Installation of Anaerobic Digestion plant consisting of control building, feedstock/reception building, 30m diameter digester, 30m diameter digestate store, feedstock clamps and all associated works.

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application for Installation of Anaerobic Digestion plant consisting of control building; feedstock/reception building, 30m diameter digester, 30m diameter digestate store, feedstock clamps and all associated works and drew Members’ attention to the schedule of additional letters. It was confirmed that Members had attended a site visit that morning and had assessed the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding area.

In response to a question from the Chairman regarding the re-routing of the culvert, the Principal Planning Officer explained that the applicant would be required to submit a detailed scheme as detailed in the Officer’s report at Condition 21.

Peter Lowe, local resident, spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which a number of points were raised including the following:

·         There was no pre-application consultation with the local community;

·         The electricity generated would not enable the applicant to become self-sufficient;

·         The anaerobic digester at Swancote did produce odour;

·         The development would adversely affect highway safety;

·         If there was an incident and an exclusion zone was enforced by the Environment Agency the A525 by-pass would be closed, causing gridlock in the town;

·         The existing water course was a habitat for water voles;

·         There was no shortage of electricity in Whitchurch as stated in the report; and

·         The application was no benefit to the Town and would adversely affect tourism.

Councillor John Sinnot, Whitchurch Town Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which a number of points were raised including the following:

·         The Town Council were not against anaerobic digesters in principle but were united in their objection to this application as they considered it to be in the wrong location;

·         He assured the meeting that there was no shortage of electricity in the Town;

·         The electricity generated cannot be used by the Town and therefore was of no benefit to the wider community;

·         The site was too close to receptors such as the local nursery; and

·         The anaerobic digester would produce odour.

Linda Grocott, applicant, spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which a number of points were raised including the following:

·         The current business moved to Whitchurch in 1996 and played a vital part in the Shropshire economy;

·         The business provided stable employment for local people;

·         The application would enable the business to become self-sufficient;

·         A number of businesses had left Whitchurch due to power shortage issues; and

·         Amendments had been made to the application following concerns such as the elimination of food waste.

Nick Williams, agent for the applicant, spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which a number of points were raised including the following:

·         The business was the largest employer in Whitchurch;

·         Electricity was required at the business 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 364 days a year;

·         The anaerobic digester would generate more than half of the electricity required by the business;

·         The removal of food waste element was welcomed by Environment Agency and Public Protection;

·         There had been no representations from statutory consultees;

·         The plant would operate in line with a permit from the Environment Agency and would be closed if conditions were not met; and

·         The development was located in a sensible site and would supply renewal energy in line with the guidance. 

Councillor Mrs Peggy Mullock made a statement in support of the proposal, and then left the room, taking no part in the debate and did not vote.

By virtue of the amendment made to Shropshire Council’s Constitution, as agreed at the meeting of Council held on 27 February 2014, Councillor Gerald Dakin, as the Local Member, made a statement, and then left the room, taking no part in the debate and did not vote. During his statement a number of points were raised including the following:

·         The electric supply on the industrial estate was insufficient;

·         The proposed plant was different to the plant at Harper Adams University;

·         There were 13 other anaerobic digesters in Shropshire;

·         The proposal would give power where it was needed and enable the business to continue in the future;

·         The business was largest employer in Whitchurch and known nationally;

·         There had been a scaremongering campaign by a group of people objecting to the application;

·         If the plant failed to operate in line with the Environment Agency permit it would be closed;

·         The applicant would not allow this to happen and waste a 5 million pound investment; and

·         He had no concerns in relation to the application and felt it would serve the needs of the Town.

The Principal Planning Officer explained that the benefits of the scheme outweighed the adverse impacts and the concerns raised by objectors had resulted in a better scheme. It was confirmed that there had been a pre-application process and that if there was an incident at the site this would be subject to a number of different regulatory regimes although the primary responsibility would rest with the operator. In response to comments relating to the fire prevention measures detailed in paragraph 7.3.3, the Principal Planning Officer advised that if Members were minded to approve the application a condition be added in relation to this issue.

Having considered the submitted plans for the proposal, the Members unanimously expressed their support for the officer’s recommendation, subject to the inclusion of an additional condition in relation to fire prevention measures.

RESOLVED:

That Planning Permission be granted in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation subject to:

·      The conditions set out in Appendix 1; and

·      An additional condition relating to fire prevention measures.

Councillors Mrs Peggy Mullock, Gerald Dakin and Paul Wynn re-joined the meeting at this point.