Agenda item

(Councillor S P Roe re-joined the meeting)

The Committee received a report which sought planning permission by Beeswax Dyson Farming for the construction of a covered digestate storage lagoon, perimeter bunding and fencing and concrete apron for the storage of silage at Woodbecks Farm, Edlington Road, Edlington.

It was reported that further to the publication of the agenda, representations from Thimbleby Parish Council had been received and there had been a slight amendment to condition 4 (a), both of these had been set out in the update to the Committee circulated prior to the meeting.  It was also noted during discussion that there was a minor error in condition 3 and the references to 'leachate' should be amended to 'digestate'.

Officers guided members through the report and set out the main issues to be considered in the determination of this application.

Christian Smith, agent for the applicant, was in attendance to answer any queries from the Committee.  The following questions were asked to Mr Smith:

·         It was noted that the report indicated that the digestate would be stored all winter, prior to distribution at the appropriate time.  It was queried when that time was and whether it would only be distributed on the applicants own land.  Members were advised that the timings for spreading could be quite flexible depending on the weather conditions.  It could be late summer/early autumn and early to late spring.  It was confirmed that it would only be spread on the applicants land.

·         In relation to the site being located within a flood zone, it was queried whether it was a 1 in 1000 or 1 in 100 probability.  It was confirmed that it was 1 in 1000 probability as it was within Flood Zone 1, which was the lowest probability of flooding.

Councillor Mrs P A Bradwell OBE was in attendance as the local councillor and made the following points:

·         Edlington was a very small hamlet.

·         There was a weight restriction from A158 through village, but it stopped before the road reached Woodbecks Farm.  The worry was that people did not take any notice of this as there were a lot of farm vehicles that used this road.

·         There were significant concerns about the digestate. 

·         The access would be through Thimbleby.  The report set out that there would be one HGV vehicle per week, and they would be travelling from the Carrington Estate and the Nocton Estate.  There was a need to understand that the highways around these villages were very narrow.  It was believed that the lagoon should be located in Carrington, where the anaerobic digester was.

·         The local member also highlighted that she had not been consulted about the application, and neither had Thimbleby Parish Council.

·         It was requested that the Committee visited the area so they could visualise the area.

The Committee was provided with the opportunity to discuss the application and information presented and some of the points raised included the following:

·         Officers apologised to Councillor Mrs Bradwell as she should have received notification of the application.  In relation to Thimbleby Parish Council, it was confirmed that they were notified by e-mail on 28 August 2019.  However, the e-mail had been diverted to the junk mail folder.  It was highlighted that the comments from the Parish Council had been received and the Committee were now aware of its thoughts.

·         In terms of HGV movements, these had been assessed by the Highways officer, who had not submitted any objection to the number of vehicle movements which had been set out by the applicant.  The application set out that there would be 113 vehicle movements in one year, which was a modest number for a development.

·         It was acknowledged that there had been problems with visibility on the junction of the B1190 with Hungram Lane.  It was highlighted that there was more of an issue for vehicles turning out of the junction, and for those vehicles travelling from the Horncastle direction and turning across the traffic.  With this application it was not the expectation that vehicles would be coming from this direction.

·         It was queried why the applicant wanted to build on a location away from their anaerobic digesters, and members were advised that this was to give the applicant flexibility and enable them to store digestate as there were restrictions on when this material could be spread.  This location also enables the digestate to be used on a number of different farms.

·         The proposed vehicle movements were relatively modest.  The delivery and spreading of the digestate on the land would have far less impact than an anaerobic digester.

·         It was commented that it was felt that there was little on which the Committee could actively refuse this application.  However, it was queried whether there was anything which could be achieved by including a routing condition, and whether that would be reasonable.  Members were advised that this would normally be through a Section 106 Agreement, rather than a planning condition.  The only condition would be that vehicles could not turn right out of the access, and request that signage was installed at the point of access.

·         It was requested whether a complete count of vehicle movements could be provided.  Members were advised that Condition 3 stated the volume of liquid waste which could be brought through the site, and the applicant would be required to maintain detailed records.  The Council would be able to request copies of these records.

·         It was queried whether the digestate would still be spread if the Committee refused the lagoon, and it was noted that they could still do that.

·         There was support for some signage to be included.

A discussion was held regarding the need for a site visit, and what it would include.  It was proposed by Cllr D Brailsford and seconded by Councillor C L Strange that the Committee hold a site visit.  Upon being put to the vote the motion was lost.

It was proposed by Councillor T R Ashton and seconded by Councillor I G Fleetwood that the Committee accept the recommendations as set out in the report with the added condition to prevent a right turn out of the access and to add appropriate signage and it was:-

RESOLVED (13 for, 1 against)

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report, taking into account the amendments and addition of two further conditions as set out below:

a)    Condition 3 – replace reference to 'leachate' with 'digestate'

b)    Condition 4 (a) is amended to replace "an archaeological watching brief" with "monitoring and recording"

c)    Add the following conditions - Prior  to the lagoon receiving the first delivering of liquid digestate, details of the signage directing HGV tanker driver to only turn left when leaving the farm shall have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority,  The details shall include information on the design, wording, size of signage and location.  The approved signage shall be erected in the approved location before the lagoon is first brought into use and retained and maintained for the duration of the development.

            All construction traffic and HCV tanker traffic shall only turn left onto Edlington Road when exiting Woodbecks Farm.

            Reason - To prevent mud or other deleterious materials derived from           the development being transferred onto the public highway in the            interests of highway safety and safeguarding the local amenity and environment.