Agenda item

Proposal:	Installation of containerised biomass boiler systems.
Location:	St Andrews School, Unnamed Road from Gardeners Lane to Buckhold Farm Pangborne RG8 8QA
Applicant:	The Warden and Council, St Andrews School
Recommendation:	Delegate to the Service Director of Development and Regulation to grant planning permission.

 

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 22/00193/FUL in respect of an application seeking planning permission for the installation of containerised biomass boiler systems at St Andrews School.

 

Ms Sarah Weaver, Senior Planning Officer, introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Dr Anthony Haden-Taylor and Ms Maggie Culling, objectors, and Mr Stuart Reid, Mr Ed Graham and Ms Penny Franklin, applicant/agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Objector Representation

Dr Anthony Haden-Taylor and Ms Maggie Culling in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         Ms Culling noted that she was the owner of Cullinghood Equestrian Centre and Herons Farm, and had no objection to the school having a biomass boiler system, however objected to its proposed siting 150 metres from her home and garden. Ms Culling feared that pollution and fumes would affect her garden, bed and breakfast accommodation business, and horses.

·         Ms Culling noted that her business attracted livery owners, visitors and wedding guests, many of whom were elderly and with health issues. During summer months many of them would be in the garden.

·         Ms Culling had spoken to XL Planning, who stated that the site of the biomass boiler would be safe as the fumes would be carried over uninhabited farmland. Ms Culling disputed this and suggested that the fumes would travel in a south-westerly direction, over Cullinghood Equestrian Centre and Herons Farm.

·         Ms Culling called on the Committee to obtain a full risk assessment of the proposed development from St Andrews School and the manufacturer concerning the effects of the particles and fumes.

·         Ms Culling additionally noted concern over the impact of the potential noise from the burner on her horses. Despite the manufacturer suggesting that the boiler was quiet, Ms Culling requested that a risk assessment for its effect on horses be undertaken, given that horses were flighty animals and prone to being alarmed by unusual noises.

·         Ms Culling further expressed concern over the effect of the heat on lime trees, which she understood would kill them within five years, and the potential to kill wild birds.

·         Dr Haden-Taylor noted that the exhaust gases from the chimney would range in temperature from 750°C to 850 °C. The height of the chimney would send the fumes directly into the canopy of the lime trees. Dr Haden-Taylor noted that there were 68 of them, and they had been there since the 1880s. Dr Haden-Taylor suggested that the intensity of heat would, without doubt, damage and kill the trees.

·         Dr Haden-Taylor suggested that the boiler be relocated to the far east of the property, 380 metres away, and the exhaust would blow over empty farmland. This would not detract from the efficiency of the plant, but would protect those to the north-west.

·         Dr Haden-Taylor additionally noticed that those with COPD, bronchial issues, and asthma would be adversely effected.

Member Questions to the Objector

Councillor Tony Linden queried what COPD was and Dr Haden-Taylor explained that it was chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, a lung condition which prevented absorption of oxygen by the blood. Dr Haden-Taylor commented that anybody with asthma or COPD would be adversely effected by the fumes.

Councillor Alan Law asked Ms Culling how she would respond to the West Berkshire Environmental Health response, which stated that the proposal would have minimal effect on air quality and would be exempt from the Clean Air Act. He suggested that this would satisfy the request for a risk assessment. Ms Culling responded that she had not read the report, but that she knew that the particles were carcinogenic, and would impact her health.

Councillor Law responded that he understood the concerns but that he had to follow the experts and officers. Ms Culling asked for a risk assessment to provide assurance that no fumes would enter her property and adversely effect her health.

Applicant/Agent Representation

Mr Stuart Reid, Mr Ed Graham and Ms Penny Franklin in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         Mr Graham and Ms Franklin were present as the applicants, St Andrews School. Mr Reid represented AMP Clean Energy on behalf of the applicants.

·         Mr Graham noted that the school had a sustainability plan to reduce its carbon emissions. Currently, the school used oil and liquid petroleum gas (LPG), to provide heat and hot water for its larger buildings. The proposal being considered was to reduce reliance on fossil fuels by installing renewable energy in the form of a biomass boiler system, which would replace the use of oil and significantly reduce the use of LPG.

·         The effect of the proposed development’s installation would be to reduce the school’s carbon emissions from heating by 151 tonnes per year. In addition, there would be a net reduction of traffic to the school site by around 40 lorries per year, as there would be no deliveries of oil, further reducing carbon emissions.

·         Mr Graham stated that students would be encouraged to use the biomass boiler and wood pellets in their science lessons and sustainability projects, giving them a real-life insight into carbon reduction technologies.

·         Mr Graham commented that he understood concerns that had been raised by neighbours and residents, and would be inviting them to visit the site once it was built.

·         Mr Reid stated that he had been working in the field of biomass heating for 15 years, and had been involved in over 400 projects of a similar size and scale, 45 of which were in schools.

·         Mr Reid stated that he hoped that the application and ensuing correspondence had resolved concerns that had been raised, and added that they were taken seriously. Mr Reid stated that it was his view that the planning officers had taken the issues into consideration and that he was willing to answer any further technical questions.

·         Mr Reid noted that it was important to understand the distinction between a wood-burning stove, which burnt logs of varying fuel quality and moisture content, and wood pellet boilers. Wood pellet boilers controlled emissions, and were Clean Air Act exempt meaning that there was no visible smoke, and emissions had to comply with a legislative standard to meet the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI), criteria.

·         Mr Reid commented that the heat of emissions was closer to 120°C, rather than 850°C, and the gasses would circulate within the boiler to increase the combustion efficiency.

·         Mr Reid stated that it was his view that re-locating the proposed development would add additional cost, and would impact the ease by which hot water would be pumped around the school.

Member Questions to the Applicant/Agent

Councillor Linden queried whether the applicant had measured the level of emissions and whether the results were publically available. Mr Reid responded that an emissions certificate was issued in relation to each individual biomass boiler, which would be publically available.

Councillor Law asked why the proposed development was planned to be situated where it was, considering the objectors’ suggestion of an area 300 metres to the east. Mr Reid responded that cost was the main consideration, as there would be an underground network of pipes connecting the heating system. The further the pipes would have to travel to the boilers, the more it would cost to build and pump the water. In addition, the water would be less hot on reaching the boiler, requiring more energy to heat. It was Mr Reid’s view that a boiler situated further away would be unviable.

Councillor Alan Macro queried how the number of HGV movements would be reduced compared to using oil when wood pellets would still need to be delivered. Mr Reid responded that oil was topped up regularly and often, up to weekly, whereas wood pellets would be delivered on a less regular schedule and stored in a silo.

Councillor Macro asked whether reassurances could be given on the noise aspect of the development. Mr Reid responded that there would be minimal noise within the boundary area, and that similar developments were regularly built on farmland, adjacent to animals and houses. Mr Reid was unaware of any case where the sound of a biomass boiler had frightened a horse.

Councillor Geoff Mayes asked whether the pipes shown in the diagram would be insulated. Mr Reid responded that they would be pre-insulated plastic pipe, with minimal heat loss.

Councillor Mayes asked whether they would be carrying heated water. Mr Reid responded that they would be.

Councillor Mayes queried how maintaining water heat was a problem with moving the development, citing the size of the building and insulated piping. Mr Reid responded that the site chosen was the most practical.

Councillor Mayes asked whether the wood pellets would be stored in a single container. Mr Reid responded that they would. Councillor Mayes asked how it was filled and how often. Mr Reid responded that it was blown in, and would typically be near-empty when refilled. Mr Reid suggested that a single lorry load would contain approximately 16 tons of wood pellets.

Councillor Graham Pask asked what the temperature of the exhaust at the top of the chimney was, and whether studies had been undertaken into the effects of constant heat on the trees nearby. Mr Reid responded that specific studies had not been conducted in relation to the current development, but had been looked at before. Mr Reid suggested that the majority of heat from the combustion was recycled, and the gases exiting were at the lowest possible temperature before condensation. Mr Reid stated that this temperature was not any different from other combustion boilers used at this scale.

Ward Member Representation

1.     Councillor Ross Mackinnon was unable to attend the meeting.

Member Questions to Officers

Councillor Law asked how Conditions 4 and 5, relating to HGV movements and plant noise, would be monitored. Ms Weaver responded that the conditions were reasonable and enforceable according to National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), guidelines, and had been assessed and reviewed. They could be amended to specify that monitoring be undertaken via an annual report.

Councillor Law queried who such a report would addressed to. Ms Weaver responded that it would be referred to the Environmental Health Officer of the Council.

Debate

Councillor Law opened the debate by stating that there were three main objections to the application, notably air pollution, noise, and excessive HGV movements. The Committee had heard from Mr Ed Graham that HGV movements would be reduced by the change from oil to wood pellets by around 40 each year. The noise and pollution would be managed by conditions. Therefore, each of the objections had been adequately addressed, and Councillor Law moved that Officer’s recommendations be approved and planning permission be granted, with amendments to the conditions to specify annual reports for HGV movements and noise.

Councillor Andrew Williamson seconded the proposal, stating that it was a positive step forward, in line with the Council’s strategy on environmental impact and climate emergency.

Councillor Mayes proposed to add to the condition that the number of HGV movements be logged as part of the annual report. Ms Weaver responded that she did not believe that it could be added to the condition but that she had taken advice from Paul Goddard that the number of HGV movements would definitely be reduced. Councillor Williamson commented that the evidence was that oil was delivered like a milk round on a regular basis, whereas the wood pellets were being delivered as full loads.

Ms Weaver clarified that she had received advice that the amendments to the conditions did not pass the NPPF tests as they were not relevant to planning. Councillor Law disagreed, and noted that the requirement for annual reports had been added to previous applications.

Mr Mehdi Rezaie, the Interim Development Control Manager, noted the provisions under the Town and Country Planning Act, specifically the legal powers in relation to conditions, which stated that conditions must be necessary, relevant to planning, relevant for the development to be permitted, enforceable, precise and reasonable. The conditions related to the Environmental Health Act 1990, which were not under planning. However, Environmental Health or Public Protection might report breaches in the existing planning conditions. Councillor Law asked who would monitor the conditions without an annual report. Mr Rezaie responded that the Committee should consider the application before them, noting that there was no objection from Environmental Health. Councillor Law withdrew the proposal to accept the Officer’s recommendation.

Councillor Linden proposed to accept the Officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report. This was seconded by Councillor Macro.

The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Linden, seconded by Councillor Macro, to grant planning permission. At the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that: the Service Director for Development and Regulation be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the following conditions:

 

Conditions

1.    Commencement of development

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

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

2.    Approved plans

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans and documents listed below:

Location Plan. Drawing number SA101/B.

Block Plan. Drawing number SA102/A.

Floor Plan and Roof Plan. Drawing number SA103/A.

South East and North West Elevations. Drawing number SA104/A.

North East and South West Elevations. Drawing number SA105/A.

Trench Details For Underground Pipeline. Drawing Number SA106/A.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3.    Materials

The materials to be used in the development hereby permitted shall be as specified on the plans and/or the application forms. Where stated that materials shall match the existing, those materials shall match those on the existing development in colour, size and texture.

Reason: To ensure that the external materials respect the character and appearance of the area. This condition is applied in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), and Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006).

4.    Servicing and maintenance

The hereby approved containerised biomass boiler systems shall be operated in accordance with the submitted documents of this application predominately the Biomass Boiler Information Form V DN (004) Final. The units shall be regularly serviced and maintained to ensure efficient mechanical function.

Reason: To protect the occupants of nearby residential properties from noise and exhausts. This condition is applied in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), and Policies OVS.5 and OVS.6 of the West Berkshire Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007).

5.    Plant noise

All plant, machinery and equipment installed or operated in connection with the carrying out of this permission shall be so enclosed and/or attenuated that noise therefrom does not exceed at any time a level of 5dB[A] below the existing background noise level, or 10dB[A] if there is a particular tonal quality when measured in accordance with BS4142:2014 at a point one metre external to the nearest residential or noise sensitive property

Reason: To protect the occupants of nearby residential properties from noise. This condition is applied in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), and Policies OVS.5 and OVS.6 of the West Berkshire Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007).

6.    Construction Time Restrictions

No construction or associated deliveries of the development hereby permitted shall take place during arrival and departure times for the school during term time, unless in accordance with a construction method statement (CMS) that has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such a CMS shall include:

(a) A site set-up plan during the works;

(a) Parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors;

(b) Loading and unloading of plant and materials;

(c) Storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development;

(d) Erection and maintenance of security hoarding including any decorative displays and/or facilities for public viewing;

(e) Temporary access arrangements to the site, and any temporary hard-standing;

(f) Wheel washing facilities;

(g) Measures to control dust, dirt, noise, vibrations, odours, surface water run-off, and pests/vermin during construction;

h) A scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works;

(i) Hours of construction and demolition work;

(j) Hours of deliveries and preferred haulage routes;

 

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of school users and adjoining land uses and occupiers, and in the interests of highway safety. This condition is applied in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies CS13 and CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy 2006-2026, and Policies OVS.5, OVS.6 and TRANS.1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007). A pre-commencement condition is required because the CMS must be adhered to during all demolition and construction operations.

7.    Arboricultural Method Statement

No development or other operations shall commence on site until an Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The AMS shall include details of:

(a) The implementation, supervision and monitoring of all temporary tree and ground protection; and

(b) The implementation, supervision and monitoring of any special construction works within any defined tree protection area.

Thereafter the development shall not be undertaken except in accordance with the approved AMS.

 

Reason: To ensure the retention and protection of trees identified at the site in accordance with the NPPF and Policies ADPP1, ADPP5, CS14, CS17, CS18 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy 2006-2026. A pre-commencement condition is necessary because insufficient detailed information accompanies the application; tree protection installation, other measures and works may be required to be undertaken throughout the construction phase and so it is necessary to approve these details before any development takes place.

Informatives

Proactive actions of the LPA

The Local Planning Authority (LPA) has worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to dealing with a planning application. In particular, the LPA:

(b) Provided the applicant with a case officer as a single point of contact.

(c) Alerted the applicant to issues that were raised during the consideration of the application.

(d) Accepted amended plans to address issues arising during the consideration of the application.

(e) Agreed an extension of time before determining the application to enable negotiations with the applicant.

(f) Entered into /negotiations in order to find a solution to problems with the proposed development, rather than refusing planning permission without negotiation.