consider that the proposed development would not be contrary to the provisions of the above Articles in respect of the human rights of surrounding residents/occupiers.

3.2 This application has been considered in relation to Section 17 of The Crime

and Disorder Act. The Police Crime Prevention Officer has been afforded the opportunity to comment on this scheme, but no comments have been received.

3.3 The application has been considered in accordance with the St Helens

Council’s Comprehensive Equality Policy, which seeks to prevent unlawful discrimination, promote equality of opportunity and good relations between people in a diverse community. In this case the proposed development is not anticipated to have any potential impact from an equality perspective.

3.4 The following policies are relevant in the determination of the application: 3.5 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan making and decision taking. For decision making this means approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay The purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. There are three dimensions to sustainable development: economic, social and environmental. These dimensions give rise to the need for the planning system to perform a number of roles: - Economic role: Contributing to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right place and at the right time to support growth and innovation - Social role: Supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing the supply of housing required To meet the needs of presents and future generations - Environmental role: Contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and, as part of this, minimize waste and pollution. To achieve sustainable development , economic, social and environmental gains should be sought jointly and simultaneously through the planning system.

3.6 PPS10 'Planning for Sustainable Waste Management' Paragraph 3 sets out the Key Planning Objectives which indicate that Local Authorities should prepare and deliver planning strategies that, amongst other requirements:


P/2013/0475

- Help deliver sustainable development through driving waste up the waste hierarchy, addressing waste as a resource and looking to disposal as the last option, but one which must be adequately catered for;

- Provide a framework in which communities take more responsibility for their own waste, and enable sufficient and timely provision of waste management facilities to meet the needs of their communities;

- Help secure the recovery or disposal of waste without endangering human health and without harming the environment, and enable waste to be disposed of in one of the nearest appropriate installations;

- Reflect the concerns and interests of communities, the needs of waste collection authorities, waste disposal authorities and business, and encourage competitiveness The Council have now adopted the Joint Waste Local Plan (2013), which sets out how it will deliver these planning objectives.

3.7 St Helens Core Strategy CP 1 Ensuring Quality Development in St. Helens

CP 2 Creating and Accessible St. Helens CR 2 Waste

3.8 Waste Development Plan (2013)

WM 1 Guide to Site Prioritisation WM 2 Sub-regional Site Allocations WM 3 Allocations for District level Sites WM 5 Areas of Search for Additional Small Scale Waste Management Operations and Re-processing sites WM 7 Protecting Existing Waste Management Capacity for Built Facilities and Landfill WM 10 High Quality Design and Operation of Waste Management Facilities WM 11 Sustainable Waste Transport WM 12 'Criteria for Waste Management Development' WM 13 'Planning Applications for New Waste Management Facilities on Unallocated Sites'

WM 14 Energy from Waste 4.0 Consultations 4.1 Highways Advisor: No objections subject to conditions. Conditions requested

include ensuring parking areas are provided; cycle parking provision; submission of a travel plan statement; the appointment of a travel plan co-ordinator and the provision of wheel wash facilities.

4.2 Environmental Health: Contaminated Land: No objections. 4.3 Environmental Health: Pollution:

The technology required to reduce the daily mean NOx emissions to 80mg/m3 should be agreed with the Environment Agency at the permit application stage. To prevent odour, vehicles should only be unloaded within the building under negative pressure, with doors closed.

The proposed mitigation methods for minimizing dust from the site during construction and operational phases is acceptable. All mitigation measures relating to dust and odour prevention, outlined in Section 10.4 of the


P/2013/0475

Environmental Statement (v1.2 Document ref: 2589-529-B) should be implemented and maintained throughout the operation of the development.

Given the overall impact of the development on the local area leading to a creeping background, a restriction should be placed on the vehicle fleet so the incoming and outgoing heavy goods vehicles are all Euro Class V or above.

4.4 Environmental Health: Noise: The application involves the operation of plant

within an existing building and movements of vehicles on site at night. There is also a proposal for a separate generator which could cause noise at night. It is recommended that a scheme of noise mitigation measures be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, approved and implemented prior to commencement of operation of the site. The scheme should include an acoustic barrier to screen the generator. The location dimensions and density of this barrier to be approved by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall also include the provision of acoustic insulation to the existing building to a specification to be approved b the Local Planning Authority. The insulation scheme must take account of the roof and any openings to the building.

4.5 Trees and Woodlands Officer: Amendments required. Conditions requested

include the protection of trees; three thinning method statement and a landscaping scheme to be submitted.

4.6 Environment Agency: No objection subject to condition. Conditions requested

include a surface water drainage strategy; overland flood flow routing and contaminated land.

The application highlights that the electricity generated by the proposed facility at Lock Street in St Helens will offset the need to generate around 10.6MW of electricity from conventional means such as from traditional fossil fuels. The Waste to Energy plant will use around 90,000 tonnes of refuse derived fuel (RDF) which is processed from approximately 150,000 tonnes of non-hazardous commercial, industrial and household waste. The RDF will be processed using gasification and steam turbine technology to produce electrical energy. The application does not appear to contain details on the use of "carbon capture and storage technology" to treat the resulting carbon dioxide emissions from the plant and therefore if the plant is to be considered as a low carbon energy facility, further information will be required from the applicant to understand how the proposed plant will produce power with substantially lower carbon dioxide emissions than conventional fossil fuel powered generation. This type of facility (Energy from Waste) will require a permit from the Environment Agency and the applicant will need to submit an application in due course. Until this permit is issued the facility will not be allowed to operate. The determining process considers the applicant's application and records the decision making process to show that all the relevant factors have been taken into account in reaching the final decision. The determination considers the process as well as the location and emissions from site. It considers a number of issues including the type of waste (EWC code), the combustion process, global warming potential, energy efficiency (electricity & heat) as well as the abatement techniques and compares them against the best available techniques (BAT) and current legislation to ensure Human


P/2013/0475

Health and the Environment are protected.

4.7 Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service (MEAS): The overall contents of the Environmental Statement is in general compliance with the requirement of the EIA regulations 2011 and can be used as the basis for determining a planning application.

MEAS have requested conditions for a site waste management plan;

contaminated land condition; details of a surface water drainage scheme; pollution prevention measures (contained in EIA ecology section); a construction environment management plan.

MEAS have assessed the proposal against the provisions of the adopted

Waste Local Plan 2013. They express concern about the schemes ability to satisfy the requirements of the plan, specifically WM 12, WM 13, WM 14 below.

Following the withdrawal of this application from the Committee on 4th

November 2013, MEAS have made further comments on the additional information supplied, which is summarised below: The DEFRA document 'Energy from Waste - A Guide to the Debate' backs up the applicant's argument that the development is 'low carbon' and states that

"Only energy generated from the recently grown materials in the mixture is considered renewable. Energy from residual waste is therefore a partially renewable energy source, sometimes referred to as a low carbon energy source."

Document 2589-529-Q provides some generic figures on GHG

savings by comparison to coal and from the elimination of transport mileage. These calculations provide useful indicative context but are from generic sources and do not relate to the actual calorific value and composition of the RDF the scheme is proposed to use, or the efficiency of the process to be employed on this development.

In conclusion, the proposed energy from waste facility is 'lower carbon'

than the current fate of the waste on the basis that carbon emissions will be lower due to elimination of transport miles to Europe. The proposal could be considered 'even lower carbon' if there was more certainty about the calorific value and composition of the feedstock and if the proposal made use of the heat through combined heat and power, rather than just power as currently stated.

Following the submission of documentation from the applicant regarding the low carbon nature of the proposal, MEAS provided the following additional comments: - The provision of site-specific information relating to the waste feedstock going into the plant, and the actual carbon performance and energy efficiency of the proposal would have provided greater clarity in terms of low carbon performance of the proposed development. With the limited information has made it difficult to demonstrate conclusively compliance with Joint Waste Local Plan policies, in particular WM12, WM13 and WM14.


P/2013/0475

Although it would appear that the applicant (in document 2589-529-Q) over-stated the carbon emission savings likely to be made, if the proposed EfW plant were granted permission, by using the wrong comparator for fossil fuel savings (using industrial coal instead of natural gas), this does not mean that there won’t be carbon savings resulting from the proposal. Similarly, because the applicant has only compared carbon savings on transport with export of waste to the continent and has not acknowledged that there is future potential (subject to contractual agreements) for RDF to go to a consented and soon to be operational EfW facility in Runcorn (fully commissioned mid 2014), it is difficult to make a realistic assessment of the level of low carbon performance that will be achieved. A third party representative argues that the proposed facility would not be classed as an R1 Recovery facility but a D10 incineration facility in line with the EU Waste Framework Directive. This is a matter for the Environment Agency to consider. However, it is understood that the Government was required to ensure all EfW facilities were R1 Recovery facilities by 2008, so it is highly unlikely that the Environment Agency would grant an Environmental Permit for anything but an R1 Recovery EfW facility at this point in time. The applicant will be required to provide all the carbon performance, energy efficiency and feedstock information to the Environment Agency when applying for the Environmental Permit.

4.8 Natural England: No objections. 4.9 The Coal Authority: Substantive concern raised. 4.10 Merseyside Fire & Rescue Service: No objections. 4.11 United Utilities: No objections. 5.0 Representations 5.1 Prior to the submission of the planning application, the applicant undertook a

public consultation exercise through staging an exhibition at Chain Lane Community Centre on 23 March 2013. Written invitations were distributed to residents and businesses within a catchment area agreed with the LPA. Additionally, an advertisement notifying the public of the exhibition was placed in the St. Helens Star newspaper on 7 March 2013. Email invitations were also sent to locally elected members. Details of the outcome of the public consultation were not provided.

5.2 The application was publicised by individual neighbour notification letters, site

notices and a notice in the local press. 101 letters of objection were received in response to the publicity given to the application. The letters raised the following issues:

- Object to the relocation of the waste plant; - The surrounding houses are already inundated with flies from the Biffa plant; - Smell from burning rubbish; - Increase in rats and mice;

- The company is only interested in making a profit and not interested in the welfare of residents;


P/2013/0475

- There have been many incidents over the years and they are not fit to operate a new venture based on their track record; - A processing plant of this type should be built in a more industrial area, away from residential properties; - Impact of traffic on local roads; - The only access in is via a route which a passes primary school and a secondary school; - Merton Bank Road is already congested and has been closed a number of occasions during the last 12 months due to flooding; - Domestic properties, local schools and businesses would be affected by odours emitted from the site; - Too close to residential properties and local schools; - Air pollution; - Merton Bank Road is covered in dust and there are always pieces of brick and large stones from the crumbling walls due to the velocity of HGV's along the road; - Over the past three summers the smells from the plant have been unbearable and the amount of flies the plant has created is disgusting;

- Affect property values; - The CEW business has already caused inconvenience and a danger to health in the past i.e. asbestos fires; - The proposed hours of use (7am to 9pm weekdays; 7am to 6pm Saturday and 8am to 4pm Sundays) would have an adverse effect on the neighbourhood; - Local companies who produce food will be affected by the proposal; - 60 staff employed means there will be more traffic and not a reduction in traffic; - Management of the existing plant is poor; - Existing view affected by a 39m high chimney and will be an eyesore; - The Council have spent a lot of money trying to improve the area and this proposal would be a step in the wrong direction; - This use should be sited away from housing with more direct transport links; - The planning application is made at Lock Street because the company holds the land there, not because it is the right place or even an appropriate activity to bring to the area; - Dubious about the applicants claim that there will be a reduction in HGV movements; - The company has a poor track record to date in terms of site management - fires, collapse of building; - Trustworthiness of intention must be borne in mind; the company was given permission to sort bale and waste and now the application moves towards incineration; - A similar application was refused last year and the plans for the proposed plant are the same; - The proposal to build new industrial units on the existing CEW site will increase the amount of traffic using Merton Bank Road; - The materials being brought on site are non hazardous, but what happens when they are heated - toxic emissions; - The firm claim that the emissions will be a acceptable level, but no level is acceptable; - For a lot of the houses along Hinckley Road and Makerfield Crescent, the chimney will dominate the landscape, therefore objection to the visual aspect of the proposal; - Generators are proposed outside the warehouses, object on noise;


P/2013/0475

- Don't know why the Council are even considering an application when an application has already been refused; - There is already too much disposal activity concentrated in our local area; - Was the industrial estate considered when large scale residential developments were approved in the 1970's and 1990's? - Where will the ash be disposed of? - No evidence that the applicant has given any consideration to developing other sites identified in the waste plan, which is contrary to the waste plan applicant has not demonstrated a need for waste to energy to meet a local need and the applicant has not demonstrated the site would operate at high standards; - In the event of a breakdown and the alarms being sounded what will stop the operators from silencing the audible alarms and overriding automatic shut down systems thereby allowing excessive emissions into the atmosphere? - It is considered that the Environmental Statement is incomplete and further information is required. Further to information submitted by Oak Tree Environmental, the following representation was received: - Oaktree Environmental provides no evidence to demonstrate that much of the waste material cannot be reduced re-used, recycled, composted, or anaerobically digested; - Oaktree Environmental has not demonstrated that there would be more genuinely waste arising than there would be treatment capacity at local, regional or national level; - Oaktree Environmental has failed to demonstrate that even if there were a domestic shortfall of residual waste capacity, that this would justify the proposed facility.

5.3 Following the publication of the Committee Report, third party representations

were received indicating that a positive decision could be open to a Judicial Review. In summary, the following points were made:

- At paragraph 7.14 of the Officers Report reads 'Energy from Waste is considered to be a form of low carbon energy'. This unqualified statement is inaccurate and potentially misleading;

- Despite repeated requests, the applicant has refused to supply supporting evidence that the energy that would be generated would qualify as 'low carbon.'

- Failure to set out the facility's "carbon and energy management performance" is contrary to policy WM 12;

- The proposal fails to meet WM 13 and WM 14. 5.4 In addition, the third party representations were expanded/clarified following

the submission of the two documents discussing the low carbon elements of the proposal. The representations raise the following points:

- The claim by the applicant that the facility would be low carbon should not weigh in favour of the application because the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the facility would be low carbon as defined in the NPPF;

- The fact that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that their proposal would not hamper efforts to move towards a low carbon economy and decarbonise the energy supply should weigh heavily against the application;

- The failure of the applicant to comprehensively consider and set out the proposed incinerator's environmental performance should be considered to conflict with Waste Plan polices WM12, WM13, WM14.


P/2013/0475

6.0 Planning History 6.1 P/2004/1080: Change of use of warehouse building to a materials reclamation

and waste recycling facility, involving importation of dry non-hazardous waste for storage and storing. Planning permission granted subject to conditions 22/09/2004.

6.2 P/2006/0129: Variation of condition 4 on P/2004/1080 to permit the

processing of waste electrical and electronic equipment. Planning permission granted subject to conditions 24/03/06.

6.3 P/2007/0211: Installation of 9MW Gasification Plant to generate electricity

from reclaimed wood. Planning permission granted subject to conditions 30/04/07.

6.4 P/2008/0404: Installation of new rollers shuttered door opening to side

elevation. Planning permission granted 22/05/08. 6.5 P/2009/0484: Change of use of land for a period of 12 months for the storage

of clean, empty, waste skips. Planning permission granted for a temporary 12 month consent 04/08/2009.

6.6 P/2012/0054: Change of use of land for the storage of skips and containers.

Planning permission refused 07/03/12. 6.7 P/2012/0020: Change of use of warehouse building and installation of plant &

machinery (including 49m high flue) to form a 10.6mw energy from waste plant that will be powered by refuse derived fuel. Planning permission refused 02/05/2012 for the following reason:

The proposed development would be contrary to the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework, Planning Policy Statement 10, Policies GEN1, GEN2 and WD1 in the St Helens Unitary Development Plan, Policy CR2 in the St Helens Re-publication Core Strategy Accepted Changes Version and Policies WM1, WM12 and WM13 in the Joint Waste Development Plan Document Proposed Submission Document in that existing waste facilities in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development have had a significant adverse impact on the community by way of causing serious nuisance through flies, smells, fires and general disturbance. This proposal would result in a significantly greater amount of waste being processed in the local area and the cumulative effect of this proposal and current uses would lead to further adverse impacts on environmental quality and residential amenity. The proposed development would also fail to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of the local area and the way it functions.

7.0 Assessment 7.1 The proposal is for the development of an energy plant on Lock Street, the

relocation of the existing Materials Reclamation and Waste Recycling Facility (MRWRF) from the current site on Merton Street to the proposed energy plant site on Lock Street and the demolition of the existing MRWRF on Merton Street. As the MRWRF will be located within the same building as the energy plant, there will be no need for further transportation of fuel as would have been the case with the earlier, refused proposal.


P/2013/0475

7.2 The proposed energy plant would receive up to 150,000 tonnes/annum of non hazardous, residential, commercial and industrial waste, which will undergo various internal waste processing operations to produce up to 90,000 tonnes/annum Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF), which will be used to generate energy using gasification and steam turbine based technology. The residual and recyclable waste removed during the waste processing not used in the energy generation process will be in the region of 60,000 tonnes/annum, which will be exported from site for further recycling/ processing or final disposal to landfill. The Refuse Derived Fuel would be gasified to produce syngas. The syngas will then be combusted under highly controlled conditions to produce heat, which will be converted to steam in waste heat boilers. The steam is then used in a turbine to produce electrical power for export to the National Grid.

7.3 In a marked difference to arrangements included as part of the previously

refused application (P/2012/0020) to develop an energy plant on the application site, all RDF will be produced on the site as opposed to being transported to the site as was previously the case.

7.4 The RDF fuel will be sourced from the relocated MRWRF on the application

site to ensure that the correct quality fuel is produced. The RDF to be used is produced from predominantly solid, dry, non hazardous household, commercial and industrial waste as defined in the Controlled Waste Regulations 192 and Section 75 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. The energy plant would process dry, non hazardous batches of fuel.

7.5 Local Economy At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable

development. To achieve sustainable development, economic, social and environmental gains should be sought jointly and simultaneously through the planning system.

7.6 The main plant building is an existing structure and there will be limited

changes to the building. The site is unallocated on the Unitary Development Plan Proposals Map. Whilst currently vacant, the site was last in use as an employment site. Together with the NPPF, PPS10 'Planning for Sustainable Waste Management', the Joint Merseyside Waste Local Plan, St. Helens Core Strategy and Saved UDP Policies are relevant to the determination of the application and should be taken into consideration.

7.7 NPPF paragraph 19 emphasises the need to support economic growth, and

significant weight is given to sustainable growth. Accordingly, when considering all of the material considerations, significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth. It is considered that this development would contribute to economic growth by creating jobs in the construction and operational phases. Furthermore, by using commercial and industrial waste to produce electricity, it is likely that it would potentially provide a possible additional choice of power for nearby industrial uses (though the applicant has not demonstrated this), providing energy security important for such uses. It would also possibly reduce the need to import fuel and electricity, thereby boosting the local economy.

7.8 The site of the proposed relocated facility forms part of the Merton Bank

Industrial Estate but is set back from the bulk of the buildings at the Industrial Estate. The site is considered to be part of the Borough’s


P/2013/0475

employment land supply and was appraised in the St.Helens Employment Land & Premises Study (May 2011). The study considers that the vacant warehouse unit is suitable for continued B2/B8 use although the sites access is poor for B8 purposes. The study concluded that the site should be retained for B2/B8 use.

7.9 The proposed “Energy from Waste” use would be classed as a sui generis

use, resulting in a loss of employment land. Policy CE1(3) requires that A. The reuse, reconfiguration or redevelopment of sites and premises last used for B1, B2 or B8 purposes for B1, B2 or B8 uses will be supported where they have: i. Suitable road access ii. An acceptable impact on neighbouring land uses. B. Where it is demonstrated that land or premises for B1, B2 or B8 purposes is no longer suitable or economically viable for B1, B2 or B8 use then the site's suitability for other employment generating uses must be considered before non employment generating uses.

7.10 No evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the site is no longer

suitable or economically viable for B1, B2 or B8 use. However, the use of the site as an “Energy From Waste” facility is considered to be in keeping with the industrial nature of the site, as the various operations of such a facility can be classed as B2 general industrial and B8 storage. The applicant has indicated that a number of jobs are to be created, it is therefore an employment generating use. Further, the application includes an element of compensatory provision of industrial land with the proposal for starter units on the vacated waste transfer site. From an employment land perspective, the proposal is not considered the proposal to be contrary to the provisions of CE1.

7.11 Low Carbon Energy: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraph 17 sets out the Core

Planning Principles to underpin decision-taking. One of these principles states that planning should:

“Support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate, taking full account of flood risk and coastal change, and encourage the reuse of existing resources, including conversion of existing buildings, and encourage the use of renewable resources (for example, by the development of renewable energy)”.

7.12 The proposal is described as resulting in the generation of 10.6MW of

electricity to be exported to the National Grid (Source: Environmental Statement - Non Technical Summary v1.2 11 April 2013). It therefore has the benefit of contributing to the transition to a low carbon future through the production of renewable energy.

7.13 Paragraph 98 of the NPPF states that when determining planning

applications, local planning authorities should: - Not require applicants for energy development to demonstrate the overall need for renewable or low carbon energy and also recognise that even small scale projects provide a valuable contribution to cutting greenhouse gas emissions; and - Approve the application (unless other material considerations indicate otherwise)


P/2013/0475

7.14 In principle and from the thrust of government guidance and policy, Energy from Waste is considered to be a form of low carbon energy. Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of the NPPF the LPA does not consider that the applicant has to demonstrate that there is a need for ‘low carbon energy’ and recognises that the generation of 10.6MW of energy from low carbon sources is a positive benefit associated with the development, which can be accorded weight.

7.15 In this case, issues have arisen as to the actual low carbon performance of

the proposed plant and as a result, the application was deferred from the last Committee. The applicant has been given the opportunity to clearly demonstrate the low carbon generation performance. Additional information has been supplied (summarised in section 2.12). The information concentrates on the comparative advantages of not exporting RDF to the continent (i.e. using locally) and the performance upon combustion compared to using fossil fuels. These arguments are a further explanation of points already made and have a general validity but are still capable of some criticism in detail (see Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service comments in section 4.7). The precise make up of the feedstock has not been fully explored as Officers would have wished. The feedstock generally is described as non hazardous waste, including industrial, commercial and household waste, but ideally this would have been spelt out precisely together with the details of the ability of the plant to capture carbon generated. Further information is unlikely to be made available. Therefore, a judgement has to be made on the basis of the national and local policy guidance and the information available. On balance, it is considered that the proposed energy from waste facility is low carbon and/or a renewable energy source, although the performance of the plant in this regard is very dependent upon what is put into it.

7.16 Waste Policy The fact that the proposal would generate low carbon energy is only one of a

number of considerations when assessing this application. The development is a waste use and must therefore be considered in accordance with national and local waste policies.

7.17 The applicant states that the development is driven by the need to reduce

greenhouse gas emissions associated with fossil fuel combustion for energy generation, to reduce the amount of waste sent to landfill in line with legislative demands, and to contribute to legislative targets for recovery of value from industrial, commercial and municipal waste and as such it provides a sustainable solution for residual waste management as demanded by European and National waste legislation.

7.18 The Joint Waste Local Plan states that there is sufficient consented energy from waste generation capacity across the Merseyside sub region.

7.19 As there is sufficient consented capacity in the sub-region, it is likely that the

provision of additional waste facilities will lead to a greater importation of waste into the City Region. The applicant has stated that as the proposed development would accept waste from the existing MRWRF on Lock Street that is already being brought into the City Region, the proposed development would lead to a reduction in the distance waste is transported.

7.20 One of the key planning objectives of PPS 10 'Planning for Sustainable

Waste Management' is that planning authorities should provide a framework


P/2013/0475

in which local communities take more responsibility for their own waste and enable sufficient and timely provision of waste management facilities to meet the needs of their communities.

7.21 PPS 10 (paragraph 22) states that development plans form the framework within which decisions on proposals for development are taken. It is important that plans are kept up-to-date and properly reflect national policy. When proposals are consistent with an up-to-date development plan, waste planning authorities should not require applicants for new or enhanced waste management facilities to demonstrate a quantitative or market need for their proposal.

7.22 Although this application proposes a development comprising an energy from waste plant and an MRWRF, its primary purpose is energy from waste. Waste Local Plan policy WM 14 addresses itself directly to the issue of energy from waste facilities. The policy has been prepared against a backdrop of the sub region having a significant amount of consented capacity. However, the policy is still needed because of the inevitable uncertainty that all this capacity will be built and the unforeseen circumstances which may occur over the plan period.

7.23 In relation to ‘large scale proposals’ Policy WM14 states that:

1. All proposals for EfW facilities will be assessed in relation to operational and consented capacity within the Plan area and the requirement for new facilities. Planning applications for such proposals must demonstrate that existing operations and consented capacity cannot be accessed to meet the identified need or in the case of Local Authority Collected Waste that is not suitable for the proposes of MRWA. Account must be taken of: - The contractural position for Local Authority Collected Waste and the out come of any MRWA procurement process to meet the treatment needs of the Plan area; - Operational EfW capacity within the Plan area, and; - Existing consents for EfW within the Plan area and availability of that consented capacity to meet the needs of the Plan area.

2. EfW proposals must meet the waste management needs of the Plan area and will be required to provide combined heat and power unless it can be demonstrated that this requirement would prevent important waste infrastructure being brought forward.

3. All proposals for EfW must comply with policies WM 12 and WM 13. 7.24 In relation to ‘small scale’ developments Policy WM14 states that:

Applications for small scale EfW facilities, up to a maximum of 80,000 tonnes per annum treatment capacity or up to a maximum of 10MW heat and power output, which can be demonstrated to serve an identified local need, will be considered subject to compliance with Policies WM 12 and WM 13.

7.25 Although, according to the Waste Local Plan, there is no identified need for

Energy from Waste facilities due to the existing consented capacity within the sub region, Local Planning Authorities have a duty to consider proposals for such when submitted, which is why the Waste Local Plan contains Policy WM14 for Large Scale and Small Scale Energy from Waste Facilities.

7.26 The proposal falls just short of being counted as a Small Scale Energy from

Waste facility because it is proposed that 90,000 tonnes of RDF will be utilised with a maximum of 10.6MW output. With that said, it is only


P/2013/0475

marginally above what is considered small scale (10.6MW output compared to 10MW output) and the Council could consider the proposal as small scale.

7.27 The applicant has failed to demonstrate the facility will meet an identified local need (for example, the applicant has not stated they would be providing an existing business with significant energy requirements). However, they have stated their argument for need (outlined section 2.11) and outlined that at present due to a lack of operational demand, they export RDF to mainland Europe. The applicant has also stated that the electricity would be fed into the National Grid and the heat/electricity could also be utilised for the proposed starter industrial units at Lock Street which are in the applicant's control.

7.28 In your Officer's opinion, the case of local need in itself has not been proven

but there are other material factors which have to be taken into account. The existing CEW premises at Lock Street/Merton Street currently deal with approximately 37,000 tonnes of waste (figures from Environment Agency 2011 site returns; permitted waste (75,000 tonnes per annum). This waste is received and then processed to form Refuse Derived Fuel. It is understood that much of the product is currently exported to the continent. The existing facility is outdated and has caused significant amenity problems for the local community which has resulted in enforcement action being taken by the Environment Agency. The proposition that this building remain as the reception point for the Energy from Waste plant in the last application was a major factor in the refusal of planning permission. The current package of proposals would remove the outdated facilities and provide a new development site, whilst providing a renewable energy supply which can either be used locally or fed into the National Grid (via an existing sub station).

7.29 In the opinion of Officers, these benefits outweigh the failure to explicitly

demonstrate that a local need has been met. On balance your Officers consider the first part of WM14 has been met and it is therefore necessary to assess whether the proposal is compliant with Policies WM12 and WM13.

7.30 WM 12 states that all proposals for new waste management development

facilities will be expected to submit a report covering the general details of the proposed development and a written assessment and mitigation of the short, medium, long terms and cumulative impacts on its neighbours and the surrounding environment in terms of the: 1. Social, economic and environmental impact on the area; 2. Amenity impacts; 3. Traffic (& transport) impacts; 4. Heritage & nature conservation impacts; 5. Overall sustainability of the proposals (including carbon and energy management performance); 6. Hydrogeological/hydrological/geological impacts (for landfill and open windrow composting only). Applications should refer to Box 1 (Box 1 'Information to be submitted in support of a Waste Planning Application for Policy WM 12) which lists the general information that must be submitted with all waste applications and criteria which should be included in the assessment of impacts.

7.31 The planning application was accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment which covered all of the headings above. See section 7.5-7.11


P/2013/0475

of this report. More detailed information can be found within Section 14 of the EIA 'EIA Conclusions'.

7.32 One area the applicant has failed to cover in detail is the nature of waste material received and the European Waste Code references have not been provided. With that said, as stated in section 2.3, the applicant has stated that the waste types to be accepted are non hazardous. Hazardous waste is defined in legislation and its use would be prohibited by the Environmental Permit. Non hazardous wastes are dry residual wastes, arising from household, commercial and industrial sources and would consist of paper, plastics, card, wood fractions which have no recycling potential. The site would not handle putrescible waste.

7.33 The information submitted in the application has sought to pick up the main points of the policy, but has not necessarily addressed every point. On balance, although all of the information has not been submitted, there has been a general compliance with policy WM 12 and there have been no statutory objections to the EIA or its contents.

7.34 WM 13 states that planning permission will only be granted for additional waste management facilities on unallocated sites where the application has provided written evidence to demonstrate: 1. That a suitable allocated site is not available or suitable for their proposed use; 2. That the proposed site has been assessed against the criteria for built facilities 3. That the proposed site has been assessed against the criteria for built facilities used in the site selection process for allocated sites shown in Table 5.1; 4. The site will be sustainable in terms of its social, economic and environmental impacts and this has been demonstrated through Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulations Assessment at the project level; 5. The proposal complies with the vision and spatial strategy for the Waste Local Plan and satisfies criteria in policy WM 1 and WM 12.

7.35 Developers should develop sites allocated in the Waste Local Plan in accordance with policy WM 1 Guide to Site Prioritisation; WM 2 Sub-regional Site Allocations; WM 3 Allocations for District level Sites and WM 5 'Area of Search for Additional Small-scale Waste Management Operations and Re-processing sites'.

7.36 Although 20 sites are allocated for waste uses throughout Merseyside and

Halton, only one site is allocated for thermal treatment in the Waste Local Plan, Alexandra Dock in Liverpool. The applicant has ruled out sites that are not allocated for thermal treatment on the basis that there must be a reason for not including thermal treatment as an appropriate use in the site's allocation. However, MEAS have stated that one of the main reasons that allocated sites do not have thermal treatment identified as a potential waste management use, is because there is no identified need for thermal waste facilities within Merseyside and Halton.

7.37 This is not the case as no further sites were allocated for energy from waste

as it was considered there was no need for such facilities in the Plan area. The Waste Local Plan states that Merseyside and Halton are in the unusual position of having a significant amount of consented and available EfW


P/2013/0475

capacity within the sub region by over 450,000 tonnes of Refuse Derived Fuel. It was on this basis that no further sites were allocated for thermal treatment and not that the sites specified are not acceptable for thermal treatment.

7.38 There is only one site allocated in St Helens that is available (Abbotsfield) and

this is approximately 3.7 miles (as the crow flies) from the site and is not allocated for thermal treatment. The site is also only 1.2ha in area and is too small for the requirements of the applicant (the proposed site is approximately 5.6ha). The proposal is therefore not a suitable alternative allocated site for this use.

7.39 The applicant has stated that they do not have any other sites under their

control. The applicant submitted a Site Scoring Assessment which gave the site an overall score of -10. MEAS have stated that the applicant’s Site Scoring Assessment provides a reasonable representation of the constraints and opportunities of the site. There are two allocated sites within St Helens; one is Pocket Nook Street which is currently occupied by BIFFA (waste recycling) and the second site is land to the north of Abbottsfield Road and had a site score of -8. The Waste Local Plan also states that a negative score for a site does not prevent a site coming forward for a potential waste use, because it is a relative rather than absolute measure.

7.40 It is considered that the proposal broadly complies with WM 13, in that there is not a suitable allocated site in St Helens. The site has been assessed in accordance with BOX 1 of policy WM 13 to which MEAS states provides a reasonable representation; the site is suitable in terms of its social, economic an environmental impacts and the proposal complies with waste policies WM 1 and WM 12.

7.41 The proposal also involves the relocation of an existing MRWRF and

therefore Policy WM7 is relevant. In relocating the existing MRWRF from its current location in Merton Street, the proposed development is in compliance with this policy as it does not entail a loss in waste management capacity.

7.42 The proposal would comply with WM 11, which seeks to ensure sustainable

waste transport as although it would not make use of alternative means to road transport, it would provide two facilities on one site, thereby reducing vehicular movements.

7.43 In summary, the proposal broadly complies with the waste plan policies and

to allow the proposal would remove a facility that is currently causing problems for the amenity of residents and generate local jobs. Although the applicant has not demonstrated that there is a local need for heat/electricity, the applicant has stated that the electricity would be fed into the National Grid via the existing sub station on Lock Street. The applicant has also confirmed that they currently export their RDF fuel to mainland Europe. This proposal would reduce the distance that some RDF is transported to an EFW plant.

7.44 Cumulative impacts and effects on amenity:

The application site is located on previously developed land, in an area that can generally be considered to be of an industrial nature, although there are numerous residential dwellings within 400m of the site. Also in close proximity of the site are two existing waste uses, an MRWRF operated by BIFFA lies approximately 350m to the south east and an MRWRF operated by the


P/2013/0475

applicant lies around 150m to the east on Merton Street/Lock Street (the extinguishment of which and redevelopment forms part of these proposals).

7.45 In determining whether a site is suitable for a waste use PPS10 requires

waste planning authorities to assess the cumulative effect of previous waste disposal facilities on the well-being of the local community, including any significant adverse impacts on environmental quality, social cohesion and inclusion or economic potential and reflect the concerns and interests of communities.

7.46 There have been very significant amenity issues related to this existing waste

use which have detrimentally affected the occupants of surrounding residential properties and local businesses and has been reflected in the representations received as a result of publicity. The representations received related mainly to odours, flies, fires and general disturbance that are associated with the MRWRF.

7.47 The existing MRWRF is located in a building that is that is unfit for purpose

and this has been partially responsible for the impacts outlined above. This proposal would extinguish that use and relocate the operation to a purpose designed facility alongside the energy from waste plant. The specifics of the environmentally controls will be permitted by the Environment Agency who are responsible for ensuring that the sites operate in an environmentally sound manner and in accordance with their permit conditions.

7.48 Only a small portion of the application site would be used by the energy from waste facility, and given the inextricable links between the proposed development and the MRWRF it is considered that a sustainable approach would be to provide a purpose built facility housing the two uses on the site which could also help to provide a more appropriate, purpose built facility for the MRWRF that would address the amenity issues outlined above. This proposal is better than the previous proposal as it links the two facilities together on the same side of Lock Street.

7.49 The Environmental Statement has predicted that the proposals will have negligible impacts on the environment. As a negligible impact has been predicted, the proposals will not make any significant contribution to any cumulative impacts within other processes.

7.50 The National Planning Policy Framework states that good design is a key

aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning, and should contribute positively to making places better for people. It states that permission should be refused for the development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions.

7.51 PPS10 states that facilities should be well designed so that they contribute

positively to the character and quality of the area in which they are located. Poor design is in itself undesirable, undermines community acceptance of waste facilities and should be rejected.

7.52 It is considered that the proposal broadly complies with the NPPF, PPS10, Core Strategy CP 1 'Ensuring Quality Development in St Helens' and the Waste Local Plan as the proposal would remove an existing problematic facility and therefore be its removal would enhance the locality.


P/2013/0475

7.53 Flue/chimney: An air dispersion modelling assessment has been undertaken as part of the

EIA process. As part of the assessment, a stack height assessment was undertaken to determine the minimum stack height required to ensure adequate dispersion of air emissions for the protection of human health and sensitive vegetation. The assessment has determined that a stack height of 39m will ensure adequate dispersion of plant emissions in order to prevent exceedances of health based Air Quality Objectives occurring at surrounding ground level locations and to ensure minimal impacts on human health.

7.54 Site specific air emissions modelling has been undertaken which has

demonstrated that there will be negligible impacts on air quality at sensitive receptor locations. Ground level pollutant concentrations have been predicted to be below Air Quality Objective levels at all locations surrounding the plant.

7.55 An assessment has been made of the baseline air quality within the vicinity of

the proposed site. The site is in close proximity to a number of industrial processes which are considered to be strong sources of dust and odour when compared to the proposed plans. The site location has elevated levels of some background pollutants at present. These have been taken into account when assessing potential impacts from residual stack emissions.

7.56 The potential air quality impacts during the construction phase includes

construction phase dust and Volatile Organic Compound emissions from stored chemicals. The applicant has stated that they have provided a series of good practice dust mitigation measures and statutory controls are to be followed, such impacts are not predicted to be significant.

7.57 A series of primary and secondary control measures will be used to ensure air

emissions are controlled to within the stringent Emission Limit Values contained within the Industrial Emissions Directive. Detailed dispersion modelling has been undertaken to quantify potential impacts from residual process air emissions at sensitive receptor locations surrounding the site. No exceedance of human health based Air Quality Limit Values, Air Quality Target Values or Environmental Assessment Levels are predicted.

7.58 A Human Health Risk Assessment will be required to be completed at the

permitting site. The applicant has stated that the EA will not grant a permit for the site to operate unless they are satisfied the plant will not have a significant adverse impacts on air, land or water. The applicant has also stated that the plant will have dedicated abatement systems in place to control emissions prior to release to atmosphere. The type and extent of abatement plant will be agreed with the EA at the permitting stage.

7.59 Concerns have been raised that the emissions from the plant would be detrimental to health. The proposed activity would require a permit from the Environment Agency that would regulate emissions to air from the site to safe levels. The National Planning Policy Framework and PPS10 are clear when they state that if an activity is permitted the LPA should focus on whether the development itself is an acceptable use of land, and the impact of the use, rather than control the emissions themselves.

7.60 The proposal would comply with Core Strategy policy CP 1 and CR 2 as it is considered that the proposal would ensure that the amenities of occupiers if


P/2013/0475

the new development will not be adversely affected by neighbouring uses and vice versa and would ensure that waste management facilities are developed whilst minimising the impacts on the environment and communities of the Borough

7.61 Visual impact: The proposal would necessitate the erection of a 39m high by 3.2m diameter

flue in order to ensure that the emissions produced by the plant would be adequately dispersed. The application has been accompanied by a Landscape and Visual Assessment that has been undertaken by a suitably qualified person to assess its impact on the landscape character and visual amenities of its surroundings.

7.62 St Helens has adopted a Landscape Character Assessment (LCA), which breaks the Borough into a number of landscape character types that describe the features of the landscape area, identifies whether these are positive or negative and recommends how the area can accommodate development.

7.63 The application site lies in area UV1 ‘Gerard’s Bridge’ which is an ‘Urban

Industrial Valley’, an area that is characterised by “the large scale building development of warehouses and factories comprising a number of large vertical chimneys and gasometers which interrupt the skyline and create a series of important regional landmarks.” The LCA identifies chimneys (mainly on a Pilkington’s site to the west) and the gasometer (to the south of the site) as positive features “that are important landmarks and orientation features that highlight the core of St Helens.”

7.64 The LCA states that management of the landscape should “pay cognisance to

the requirement to retain and enhance the existing and more recent feature of the industrial landscape which has (sic) become important landmarks.”

7.65 The proposed chimney would appear as a relatively isolated vertical feature

as the majority of chimneys and other large structures in the surrounding area are clustered, such as on the Pilkinton’s site. However, given the general landscape context it is considered that the proposed chimney would not appear an overly incongruous feature in its surroundings and that it would not or have an unacceptable impact on its landscape setting.

7.66 With regard to visual amenity, the proposed chimney would be a skyline

feature that would be visible from sensitive receptors, such as residential dwellings in a relatively wide area, particularly from the east, west and south. Large skylined industrial features are a common sight in the Borough, particularly in this part and the distance between the residential dwellings and the chimney means that it is not considered that the proposal would have a significant impact upon visual amenity sufficient to warrant refusal of this application.

7.67 The development also proposes some landscape works on the site and a

landscape masterplan has been included in the application. The Trees & Woodlands Officer has considered the proposals and subject to minor amendments, which could be secured via a planning condition, he has no objections to the proposal. However, the applicant doesn't own and control the majority of the land that these landscaping proposals relate to and therefore there is not a reasonable prospect of them being carried out and therefore not considered necessary.


P/2013/0475

7.68 The proposal would comply with Core Strategy policy CP 1 and CR 2 as it is considered that the proposal would ensure that the amenities of occupiers of the new development will not be adversely affected by neighbouring uses and vice versa and would ensure that waste management facilities are developed whilst minimising the impacts on the environment and communities of the Borough.

7.69 Dust: Site operations would be carried out to minimise the creation of dust. A

permanent constant mains water supply would be available on site in all climatic conditions to ensure that the dust suppression systems can function effectively and all external water pipes are lagged to prevent frost damage during winter months.

7.70 The staff would continuously monitor dust emissions whilst the plant is in

operation and take appropriate action when required. In addition, the site supervisor would monitor for dust at the site perimeter at least twice daily to ensure that no dust blows off site. Results of monitoring exercises would be entered in the site diary.

7.71 Water sprays /bowsers would be used to reduce dust levels on all external

site surfaces where necessary. This would apply to site roads, storage, loading and unloading areas. Vehicles carrying potentially dusty loads off site will be securely sheeted, enclosed or sprayed with water to reduce dust emissions.

7.72 The proposal would comply with Core Strategy policy CP 1 and CR 2 as it is considered that the proposal would ensure that the amenities of occupiers of the new development will not be adversely affected by neighbouring uses and vice versa and would ensure that waste management facilities are developed whilst minimising the impacts on the environment and communities of the Borough

7.73 Noise: The application would involve the use of plant and machinery that would

generate noise, the plant and machinery is proposed to operate 24 hours per day. The applicant has undertaken a noise assessment which demonstrates that provided mitigation measures are undertaken, namely the internal cladding of the warehouse building and the erection of an acoustic barrier around the external generator, then the proposal would not affect residential amenity by way of noise and disturbance. The Council’s EHO has no objections to the proposal subject to conditions.

7.74 A BS 4142 noise assessment has demonstrated that the plant will not create

unacceptable levels of noise at sensitive receptor locations. Emissions from the process will be controlled under the conditions of an Environmental Permit regulated by EA.

7.75 The proposal would comply with Core Strategy policy CP 1 and CR 2 as it is considered that the proposal would ensure that the amenities of occupiers of the new development will not be adversely affected by neighbouring uses and vice versa and would ensure that waste management facilities are developed whilst minimising the impacts on the environment and communities of the Borough


P/2013/0475

7.76 Mud/litter: The applicant has stated that the deposit of mud or litter onto the road and

highway is unlikely, however, if it does occur during the construction phase, the material would be cleared using a road sweeper or hand picked in the case of litter. Visual inspections of the site surface would be carried out daily and staff will report any problems with debris on the site surface immediately to the supervisor. Vehicles would be visually inspected before exit to check that loads are safe and that no debris is carried out on the wheels or body of the vehicle.

7.77 Vermin/insect/bird control: The applicant has stated that the site would have a pest management plan

agreed with the EA as part of the permit application process. 7.78 Odours: The main potential for odour emission would be from waste during

transportation to and from the site. Such impacts can be controlled by sheeting/covering of Vehicles. The building will be operated under negative pressure to ensure odours are adequately contained and controlled.

7.79 Highways: Waste for the production of RDF would be transported to site by road as this

is the only means available. The principle vehicle movements associated with the energy plant would include Heavy Goods Vehicles used for the importation of waste and raw materials to the site. By having both the fuel production plant and the energy plant on the same site, the applicant has stated that there would be a net reduction in traffic from the currently consented situation relating to the Merton Street operation. The proposed development would also secure a reduction in traffic to the previously proposed energy plant where there was reliance on the provision of fuel from the Merton Street facility. As such, there will be in the region of a 60% reduction in traffic movements from that which is currently consented. This is the worst case scenario and traffic generation is likely to be lower. This would result in an average weekly traffic movement of 622 as opposed to the current, consented weekly maximum of 1648 movements. In addition, there would be up to 130 car movements per day associated with site staff travelling to and from work.

7.80 The applicant has stated that the plant can be shut down if no fuel is available

but down time, other than for planned essential maintenance, is costly and reduces the overall electricity generation. If fuel was brought in from another fuel supplier, only 14 loads (HGVs) per day would be required to operate the plant at full capacity, each load being a 20 tonne payload. The surrounding road network would have sufficient capacity to meet these movements.

7.81 The applicant anticipates that there will be up to a maximum of 6 HGVs per

day for the delivery of reagents and raw materials required for the process and for the removal of any residual wastes from site.

7.82 Given the projected employee numbers of 65, staff vehicle movements could

be as high as 130 per day. However, the reality is that car-sharing and use of other means of transport such as public transport, cycling and walking, mean that movements may be significantly lower.


P/2013/0475

7.83 The current proposals have been revised to those previously considered, insofar as it proposes the relocation of the existing adjacent Materials Reclamation and Waste Recycling Facility (MRWRF) to the same site as the proposed energy plant.

7.84 It is understood that the current MRWRF has consent to potentially generate

a significant volume of HGV vehicle movements per week. 7.85 The current proposals are anticipated to generate up to around 89 HGV

vehicle movements per day, or just over 600 per week, which is claimed to be a significant reduction from the current consented levels for the existing adjacent MRWRF facility.

7.86 The level of vehicle movement associated with the development is very much dependent on the type and size of vehicles used and the operational methods employed, i.e. smaller vehicles have lower payloads and lead to more movements, whereas backloading, where incoming loaded vehicles also leave with a payload, can reduce the number of movements. The applicant has provided further information to clarify the level of goods vehicle movement identified in the supporting documents and the movements quoted are consistent with the likely approach of servicing the site via vehicles with a 15 tonnes payload. The 89 goods vehicle movements quoted are considered robust in that they include movements to and from the site, take no account of backloading and that they forecast the maximum throughput on any given day; the site will not always operate at maximum throughput and so the average level of movements will be lower.

7.87 It has to be acknowledged that the development site has a current consent for

B8 Warehouse and Distribution use (it was previously used as a TNT distribution depot) and that the potential level of goods vehicle movements from such a use is higher than the projected movements associated with the current proposal. Given that the site is located within an established industrial estate with access to the A58 (part of the Primary Route Network) directly via Merton Bank Road, which is designed and constructed to accommodate heavy goods movements, there are no highway objections.

7.88 The current MRWRF facility is intended to be demolished and the site redeveloped for industrial purposes, which is in outline form as part of this application. The redevelopment of the current MRWRF site will of course generate some additional traffic, however, given the site is an existing industrial site located within the middle of an existing established industrial area, there are not anticipated to be any significant highway implications or objections to such in principle.

7.89 Overall, given the industrial location, and the much higher levels potentially

generated by the current consented site use (storage & distribution), the proposals are considered to be acceptable in highway terms, and there are no objections, subject to appropriate conditions and informative notes being attached to any approval subsequently granted.

7.90 The proposal would comply with Core Stratgy policy CP 2 which state that all proposals for development within St.Helens will be expected to meet principles, except where specific locational requirements restrict the opportunity for ensuring a choice of travel:


P/2013/0475

7.91 Landscaping: In terms of the site, the Council's Trees and Woodlands Officer agrees that

the lower level views are relatively limited. There is a fringe of existing trees, many of which appear to have naturally regenerated on relatively poor ground and this has resulted in dense, narrow stands of light demanding trees such as birch and willow. The look is one of neglect and any landscape improvements on site should seek to deal with the enhancement of the existing landscape on site. The application has attempted to address some of these issues, but amendment to the specifications and proposals within the Landscape Masterplan should be made.

7.92 Management of existing trees The areas of tree cover on the site have naturally regenerated and are very

dense in places. A 30% thinning should be carried out to reduce tree density. Failure to do this will result in thin, straggly trees developing with little crown remaining. Better screening will be achieved in the long term by thinning these trees out to allow the remaining trees to develop broader crowns. It will also allow more light through for understory planting to be carried out.

7.93 Ecology Impacts: An Ecological Impact Assessment was undertaken to evaluate the likely

impacts on ecological resources during the construction and operational phase of the proposed energy plans. A site survey was undertaken together with a search on the BioBank resource to determine the potential for the site to support protected habitats and species and whether there are any protected species and habitats present on site. No rare or notable plants species are located within the site. Dense scrub along the canal bank is isolated from the site by a palisade fence and will not be subject to development or to direct impacts from the development. No aquatic habitats occur on the site, the main canal to the North being isolated from the development area. No direct habitat connectivity exist between the development site and canal. There were no signs of otters, bats, badgers or reptiles during the survey, nor were there any records of such within 500m of the site.

7.94 Natural England were consulted on the proposal raised no objections to the proposal.

7.95 Subject to conditions, the proposal would comply with Core Strategy policy

CP1 which states that proposals should provide landscaping as an integral part of the development.

7.96 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): An EIA was submitted with the planning application due to the size, scale and

nature of the proposal. Representations have been received which challenge the adequacy of the EIA.

7.97 The EIA regulations contain within them an inherent principle that the requirements should be proportionate and reasonable. Whilst it is considered that the EIA could be fuller in some respects (for example, those parts relative to carbon emissions and climate change, energy performance, fuel stock composition, choice of technology and process descriptions), it is sufficient to


P/2013/0475

meet the requirements of the regulations and the application can be determined on this basis.

7.98 Geological, Surface Water and Hydrogeological Impacts: An assessment of the site geology, hydrogeology and hydrology baseline has

been undertaken through assessment of a GroundSure report for the site. The site does not lie within a floodplain. Previous uses on site have included chemical/alkali works, a refuse tip and a colliery working. More recently, the site has been developed as a warehouse/depot facility. With consideration to the previous historic land uses on site, a Phase I Contamination Assessment has been undertaken. This has concluded that no intrusive investigation works should be required at this stage.

7.99 A flood risk assessment was undertaken. The Environment Agency have no

objections to the measures proposed and have requested conditions. Uncontaminated, site surface drainage water will be managed and discharged to St Helens Canal, using the existing drainage systems in place on site.

7.100 Site Management Management of a site is not a material planning consideration. With that said,

detailed procedures for the maintenance of the energy plant, including breakdowns, spillages, accidents, etc are all regulated by the Environment Agency as part of the Environmental Permit application process.

7.101 All operations should be carried out in accordance with the relevant

requirements of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and the company health and safety policy. Compliance is not within the remit of the Local Planning Authority.

7.102 Listed Building: Given the location of the Lock Gate, which is adjacent to the industrial estate

on Merton Road/Lock Street and to the existing warehouse facility used for storage and distribution, it is not considered that the proposals would create any adverse impact on the amenity of this location due to noise.

7.103 The Coal Authority: The Coal Authority have raised a substantive concern regarding the proposal

as their records indicate that within the site and surrounding area, there are coal mining features and that the site is located in an area where underground coal mining is recorded to have taken place at shallow depth and there are a number of mine entries within the application boundary.

7.104 National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 120) states that where a site is affected by stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner. This issue of coal mining is common throughout St Helens given its history of mining.

7.105 Taking this into account as well as the limited new build on the site, it is considered that an appropriate way forward would be to condition the requirement to submit a Coal Risk Assessment and also condition what measures are necessary to facilitate the development.

7.106 Outline application: The planning application includes an outline proposal for industrial

development on the current site of the MRWRF. A concept proposal plan


P/2013/0475

was submitted with the application which illustrates 14 units with car parking and vehicular access from Lock Street.

7.107 There are no issues in relation to the outline proposal subject to detailed reserved matters and a number of conditions.

7.108 The proposal would comply with Core Strategy policy CE 1 which states that the Council will help to support the creation and growth of new small businesses.

8.0 Conclusions 8.1 The proposal is considered to be in an acceptable location and in accordance

with the NPPF would constitute sustainable development. An EIA has been submitted, which has been found to be acceptable; there are no objections from statutory consultees regarding amenity, pollution or highway safety and the proposal would remove an existing problematic site.

8.2 The applicant has outlined the following benefits to the proposal:

- Major reduction in vehicle movements on surrounding road network compared to existing consented levels and significant reduction in associated vehicle exhaust emissions

- Extinguishment of operations and demolition of Materials Reclamation and Waste Recycling, Facility on Merton Street

- Redevelopment of Merton Street site as Industrial Starter Units (to be covered by a separate application subject to current proposals being awarded planning consent)

- Reduction in waste to landfill - Creation of 40 jobs to manage the energy plant, plus safeguarding of 25

existing jobs at Central Grange Environment Waste Ltd, which will be transferred over to the energy plant

- Job creation for local contractors in the development of the proposed £60 million project over a two year period and increased business for local suppliers

- Contributes to achieving national and regional targets for renewable energy provision as well as providing additional energy capacity

- Contributes to a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions - Contributes to regional and national targets for recovery of value from

municipal, industrial and commercial waste - Supply of electrical energy to the grid equivalent to the annual usage of up to

25,440 households - Reduction in vehicle movements to local landfill sites

8.3 At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable

development. To achieve sustainable development, economic, social and environmental gains should be sought jointly and simultaneously through the planning system. It is considered that this proposal constitutes sustainable development. Jobs would be created and there would be no environmental impacts and the proposal is recommended for approval.


P/2013/0475

9.0 Recommendation 9.1 Grant permission subject to conditions:

FULL PLANNING PERMISSION : CONDITIONS 1-27 WILL SOLELY RELATE TO THE FULL PLANING PERMSISION CHANGE OF USE OF WAREHOUSE BUILDING (TO THE WEST OF LOCK STREET) AND INSTALLATION OF PLANT AND MACHINERY INCLUDING 39M HIGH FLUE TO FORM 10.6MW ENERGY FROM WASTE PLANT THAT WILL BE POWERED BY REFUSE DERIVED FUEL, TOGETHER WITH THE RELOCATION OF EXISTING MATERIALS RECLAMATION AND WASTE RECYCLING FACILITY TO ACCEPT NON-HAZARDOUS WASTES, CURRENTLY LOCATED ON MERTON STREET, DEMOLITION OF THE EXIISTING FACILITY ON MERTON STREET.

TIME LIMITS

1. TLFP The development must be begun within three years of the date of this

decision notice.

DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS 2. DPPA The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following

application drawings: Drawing No. 2589/529/03 'Site Layout Plan' Drawing No. 2589/529/05 'Existing and Proposed Elevations (North & West)' Drawing No. 2589/529/06 'Existing and Proposed Elevations (South & East)' Drawing No. 2589/529/16 'Additional Plant Elevations'

3. NON STD Prior to the commencement of development and further to Drawing

no. 2589/529/04 'Indicative Internal Layout', a plan illustrating the final internal layout of the building should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. The approved plan shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Council prior to the proposal being brought into use.

LANDSCAPING

4. LABS No development shall take place until a landscaping and boundary

treatments scheme has been submitted to and agreed in writing with the Council as Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include the following: - Layout drawing/planting plans - Planting Schedule (indicating size, species, spacing, number and density of plants) - Written specifications - Tree pit specifications - Ground condition enhancement (including cultivation and other operations associated with trees, shrub, hedge or grass establishment) - Areas of hard standing - Method statements - Implementation and maintenance programme - Management and monitoring plans - Drainage details, where appropriate. - Proposed finished site levels


P/2013/0475

The agreed scheme shall be implemented prior to any part of the development being brought into use. Any planting which within a period of 5 years of implementation dies, is removed, or becomes seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with others of a similar size or species, unless the Council as Local Planning Authority gives written consent to a variation. Should replacement planting be necessary, the Council shall be notified in writing not less than 7 days prior to the planting taking place. Notification shall include details of the problem with the implemented scheme and the specification and timing of the replacement planting.

5. LATC NON STD Temporary measures to provide physical protection of all

trees, hedges and shrubs shown to be retained on the submitted plans shall be agreed in writing with the Council as Local Planning Authority and implemented prior to the commencement of the development as such. The provision of total exclusion zones must be achieved by the erection of protective fencing to not less than the minimum standard contained in British Standard BS5837 (2012). The areas so defined shall be kept free of machinery, stored materials of all kinds and any form of ground disturbance not specifically catered for in the agreed measures, for the duration of site and building works.

6. NON STD A method statement should be provided indicating areas where

tree thinning will be carried out within the site that shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Council as Local Planning Authority. This should include thinning densities, location of works, methodology and timing with works to be completed before the site is operational and outside the bird breeding season between the months of March and September.

HIGHWAYS

7. NON STD Prior to commencement of development hereby approved details

of the areas indicated on the submitted plans identified for parking and servicing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. The areas identified shall be, surfaced, drained, permanently marked out/demarcated and implemented prior to first use of the premises and retained for parking/servicing purposes thereafter.

8. NON STD No development shall take place until a scheme for the provision of

cycle parking, in accordance with the Council’s current standards, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved before any part of the development is brought into use and shall be retained as such thereafter. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order) no Building works, which reduce this provision, shall take place except following the express grant of planning permission by the Council.

9. NON STD The development shall not be occupied until the owners and

occupiers of the site have appointed a Travel Plan Co-ordinator. The Travel Plan Co-ordinator shall be responsible for the implementation, delivery, monitoring and promotion of the Travel Plan Statement, including the day-to-day management of the steps identified to secure the sustainable transport initiatives. The details (name, address, telephone number and email address)


P/2013/0475

of the Travel Plan Co-ordinator shall be notified to the Council as Local Planning Authority upon appointment and immediately upon any change.

10. NON STD Within 3 months of the development being brought into use, a

Travel Plan Statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. The Statement shall include immediate, continuing and long-term measures to promote and encourage alternative modes of transport to the single-occupancy car. For the avoidance of doubt, the Travel Plan Statement shall include, but not be limited to: a) Involvement of employees b) Information on existing transport policies, services and facilities, travel behaviour and attitudes c) Access for all modes of transport d) Targets for mode share e) Resource allocation including Travel Plan Co-ordinator and budget f) A parking management strategy g) A marketing and communications strategy h) Appropriate measures and actions to reduce car dependence and encourage sustainable travel i) An action plan including a timetable for the implementation of each such element of h above j) Mechanisms for monitoring, reviewing and implementing the travel plan The Approved Travel Plan Statement shall be implemented in accordance with the timetable contained therein and shall continue to be implemented as long as any part of the development is occupied and in use.

11. NON STD The wheel wash facility as detailed in section 9 of the Planning,

Design and Access Statement shall be implemented, operated and maintained on site in accordance with the approved details.

ENVIRONMENT AGENCY

12. NON STD The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until

such time as a surface water drainage scheme has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning authority.


such time as a scheme for overland flood flow routing has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning authority.

14. NON STD (1) Prior to each phase of development approved by this planning

permission no development (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), shall take place until a scheme that includes the following components to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority: 1) A preliminary risk assessment which has identified:


P/2013/0475

- all previous uses - potential contaminants associated with those uses - a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors - potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site. (2) A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. (3) The results of the site investigation and detailed risk assessment referred to in (2) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken. 4) A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (3) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action. Any changes to these components require the express written consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

15. NON STD If, during development, contamination not previously identified is

found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted a remediation strategy to the local planning authority detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with and obtained written approval from the local planning authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved.

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH

16. NON STD A scheme of noise mitigation measures shall be submitted to the

Local Planning Authority, approved in writing and implemented prior to commencement of operation of the site. The scheme should include an acoustic barrier to screen the generator, the location dimensions and density of this barrier to be approved by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall also include the provision of acoustic insulation to the existing building to a specification to be approved b the Local Planning Authority. The insulation scheme must take account of the roof and any openings to the building.

17. NON STD No pathways shall be created by which any contamination may

either migrate off-site or affect the proposed site use. Evidence (photographic or otherwise) of the use of a pathway breakage method, for example a comprehensive hard standing layer, capping measures for landscaped areas, protective measures for structures (e.g. specification for buried concrete) and services laid in contaminated made ground, etc, shall be submitted for written approval prior to occupation of the site.

18. NON STD The proposed mitigation methods for minimising dust from the site

during construction and operational phases as detailed in section 10.4 of the environmental statement v1.2 Document ref: 2589-529-B shall be implemented, operated and maintained on site in accordance with the approved details.

19. NON STD Prior to the commencement of development, details of how the

building shall operate at all times under negative pressure shall be submitted to and approved to the Council as Local Planning Authority. The approved


P/2013/0475

details shall be implemented prior to the commencement of the first use of the building and retained thereafter.

MEAS

20. NON STD Prior to the commencement of development, a Site Waste

Management Plan (SWMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. The approved SWMP shall be fully implemented on site during the construction phase.

21. NON STD The pollution prevention measures as outlined in the

Environmental Impact Assessment (section 8 Ecology) shall be implemented on site prior to the commencement of development.

22. NON STD Prior to the commencement of development, a Construction

Environment Management Plan (CEMP), which shall later become the sites Environmental Management Plan (EMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. The approved CEMP shall be implemented in full and the EMP kept up to date annually.

RESTRICTIONS

23. NON STD The maximum throughput of non hazardous waste shall not

exceed 150,000 tonnes/annum. 24. NON STD The facility hereby approved shall not carry out the processing of

any hazardous waste materials as defined in legislation. 25. NON STD Prior to the commencement of development, a phasing plan shall

be submitted to and approved by the Council as Local Planning Authority that provides a timescale for the cessation of the existing MRWRF use, its demolition and the opening of the new energy from waste and MRWRF site. The development shall proceed in accordance with the approved plan.

26. RECD There shall be no deliveries of waste outside the following hours:

Mondays to Fridays 07:00 to 21:00 Saturdays 07:00 to 18:00 Sundays and Bank Holidays 08:00 to 16:00

STABILITY

27. NON STD No development shall take place until a Coal Mining Risk

Assessment has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. Any remedial works required as a result of the Coal Mining Risk Assessment to treat any areas of shallow mine workings and/or any other mitigation measures to ensure the safety and stability of the proposed development shall be implemented prior to the commencement of development.


P/2013/0475

OUTLINE PERMISSION: CONDITIONS 28-47 WILL SOLELY RELATE TO THE OUTLINE PLANING PERMSISIONFOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE MERTON STREET SITE (ALL MATTERS RESERVED FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION).

TIME LIMITS

28. TLOA The development must be begun within three years of the date of this

decision notice, or two years from the approval of the last reserved matter, whichever is the later.

29. DPRM No development shall take place until details of the reserved matters

set out below have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority: (a) layout; (b) scale; (c) appearance; (d) access; and (e) landscaping. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the reserved matters as approved.

DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS

30. DPSL No development shall take place until existing and proposed site levels

Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed levels.

LANDSCAPING

31. LABS NON STD

Any planting (as agreed within condition 29) which within a period of 5 years of implementation dies, is removed, or becomes seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with others of a similar size or species, unless the Council as Local Planning Authority gives written consent to a variation. Should replacement planting be necessary, the Council shall be notified in writing not less than 7 days prior to the planting taking place. Notification shall include details of the problem with the implemented scheme and the specification and timing of the replacement planting.

HIGHWAYS

32. NON STD Prior to commencement of development hereby approved details of

the areas indicated on the submitted plans identified for parking and servicing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. The areas identified shall be, surfaced, drained, permanently marked out/demarcated and implemented prior to first use of the premises and retained for parking/servicing purposes thereafter.

33. NON STD No development shall take place until a scheme for the provision of

cycle parking, in accordance with the Council’s current standards, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved before any part of the development is brought into use and shall be retained as such thereafter. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order) no Building works, which reduce this provision, shall take place except following the express grant of planning permission by the Council.


P/2013/0475

34. NON STD The development shall not be occupied until the owners and occupiers of the site have appointed a Travel Plan Co-ordinator. The Travel Plan Co-ordinator shall be responsible for the implementation, delivery, monitoring and promotion of the Travel Plan Statement, including the day-to-day management of the steps identified to secure the sustainable transport initiatives. The details (name, address, telephone number and email address) of the Travel Plan Co-ordinator shall be notified to the Council as Local Planning Authority upon appointment and immediately upon any change.

35. NON STD Within 3 months of the development being brought into use, a Travel

Plan Statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. The Statement shall include immediate, continuing and long-term measures to promote and encourage alternative modes of transport to the single-occupancy car. For the avoidance of doubt, the Travel Plan Statement shall include, but not be limited to: a) Involvement of employees

b) Information on existing transport policies, services and facilities, travel behaviour and attitudes c) Access for all modes of transport d) Targets for mode share e) Resource allocation including Travel Plan Co-ordinator and budget f) A parking management strategy g) A marketing and communications strategy h) Appropriate measures and actions to reduce car dependence and encourage sustainable travel i) An action plan including a timetable for the implementation of each such element of h above j) Mechanisms for monitoring, reviewing and implementing the travel plan The Approved Travel Plan Statement shall be implemented in accordance with the timetable contained therein and shall continue to be implemented as long as any part of the development is occupied and in use.

36. COWW No development shall take place until details of wheel wash facilities for

all vehicles visiting the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include plan(s) showing the location(s) of the facilities, hours of operation and technical specifications of plant and equipment. Thereafter the wheel wash facilities shall be installed and operated in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise approved by the Council as Local Planning Authority.

ENVIRONMENT AGENCY


such time as a surface water drainage scheme has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning authority.


such time as a scheme for overland flood flow routing has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning authority.


P/2013/0475

39. NON STD (1) Prior to each phase of development approved by this planning permission no development (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), shall take place until a scheme that includes the following components to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority: 1) A preliminary risk assessment which has identified: - all previous uses - potential contaminants associated with those uses - a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors - potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site. (2) A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. (3) The results of the site investigation and detailed risk assessment referred to in (2) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken. 4) A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (3) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action. Any changes to these components require the express written consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

40. NON STD If, during development, contamination not previously identified is

found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted a remediation strategy to the local planning authority detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with and obtained written approval from the local planning authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved.

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 41. NON STD Prior to the commencement of development a scheme of noise

mitigation measures be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be and implemented prior to commencement of development of the site.

42. NON STD No pathways shall be created by which any contamination may

either migrate off-site or affect the proposed site use. Evidence (photographic or otherwise) of the use of a pathway breakage method, for example a comprehensive hard standing layer, capping measures for landscaped areas, protective measures for structures (e.g. specification for buried concrete) and services laid in contaminated made ground, etc, shall be submitted for written approval prior to occupation of the site.

43. CODS No work shall commence on site until details of a mitigation scheme for dust suppression has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.


P/2013/0475

MEAS 44. NON STD Prior to the commencement of development, a Site Waste

Management Plan (SWMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. The approved SWMP shall be fully implemented on site during the construction phase.

RESTRICTIONS 45. REUA The premises shall be used solely for B1, B2 or B8 and for no other

purpose. 46. RECD There shall be no deliveries outside the following hours:

Mondays to Fridays 07:00 to 21:00 Saturdays 07:00 to 18:00 Sundays and Bank Holidays 08:00 to 16:00

STABILITY 47. NON STD No development shall take place until a Coal Mining Risk

Assessment has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. Any remedial works required as a result of the Coal Mining Risk Assessment to treat any areas of shallow mine workings and/or any other mitigation measures to ensure the safety and stability of the proposed development shall be implemented prior to the commencement of development.

INFORMATIVES 1. Standard condition discharge

HIGHWAYS 2. Prior to commencement of development a joint inspection between the

applicant and the Highway Authority of the condition the existing footways/carriageways within the vicinity of the site should be carried out. The applicant is advised to contact Danny Gordon, Streetworks Manager, Wesley House, Corporation Street, St Helens WA10 1HF (Tel 01744 676382) for further details.

3. The applicant is reminded that it is an offence to allow material to be carried

from the site and deposited on or cause damage to the highway from uncleaned wheels or badly loaded vehicles. The Highway Authority will seek to recover any expenses incurred in clearing, cleaning or repairing highway surfaces and will prosecute persistent offenders under Sections 131, 148 & 149 of the Highways Act 1980.e0174

ENVIRONMENT AGENCY

4. Environmental Permit Requirements:

An Environmental Permit already exists at the site (permit EAWML/50362), which allows household, commercial and industrial waste transfer and treatment. Since 2010 there has been several non-compliancy issues with the Permit and the Environment Agency has been in discussions with the operator and has also issued l egal non-compliancy notices.


P/2013/0475

The proposed facility will process more than 3 tonnes/hr of non hazardous waste. Therefore the company will need to apply to us for an Environmental Permitting Regulations Application (EPR) (Section 5.1. Part A (1)), and the application would need to include more detail on the proposed abatement technology. The plant design would need to consider and comply with the Waste Incineration Directive (WID). In addition, an important consideration for the application will be the fire prevention measures for the wood storage at the site. Given the ongoing compliance issues with the current permit, we strongly advise that the applicant contact us for pre-permitting advice as soon as possible.

5. Contamination

When considering sites that are contaminated we recommend that developers should: 1. Follow the risk management framework provided in CLR11, Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, when dealing with land affected by contamination. 2. Refer to the Environment Agency Guiding Principles for Land Contamination for the type of information that we require in order to assess risks to controlled waters from the site. The Local Authority can advise on risk to other receptors, such as human health. 3. Refer to our website at www.environment-agency.gov.uk for more information. The CL: AIRE Definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice (version 2) provides operators with a framework for determining whether or not excavated material arising from site during remediation and/or land development works are waste or have ceased to be waste. Under the Code of Practice: - excavated materials that are recovered via a treatment operation can be re-used on-site providing they are treated to a standard such that they are fit for purpose and unlikely to cause pollution - treated materials can be transferred between sites as part of a hub and cluster project - some naturally occurring clean material can be transferred directly between sites. Developers should ensure that all contaminated materials are adequately characterised both chemically and physically, and that the permitting status of any proposed on site operations are clear. If in doubt, we should be contacted for advice at an early stage to avoid any delays.

6. Surface Water Attenuation:

The development site is bounded on two sides with aquatic local wildlife sites; Rainford Brook and St. Helens Canal. In line with the National Planning Policy Framework and Liverpool City Region Ecological Framework guidance, natural solutions should be sought to manage surface water runoff. Surface water run-off should be controlled as near to its source as possible through a sustainable drainage approach to surface water management (SUDS). SUDS are an approach to managing surface water run-off which seeks to mimic natural drainage systems and retain water on or near the site as opposed to traditional drainage approaches which involve piping water off site as quickly as possible. SUDS involve a range of techniques including soakaways, infiltration trenches, permeable pavements, grassed swales, green roofs, ponds and wetlands. SUDS offer significant advantages over conventional piped drainage systems in reducing flood risk by attenuating the rate and


P/2013/0475

quantity of surface water run-off from a site, promoting groundwater recharge absorbing diffuse pollutants and improving water quality. Ponds, reedbeds and seasonally flooded grasslands can be particularly attractive features within public open spaces. Further information on SUDS can be found in; - PPS 25 Practice Guide - the CIRIA C697 document SUDS manual - HR Wallingford SR 666 Use of SUDS in high density developments -CIRIA C635 Designing for exceedence in urban drainage - good practice - the Interim Code of Practice for Sustainable Drainage Systems.

7. Land Drainage Consent

Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991 and the Land Drainage Byelaws, our prior written consent is required for any proposed works or structures in, under, over or within 8 metres of the top of the bank of the main river Rainford Brook.


P/2013/0475

10.0 Images


P/2013/0475

Proposed site plan


P/2013/0475


P/2013/0475

Existing and Proposed North and West Elevations

Existing and Proposed South and East Elevations


P/2013/0475

Outline concept plan


P/2013/0475

1.

2.


P/2013/0475

3.

4.


P/2013/0475

5.

6.


P/2013/0475

7.

8.


P/2013/0475

9.

10.


P/2013/0475

11.

12.


P/2013/0475

13.

14.


P/2013/0475

15.

16.


P/2013/0475

17.

18.


P/2013/0475

19.

20.


P/2013/0475

21.

22.


P/2013/0475

23.

24.


P/2013/0475

25.

26.


P/2013/0475

27.

28.


P/2013/0475

29.

30.


P/2013/0475

31.

32.


P/2013/0475

33.

34.

Planning Committee 10/12/2013 APPLICATION NO: P/2013/0475

Documents

Transcript of Planning Committee 10/12/2013 APPLICATION NO: P/2013/0475