PLANNING STATEMENT · 2017-02-13 · 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction 1.1.1 This Planning Statement...
Transcript of PLANNING STATEMENT · 2017-02-13 · 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction 1.1.1 This Planning Statement...
PLANNING STATEMENT
PROPOSED USE OF A BUILDING TO FOOD WASTE PROCESSING BY MEANS OF THERMOPHILIC AEROBIC DIGESTION AND USE OF BIOFUEL FROM FOOD
DERIVED OIL FOR GENERATION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY
PEBBLE HALL FARM, THEDDINGWORTH ROAD, MARSTON TRUSSELL, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE, LE17 6NJ
WELLAND WASTE MANAGEMENT LTD
June 2013 Version 1 Final
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 The Site and Site Context ............................................................................................................ 2
1.3 Planning History at Pebble Hall .................................................................................................... 2
1.4 The Proposed Development ........................................................................................................ 3
1.5 Environmental Impact Assessment .............................................................................................. 6
2 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT ......................................................................................... 7
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 7
3 ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSAL ................................................................................. 18
3.2 Sustainable management of food waste and need for the development .................................... 18
3.3 Sustainable production of renewable energy ............................................................................. 19
3.4 Location .................................................................................................................................... 20
3.5 Catchment area ......................................................................................................................... 21
3.6 Environmental considerations .................................................................................................... 23
4 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................. 30
APPENDICES APPENDIX 1: Validation Checklist
APPENDIX 2: Process Diagram
APPENDIX 3: Screening Opinion
APPENDIX 4: Potential Supplier Map
APPENDIX 5: Oil Recovery Process
APPENDIX 6: Noise Assessment
APPENDIX 7: Air Quality Assessment
APPENDIX 8: Connection to National Grid System
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 This Planning Statement accompanies a planning application seeking planning permission for the change of use of one existing building for food waste processing by means of thermophilic aerobic digestion (TAD). The food processing would enable fertiliser granules for agriculture and renewable energy to be generated in order to be exported to the national grid. This application seeks to extend the existing building in order to accommodate the new TAD system. There will be a number of associated features and machinery located around the building, such as an office and utility and encased CHP gensets.
1.1.2 The original application was withdrawn, following discussions with Planning Officers from
Northamptonshire County Council. Since the withdrawal of the application, the applicant has taken the opportunity to revise a number of elements of the proposal, the most significant one of which is an increase in the amount of power generation from biodiesel from oil extracted from oil-rich food waste. The other changes are as follows:
4 No generators in acoustic enclosures Complete internal cladding of the existing building and its extension with cold-store
specification of insulation to reduce noise and fugitive odour emissions Steam boiler
Recovered oil storage ISO container Heat exchange and control panel buildings Four additional 36,000 litre tank movements per day will be required in order to collect and
deliver oil Additional tertiary odour control scrubber on biofilters
1.1.3 The generators will be linked to the National Grid via underground cables, see Appendix 8.
These will be installed by Western Power Distribution. The longer term aspiration for the facility is to have a substation on site. A separate planning application will be submitted to Northamptonshire County Council for this, subject to an arrangement being agreed.
1.1.4 This application relates to the site operated by Welland Waste Management Ltd at the
company’s existing Pebble Hall development, near Theddingworth in Northamptonshire.
1.1.5 The application is supported by the following documents: W001-07 – Design and Access Statement Welland Waste Management Working Plan – version 2
Noise Assessment – Appendix 6 Air Quality Assessment – Appendix 7
1.1.6 The application is supported by the following drawings:
GPP/WWM/PH/12/01 – Site Location Plan GPP/WWM/PH/12/02 – Site Plan GPP/WWM/PH/12/03 – Site Layout Plan GPP/WWM/PH/12/04 – Existing Building Elevations GPP/WWM/PH/12/05 – Proposed Building Elevations GPP/WWM/PH/12/06 – Catchment Area Plan
GPP/WWM/PH/12/06 v3 – Catchment Area Plan
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
GPP/WWM/PH/12/07 – Photopanel A GPP/CL/PH/09/04 Rev 2 – Landscape and Biodiversity Plan (Approved) GPP/WWM/PH/13/09 – Illustrative Cross Sections GPP/WWM/PH/13/10 – Photograph Panel B GPP/WWM/PH/13/11 – Photograph Panel C
1.1.7 The County Council’s Validation Checklist is included in Appendix 1. Compliance, as appropriate,
is identified in the list.
1.2 The Site and Site Context
1.2.1 Pebble Hall Farm is located South of the A4304 (Bosworth Road), Theddingworth in the Northern part of the District of Daventry as shown on Drawing GPP/WWM/MT/12/01 (Site Location Plan). It is approximately 1.8 km East of the village of Husbands Bosworth. Existing access to the site, which crosses the Northamptonshire and Leicestershire county boundaries, is surfaced in concrete and is approximately 560 metres long from its junction with the A4304.
1.2.2 Pebble Hall Farm is an agriculturally based operation that has been the subject of farm diversification, mainly as a result of the BSE crisis. By a series of grants of planning permission over a number of years (see planning history below), the site has established a variety of industrial/commercial concerns and a waste management operation as part of the diversification of the farm.
1.2.3 The site is located in an area of open countryside, which by virtue of Policy EN1 of the Daventry Local Plan (saved policies), is designated as being in an area of ‘Special Landscape’.
1.2.4 The site has excellent access onto the strategic highway network via the A4304, A5199 and M1.
1.2.5 The proposed change of use relates to the building contained within the red line boundary on drawing GPP/WWM/MT/12/01 which benefits from planning permission for B8 use, but is temporarily being used as a grain storage building for the agricultural activities. It is 1680 square metres in size.
1.3 Planning History at Pebble Hall
1.3.1 In December 2000 Daventry District Council granted planning permission for a change of use of the farm buildings to B8 distribution uses; reference DA/00/1095.
1.3.2 On 21 October 2003 (reference DA/03/725C) planning permission was granted by Northamptonshire County Council for green waste composting. This permission has been implemented. A second permission was granted on 4 October 2005, for an extension to the area to be used for green waste composting, it has also been implemented (reference DA/05/773C). These permissions allow a total throughput of 25,000 tonnes per annum of green waste.
1.3.3 Planning permission DA/07/319 was granted in June 2007 for the construction of an In-Vessel
Composting Plant to deal with mixed green and food waste up to 25,000 tonnes per annum; however as the Waste Collection Authority has subsequently abandoned plans to collect the food waste there is no need to provide an in-vessel composting facility.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
1.3.4 Planning permission 08/00053/WAS was granted in June 2008 for a renewable energy
generation facility for Purepower, on the site previously consented for In-Vessel composting as detailed above. The REGF occupies a similar footprint, and uses waste wood to generate renewable electricity. The permission was implemented when the hoggin was excavated to create the site for the proposed renewable energy generation facility, however the building has not yet been constructed.
1.3.5 Planning permission 09/01593/FUL was granted on 14th
June 2010 for the widening of the access track.
1.3.6 Planning permission 2010/C262/03 was granted by Daventry District Council on 7th July 2010 for
the retention of temporary office buildings in association with the permitted carpet recycling activities on the site.
1.3.7 Planning permission 2010/0477 was granted by Daventry District Council on 19th October 2010
for the retention of engineering works associated with the existing distribution uses and waste related activities at the site.
1.3.8 Planning permission 10/00038/WAS was granted on 28 July 2010 for the use of one B8 unit for
carpet recycling and part of the yard for carpet storage. The carpet recycling operations have now ceased.
1.3.9 A planning application has been submitted to Leicestershire County Council to carry forward the limitations imposed on a S106 Agreement relating to vehicle movements onto the highway; reference 2010/0879/03. This application will not be determined until such time as Northamptonshire County Council determine the application for the TAD and renewable energy generation application to which this statement relates.
1.4 The Proposed Development
1.4.1 The proposed development will provide waste treatment for two waste streams, oil-rich food waste (such as pork pies, sausages, chips) and general food waste. Approximately 70% (28,000tpa) of incoming material will be comprised of 30% plus oil rich food and 30% (12,000tpa) will be comprised of general food waste. Two options for proposed catchment areas for the two waste streams are shown on two Catchment Area Maps on Drawing GPP/WWM/PH/12/06 and GPP/WWM/PH/12/06 v3. The justification for the catchment areas is included in Section 3.5.
1.4.2 The oil-rich food waste is likely to be sourced from food manufacturers and food service outlets in the following locations:
Nottingham Coventry Northampton Birmingham Rugby Leicester
1.4.3 The general food waste is likely to be sourced from waste collection companies, supermarkets and food manufacturers in the following locations:
Leicester
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
Milton Keynes Wellingborough Corby Market Harborough Banbury
1.4.4 The development involves the following which are shown on Drawing GPP/WWM/PH/12/03 v7 Site Layout Plan: 1. Thermophilic Aerobic Digester (TAD)
The TAD system will be fully housed within the grain store building. This building will be extended in order to accommodate the TAD system and dryers.
This building will accept food waste and turn it into agricultural fertiliser granules and renewable biofuel.
The capacity of the plant is a maximum of 40,000 tonnes per annum, which will produce up to 10,000 tonnes of product.
28,000 tonnes per annum of incoming material will be comprised of 16,000 tonnes of up to 30% plus oil content food and 12,000 tonnes per annum will be general food waste.
There will be heat exchange and control panel buildings. 2 ‘Ag bags’ will be used in order to control air emissions. There will also be an associated
tertiary biofilter scrubber and fan
There will be an office and utility building, as shown on the Site Layout Plan GPP/WWM/PH/12/03.
There will be one biodiesel storage tank, recovered oil storage tank and 2 digestate storage tanks.
There will be a sunken wheel wash in the floor of the existing building in order to remove any mud from the wheels of the HGVs delivering material to the site.
Complete internal cladding of the existing building and its extension with cold-store specification of insulation.
2. Generation of Renewable Energy.
4 No. combined heat and power generators in 40ft acoustic enclosures with one 17m stack will be sited in the yard and linked in to the national grid via underground cables to be installed by Western Power Distribution.
3. Extension to the North-West side of the Existing Building 12.2 meters by 18.3 meters extension.
The total area of this extension equals 223 square metres. This will continue the existing slope of the roof. The highest point of the entire building, with the extension, will be 9 meters. The lowest point of the entire building, with the extension, will be 5.4 meters. 4. Other Features The existing soil bund along the northern boundary will be moved North to accommodate the
extension, but retained to provide screening. The height of this bund will be 2.5 meters.
Outside the building there will be two storage tanks will be located to the South of the extension. A 500kW combined heat and power generator and diesel storage tank will located South-East of the existing building.
1.4.5 Waste will be delivered to the building in HGVs, using the existing site access. All loads will be
weighed on the existing weighbridge alongside the compost site.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
1.4.6 The proposed TAD will be an entirely enclosed process, which is fully compliant with the Animal By-Products Regulations. The thermophilic aerobic digestion process takes place inside a series of tanks, which are linked together with pipework, as shown on the process diagram in Appendix 2 and on the Site Layout Plan, Drawing GPP/WWM/PH/12/03.
1.4.7 The food waste will enter the building in HGVs through a roller shutter door to be added in the North-East end of the building. All existing openings will be blocked up. Once the HGVs are inside the building the roller shutter door will be closed. The HGVs will then go through a wheel wash, which will essentially be a sunken wheel bath in the floor. The food waste will then be deposited. Most of the incoming food waste will be in packaging.
1.4.8 Prior to the food waste being put into the TAD it will be removed from the packaging, it will
then be fed into a homogenization tank with screening system to ensure particle size is less than 12mm and that any non-organic fractions are removed; water will be added as necessary. The waste will then be fed into a centrifuge to extract the oil. In the short-term, this oil will then be stored pending removal off-site for processing into B100 biodiesel. It is intended to apply to the Environment Agency for ‘end of waste’ status for the oil. This is expected to take approximately 18 months. The oil will then be able to be used as a fuel directly in the generators, to create heat and power, some of which will be used in order to facilitate the drying process at the end of the TAD system. This means that the TAD facility needs to use very little imported energy and thus be very sustainable in its energy use. The oil recovery process is described in Appendix 5.
1.4.9 At the end of the digestion process the digestate will be put into driers before being put into a machine to produce fertiliser granules. The granules will be sold or used on Pebble Hall Farm crops as a fertiliser.
1.4.10 While a proportion of the oil recovered will be used in a generator to heat the driers, a large majority of it will be sold to biodiesel manufacturers. In return, B100 biodiesel will be brought in to fuel the generators. There will be 5 generators on site, with the capacity to produce 4 MW of electricity. B100 biodiesel product will be brought onto the site in 36,000 litre tankers. There will be one delivery of oil per day and one collection of oil per day.
1.4.11 The building structure and management procedures will have to comply with the requirements of the Animal By-Products Regulations, controlled by the Animal Health and Vetinary Agency (AHVLA) of DEFRA. Therefore, the pedestrian doors will have changing areas and foot baths located adjacent to them. The Western end of the building will have the walls and roof insulated to reduce heat loss, thus reducing the amount of energy used by the process.
1.4.12 The plant would run 24 hours per day but with controlled delivery times. The TAD is an innovative high quality development. The technology has been successfully in use at a site in East Anglia, which has now ceased trading and the equipment is to be reused on this site in the event that planning permission is granted. When the system was working, it received food waste bulked up by AE Burgess in Leicester. By relocating the plant to Pebble Hall, the HGVs will save approximately 100 miles per trip.
1.4.13 The proposed development will require an Environmental Permit from the Environment Agency. The technology is proven and meets the requirements of the Animal By-Products Regulations and an Environmental Permit has been issued for its operation elsewhere.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
1.5 Environmental Impact Assessment
1.5.1 A screening opinion was issued by Northamptonshire County Council on 11th December 2012 in which it was confirmed that an EIA for this development is not required; a copy is included in Appendix 3. The development has not changed significantly since the issuing of a Screening Opinion, therefore no request has been made.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
2 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT
2.1 Introduction
2.1.1 Relevant policy documents and policies are listed below.
National Planning Policy Documents
Government Review of Waste Policy in England 2011 2.1.2 The Waste Review 2011 builds upon the waste hierarchy which was the core of the 2007 Waste
Strategy for England. The key themes that are discussed within the review are; The need to focus on preventing waste as a priority, as a key component of broader
resource efficiency; The importance of treating waste as a resource and embedding waste policies into a
wider resource and material security policy; The need to remove barriers which prevent greater integration of household and
business waste policy and service delivery; The importance of policies which continue to promote high levels of high quality
recycling; and The need to continue to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill.
2.1.3 In addition to the above key themes, the review assessed the merits of Anaerobic Digestion,
which is similar in principle to the proposed Thermophilic Aerobic Digester.
The principal purpose of consigning waste to anaerobic digestion is to recover energy from it. For certain waste, such as food waste, the use of anaerobic digestion, is considered to deliver a better overall environmental outcome than recycling the waste, taking into account the local economic and environmental considerations. Our evidence base shows that of the main options for the treatment of food waste, anaerobic digestion offers the greatest environmental benefit. Potentially, by 2020, a reasonable expectation for England could be around 5 million tonnes of food waste and around 20-60 million tonnes of animal waste to be available for anaerobic digestion.
The 2007 Waste Strategy for England
2.1.4 The main objective of the 2007 Waste Strategy is to significantly reduce the amount of waste that is disposed at landfill. Fundamental to this objective is the concept of the waste strategy, where by operators are encouraged through policy, targets and levies to move up the waste hierarchy through more efficient and sustainable waste management.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
National Planning Policy Framework and Technical Guide
2.1.5 The National Planning Policy Framework was published on the 27th March and came into force immediately with respects to plan and decision making. The NPPF states at paragraph 5 of its introduction that it does not contain specific waste policies 'since national waste planning policy will be published alongside the National Waste Management Plan for England'. However, paragraph 5 goes on to say that local authorities should have regard to the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework in preparing their waste plans.
2.1.6 The NPPF provides a presumption given in favour of development with sustainable credentials. Paragraph 14 of the NPPF states:
'At the heart of the planning system 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-taking this means Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay and Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, granting planning permission unless: o Any adverse impact of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh
the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole or
o Specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted.
2.1.7 The Technical Guide sets out the requirements for carrying out a Flood Risk Assessment, to replace Planning Policy Statement 25.
2.1.8 In paragraph 17, the NPPF states that one of its core planning principles is to:
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);
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
2.1.9 In paragraph 97, it states:
To help increase the use and supply of renewable and low carbon energy, local planning authorities should recognise the responsibility on all communities to contribute to energy generation from renewable or low carbon sources. They should:
have a positive strategy to promote energy from renewable and low carbon sources; design their policies to maximise renewable and low carbon energy development while ensuring that adverse impacts are addressed satisfactorily, including cumulative landscape and visual impacts; consider identifying suitable areas for renewable and low carbon energy sources, and supporting infrastructure, where this would help secure the development of such sources; support community-led initiatives for renewable and low carbon energy, including developments outside such areas being taken forward through neighbourhood planning; and identify opportunities where development can draw its energy supply from decentralised, renewable or low carbon energy supply systems and for co-locating potential heat customers and suppliers.
2.1.10 In paragraph 98, it 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 if its impacts are (or can be made) acceptable. Once suitable areas for renewable and low carbon energy have been identified in plans, local planning authorities should also expect subsequent applications for commercial scale projects outside these areas to demonstrate that the proposed location meets the criteria used in identifying suitable areas.
PPS10 Planning for Sustainable Waste Management and Companion Guide
2.1.11 The National Planning Policy Framework has replaced most Planning Policy Guidance Notes and Statements, but it is noted that PPS 10 remains valid, together with its Technical Guidance Note. Planning Policy Statement 10 considers that positive planning has an important role in delivering sustainable waste management, through the development of appropriate strategies for growth, regeneration and the prudent use of resources. One of the key objectives of PPS10 is driving waste management up the waste hierarchy and using waste more as a resource.
2.1.12 Paragraph 29 states that “waste planning authorities should consider the likely impact on the local environment and on amenity”.
Anaerobic Digestion Strategy and Action Plan 2011
2.1.13 Although this publication is designed to provide information on Anaerobic Digestion (AD), the proposed Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion process is similar in principle to the AD process. The publication is designed to provide information on how AD works to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill. It is recognised that AD offers a local, environmentally sound option for waste management that helps divert waste from landfill, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and produce renewable energy which could be used to power homes and vehicles.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
Regional Planning Policy
2.1.14 The East Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy has now been revoked. However, its policies for low carbon energy generation are of relevance to this proposal, considering there is now little planning policy guidance in this area. In a recent planning appeal for a 116 home development in St Albans, Hertfordshire, the Planning Inspector dismissed the appeal stating that the local authority did not have an up to date plan. In this case the inspector decided that the RRS “provides the only figure that has been scrutinised through the independent examinations process.”
2.1.15 Policy 40 states that the following should be promoted by local authorities:
The development of combined heat and power (CHP) and district heating infrastructure necessary to achieve the regional target of 511 MWe by 2010 and 1120 MWe by 2020 and The development of distributed energy network using low carbon and renewable resources.
2.1.16 In establishing criteria for new facilities for renewable energy, Local Planning Authorities are advised to give particular consideration to:
The proximity of renewable energy resource The relationship with the existing natural and built environment The availability of existing surplus industrial land in close proximity to the transport network; and The benefits of grid and non-grid connected “micro-generation”
Local Planning Policy
Daventry District Council Local Plan 1997 (Saved Policies)
2.1.17 The following policies from the Local Plan are relevant to the proposal:
Policy GN1 – Guide to granting planning permission, which sets out the parameters that need to be taken into account. Policy GN2 – Criteria for granting planning permission: development will normally be granted provided the proposal will be in-keeping with the locality and does not detract from its amenities. Policy GN3 – Availability of services, infrastructure and amenities. Policy EM16 – Employment in the open countryside; exceptions to the restriction on employment are for development involving the reuse of buildings. Policy EN1 – Special Landscape Areas Policy EN20 – Conversions and change of use of farm buildings to be allowed where they will not have a significant effect on the landscape.
Energy and Development Supplementary Planning Document (March, 2007) Daventry
District Council
2.1.18 The SPD recognises that renewable energy provides an increasingly important fuel source. It provides the following:
“Using wastes as fuel can have important environmental benefits. It can provide a safe and cost-effective disposal options for wastes that could otherwise present
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
significant disposal problems.” “New development can have a significant impact on energy use. By designing things in from the start, you can contribute to improving energy use. Developers are encouraged, subject to other planning considerations, to showcase innovative energy measures in development.”
Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy (2010)
2.1.19 Box CS3 Locational hierarchy The hierarchy of areas for locating waste management facilities are defined as: Central spine – in or related to the principal urban area of Northampton; in or related to the urban areas of Corby, Kettering, Wellingborough and Rushden / Higham Ferrers; in or related to the central spine service centres of Burton Latimer, Irthlingborough, Rothwell and Desborough; in or related to other built up local service centres within the central spine between Northampton and Corby. Sub-regional centre – in or related to Daventry. Rural service centres – in or related to Brackley, Oundle, Raunds, Thrapston and Towcester. Rural hinterlands – the rest of Northamptonshire. Catchment areas Waste management facilities in Northamptonshire will be designated as having one or more of the following catchments within which waste can be sourced: National, Regional, Sub-regional, Local, and Neighbourhood. The definitions of these catchments will be contained in the Control and Management of Development DPD. Functional role The functional role of waste management facilities are defined as: Advanced treatment – thermal, pyrolysis, gasifcation, plasma arc and other waste to energy processes and other emerging advanced technologies. Preliminary treatment – household waste recycling centres, materials recycling facilities, composting (open windrow and in-vessel), anaerobic digestion, mechanical biological / heat treatment, inert processing, other recycling facilities and waste transfer stations. Disposal – non-inert landfill / landraise and inert landfill / landraise. Sewage and waste water treatment – sewage and waste water treatment plants.
2.1.20 Policy CS1 – Northamptonshire’s waste management capacity The development of a sustainable waste management network to support growth within Northamptonshire will involve the provision of facilities to meet the following indicative waste Management capacities during the plan period:
Biological processing (MSW and C&I) capacity of 423,000 and 498,000 tonnes per annum for 2016 and 2026 respectively, Waste management or advanced treatment (MSW and C&I) capacity of 392,000 and 456,000 tonnes per annum for 2016 and 2026 respectively,
This provision will come from a mix of extensions to existing sites, intensification or re-development of existing sites and new sites, providing they all meet the spatial
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
strategy for waste management and are assessed as meeting environmental, amenity and other requirements. Allocations that will contribute to meeting provision will be identified in the Locations for Waste Development DPD.
2.1.21 Policy CS2 – Spatial strategy for waste management
Northamptonshire’s waste management network, particularly advanced treatment facilities with a sub-regional or wider catchment, will be focused within the central spine, and the sub-regional centre of Daventry. In the rural hinterlands only facilities with a local or neighbourhood catchment providing for preliminary treatment, or that are incompatible with urban development, should be provided. Where it is the latter they should deal with waste generated from identified urban areas and be appropriately located to serve those areas. Facilities in rural areas should, where possible, be associated with existing rural employment uses.
2.1.22 Policy CS9: Encouraging sustainable transport movements
Minerals and waste related development should seek to minimise transport movements and maximise the use of sustainable or alternative transport modes.
2.1.23 Policy CS14: Addressing the impact of proposed minerals and waste development Proposals for minerals and waste development must demonstrate that the following matters have been addressed: minimising environmental impact and protecting Northamptonshire’s key environmental designations, protecting natural resources or ensuring that any unavoidable loss or reduction is mitigated, ensuring built development is of a design and layout that has regard to its visual appearance in the context of the defining characteristics of the local area, ensuring access is sustainable, safe and environmentally acceptable, and ensuring that local amenity is protected.
2.1.24 Paragraph 4.16 the Core Strategy provides that:
Inevitably there will be some cross-border flows for reasons of geographical convenience, which may be broadly balanced, or because some waste management facilities can have a highly specialised role that means they have larger catchment areas. The Core Strategy recognises that waste management is becoming more specialised and is also a higher value industry than previously. It is not appropriate to oppose facilities serving wider catchments when other industries and commercial enterprises are not so constrained. However, in the wider interests of sustainability, it is not envisaged that Northamptonshire should take on a role as a key sub-national location for waste management facilities.
2.1.25 Paragraph 6.20 provides that: The development in Northamptonshire of facilities with a national or regional catchment area are only considered appropriate where these would be of a specialised nature, with a genuine specialist catchment area for the waste to be managed.
2.1.26 Paragraph 6.17 provides that: Facilities provided for within the rural hinterlands should have a local or
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
neighbourhood catchment and should mainly be for preliminary treatment. Facilities located within the rural hinterlands may also include those whose siting is incompatible with, or not complementary to, urban development; for example due to facility operational requirements (such as in the case of anaerobic digestion). In such circumstance, the facility should deal with waste generated from identified urban centres and be appropriately located to serve those centres.
Locations for Waste Development, Development Plan Document (2011)
2.1.27 This document principally sets out locations for waste development within the county, under four distinct categories, including:
Sites for waste management use in rural areas
This DPD sets out the allocation of specific sites for waste management facilities, and the identification of specific locations where waste management uses would be acceptable in principle. Such matters are addressed within policy in this DPD in the following manner:
Sites for waste management use in rural areas - specific sites within rural areas where those waste management uses most appropriately located in these areas (particularly composting and anaerobic digestion) would be acceptable.
It is therefore not appropriate for this DPD to attempt to identify all of the sites that will be required for waste management facilities over a twenty year period. To do so would be too prescriptive and inflexible and could potentially mean that acceptable sites identified outside of the plan-making process could be prevented from being implemented.
2.1.28 Already allocated sites for waste management use in rural areas are listed in Policy W4. These
are:
WS11: Kilsby WS12: Chelveston WAS13: Nassington – Kings Cliffe Regeneration Centre
The Control and Management of Development, Development Plan Document (2011)
2.1.29 Box CMD1 Indicative (non-hazardous) waste management capacity gaps (2026) A need has been identified for additional biological processing capacity, as follows:
Biological processing capacity for municipal and commercial & industrial waste will need to increase by 221,000 tonnes.
2.1.30 Box CMD2: Functional role of waste management facilities Preliminary treatment includes the following:
civic amenity sites & household waste recycling centre’s, material recycling facilities, composting (open windrow / in-vessel), anaerobic digestion, mechanical biological / heat treatment, inert processing, other recycling facilities, and waste transfer stations.
2.1.31 Specific policy within the DPD dictates the need to identify the likely catchment area of waste
sources for specific waste facilities. Paragraph 3.12 of the DPD sets out the definition of the scales of geographic influence that a waste facility may command. Sustainability principles are indicated within the DPD as the core reason for the management of waste streams to occur
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
within the vicinity of its creation. The DPD document states the criteria in which each facility is to be measured against with regard to their scale. The classifications are National, Regional, Sub-Regional, Local and Neighbourhood facilities. Each of these facilities has a list of criteria that indicate the scale of development and the bounds in which the waste is to be derived from, and as such the catchment area for the facility. Regional Waste to be managed on site originates from within the East Midlands or an
equivalent geographical area. The facility is of a specialised nature specifically relating to the waste to be
managed or the nature of the processes involved; on the basis of its specialised role the facility is one of only one or two within the region (or identified area).
Waste to be managed does not include untreated / unsorted MSW3, C&D, or green waste.
The facility supports the waste hierarchy and is not for the disposal of waste, unless disposal forms the last available option.
Sub-Regional Waste to be managed on site originates from with Northamptonshire or an
equivalent geographical area. May include a wide variety of waste types including municipal solid waste,
construction and demolition and green waste. The facility supports the waste hierarchy and is not for the disposal of waste,
unless this is the last available option.
2.1.32 Policy CMD1: Development criteria for waste management facilities Proposals for waste management facilities on non-allocated sites (including extensions to existing sites and extensions to allocated sites) must demonstrate that the development:
does not conflict with the spatial strategy for waste management, promotes the development of a sustainable waste network and facilitates delivery of Northamptonshire’s waste management capacity requirements, clearly establishes a need for the facility identifying the intended functional role, intended catchment area for the waste to be managed, market base for any outputs, and where applicable the requirement for a specialist facility, is in general conformity with the principles of sustainability (particularly regarding the intended catchment area), facilitates the efficient collection and recovery of waste materials, and where intended for use by the local community, is readily and safely accessible to those it is intended to serve.
2.1.33 Development should also, where appropriate, and particularly in the case of advanced
treatment facilities: ensure waste has undergone preliminary treatment prior to advanced treatment, integrate and co-locate waste management facilities together with complementary activities, maximise the reuse of energy, heat and residues, and maximise the use of previously developed land (particularly existing and designated industrial land and derelict, despoiled or brownfield urban land) or redundant agriculture and forestry buildings (and their curtilages).
2.1.34 Policy CMD7: Natural assets and resources Minerals and waste development should seek to (where possible) achieve a net gain in assets and resources, through:
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
delivery of wider environmental benefits in the vicinity where development would adversely affect any regional or locally designated sites or other features of local interest, protecting and enhancing green infrastructure and strategic biodiversity networks, in particular the River Nene and other sub-regional corridors, and consider opportunities to contribute towards Northamptonshire Biodiversity Action Plan targets for habitats and species. Proposals for minerals and waste development will be required to undertake an assessment (where appropriate) in order to: identify and determine the nature, extent, and level of importance of the natural assets & resources, as well as any potential impacts, and identify mitigation measures and / or requirement for compensation (where necessary) to avoid, reduce, and manage potentially adverse impacts.
2.1.35 Policy CMD8: Landscape character
Minerals and waste development should seek to reflect Northamptonshire’s landscape character. Development should mitigate potentially adverse impacts on the local character and distinctiveness of Northamptonshire’s landscape where necessary during the development, operational life, restoration, aftercare, and after-use. Opportunities for enhancement should be maximised through restoration, aftercare, and after-use.
2.1.36 Policy CMD10: Layout and design quality
The layout and overall appearance of waste management facilities will be required to demonstrate that the development: supports local identity and relates well to neighbouring sites and buildings,
is set in the context of the area in which it is to be sited in a manner that enhances the overall landscape, incorporates specific elements of visual interest, and builds-in safety and security
2.1.37 Paragraph 3.12 provides that: Where the facility is one of only very few of its type nationally (on the basis of its specialist role) either planned or existing, then a national catchment for the facility would be considered appropriate.
Development and Implementation Principles Supplementary Planning Document
2.1.38 This document was adopted in September 2011 and includes table SPD3 which indicates the proposed catchment area for facilities of differing scales. They are as follows:
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
CHP Ready Guidance for Combustion and Energy from Waste Power Plants,
February 2013
2.1.39 The Environment Agency requires that all applications for Environmental Permits for new installations regulated under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010 demonstrate the use of Best Available Techniques (BAT) for a number of criteria, including energy efficiency. One of the principal ways in which energy efficiency can be improved is through the use of Combined Heat and Power (CHP).
2.1.40 The CHP Ready Guidance (2013) states that for new energy from waste plants which generate less than 50MW the National Policy Statements (NPS) are likely to be a material consideration.
2.1.41 The following NPS documents are relevant:
EN-1 Overarching Energy NPS (July 2011);
The UK has committed to sourcing 15% of its total energy (across the sectors of transport, electricity and heat) from renewable sources by 2020 and new projects need to continue to come forward urgently to ensure that we meet this target. Projections suggest that by 2020 about 30% or more of our electricity generation – both centralised and small-scale – could come from renewable sources, compared to 6.7% in 2009. The Committee on Climate Change in Phase 1 of its advice to Government in September 2010 agreed that the UK 2020 target was appropriate, and should not be increased. Phase 2 was published in May 2011 and provided recommendations on the post 2020 ambition for renewables in the UK, and possible pathways to maximise their contribution to the 2050 carbon reduction targets
Energy from Waste (EfW) – the principal purpose of the combustion of waste, or similar processes (for example pyrolysis or gasification) is to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill in accordance with the Waste Hierarchy and to recover energy from that waste as electricity or heat. Only waste that cannot be re-used or recycled with less environmental impact and would otherwise go to landfill should be used for energy recovery. The energy produced from the biomass fraction of waste is renewable and is in some circumstances eligible for Renewables Obligation Certificates, although the arrangements vary from plant to plant.
EN-3 Renewable Energy Infrastructure NPS.
Given the importance which Government attaches to CHP, for the reasons set out in EN-1, if an application does not demonstrate that CHP has been considered the IPC should seek further information from the applicant. The IPC should not give development consent unless it is satisfied that the applicant has provided appropriate evidence that CHP is included or that the opportunities for CHP have been fully explored. For non-CHP stations, the IPC may also require that developers ensure that their stations are configured to allow heat supply at a later date as described in paragraph 4.6.8 of EN-1 and the guidance on CHP issued by BIS in 2006.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
3 ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSAL
3.1.1 From a review of the relevant planning policy, the main issues relating to whether this proposal complies with policy are: How the technology moves the management of waste up the waste hierarchy and provides a
sustainable solution to the treatment of food waste and need for the development.
How the technology provides renewable energy, helping Northamptonshire meets its energy targets.
The location of the site in the countryside The location relative to the sources of waste, i.e. the catchment area. Environmental considerations, including intensification of waste uses and cumulative effect
3.2 Sustainable management of food waste and need for the development
3.2.1 National and local waste planning policies require waste management to be moved up the waste hierarchy, away from disposal to landfill. The National Planning Policy Framework, which postdates adopted waste policy, places an emphasis on promoting sustainable development.
3.2.2 Food waste has traditionally been landfilled, although more recently it has been diverted from landfill for treatment in in-vessel composting facilities to produce compost or in anaerobic digestion facilities to produce renewable energy and a digestate agricultural fertiliser. The thermophilic aerobic digestion process, with the addition of a food oil recovery process, has proved to be much more efficient. The technology has been successfully in use at a site in Norfolk, which has now ceased trading and the equipment is to be reused on this site.
3.2.3 The TAD system requires only a low energy input, to run the preparation processes and the pumps. It has been shown that it only requires 22kW per tonne. This energy input will be provided by on-site combined heat and power plant, principally a generator, which will utilise oil recovered from the oil-rich food waste, thus making the process energy self-sufficient. The aerobic process for the breakdown of the waste takes only 3-4 days, thus is much quicker than either in-vessel composting or anaerobic digestion processes. This means that much less equipment is needed to process a similar tonnage of material. During the aerobic process, heat is produced, which promotes the digestion process and dries the material, thus producing a product in a short period of time, that is easy to handle and in a concentrated granule, which thus uses less transport to deliver the product to local farms.
3.2.4 The granular product is easy to store pending its application to agricultural land, as it does not
continue to breakdown. It returns organic material to the land to sequestrate carbon, rather than using it to generate energy and CO2, the gas then entering the atmosphere. It promotes CO2 removal from the atmosphere by natural plant photosynthesis, and displace highly polluting fertilizers. For each tonne of typical nitrogen fertilizer that is displaced by organic fertilizer granules, up to 6t of CO2 is prevented from entering the atmosphere.
3.2.5 The TAD process has been verified to comply with the PAS100 composting standard, thus the
granules are regarded as a product. The oil extraction system and the use of the oil in the energy generation plant has been approved for double ROCs payments, in recognition of the efficiency of the generation of renewable energy.
3.2.6 The technology is the most sustainable available for the treatment of food waste, therefore
complying with national and local policy.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
3.2.7 Policy CMD1 of the Control and Management of Development DPD requires that the need for
the facility is clearly established. Policy CS2 states that in the rural hinterlands only facilities with a local or neighbourhood catchment will be allowed. Pebble Hall Farm is located in the rural hinterlands, but this proposal is for a larger catchment, as discussed below.
3.2.8 The Core Strategy Policies CS1 and Box CMD1 in the Control and Management of Development
DPD identify a shortfall in capacity for biological processing of over 200,000 tonnes per annum. This proposal will provide a facility diverting waste from landfill and lower quality recovery, to process 40,000 tonnes per annum, thus assisting with meeting the shortfall and complying with policy.
3.3 Sustainable production of renewable energy
3.3.1 The NPPF provides that Local Authorities should have a positive strategy to promote energy from renewable and low carbon sources. The proposed development will generate energy from waste that would otherwise go to landfill or lower quality recovery. The NPPF also provides that Local Authorities should maximise renewable and low carbon energy development while ensuring that adverse impacts are addressed satisfactorily, including cumulative landscape and visual impacts. The cumulative impacts of this development are addressed in Section 3.6. Visual impacts of the proposed development are seen to be minimal due to the fact that the extension will not be seen from the nearest public road. The visual impact of the stack will be outweighed by the benefits that the area will gain in terms of renewable energy supply. It is acknowledged that the proposed stack may be able to be seen at a short distance. However, it will be coloured grey in order to blend into the landscape, therefore reducing its visual appearance.
3.3.2 The Anaerobic Digestion Strategy and Action Plan (2011) realises that AD offers a local, environmentally sound option for waste management that helps divert waste from landfill, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and produce renewable energy which could be used to power homes and vehicles. As the TAD facility proposed at Pebble Hall is similar in principle to AD facilities, it should be noted that it has the potential to provide similar and improved benefits. The TAD system is an improvement over AD in that it can produce up to 3 times more energy from the same food waste, and recycles up to 50% more carbon back to soil as organic fertiliser granules.
3.3.3 In a recent appeal case in Hertfordshire, the Inspector dismissed an appeal based on guidance provided by a Regional Spatial Strategy as it “provides the only figure that has been scrutinised through the independent examinations process.” The East Midlands Spatial Strategy currently provides the clearest guidance on renewable energy facilities in the East Midlands, in the absence of adopted county or district targets. It sets clear targets for generating renewable energy in Policy 40. The TAD facility helps the East Midlands meet the targets set out in this document. The proximity and catchment area of the renewable energy resource is provided in section 3.5. There are numerous benefits of using waste in order to generate renewable energy and the location of the facility is considered appropriate as Pebble Hall is already an established waste site.
CHP Ready Guidance
3.3.4 In accordance with the CHP Ready Guidance, the applicant has fully considered opportunities for CHP. Primarily, there is an opportunity to use the heat generated by the TAD system to fuel the driers.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
3.3.5 An outline planning application has been submitted to Harborough District Council for up to
1000 dwellings, marina and hotel at Land at Airfield Farm Leicester Road Market Harborough Leicestershire. This development would be located approximately 7 km North-East of Pebble Hall. The applicant is currently exploring opportunities to supply this housing development with heat from the TAD CHP system.
3.3.6 A planning application has also been submitted for 5 new properties located approximately 1Km west of Pebble Hall at Husbands Bosworth. The applicant is also exploring possibilities for supplying heat use to these dwellings.
3.4 Location
3.4.1 The complex of redundant agricultural buildings at Pebble Hall has planning permission for change of use to B8. Some units also benefit from additional permissions for workshop use. Alongside these uses, waste activities in the form of green waste composting and wood shredding are undertaken and permission has been granted for a renewable energy generation facility. The use of a building with permission for commercial use means that the proposals are in line with Policies GN2 and EM16 of the Daventry Local Plan and Policy CS2 of the Core Strategy.
3.4.2 Pebble Hall is situated in the countryside, which is included in the Special Landscape Area as shown on the Daventry Proposals Map and covered by a saved policy of the Local Plan. However, this designation has been replaced by the Northamptonshire Landscape Character Area Assessment. This development does not comprise of agricultural, forestry, recreational or tourism development or relate to settlements within these areas. However, it does relate to the reuse and adaption of a rural building, which will have no significant impact on the surrounding landscape. The impact on landscape of the development is considered in Section 3.7.
3.4.3 The site is located in the ‘rural hinterlands’, as defined in the Core Strategy, where composting and anaerobic digestion uses are noted as acceptable. The TAD system is very similar to anaerobic digestion processes, but has less odour and visual impact, therefore is also acceptable.
3.4.4 Pebble Hall is not allocated as a waste site in Policy W4 of the Locations for Waste
Development, but is has existing and consented waste activities within the Pebble Hall complex. Policy CS1 of Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy recognises that the new provision for biological treatment facilities will come from extensions to existing sites.
3.4.5 The suitability of its location is that it is well located to serve commercial producers of oil-rich and general food waste that are clustered within the East and West Midlands. In the East Midlands, the Regional Waste Strategy noted that 27% of all commercial and industrial waste is generated by the food and drink industry. Access to the site from a regional catchment area benefits from proximity to the M1/M6/A14 network and for deliveries from Leicester via the A6.
3.4.6 Policy GN1 of the Daventry Local Plan states that development should make proper use of underutilised land. As this building has permission for B8 use but is currently being used as a grain store, it is not being used to its full commercial potential.
3.4.7 The proposed development is ideally suited for a rural location such as Pebble Hall as the TAD system will produce fertiliser granules, which will be used for agriculture. This process will
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
effectively return carbon to the land in accordance with policy CMD7 of the Control and Management of Development DPD, which is concerned with natural assets of potential development. In connection with previous planning permissions, the landowner has undertaken extensive landscaping to deliver a net gain to the natural assets of the locality. The project will also generate a significant amount (4MW) of renewable electricity. The NPPF provides that renewable and low carbon energy facilities should be located in suitable areas. Pebble Hall is located in a rural location, and is not located in a close proximity to any sensitive receptors. In addition, power distribution companies have welcomed the energy generation proposals in this location as it will assist in filling a predicted shortfall in local grid capacity to cater for the planned 1000 home Airfield Farm housing development at Market Harborough. Pebble Hall is therefore seen as an appropriate location and is therefore compliant with the NPPF.
3.4.8 A significant factor in the choice of the application site is that the reception and treatment of
food waste carries a risk of noise and odour generation, however there are not any sensitive receptors likely to be affected, due to the remote location of the site.
3.4.9 The development involves a change of use of an existing building, with only a small building extension, which therefore meets the requirements of policy CS7 for the efficient use of resources.
3.4.10 Although the site is in a rural area, its proposed use complies with the location of development
that is incompatible with urban development and it is associated with existing rural employment uses.
3.5 Catchment area
3.5.1 The TAD system is an advanced technology for the efficient treatment of food waste, which will process both general food waste and more scarce oil-rich food waste. Two catchment area plans are included with this application in accordance with CMD2 for consideration by the Local Planning Authority.
3.5.2 Pebble Hall is centrally located within a major concentration of East and West Midlands oil-rich food waste sites; there is a cluster of commercial meat processors around Leicester and numerous red meat abattoirs and food processors in the proposed catchment area, although the businesses are scattered around the two regions. As the high oil content food will be sourced from specialist food processors, a wider catchment area is needed in order to meet the annual throughput tonnage to make viable the combined activities of oil recovery, combined heat and power generation and the TAD system.
3.5.3 General food waste will be sourced more locally, from a sub-regional catchment area. Any specialised food waste treatment facility needs at least a sub-regional catchment area to ensure that it can source a sufficient tonnage to maintain the viability of the operation, in the face of increased competition for food waste.
3.5.4 As this is a new facility, using a novel oil extraction technology in association with the TAD process, there are currently no similar processors in the region. This justifies the need for regional and sub-regional catchment areas.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
Option 1
3.5.5 Option 1 is shown on Drawing GPP/WWM/PH/12/06. This option incudes a larger catchment area for specialised oil-rich food waste and a smaller one for general food waste. The two different waste streams require different catchment areas, as shown on the plan.
Option 2
3.5.6 It is acknowledged that the specialist oil-rich food waste will need a regional catchment area in order to ensure that it is economically viable. The second option shows three clusters of localities where there are known sources of oil rich food from commercial operations. The three clusters have been made as small as possible. However, the commercial sources are well scattered within each cluster. The sub-regional catchment area also includes some potential customers of oil rich food waste, but not sufficient to justify the investment in the oil extraction and renewable energy generation operations.
Compliance with Planning Policy
3.5.7 Compliance with the catchment area limits can be demonstrated as follows. The sources can be identified from the waste transfer notes, which list the suppliers of and waste codes for the incoming material. A list of suppliers of oil-rich food waste will be maintained in the site office, alongside a separate list of general food waste suppliers. An interactive map of potential suppliers of oil-rich food waste can be found at this address: http://www.emap.org.uk/map.aspx. A screen shot is included in Appendix 4. From this map it can be seen that there are a number of meat processors and meat waste suppliers in the wider catchment area. Examples of potential suppliers of oil-rich food waste suppliers are listed below: Figure 1 / Potential suppliers of oil-rich food waste suppliers
COMPANY NAME LOCATION TYPE OF FOOD WASTE Greencore PLC Kiveton
Nottingham Chilled food waste
TMI Bacon Northampton Cooked bacon, sausages and roasted
vegetables
Pork Farms, Queens Drive Nottingham Pork pies
Charnwood Bakery Leicester Pork Pies
3.5.8 It is acknowledged in Northamptonshire’s Core Strategy that there will be some cross border
flows of waste because some waste management facilities can have a highly specialised role that means they have larger catchment areas. It provides:
The Core Strategy recognises that waste management is becoming more specialised and is also a higher value industry than previously. It is not appropriate to oppose facilities serving wider catchments when other industries and commercial enterprises are not so constrained. However, in the wider interests of sustainability, it is not envisaged that Northamptonshire should take on a role as a key sub-national location for waste management facilities.
3.5.9 The proposal has a regional catchment area for the specialist oil-rich food waste. It therefore will not encourage Northamptonshire to be a key sub-national location for waste management facilities. This innovative technology needs a regional catchment area in order to make it economically viable. The Core Strategy recognises that it is not appropriate to oppose facilities
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
serving a wider catchment area, when other industries and commercial industries are not so constrained. Therefore, a regional catchment area for this facility is appropriate. The Core Strategy provides in paragraph 6.20 that regional catchment areas are considered appropriate where these would be of a specialist nature. This operation is first of its kind in the region, with a very specialised technology.
3.5.10 Paragraph 3.12 of Northamptonshire’s Control and Management of Development, Development Plan Document provides that for facilities where there it is one of a few of its type nationally then a national catchment for the facility would be appropriate. While a national catchment area for this development would be preferred in order to not unduly constrain the profitability of this new technology, this proposal seeks to gain planning permission for a regional catchment area, in order to comply with Northamptonshire’s Core Strategy.
3.6 Environmental considerations
Introduction
3.6.1 To demonstrate compliance with Policy CS14 of the Core Strategy and GN2 of the Daventry Local Plan, the following environmental impacts are addressed:
Traffic and Transportation Noise Landscape and Visual Amenity Odour Air Emissions
Dust and Litter Pest Infestations
Traffic and Transport
3.6.2 Policy CS9 of the Core Strategy encourages sustainable traffic movements and policy CS14 requires that access is sustainable, safe and environmentally acceptable.
3.6.3 HGVs will bring the food waste onto the site in bulk loads. The food waste will be bulked up either by the producer or at a waste transfer station, to deliver large loads to the site, in 25 tonnes loads (see 3.2), thus minimising HGV movements on the strategic highway network.
3.6.4 During processing, 80% of the input tonnage will be lost in moisture and there will be approximately 3 - 4 tonnes of plastic per load in the form of food packaging. This may be washed; it will be taken off site for recycling elsewhere. The food will then go through the thermophilic aerobic digester and turned into fertiliser granules. There will be separate HGV movements bringing food waste onto the site and taking the granules off the site.
3.6.5 There will be 40,000 tonnes of incoming waste per year which will be brought into the site in 25 tonne loads. This will create 1600 loads per year which will produce 8 incoming HGV movements per day. These vehicles will also have to leave the site so the total number of VMPD produced by incoming vehicles will be 16.
3.6.6 The site will produce 10,000 tonnes of agricultural granules per annum, which will be taken out in 10 tonne loads. This will mean that there will be 1000 loads of product per year. The total number of output vehicle movements per day will be 4. As these vehicles will have to enter the site as well, the total number of VMPD produced by outgoing vehicles will be 8. In addition, the
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
plastics will be removed in bulk loads of 25 tonnes, of 1-2 per day, adding 4 vehicle movements per day.
3.6.7 One HGV will be needed per day to collect oil and one will be needed to deliver biodiesel, therefore generating 4 vmpd.
3.6.8 This will give a total number of HGV movements on the site per day of 32. Allowing for two staff to enter and leave the site per day this will make the overall total number of vehicle movements per day to this part of the site 34.
3.6.9 The application site would produce between 34 and 48 vehicle movements per day as a B8 use. As the proposed development will fit within the existing parameters of vehicle movements per day it is not expected that traffic to the site will be a significant issue.
3.6.10 Although the plant will be running continuously the delivery times will be controlled to between 7am and 5pm. This is the same as the compost operation on the site.
3.6.11 There is a limit agreed by means of a S106 Unilateral Undertaking with Leicestershire County Council on the total number of daily movements using the Pebble Hall access and this limit is monitored using a traffic counter at the access to the site. On the basis of the traffic figures above, the proposed development is not expected to cause the limit to be exceeded. This complies with the requirement for a safe and acceptable access.
3.6.12 Through minimising the amount of HGV movements the operations comply in part with policy.
In addition, a main supplier will be in Leicester, which supplied the TAD plant in Norfolk before the site was closed. Therefore by relocating the plant to Pebble Hall, the HGVs will save approximately 100 miles per trip. Food waste will be bulked up at centres within the catchment area and brought to the site. Further information on traffic is detailed in section 3.2.
3.6.13 The food waste will be supplied from a number of different commercial premises within the
proposed catchment area; other than bulking up there is no alternative means of conveying the material to a specialist treatment facility.
3.6.14 The facility complies with policy for sustainable transport as far as is possible when handling food waste.
Noise (controlled by the conditions of an Environmental Permit)
3.6.15 Policy CS14 of the Core Strategy requires that local amenity is protected.
3.6.16 The Thermophilic Aerobic Digester would be fully enclosed within the building, which will utilise equipment with low levels of noise generation. Therefore, it is not envisaged that it will create a significant noise issue. In addition, the whole building and the extension will have its walls and roof insulated to retain heat, which in turn will reduce the noise from the operations inside the building.
3.6.17 The GHP generators used to produce electricity will be acoustically enclosed in order to reduce
the possibility of noise being generated. In addition, only four generators will be used at any one time, therefore reducing the amount of noise generated by the facility.
3.6.18 The closest sensitive receptor to the site is the residential dwelling that is located 510 meters
away from the building. There have not been any issues of noise from the existing operations at
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
the site, therefore a detailed noise impact assessment is not considered to be necessary. Therefore, there is no conflict with the policy to protect local amenity.
3.6.19 A noise assessment has been carried out for the proposed development and is included in Appendix 6. It concludes that:
Site noise levels and background noise levels are below BS 4142 standards Noise levels are unlikely to cause complaints during the daytime or night time
3.6.20 In terms of noise, there is no conflict with policy.
Landscape and Visual Amenity
3.6.21 Policy CS14 of the Core Strategy requires that the built development has regard to its visual appearance in the context of the landscape character and Policies CMD7, 8 and 10 require a net gain in natural assets, respect for landscape character and support of local identity.
3.6.22 The site lies within a ‘Special Landscape Area’ as designated by Daventry District Council, although this designation has been replaced by the landscape character assessment for Northamptonshire as a whole. The character assessment describes the area as being located in Welland Valley. The Welland Valley is described as varying in height with the Southern side of the Welland Valley overlooking Rutland and Leicestershire. It is due to these differences in height in the lay of the land that the Pebble Hall site does not disrupt the visual character of the area; the high level ground between the highway and the proposed extension effectively screens it from view.
3.6.23 The Thermophilic Aerobic Digester will be fully contained within the building, once it is extended. See Drawing GPP/WWM/PH/13/11 which shows how the extension will fit into the existing buildings at Pebble Hall.
3.6.24 Due to the siting of the building and the extensions, it is barely visible from the highway or the residential properties to the North, as it is largely screened by the established vegetation and the intervening landform. Drawing GPP/WWM/PH/13/09 shows an illustrative cross section of the lie of the land between the proposed extension and the nearest residential property, Woodside Bungalow and Farm. From this drawing it can be seen that the land between Woodside Bungalow and Farm and the extension is high enough to effectively screen it. In addition, the proposed 2.5 metre high bund will provide further screening. Photograph Panel B shows the view from the two nearest residential properties looking towards the site. From these photographs it can be seen that the extension would not be visible and therefore not cause any visual impact. It is worth noting that these photographs were taken in January and at other times of the year the existing vegetation would provide even more screening. Due to the fact that the extensions will not be visible, there will be no cumulative impact as a result of the development.
3.6.25 Recent tree and shrub planting, as shown on the Approved Landscape and Biodiversity Plan, Drawing GPP/CL/PH/09/04 will significantly enhance the appearance of the Pebble Hall complex of buildings and operations. Although the management of this planting was inadequate during the first couple of years following planting, a management contract has now been let and significant improvements were carried out in 2012. All dead plants were replaced, weed control was carried out at the appropriate times and plants were properly protected by staking and replacing rabbit guards. These measures will ensure that the planting makes a positive contribution to the landscape and to screening the wider site.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
3.6.26 The proposed stack has the potential to have an impact on visual amenity. The proposed stack will be barely visible due to the fact that it has a very small diameter (0.5 metres) and will be coloured grey in order to blend into the colour of the sky. In addition, even though it will need to be 17 metres high it will only be 5 metres above the height of the rising land to the South of the site.
3.6.27 The lack of landscape impact, the extent of landscaping and extent of biodiversity provision
mean that the proposals comply with planning policy.
Odour (controlled by the conditions of an Environmental Permit)
3.6.28 Policy CS14 of the Core Strategy requires that local amenity is protected.
3.6.29 Waste reception will be carried out within the building, with fast acting roller shutter doors kept closed except during deliveries. The building will be fully enclosed. Air from within the building will be extracted and passed through an Ag Bag biofilter and tertiary air scrubber, which will significantly reduce the possibility of fugitive odour. From that point forward all materials will remain fully contained until the processed, dried digestate is removed for distribution off site for use as agriculture fertiliser granules. As the Thermophilic Aerobic Digester will be fully contained within the building, any odour will be contained and vented via the extraction system. The building will be kept at a slight negative pressure in order to prevent the escape of odorous air when a door is opened. Cleaned liquid will be returned for use in the process, being added at the preparation stage.
3.6.30 Odour is generated by the existing composting operations, although rarely have odour concerns been raised by nearby residents. Odour levels from the combined activities at the site are unlikely to be increased, due to the measures set out above to control odour from the TAD operations. The Environmental Permit will require an Odour Management Plan for the operations, in the event that any problems with odour are experienced off-site. Details of the Odour Management Plan can be found in the supporting document Working Plan – version 2.
Air Quality
3.6.31 The only emission to air from the TAD process is water vapour. Emissions from the generator will occur, in the form of engine gases, but the equipment is small scale and no regulation of the emissions is required.
3.6.32 A detailed Air Quality Assessment has been carried out and is included in Appendix 7. This Air Quality Assessment has been done based on the cumulative effect of the proposed TAD system and the Purepower Facility, which already has planning permission. The Purepower permission has been implemented, but the power generation building is not now going to be constructed in the approved location. The applicant is in active discussions with developers about a potential wood biomass application, which would replace the Purepower permission.
3.6.33 The Air Quality Assessment concludes the following:
Based on the Environmental Protection UK impact descriptive terms, the potential impact on local air quality at the location of maximum Process Contribution, close to the site boundary, would be described as large with a slight adverse impact. The corresponding values at nearby residential receptors would be classified as small to imperceptible. Model predictions for nearby residential receptors indicated that
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
annual NO2 Process Contributions at these locations were likely to be between ~2% and ~3% of the AQS objective. When taken in conjunction with the estimated background concentration of 10.4 μg m-3 for 2013, the impact on local air quality of emissions of NOX from the four CHP engines associated with the TAD facility can be screened out as insignificant.
3.6.34 As the applicants parents live at the site boundary the effect on this area of the site is not seen to be a significant issue. Crucially, this demonstrates that the impact on air quality at nearby residential receptors will be small to imperceptible, indicating that no complaints are likely to be received by the local authority as a result of this application.
The maximum annual average PM10 process contribution represents a small to imperceptible change in ambient concentration and likely to have a negligible impact on local air quality in the vicinity of the development, as defined by the Environmental Protection UK assessment criteria. Similar conclusions were drawn for emissions of carbon monoxide and volatile organic compounds. A cumulative impact assessment was undertaken for emissions from the proposed TAD facility and the approved energy recovery facility to be developed on the Pebble Hall site. The results from modelling confirmed that the cumulative impact of emissions from the two facilities would be well within relevant AQS objective values, and can be screened out as insignificant in relation to Environment Agency guidance.
3.6.35 The assessment concludes that the cumulative effect of the TAD facility with the Purepower
permission will not cause an issue. Overall, the Air Quality Assessment concludes that:
The overall conclusion from detailed modelling of emissions from the proposed TAD facility at Pebble Hall, near Theddingworth, is that the potential impact on local air quality is likely to be low, and unlikely to pose a significant threat to the health of local residents or people working nearby.
3.6.36 In terms of air emissions, there is therefore no conflict with policy in the Development Plan that seeks to protect local amenity.
Dust and Litter (controlled by the conditions of an Environmental Permit)
3.6.37 Policy CS14 of the Core Strategy requires that local amenity is protected.
3.6.38 The operations that will be carried out in buildings are not dusty in nature and will be contained inside. Should dust become a problem from vehicles moving around the site, a mobile bowser with sprinkler would be employed to dampen the surface to eliminate dust blow.
3.6.39 Dust control measures are already in place for the composting operations, therefore there
should not be a cumulative impact as a result of the proposed new operations. Details of procedures used to control dust and litter can be found in the supporting document Working Plan – version 2.
3.6.40 In terms of dust and litter, there is no conflict with policy that seeks to protect local amenity.
Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage
3.6.41 The National Planning Policy Framework Technical Guide sets out the requirements for the preparation of a Flood Risk Assessment. The proposal involves an area of less than 1 hectare,
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
therefore a Flood Risk Assessment is not necessary.
3.6.42 The building extension will be drained to the existing building drains, which direct the roof water to the stream. The small extension will not result in a significant increase in the run-off from the site.
Pest Infestations
3.6.43 Policy CS14 of the Core Strategy requires that local amenity is protected.
3.6.44 The containment of the food waste materials within the reception building minimises any infestations from insects. The site will be inspected on a daily basis for evidence of pest infestations. A record of spraying insecticides will be kept in the Site Diary. Details will only be recorded when infestations are found. If necessary, the area will be sprayed with insecticide using knapsack sprayers (for flies), using insecticides kept on the farm. See the supporting document Working Plan – version 2.
3.6.45 There is no conflict with policy that seeks to protect local amenity.
Ecology
3.6.46 Policy CS14 of the Core Strategy requires that natural resources are protected and Policy CMD7 of the Control and Management of Development DPD requires proposals to consider opportunities to contribute to BAP targets.
3.6.47 The proposal will take place in an existing building within the setting of the commercial yard
and waste operations. Therefore there are not any features of nature conservation interest that will be adversely affected by the development.
3.6.48 The recent landscaping work has been designed to enhance biodiversity at the Pebble Hall site. Therefore, the proposals comply with policy.
Cumulative Impact
3.6.49 The National Planning Policy Framework places emphasis on demonstrating that the cumulative effects of development in respect of some of the environmental impacts is acceptable. Cumulative impact has three components, in respect of successive, simultaneous and combined effects.
3.6.50 The proposed change of use to include a TAD facility, with a renewable energy generation component, adds a third waste operation at the Pebble Hall site. Green waste composting has been carried out at the site for 10 years. Permission exists for the construction of a renewable energy production plant utilising wood waste that is already being managed at the site. The complex of buildings at Pebble Hall already benefits from permission for a commercial use, which has been implemented, therefore other activities are taking place within the complex. The successive impacts, resulting from a series of developments and permissions is similar to the simultaneous effects, where they are in existence together.
3.6.51 In considering the impacts of the addition of the new facility, account has been taken of the existing impacts from the combined developments already taking place. Some features of the development are similar to features associated with existing uses on the site. It is possible that the combined effect of these could lead to a level of impact that could be objectionable. The
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
features of relevance are traffic, visual impact, noise, air emissions and odour.
The location has been acknowledged as suitable for waste development, due to its remoteness from sensitive receptors and to its access directly onto an A-class road, which means that heavy lorries do not have to travel along country roads. This additional facility will benefit from the co-location with other waste uses, as it can share the use of the existing weighbridge and staff on site with experience of running a waste facility.
Traffic impacts are controlled at their existing level by means of a legal agreement with Leicestershire County Council, in connection with the use of the access. Therefore there can be no increase in impact on the use of the access and the highway network.
The plant and equipment generate little noise, which in any event would be similar to the noise generated from the use of the building as a grain store or for B8 use. The distance from sensitive receptors means that this noise, together with noise from the other premises within the Pebble Hall complex, will not be obtrusive. A noise assessment has been carried out which included the noise from the shredding operations associated with the green waste composting operations as part of the background noise levels. The noise assessment concluded that there will be no adverse levels of noise as a result of this proposal.
The potential sources of odour have been identified and mitigation and management measures included in the Odour Management Plan. Therefore, adding the risk of significant odour to the existing risk of odour from composting operations will not lead to a level of odour from the combined operations that would be obtrusive.
The potential landscape and visual impacts of the proposed development have been assessed earlier in this section. Due to the high level of the ground, the extension of the TAD building will not be visible from the nearest residential dwelling. The proposed stack will be barely visible due to the fact that it has a very small diameter (0.5 metres) and will be coloured grey in order to blend into the colour of the sky. In addition, even though it will need to be 17 metres high it will only be 5 metres above the height of the rising land to the South of the site.
An Air Dispersion Model has been created, which took into consideration the emissions from the consented energy production plant permission and the proposed TAD facility. It was concluded that the impact on local air quality as a result of the application is likely to be low.
3.6.52 None of the simultaneous effects from the existing and proposed development are considered
to be objectionable, therefore there is no simultaneous combined effect.
3.6.53 In respect of the combined effects from the TAD development, none of the features considered in section 3.6 are close to being objectionable, none in combination could cause objections and there are no unusual features associated with the development. Therefore, there is no cumulative combined impact from the development considered on its own.
3.6.54 The conclusion is that there are no unacceptable levels of impact resulting from the addition of the TAD and renewable energy facility to an existing waste and employment site.
Fire Risk
3.6.55 Fire risk is low due to it being a largely wet process. The Dryer operates at a low temperature. There are large water tanks available on site for fire fighting purposes.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W001-07 PS / SE 21/06/2013
4 CONCLUSIONS
4.1.1 The proposed development seeks to change the use of one of the existing buildings at Pebble Hall Farm. It also seeks to extend the existing building on its North side by 223 square meters. The proposed change of use is considered to be acceptable in the countryside at this location, as it is for a use that is unsuitable to be located in a built-up area. The location in open countryside is beneficial, as it minimises the risk that environmental impacts such as odour and noise become a nuisance to residents in the locality; therefore the location complies with policy for the siting of biological treatment facilities.
4.1.2 There is a need for the development, to meet some of the identified shortfall in capacity for the treatment of biological waste in the county.
4.1.3 The proposal will not give rise to unacceptable amenity impacts. It will not generate additional traffic or give rise to adverse landscape and visual impacts.
4.1.4 The proposal is for the one of most sustainable technologies current available for the treatment
of general and oil rich food waste. 4.1.5 The proposal is for a significant amount of renewable energy generation, which will contribute
to meeting the targets for the East Midlands.
4.1.6 A regional scale catchment area is justified for oil-rich food waste, as the oil extraction and use allied to the TAD system will be the first of its kind in the region and because oil-rich food processors are concentrated in but scattered widely around the West and East Midlands.
4.1.7 A sub-regional catchment area is justified for general food waste, as there is insufficient such
waste generated within a local catchment area.
4.1.8 The proposed development is therefore considered to be complaint with the development plan and national, regional and local planning policy guidance.
4.1.9 The proposed development is an excellent fit with NPPF ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’ as the following benefits significantly outweigh its potential insignificant adverse impacts.
Provide 4MW of renewable electricity where there is a predicted shortfall in supply CHPr to supply heat to proposed future developments It is an innovative ‘Advanced Technology’ (attracting 2ROCs) that moves recycling up the
waste hierarchy by increasing both energy yield, nutrient recycling and greenhouse gas reduction from food waste.
Addresses a regional food waste processing niche not currently being addressed within the region with ‘Best Available Technology’
Requires only slight changes to an existing building on an existing well operated waste site. Insignificant impacts on local amenity.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W007-01 PS / SE Appendix 14/06/2013
APPENDIX 1: Validation Checklist
Planning Statement Included
Air Quality Assessment Included
Archaeology Not Required
Cumulative Impact Included as part of the Planning Statement
Daylight/Sunlight Assessment Not Required
Design Statement Design and Access statement included
Dust, mud and debris on the highway and Litter Included as part of the Planning Statement
Environmental Impact Statement Not Required
Ecology / Protected Species / Biodiversity Survey & Report Not Required
Flood Risk Assessment
Foul Sewerage Assessment Not Required
Geotechnical Appraisal Not Required
Health Impacts Not Required
Heritage Assessment (including historical features and Scheduled Ancient Monuments) / Conservation Area Appraisal
Not Required
Hydrological and Hydrogeological Assessment Not Required
Land Contamination Assessment / Contamination Risk Assessment
Landscape Assessment Not Required
Landscaping Details Not Required
Lighting Assessment External lights shown on site layout plan
Minerals Safeguarding Not Required
Noise Impact Assessment Included
Odour Impact Assessment Included as part of the Planning Statement
Parking & Access Arrangements Shown on site layout plan
Phasing / Working Programme Not Required
Photographs/Photomontages Photograph panels included
Planning Obligations Not Required
Draft Head(s) of Terms (s.106 Town and Country Planning Act 1990)
Previous 106 agreement agreed with Leicestershire County Council.
Playing Fields and Recreational Facilities Not Required
Public Rights of Way Not Required
Renewable Energy and Climate Change Renewable Energy information included in the Planning Statement
Restoration and Aftercare Statement/Plans Not Required
Statement of Community Involvement Not Required
Structural Survey Not Required
Survey of Levels Not Required
Transport Assessment Not Required
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W007-01 PS / SE Appendix 14/06/2013
Travel Plan Not Required
Tree and Hedgerow Survey/Arboricultural Report Not Required
Utilities Statement Not Required
Vermin and Birds Considered as part of the Planning statement
Waste Audit and Waste Management Facilities Strategy Not Required
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W007-01 PS / SE Appendix 14/06/2013
APPENDIX 2: Process Diagram
Thermophilic Digester 20m3HRT 0.5-2dTemp 60-70 OC
Mesophilic Digester 45 m3 HRT1-3dTemp 30-50OC
Transfer pump 1
Compressor
Cesaro Depacker14t/hr
Cesaro Transfer pump
50m3 Digestate Storage
Transfer pump 2
Transfer pump 3Thermophilic Digester
20m3 HRT 0.5-2dTemp 60-70 OC
P-2
50m3 Digestate Storage
P-3
P-4
P-5
P-6 P-7
P-8
P-9
Thermophilic Digester20m3 HRT 0.5-2dTemp 60-70 OC
Mesophilic Digester 45 m3 HRT1-3dTemp 30-50OC
Transfer pump 1
Transfer pump 2
Transfer pump 3Thermophilic Digester
20m3 HRT 0.5-2dTemp 60-70 OC
P-11
P-10
P-13 P-14
P-12
P-15
P-24
P-25
P-28
Compactor
12mm macerator
12mm Macerator
P-30
P-4
P-31
P-32
P-10
P-33
P-38
P-39
P-38
P-40P-41 P-42
P-41
P-44
Temp1
Temp2
Temp4
Temp3
Temp 1
Temp 2
Temp 4
Temp 3
Temp
Temp
Temp
Temp
Level
Level
Level Level
Level Level
Level
Level
P-132
P-29
Welland Waste Draft Process SchematicV1 08/11/12
To biofilter
To biofilterTo biofilter
To biofilterTo biofilter
To biofilter
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W007-01 PS / SE Appendix 14/06/2013
APPENDIX 3: Screening Opinion
Northamptonshire County Council
Planning Services, Floor 3 Guildhall Road Block, County Hall, Northampton, NN1 1DN
w. www.northamptonshire.gov.uk t. 01604 367019 f. 01604 366065 e. [email protected]
This information can be provided in an alternative language or format such as large print or audio cd. Contact 01604 236014
Dear Mrs Pawson, TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT) (ENGLAND AND WALES) REGULATIONS 2011: REGULATION 5 SCREENING OPINION PROPOSAL – PROPOSED THERMAL AEROBIC DISGESTER AT PEBBLE HALL FARM, THEDDINGWORTH ROAD, MARSTON TRUSSELL, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE, LE17 6NJ Thank you for your correspondence received 23rd November 2012 requesting a screening opinion in respect of the above development. Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding to your request. The development is not listed under Schedule 1 of the EIA Regulations and therefore the requirement of an EIA is not mandatory. Nevertheless, the development requires screening under the above Regulations, Schedule 2, paragraph 11 (Other Projects) (b) Installations for the Disposal of Waste, as the development exceeds 0.5 hectares. Annex A of Circular 02/99: Environmental Impact Assessment provides indicative thresholds and criteria for the identification of Schedule 2 development requiring EIA. It is written in Annex A that EIA on installations for the disposal of non-hazardous waste is more likely to be required where new capacity exceeds 50,000 tonnes per year or occupies more than 10 hectares. Based on the information you have submitted I understand that the facility would cover an area of 0.6 hectares, accept approximately 40,000 tonnes of waste per annum and produce up to 10,000 tonnes of end product to be used as agricultural fertiliser.
Mrs G Pawson GP Planning The Stables Long Lane East Haddon Northampton NN6 8DU
Please ask for: Peter Moor Tel: (01604) 367019 Our ref: 12/00008/SCR Your ref: Date: 11 December 2012
Schedule 3 of the EIA Regulations sets out selection criteria for determining whether a Schedule 2 development is likely to have significant effects on the environment. Three broad criteria are identified relating to the characteristics of the development (e.g. its size), the environmental sensitivity of the location, and the characteristics of the potential impact (e.g. its magnitude and duration). The capacity of the proposed development is below the 50,000 tonnes per annum threshold in Circular 02/99. Pebble Hall Farm is an existing waste site with consent for the processing of compost and wood waste including the permitted renewable energy generation facility (REGF) which would utilise wood as a feedstock. This permission has only been partly implemented to date, although the landowner has stated an intention to development this in the future at an alternative location on Pebble Hall Farm. This would require a fresh planning application. With the existing waste developments and other industrial uses the characteristics of the development at Pebble Hall Farm are already established. In terms of the geographical location of the development, the site is located in the open countryside and lies within an area which has been historically designated as a ‘Special Landscape Area’ under saved Policy EN1 of the Daventry District Local Plan 1997 but now assessed in accordance with the landscape character of the area. However, the proposed development will be housed inside a grain store which is situated within the existing complex of buildings currently being used for both agricultural and industrial purposes and therefore it is not considered that there will be any significant adverse impact on the surrounding landscape character. Although the proposed development also includes an extension to the existing grain store, it is not considered that this will result in any significant landscape character detriment. The characteristics of the potential impact of the development and the cumulative impacts with the existing waste developments are also not considered to be environmentally significant as it will all be contained within the existing building thereby minimising the risk of any adverse impacts. It should be noted that the nearest sensitive receptor is located over 500 metres away from the proposed development. Taking into account the characteristics of the development, location and potential impact it is considered that the development is unlikely to result in significant environmental impact and therefore an EIA is not required. Notwithstanding the above, any formal application for the proposed thermal aerobic digester should be accompanied by a full supporting statement, technical assessment reports and plans relating to the proposals including elevations, access and highway safety and environmental issues including dust, noise, visual/landscape impact, odour and associated implications. The cumulative impact of this development with the other permitted waste uses should also be assessed.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any assistance. Yours faithfully,
Peter Moor Principal Development Control Officer
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W007-01 PS / SE Appendix 14/06/2013
APPENDIX 4: Potential Supplier Map
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W007-01 PS / SE Appendix 14/06/2013
APPENDIX 5: Oil Recovery Process
Agritec C502
The Agritec C502 continuous processing machine will process 10 tons of offal and organic food waste per hour. It is designed to run continuously and is fully automatic.
The machine is self-contained, it comprises a macerator, mixer, multi phase inline cooker, two three
phase centrifuge and all the associated pumps and pipe work. It runs under the control of a PLC (programmable logic controller) that maintains the quality of the oil produced and controls all parts of the
operation.
Process Description
The organic raw material is ground/macerated and moved by pump to the ASL plant, it is assumed that
the pipework will be no longer than 10m.
The ground raw material goes through an inline steel kettle that heats the slurry. The kettle uses live steam as the heating medium and precise control of the steam is maintained by the PLC. The slurry is
then further cooked to 80C in an inline cooker that has a residence time of 20 minutes at full capacity.
From there the product is pumped to the separation process that uses two three-phase decanter centrifuges.
The centrifuges are a specially designed Hiller type DA 45 three-phase decanters that separates the slurry
into solids, water waste and oil.
The solids are discharged via two screw conveyors that reach a height of 4.2m for discharge into a truck
or transferred to the dryer module if supplied.
The oil is pumped from the separator to a 20m3 heated and insulated storage tank (tank to be supplied by others) via an inline mesh filter using a centripetal pump.
The water is discharged by gravity to effluent.
The PLC uses sensors within the machine to maintain product quality and efficient running. The PLC incorporates process start and stop programs as well as monitoring the performance of the centrifuge and
separator. The process start program brings the machine up to working temperature and starts the various components in sequence to check their operation. The system stop program incorporates a
cleaning sequence that makes sure the machine is available for start up when necessary with no operator
involvement in cleaning. The PLC uses a waterproof touch screen to provide the operator interface and information on operation. The operator, using the PLC can set various parameters and also provision is
provided for data logging from the PLC.
Machine commissioning and operator training is included.
All internal pipe work, wiring and mounting are included.
The machine can be supplied with a hard material processing unit (for processing bones) not included in
quote. The main PLC electrical control system is programmed to be able to integrate the hard material
processing unit with additional software.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W007-01 PS / SE Appendix 14/06/2013
Technical description
1) In feed
Organic raw material (de-packaged) enters the machine via the intake hopper is then macerated to a
uniform slurry using a specially designed mincer/macerator.
2) Size reduction The grinder macerator reduces the size of the raw material to a maximum size of 6mm.
3) Product feed The resulting slurry is checked by sensors for viscosity and is pumped by a 2.2kw motor to the heating
process
4) Heating
The first stage of the heating process is via an inline steel kettle that heats the slurry.
The kettle uses live steam with a specially designed injection nozzle that ensures rapid mixing of the slurry.
The final temperature is then achieved by recirculating the slurry within a secondary vessel that achieves
80C and has a residence time of 20 minutes at full capacity.
Precise temperature control is vital, product quality and the required temperature curves are maintained
by multiple sensors and the PLC control of the steam valves.
5) Centrifuge
The centrifuges are a specially designed Hiller type DA45 three-phase decanters that separate the slurry into solids, water waste and tallow.
The centrifuges differs from a normal machine in the design of the bowl and scroll – the protection
system employed for the bearings, the speed and differential speed.
6) Solids discharge
The solids are discharged via a auger screw conveyor. A second auger screw conveyor sends the material to a lorry, skip or other container. (to be supplied by others)
7) Water discharge
The water is discharged by gravity to effluent.
8) Oil discharge
The oil is pumped from the separator to a separate storage tank via a centrifugal pump.
9) Control system The PLC uses sensors within the machine to maintain product quality and efficient running. The PLC
incorporates process start and stop programmes as well as monitoring the performance of the
centrifuge. The process start programme brings the machine up to working temperature and starts the various components in sequence to check their operation. The system stop programme incorporates a
cleaning sequence that makes sure the machine is available for start up when necessary with no operator involvement in cleaning. The PLC uses a waterproof touch screen to provide the operator interface and
information on operation. The operator, using the PLC can set various parameters and also provision is
provided for data logging from the PLC.
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W007-01 PS / SE Appendix 14/06/2013
APPENDIX 6: Noise Assessment
Walker Beak Mason Consultants in Noise & Vibration Steepleton Lodge Barn Paul Cockcroft BEng PhD CEng FIOA MIMMM Long Lane Richard Lyons BEng PhD CEng MIOA MCIBSE East Haddon Rachel Canham BEng MSc CEng FIOA Northamptonshire NN6 8DU
Tel: 01604 771 101 Fax: 01604 771 416 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.wbm.co.uk
Walker Beak Mason and WBM are trading names of The Walker Beak Mason Partnership Member of the Association of Noise Consultants
Ref 4169
For Welland Waste Management Limited
c/o GP Planning Ltd
The Stables
Long Lane
East Haddon
Northampton
NN6 8DU
Date 28 May 2013
Pebble Hall Farm, Theddingworth
Noise Assessment Author Dr Paul Cockcroft
2 of 35
The Author
Dr Paul Cockcroft BEng PhD CEng MIMMM FIOA (Senior Partner) has been
practising in mining engineering and acoustics since 1983. He joined WBM in
1989, became an Associate in 1991, a Partner in 1997 and Senior Partner in
2004. He has concentrated on environmental noise and has been involved in
work for mineral operators, waste disposal companies, planning authorities
and developers at over 500 mineral, waste disposal, housing, commercial
development and other sites as well as measurement and noise prediction
work for road and rail schemes. Dr Cockcroft has considerable experience of
planning appeal work.
Walker Beak Mason
Walker Beak Mason (WBM) is an established independent acoustic
consultancy specialising in architectural & building acoustics and
environmental noise. WBM is a member of the Association of Noise
Consultants and is also an Associate Assessor Member of the Institute of
Environmental Management & Assessment. The Consultants are Members or
Fellows of the Institute of Acoustics.
3 of 35
Contents
The Author ...................................................................................................... 2
Walker Beak Mason ....................................................................................... 2
1 Introduction ............................................................................................. 4
2 Assessment Methodology ...................................................................... 5
2.1 National Planning Policy Framework .......................................................... 5
2.2 Environment Agency Horizontal Guidance for Noise .................................. 6
2.3 British Standard 4142 ................................................................................ 6
2.4 World Health Organisation ......................................................................... 7
3 Site Description ....................................................................................... 9
4 Measurement Methodology .................................................................. 10
4.1 Measurement Description ........................................................................ 10
4.2 Results ..................................................................................................... 11
5 Calculated Site Noise Levels ................................................................ 12
5.1 Noise Sources and Sound Power Levels ................................................. 12
5.2 Site Operation Activities ........................................................................... 13
5.3 Calculated Site Noise Levels ................................................................... 13
6 Comparison with Background Noise Levels ....................................... 15
7 Vehicle Movements on Site Access Road ........................................... 17
8 Summary and Conclusions .................................................................. 17
Appendix A – Glossary of Acoustic Terms................................................ 21
Appendix B – Site Location Plan and Measurement Positions ................ 23
Appendix C – Survey Details ...................................................................... 24
Appendix D – Survey Results ..................................................................... 25
Appendix E – Unattended Noise Survey Results ...................................... 29
Appendix F – Noise Calculation Method and Calculation Sheet ............. 34
4 of 35
1 Introduction
Welland Waste Management Limited (WWM) currently operates a site at
Pebble Hall Farm, near Theddingworth in Northamptonshire. The planning
history, current operations and proposed development are described in detail
in the Planning Statement prepared by GP Planning and are not reproduced
in this report.
In summary, food waste is to be delivered to the site by heavy goods vehicles
(HGVs) during daytime periods only, with almost all of the operations and
processes to take place inside buildings. For processes that are continuous,
potential impact at weekends and in particular at night will need to be
considered.
The closest dwelling to the development site is Pebble Hall Farm, which is
occupied by relatives of the site owner / applicant. Other dwellings in the area
are at separation distances of about 600 to 1500 metres, namely on the
northern side of the A4304 Theddingworth Road, on the eastern side of
Husbands Bosworth, Hothorpe Hall and nearby dwellings south of
Theddingworth.
This report sets out the findings of noise surveys conducted in April 2013 of
the existing noise climate at positions representative of the closest noise
sensitive properties to the site, for daytime, evening and night-time periods.
The report sets out the calculated noise levels arising from the proposed
operations and compares the calculated site noise levels with the measured
background noise levels to assess the potential impact of the operations in
terms of likelihood of complaints about noise for daytime and night-time.
The impact of road traffic noise from site HGVs entering and leaving the site
on the access road is also examined for the dwelling at Pebble Hall Farm.
To aid comprehension, a glossary of acoustic terms is presented in
Appendix A.
5 of 35
2 Assessment Methodology
The various relevant noise guidance documents considered for this
assessment are detailed below.
2.1 National Planning Policy Framework
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in March
2012 with immediate effect and sets out the Government’s planning policies
for England. At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a
presumption in favour of sustainable development.
The NPPF revoked and replaced a number of Planning Policy Statements
(PPS), Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) and other guidance documents,
including Planning Policy Guidance 24: Planning and Noise).
With regard to noise there are various aims, including that noise from a new
development should avoid giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health
and quality of life, and that other adverse impacts should be mitigated and
reduced to a minimum including through the use of conditions.
Section 11 of the NPPF (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment)
refers specifically to noise in the following paragraphs:
“109. The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local
environment by…preventing both new and existing development from
contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely
affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land
instability...”
“123. Planning policies and decisions should aim to:
avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and
quality of life as a result of new development;
mitigate and reduce to a minimum other adverse impacts on health and
quality of life arising from noise from new development, including through the
use of conditions;
6 of 35
recognise that development will often create some noise and existing
businesses wanting to develop in continuance of their business should not
have unreasonable restrictions put on them because of changes in nearby
land uses since they were established (subject to the provisions of the
Environmental Protection Act 1990 and other relevant law); and
identify and protect areas of tranquillity which have remained relatively
undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value
for this reason.”
2.2 Environment Agency Horizontal Guidance for Noise
From examination of the Environment Agency website and discussion with a
relevant noise officer from the Environment Agency on 26 April 2013, it is
apparent that Part 1 – “Regulation and Permitting” is no longer supplied as
part of the Horizontal Guidance for Noise. Part 2 – “Noise Assessment and
Control” is included on the Environment Agency website. At the bottom of
page 57 in Part 2 (Version 3 June 2004) it is stated “The potential noise
impacts of new or modified plants should be considered both in terms of
BS4142: 1997, PPG24 and the World Health Organisation guidelines”. As
indicated above, NPPF revoked and replaced PPG 24 Planning and Noise.
2.3 British Standard 4142
British Standard (BS) 4142:1997 “Method for Rating industrial noise affecting
mixed residential and industrial areas” describes a method of determining the
level of a noise of an industrial nature, together with procedures for assessing
whether or not the noise in question is likely to give rise to complaints from
persons living in the vicinity.
The noise level of the industrial source (specific noise source, LAeq, T) is
corrected for any distinguishable features at the receptor location that could
attract attention. The correction is +5 dB, and the corrected specific noise
level is known as the rating level (LAr,T). The acoustic feature correction
applies if the noise at the receptor location contains a distinguishable,
discrete or continuous note (such as a whine, hiss, screech or hum), contains
distinct impulses (bangs, clicks, clatters or thumps) or is irregular enough to
attract attention.
7 of 35
The measured LAeq noise level at the residences in the absence of any
specific noise level is known as the residual noise level. The LA90, T level (i.e.
the level exceeded 90% of the time) corresponding to the residual noise level
is known as the background noise level.
The likelihood of complaints is assessed by subtracting the background noise
level from the rating level; the greater the difference, the greater the likelihood
of complaints.
A difference of around +10 dB or more (rating level greater than background
noise level) indicates that complaints are likely. A difference of around +5 dB
is of marginal significance. A difference of -10 dB (rating level below
background noise level) is a positive indication that complaints are unlikely.
There are limitations to the application of BS 4142. Within the Scope of the
standard it is stated:
“The method is not suitable for assessing the noise measured inside buildings or
when the background and rating noise levels are both very low.
NOTE: For the purposes of this standard, background noise levels below about 30 dB
and rating levels below about 35 dB are considered to be very low.”
2.4 World Health Organisation
Guidelines for Community Noise 1999
The World Health Organisation (WHO) “Guidelines for Community Noise”
1999 provides guidance on community noise based on knowledge of the
health impacts of community noise and also provides guidance on the
protection of people from the harmful effects of noise in non-industrial
environments. Some of the relevant guideline values according to specific
environments and critical health effects are tabulated below.
Specific environment
Critical health effect LAeq (dB)
Time base (hours)
LAmax,fast (dB)
Outdoor living area
Serious annoyance, daytime and evening
55 16 -
8 of 35
Outdoor living area
Moderate annoyance, daytime and evening
50 16 -
Dwellings, indoors
Speech intelligibility and moderate annoyance, daytime and evening
35 16 -
Inside bedrooms
Sleep disturbance, night-time
30 8 45
Outside bedrooms
Sleep disturbance, window open (outdoor values)
45 8 60
According to the WHO guidelines, the time base for LAeq,T values is 16 hours
for daytime (including evening) and 8 hours for night-time.
The effects of noise in dwellings are usually sleep disturbance, annoyance
and speech interference. For bedrooms the critical effect is sleep disturbance.
The WHO indoor guideline values for bedrooms are 30 dB LAeq,T for
continuous noise. If the noise is not continuous, maximum noise levels should
be used to indicate the probability of noise-induced awakenings with 45 dB
LAmax,f as the relevant criterion. The WHO guidelines state that “For a good
sleep, it is believed that indoor sound pressure levels should not exceed
approximately 45 dB LAmax more than 10-15 times per night…”
At night-time, external noise levels outside the façades of bedrooms should
not exceed 45 dB LAeq,T and 60 dB LAmax,f and so that people may sleep with
bedroom windows open, assuming a noise reduction of 15 dB from outside to
inside with the window open.
To protect the majority of people from being seriously annoyed during the
daytime, the outside noise level from steady, continuous noise should not
exceed 55 dB LAeq,T on balconies, terraces and in outdoor living rooms. To
protect the majority of people from being moderately annoyed during the
daytime, the outside noise level should not exceed 50 dB LAeq,T.
It is important to note that these are health based guidelines rather than
levels set out in current Government legislation.
9 of 35
Night Noise Guidelines for Europe 2009
The World Health Organization “Night Noise Guidelines for Europe” 2009
document provides guidelines that are neither standards nor legally binding
criteria. The guidelines may be considered as an extension to, as well as an
update of, the previous WHO “Guidelines for Community Noise” 1999.
This document proposes that an Lnight,outside of 40 dB should be the target of
the night noise guideline (NNG) to protect the public. The Lnight,outside indicator
is defined in Environmental Noise Directive 2002/49/EC and is the year
average at the most exposed facade. It is the long-term A-weighted average
sound level (LAeq) determined over all the night periods of a year, where night
is eight hours in duration (usually 23.00 to 07.00 hours) and a year is a
relevant year as regard the emission of sound and an average year for
meteorological conditions. The Lnight,outside is determined at a receiver height
of 4 metres above local ground and is taken to be a free field level even
though it would be assessed near the most affected façade of a dwelling.
The Night Noise Guidelines also reports that effects on sleep quality can
occur at a threshold levels of 42 dB LAmax,inside (internal level) although
biological effects such as EEG awakening and changing sleep structure can
occur at lower noise levels.
3 Site Description
The proposed development site is situated about 500 metres south of the
A4304 Theddingworth Road. The closest dwelling to the development site is
Pebble Hall Farm, which is occupied by relatives of the site owner / applicant,
near to the junction of the site access road and the A4304. The dwelling at
Pebble Hall Farm is about 40 metres from the site access road.
Other dwellings in the area are at separation distances of about 600 to 1500
metres to the proposed development site, namely Dene Lodge and Woodside
Farm on the northern side of Theddingworth Road, Bosworth Hall on the
eastern side of Husbands Bosworth, Hothorpe Hall and nearby dwellings
south of Theddingworth.
10 of 35
4 Measurement Methodology
4.1 Measurement Description
A site location plan including the baseline noise survey measurement
locations is included in this report as Appendix B.
The noise measurements were carried out in accordance with the
Measurement Practice in BS 4142: 1997 for instrumentation and calibration.
The locations at which baseline measurements have been made were
chosen as the representative of the residential dwellings and areas closest to
the proposed development site.
Baseline noise surveys were conducted during four visits at four locations
representative of the nearest noise sensitive properties. A total of sixteen
sample measurements were taken over the course of the attended surveys in
April 2013. In addition, a sound level meter was installed for a week at Pebble
Hall Farm for largely unattended baseline noise monitoring.
Food waste is to be delivered to the site by heavy goods vehicles (HGVs)
during daytime periods only, 07:00 to 17:00, with almost all of the operations
and processes to take place inside buildings.
The sample measurements were undertaken between about 16:00 and 17:30
on Friday 19 April 2013; between about 22:00 and 23:30 on Monday 22 April
2013; between about 09:30 and 11:00 on Friday 26 April 2013; between
about 01:30 and 03:00 on Saturday 27 April 2013. The meter at Pebble Hall
Farm was installed at about 15:30 on Friday 19 April 2013 and collected at
about 11:00 on Friday 26 April 2013.
The measurements were taken at a microphone height of approximately
1.4 metres above local ground level away from reflecting surfaces other than
the ground, with a wind shield used throughout each measurement.
The sample measurements were of 15 minute duration. The start times of the
measurements are shown along with the results.
11 of 35
The parameters reported are the statistical indices LA10,T and the Background
Noise Level, LA90,T as well as the Equivalent Continuous Noise Level, LAeq,T.
An explanation of the noise units presented is given in Appendix A.
The instrumentation used for the measurements and calibration details are
shown in Appendix C. The attended survey results are presented in
Appendix D. The results from the unattended survey are presented in
Appendix E.
4.2 Results
The detailed results from the attended surveys are presented in Appendix D.
A summary of the background noise levels from the attended survey results is
presented in the following table.
Position dB
LA90,15min
dB
LA90,15min
dB
LA90,15min
dB
LA90,15min
Morning Afternoon Evening Night
1 Husbands Bosworth 44 40 31 22
2 West of Woodside Farm 47 53 29 27
3. Pebble Hall Farm 42 48 30 18
4. Hothorpe Road 41 37 35 20
The noise climate was affected by road traffic, aircraft movements, birdsong,
animal calls, distant agricultural activity and wind movement in trees at times
The results from the unattended survey at Pebble Hall Farm are presented in
Appendix E. The background noise levels at the quietest part of the night-
time period were in the range 18 to 23 dB LA90, 1 hour, free field at this location.
12 of 35
5 Calculated Site Noise Levels
The potential impact of site noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive
properties to the operations can be assessed by the calculation of site noise
levels due to the activities taking place on site and comparison with the
measured baseline noise environment.
The noise levels likely to arise at dwellings depend on the sound power levels
of the plant as much as on the distance to the properties and the effects of
intervening ground and buildings. Proper allowance can be made for these
variables to calculate site noise levels.
The Equivalent Continuous Noise Level, LAeq, T, is the preferred unit for
assessing noise sources. It is the value of a continuous level that would have
equivalent energy to the continuously varying noise over the specified period
"T". This unit is recommended internationally for the description of
environmental noise and is in general use. It is the chosen unit of BS 5228 for
Construction and Open site noise and BS 7445 for the Description and
Measurement of Environmental Noise.
5.1 Noise Sources and Sound Power Levels
The noise levels of the proposed operations have been supplied by WWM to
WBM, generally in the form of noise levels at a separation distance of 1 m.
These noise levels have been used to determine Sound Power Levels for
plant items, allowing noise levels inside the various buildings to be calculated.
With assumptions about sound insulation properties of the building walls and
roofs, the noise level breakout from each building can be determined. The
apparent Sound Power Levels for the walls and roofs of the buildings, as well
as noise from exhausts for one of the buildings and the “genset” units, have
been determined.
The calculations in this report are based on BS5228: 2009: Part 1 Noise.
Further details of the calculation methods are set out in Appendix F to this
report. A sample site noise calculation sheet for the nearest dwelling is
included in Appendix F, showing the noise sources and sound power levels.
13 of 35
5.2 Site Operation Activities
In order to calculate the noise levels for the proposed development site, the
contribution from each significant specific noise source has been evaluated
separately and then combined together to give the overall noise level.
The activities that will take place on the site are as summarised below and set
out on the sample calculation sheet along with on-time percentages for the
daytime assessment period of 1-hour or night-time period of 5-minutes.
Lorry movements along site access road;
Four engines “gensets” outside the buildings;
Stack exhausts for each of the four engines;
Reception building walls, roof and open door (daytime);
Reception building exhaust;
Digester building walls, roof and open door (daytime);
Slurry tanker outside buildings (daytime).
For the purposes of the calculations, the receiver height has been tested at
1.5 metres for the receiver locations (daytime) and 4.0 metres (night-time).
The site noise calculations include barrier attenuation attributable to the
building between the “gensets” and the dwellings at Pebble Hall Farm,
Woodside Farm and Hothorpe Hall. No allowance has been made in the
calculations for the effects of any barrier attenuation due to bunding or
landforms between the site and the noise sensitive receptors so as not to
over-estimate the attenuation.
5.3 Calculated Site Noise Levels
The nearest residential properties for which site noise calculations have been
made are Pebble Hall Farm, Woodside Farm, Bosworth Hall, Hothorpe Hall.
14 of 35
The calculated site noise levels, for night-time and daytime periods, are set
out in the table below with conventional, insulated cladding for walls and roof
of the reception building and digester building and without barrier attenuation
for the “gensets”. The daytime site noise levels include HGV movements on
the site access road, open doors to buildings and the operation outside
buildings of a slurry tanker.
Without Building as Barrier for “gensets”
Receiver Location
Calculated Daytime Site Noise Levels
dB LAeq, 1 hour, free field
Calculated Night-time Site Noise Levels
dB LAeq, 5 minutes, free field
Bosworth Hall 34 25
Woodside Farm 45 34
Pebble Hall Farm 55 36
Hothorpe Hall 39 30
Note: Pebble Hall Farm is occupied by relatives of site owner and applicant
The calculated site noise levels, for night-time and daytime periods, are set
out in the table below with conventional, insulated cladding for walls and roof
of the reception building and digester building and with barrier attenuation for
the “gensets”. The daytime site noise levels include HGV movements on the
site access road, open doors to buildings and the operation outside buildings
of a slurry tanker.
With Building as Barrier for “gensets”
Receiver Location
Calculated Daytime Site Noise Levels
dB LAeq, 1 hour, free field
Calculated Night-time Site Noise Levels
dB LAeq, 5 minutes, free field
Bosworth Hall 34 25
Woodside Farm 44 29
Pebble Hall Farm 55 30
Hothorpe Hall 39 25
Note: Pebble Hall Farm is occupied by relatives of site owner and applicant
The calculated night-time site noise levels are about 5 dB LAeq, 5 minutes, free field
lower with barrier attenuation attributable to the adjacent building, other than
for Bosworth Hall which is to the west and not shielded by the building.
15 of 35
6 Comparison with Background Noise Levels
The assessment method in BS 4142: 1997 compares the site noise level with
the background noise level, to determine the likelihood of complaints.
The following table compares the calculated daytime site noise levels from
the proposed development site and associated activities to the measured
daytime background noise levels, with the building as a barrier for the
“gensets” other than for Bosworth Hall.
Comparison for Morning / Afternoon Periods
With Mitigation for Engines Building
Receiver Location
Calculated Site Noise
Levels
dB LAeq,1 hour
Measured Background Noise Levels
dB LA90,15 minutes
Differences
dB LAeq, T – dB LA90, T
Bosworth Hall 34 44 / 40 -10 / -6
Woodside Farm 44 47 / 53 -3 / -9
Pebble Hall Farm 55 42 / 48 + 13 / +7
Hothorpe Hall 39 41 / 37 -2 / +2
Note: Pebble Hall Farm is occupied by relatives of site owner and applicant
For Bosworth Hall and Woodside Farm the calculated daytime site noise
levels below the measured background noise levels for morning and
afternoon periods.
For Pebble Hall Farm, the calculated daytime site noise levels are 13 and
7 dB(A) above the measured background noise levels for morning and
afternoon periods.
For Hothorpe Hall, the calculated daytime site noise levels are within 2 dB(A)
of the measured background noise levels for morning and afternoon periods.
For the daytime period the calculated site noise levels, other than for Pebble
Hall Farm, are below 45 dB LAeq, 1 hour, free field and are at or below the average
daytime background noise levels. For Pebble Hall Farm, the calculated site
noise level for daytime is dominated by HGV movements on the access road.
16 of 35
The following table compares the calculated night-time site noise levels from
the proposed development site and associated activities to the measured
evening and night-time background noise levels, with the building as a barrier
for the “gensets” other than for Bosworth Hall.
Comparison for Evening / Night-time Periods
With Mitigation for Engines Building
Receiver Location
Calculated Site Noise
Levels
dB LAeq, 5 minutes
Measured Background Noise Levels
dB LA90,15 minutes
Differences
dB LAeq, T – dB LA90, T
Bosworth Hall 25 31 / 22 -6 / +3
Woodside Farm 29 29 / 27 0 / +2
Pebble Hall Farm 30 30 / 18 0 / +12
Hothorpe Hall 25 35 / 20 -10 / + 5
Note: Pebble Hall Farm is occupied by relatives of site owner and applicant
For Bosworth Hall, the calculated night-time site noise level is 6 dB(A) below
the measured background noise level for the evening period and 3 dB(A)
above the measured background noise level for the night-time period.
For Woodside Farm, the calculated night-time site noise level is equal to the
measured background noise level for the evening period and 2 dB(A) above
the measured background noise levels for the night-time period.
For Pebble Hall Farm, the calculated night-time site noise level is equal to the
measured background noise level for the evening period and 12 dB(A) above
the measured background noise level for the night-time period.
For Hothorpe Hall, the calculated night-time site noise level is 10 dB(A) below
the measured background noise level for the evening period and 5 dB(A)
above the measured background noise level for the night-time period.
A difference of around +10 dB or more (rating level greater than background
noise level) indicates that complaints are likely. A difference of around +5 dB
is of marginal significance. A difference of -10 dB (rating level below
background noise level) is a positive indication that complaints are unlikely.
17 of 35
There are limitations to the application of BS 4142. Within the Scope of the
standard it is stated: “The method is not suitable for assessing the noise measured
inside buildings or when the background and rating noise levels are both very low.
NOTE: For the purposes of this standard, background noise levels below about 30 dB
and rating levels below about 35 dB are considered to be very low.”
For the night-time period, background noise levels are below 30 dB LA90, T and
the site noise levels are below 35 dB LAeq, T and accordingly are considered to
be very low and therefore outside the scope of BS 4142.
7 Vehicle Movements on Site Access Road
The dwelling at Pebble Hall Farm is about 40 metres from the site access
road and about 50 metres to the edge of the A4304 Theddingworth Road.
Food waste is to be delivered to the site by heavy goods vehicles (HGVs)
during daytime periods only, 07:00 to 17:00, with almost all of the operations
and processes to take place inside buildings.
The noise climate at Pebble Hall Farm during the period 07:00 to 17:00 is and
will continue to be dominated by road traffic noise on the A4304
Theddingworth Road.
Individual HGV movements on the site access road may well be audible at
Pebble Hall Farm but the maximum noise levels would be similar to those
arising from the passage of other HGVs on the A4304 Theddingworth Road.
8 Summary and Conclusions
Welland Waste Management Limited (WWM) currently operates a site at
Pebble Hall Farm, near Theddingworth in Northamptonshire. The planning
history, current operations and proposed development are described in detail
in the Planning Statement prepared by GP Planning and are not reproduced
in this report.
18 of 35
In summary, food waste is to be delivered to the site by heavy goods vehicles
(HGVs) during daytime periods only, with almost all of the operations and
processes to take place inside buildings. For processes that are continuous,
potential impact at weekends and in particular at night will need to be
considered.
The closest dwelling to the development site is Pebble Hall Farm, which is
occupied by relatives of the site owner / applicant. Other dwellings in the area
are at separation distances of about 600 to 1500 metres, namely on the
northern side of the A4304 Theddingworth Road, on the eastern side of
Husbands Bosworth, Hothorpe Hall and nearby dwellings south of
Theddingworth.
Baseline noise surveys were conducted during four visits at four locations
representative of the nearest noise sensitive properties. A total of sixteen
sample measurements were taken over the course of the attended surveys in
April 2013. In addition, a sound level meter was installed for a week at Pebble
Hall Farm for largely unattended baseline noise monitoring.
Food waste is to be delivered to the site by heavy goods vehicles (HGVs)
during daytime periods only, 07:00 to 17:00, with almost all of the operations
and processes to take place inside buildings.
The sample measurements were undertaken between about 16:00 and 17:30
on Friday 19 April 2013; between about 22:00 and 23:30 on Monday 22 April
2013; between about 09:30 and 11:00 on Friday 26 April 2013; between
about 01:30 and 03:00 on Saturday 27 April 2013. The meter at Pebble Hall
Farm was installed at about 15:30 on Friday 19 April 2013 and collected at
about 11:00 on Friday 26 April 2013.
In order to calculate the noise levels for the proposed development site, the
contribution from each significant specific noise source has been evaluated
separately and then combined together to give the overall noise level.
The nearest residential properties for which site noise calculations have been
made are Pebble Hall Farm, Woodside Farm, Bosworth Hall, Hothorpe Hall.
19 of 35
The calculated daytime site noise levels from the proposed development site
and associated activities are compared to the measured background noise
levels for morning, afternoon, evening and night-time periods, with the
building as a barrier for the “gensets” other than for Bosworth Hall.
For the daytime period the calculated site noise levels, other than for Pebble
Hall Farm, are below 45 dB LAeq, 1 hour, free field and are at or below the average
daytime background noise levels. For Pebble Hall Farm, the calculated site
noise level for daytime is dominated by HGV movements on the access road.
The assessment method in BS 4142: 1997 compares the site noise level with
the background noise level, to determine the likelihood of complaints.
For Bosworth Hall, the calculated night-time site noise level is 6 dB(A) below
the measured background noise level for the evening period and 3 dB(A)
above the measured background noise level for the night-time period.
For Woodside Farm, the calculated night-time site noise level is equal to the
measured background noise level for the evening period and 2 dB(A) above
the measured background noise levels for the night-time period.
For Pebble Hall Farm, the calculated night-time site noise level is equal to the
measured background noise level for the evening period and 12 dB(A) above
the measured background noise level for the night-time period.
For Hothorpe Hall, the calculated night-time site noise level is 10 dB(A) below
the measured background noise level for the evening period and 5 dB(A)
above the measured background noise level for the night-time period.
A difference of around +10 dB or more (rating level greater than background
noise level) indicates that complaints are likely. A difference of around +5 dB
is of marginal significance. A difference of -10 dB (rating level below
background noise level) is a positive indication that complaints are unlikely.
There are limitations to the application of BS 4142. Within the Scope of the
standard it is stated: “The method is not suitable for assessing the noise measured
inside buildings or when the background and rating noise levels are both very low.
20 of 35
NOTE: For the purposes of this standard, background noise levels below about 30 dB
and rating levels below about 35 dB are considered to be very low.”
For the night-time period, background noise levels are below 30 dB LA90, T and
the site noise levels are below 35 dB LAeq, T and accordingly are considered to
be very low and therefore outside the scope of BS 4142.
The noise climate at Pebble Hall Farm during the period 07:00 to 17:00 is and
will continue to be dominated by road traffic noise on the A4304
Theddingworth Road.
Individual HGV movements on the site access road may well be audible at
Pebble Hall Farm but the maximum noise levels would be similar to those
arising from the passage of other HGVs on the A4304 Theddingworth Road.
Dr Paul Cockcroft BEng PhD CEng MIMMM FIOA
Senior Partner
(This document has been generated electronically and therefore bears no signature)
21 of 35
Appendix A – Glossary of Acoustic Terms
The following section describes some of the parameters that are used to quantify noise.
Decibels dB
Noise levels are measured in decibels. The decibel is the logarithmic ratio of the sound pressure to a reference pressure (2x10-5 Pascals). The decibel scale gives a reasonable approximation to the human perception of relative loudness. In terms of human hearing, audible sounds range from the threshold of hearing (0 dB) to the threshold of pain (140 dB).
A-weighted Decibels dB(A)
The ‘A’-weighting filter emulates human hearing response for low levels of sound. The filter network is incorporated electronically into sound level meters. Sound pressure levels measured using an ‘A’-weighting filter have units of dB(A) which is a single figure value to represent the overall noise level for the entire frequency range.
A change of 3 dB(A) is the smallest change in noise level that is perceptible under normal listening conditions. A change of 10 dB(A) corresponds to a doubling or halving of loudness of the sound. The background noise level in a quiet bedroom may be around 20 –30 dB(A); normal speech conversation around 60 dB(A) at 1 m; noise from a very busy road around 70-80 dB(A) at 10m; the level near a pneumatic drill around 100 dB(A).
Façade Noise Level
Façade noise measurements are those undertaken near to reflective surfaces such as walls, usually at a distance of 1m from the surface. Façade noise levels at 1m from a reflective surface are normally around 3 dB greater than those obtained under freefield conditions.
Freefield Noise Level
Freefield noise measurements are those undertaken away from any reflective surfaces other than the ground
Frequency Hz
The frequency of a noise is the number of pressure variations per second, and relates to the “pitch” of the sound. Hertz (Hz) is the unit of frequency and is the same as cycles per second. Normal, healthy human hearing can detect sounds from around 20 Hz to 20 kHz.
Octave and Third-Octave Bands
Two frequencies are said to be an octave apart if the frequency of one is twice the frequency of the other. The octave bandwidth increases as the centre frequency increases. Each bandwidth is 70% of the band centre frequency.
Two frequencies are said to be a third-octave apart if the frequency of one is 1.26 times the other. The third octave bandwidth is 23% of the band centre frequency.
There are recognised octave band and third octave band centre frequencies. The octave or third-octave band sound pressure level is determined from the energy of the sound which falls within the boundaries of that particular octave of third octave band.
22 of 35
Appendix A (continued)
Equivalent Continuous Sound Pressure Level LAeq,T
The ‘A’-weighted equivalent continuous sound pressure level LAeq,T, is a notional steady level which has the same acoustic energy as the actual fluctuating noise over the same time period T. The LAeq,T unit is dominated by higher noise levels, for example, the LAeq,T average of two equal time periods at, for example, 70 dB(A) and 50 dB(A) is not 60 dB(A) but 67 dB(A).
The LAeq, is the chosen unit of BS 7445-1:2003 “Description and Measurement of Environmental noise”.
Maximum Sound Pressure Level LAmax
The LAmax value describes the overall maximum ‘A’-weighted sound pressure level over the measurement interval. Maximum levels are measured with either a fast or slow time weighted, denoted as LAmax,f or LAmax,s respectively.
Sound Exposure Level LAE or SEL
The sound exposure level is a notional level which contains the same acoustic energy in 1 second as a varying ‘A’-weighted noise level over a given period of time. It is normally used to quantify short duration noise events such as aircraft flyover or train passes.
Statistical Parameters LN
In order to cover the time variability aspects, noise can be analysed into various statistical parameters, i.e. the sound level which is exceeded for N% of the time. The most commonly used are the LA01,T, LA10,T and the LA90,T.
LA01,T is the ‘A’-weighted level exceeded for 1% of the time interval T and is often used to gives an indication of the upper maximum level of a fluctuating noise signal.
LA10,T is the ‘A’-weighted level exceeded for 10% of the time interval T and is often used to describe road traffic noise. It gives an indication of the upper level of a fluctuating noise signal. For high volumes of continuous traffic, the LA10,T unit is typically 2–3 dB(A) above the LAeq,T value over the same period.
LA90,T is the ‘A’-weighted level exceeded for 90% of the time interval T, and is often used to describe the underlying background noise level. It is defined in British Standard 4142 as the background noise unit and is used for establishing the reference against which industrial noises are assessed.
23 of 35
Appendix B – Site Location Plan and Measurement Positions
Location Description
1 Husbands Bosworth Southern end of Butts Lane, by public footpath sign
2 West of Woodside Farm Field entrance on northern side of Theddingworth Road
3. Pebble Hall Farm In rear garden, to south of stables / outbuildings
4. Hothorpe Road Field entrance, south of junction to “Quiet Fields”
1
2
3 4
24 of 35
Appendix C – Survey Details
Date and Location of Surveys
Friday 19.04.13, Monday 22.04.13, Friday 26.04.13, Saturday 27.04.13
In the vicinity of Pebble Hall Farm, Northamptonshire
Surveys carried out by
Ms Rachel Canham (19/22/26.04.13) and Dr Richard Lyons (27.04.13)
Instrumentation used (Serial Number)
Survey Date Sound Level Meter Calibrator
Install Meter 19.04.13 to 26.04.13 Norsonic 116 (21628) B&K 4230 (584690)
Friday 19.04.13 Norsonic 140 (1403137) Norsonic 1251 (31993)
Monday 22.04.13 Norsonic 140 (1403137) Norsonic 1251 (31993)
Friday 26.04.13 Norsonic 140 (1403136) Norsonic 1251 (31992)
Saturday 27.04.13 Norsonic 140 (1403138) Norsonic 1251 (31991)
Field Calibration
The sensitivity of the meter was verified on site immediately before and after the survey. The measured calibration levels were as follows:
Survey Date Start Cal End Cal
Install Meter 19.04.13 to 26.04.13 94.0 dB(A)
Friday 19.04.13 113.9 dB(A) 113.8 dB(A)
Monday 22.04.13 113.9 dB(A) 113.9 dB(A)
Friday 26.04.13 113.8 dB(A) 113.7 dB(A)
Saturday 27.04.13 113.7 dB(A) 113.9 dB(A)
Monthly Calibration
The meter and calibrator are tested monthly against a Laboratory Standard Bruel and Kjaer Pistonphone, type 4220 (serial number 375806) and a Norsonic Calibrator, type 1253 (serial number 22906) with UKAS approved laboratory certificate of calibration.
Install Meter
The install meter was set to store hourly results on the hour, which are presented in tabular and graphical format in Appendix E.
25 of 35
Appendix D – Survey Results
Friday 19.04.13
Occasional showers during set up of install meter, stopped raining for sample measurements. Reasonably light winds (N), overcast becoming less cloudy during survey, around 9 degrees C.
Results dB (T = 15 minutes)
Location Start time LAeq, T LAF(max) LA10, T LA90, T Comments
4 - Hothorpe Road
15:55 50 75 46 37 Stopped raining but roads damp. Distant road traffic, birdsong, distant aircraft, sheep in nearby fields, occasional bangs from direction of the site. Two passing vehicles on adjacent road, two vehicles on nearby junction.
1 - Butts Lane Husbands Bosworth
16:19 50 71 52 40 Weather dry but roads still damp. Noise due to birdsong, distant road traffic, sheep in adjacent field, light aircraft in distance and overhead, occasional dog barks, two vehicles turning.
2 - West of Woodside Farm
16:42 74 88 80 53 Noise dominated by road traffic on Theddingworth Road, also birdsong, distant aircraft, farm vehicle activity in nearby fields.
3 - Pebble Hall Farm
17:02 60 68 63 48 Noise due to road traffic on Theddingworth Road, birdsong, distant bangs, aircraft.
26 of 35
Appendix D (continued)
Monday 22.04.13
Overcast, dry, 10-12 degrees C, light SW breeze in most locations apart from Hothorpe Road where wind speeds ~ 5 m/s,
Results dB (T = 15 minutes)
Location Start time LAeq, T LAF(max) LA10, T LA90, T Comments
3 - Pebble Hall Farm
22:09 49 67 51 30 Noise due to distant road traffic, occasional vehicles on Theddingworth Road, distant aircraft, rustling leaves / wind in trees, distant bleating from sheep in fields
4 - Hothorpe Road
22:33 46 70 49 35 Quite breezy at this location, ~ 5 m/s. Noise due to rustling leaves/ wind in trees/ wind noise, very distant road traffic noise, distant animal/bird calls
2 - West of Woodside Farm
22:58 60 84 50 29 Noise due to intermittent / occasional vehicles on Theddingworth Road, distant church bells, wind in trees/ rustling foliage, distant aircraft, noise from livestock in fields
1 - Butts Lane Husbands Bosworth
23:20 44 67 45 31 Noise due to road traffic on A5199, lots of bleating from sheep and lambs in adjacent field, distant aircraft, some wind noise / rustling leaves
27 of 35
Appendix D (continued)
Friday 26.04.13
Cloudy, mainly dry with occasional light showers/hail, 8 degrees C, westerly breeze, 2-3 m/s
Results dB (T = 15 minutes)
Location Start time LAeq, T LAF(max) LA10, T LA90, T Comments
1 - Butts Lane Husbands Bosworth
09:22 48 71 51 44 Noise due to birdsong, distant traffic, local activity from adjacent houses, sheep in field, cock crowing, rustling leaves
2 - West of Woodside Farm
09:44 73 87 78 47 Noise due to road traffic, birdsong, distant farming activity, distant aircraft, rustling leaves
4 - Hothorpe Road
10:14 45 63 47 41 Brief rain shower during sample. Noise due to distant road traffic, distant aircraft, birdsong, sheep in field, distant reversing beepers, distant bangs (bird scarers?), bangs/clanks from Hothorpe Hall
3 - Pebble Hall Farm
10:41 57 69 62 42 Brief rain / hail shower at end of sample. Noise due to road traffic, birdsong, sheep in field, distant bangs, distant aircraft
28 of 35
Appendix D (continued)
Saturday 27.04.13
Dry, partial cloud, 2-3 degrees C, winds initially calm <1m/s and 3-4m/s mid-survey
Results dB (T = 15 minutes)
Location Start time LAeq, T LAF(max) LA10, T LA90, T Comments
4 - Hothorpe Road
01:31 29 46 33 20 Distant occasional vehicles on Theddingworth Road;distant sheep bleeting; dog barking in distance; owl hoots; distant aircraft movement; dull thuds from ENE.
3 - Pebble Hall Farm
01:58 46 66 47 18 Owl hoots; distant sheep bleats; distant road traffic, intermittent vehicles on Theddingworth Road; fox baying; occasional birdcalls; distant church bell chimes; dull thud in distance.
2 - West of Woodside Farm
02:23 56 82 40 27 Breeze in trees; owl hoots; birdcalls; distant RT; occasional vehicles on Theddingworth Road; distant aircraft movement.
1 - Butts Lane Husbands Bosworth
02:46 30 46 33 22 Distant road traffic on Theddingworth Road and to West; breeze in trees; distant sheep bleats; owl hoots; church bell chimes; birdsong
29 of 35
Appendix E – Unattended Noise Survey Results
0.0
10
.0
20
.0
30
.0
40
.0
50
.0
60
.0
70
.0
80
.0
90
.0
10
0.016:00
20:00
00:00
04:00
08:00
12:00
16:00
20:00
00:00
04:00
08:00
12:00
16:00
20:00
00:00
04:00
08:00
12:00
16:00
20:00
00:00
04:00
08:00
12:00
16:00
20:00
00:00
04:00
08:00
12:00
16:00
20:00
00:00
04:00
08:00
12:00
16:00
20:00
00:00
04:00
08:00
Measured Noise Level dB(A)
Star
t Ti
me
(H
ou
rs:
Min
ute
s)
The
dd
ingw
ort
h B
ase
line
No
ise
Su
rve
y R
esu
lts
Pe
bb
le H
all F
arm
Fri
day
19
to
Fri
day
26
Ap
ril 2
01
3
LAm
ax,f
LA1
0,1
ho
ur
LAe
q,1
ho
ur
LA9
0,1
ho
ur
30 of 35
Appendix E (continued)
Start time LAeq, T LAF(max) LA10, T LA90, T
16:00 60 81 64 45
17:00 61 75 64 47
18:00 60 79 64 43
19:00 59 76 64 39
20:00 57 75 62 37
21:00 57 72 62 32
22:00 55 72 60 26
23:00 54 71 58 27
00:00 51 70 55 23
01:00 49 69 45 19
02:00 48 71 41 18
03:00 46 71 41 18
04:00 46 67 44 20
05:00 58 77 62 32
06:00 54 76 59 35
07:00 57 76 61 40
08:00 54 70 59 39
09:00 54 73 58 39
10:00 55 80 59 42
11:00 54 86 57 39
12:00 55 79 57 39
13:00 53 74 57 38
14:00 53 74 57 37
15:00 56 83 59 37
16:00 56 81 58 37
17:00 55 77 59 36
18:00 53 70 57 37
19:00 55 72 59 36
20:00 54 84 58 30
21:00 49 75 53 28
22:00 45 62 48 27
23:00 47 64 50 27
00:00 46 65 47 21
01:00 46 70 44 20
02:00 42 67 35 18
03:00 43 69 34 18
04:00 40 66 35 18
05:00 59 85 63 29
06:00 53 77 56 36
07:00 53 77 56 32
08:00 53 83 56 35
31 of 35
Start time LAeq, T LAF(max) LA10, T LA90, T
09:00 55 76 59 39
10:00 55 80 58 40
11:00 55 83 58 41
12:00 56 85 59 42
13:00 56 84 60 41
14:00 55 86 58 42
15:00 57 88 59 41
16:00 54 85 59 41
17:00 55 81 59 42
18:00 54 72 59 38
19:00 54 84 59 37
20:00 54 77 57 33
21:00 50 83 52 29
22:00 47 77 47 24
23:00 44 69 43 20
00:00 41 66 42 19
01:00 40 66 38 18
02:00 38 63 31 18
03:00 42 68 38 19
04:00 46 68 45 19
05:00 61 78 65 34
06:00 56 73 61 37
07:00 58 75 62 46
08:00 58 76 61 46
09:00 57 82 60 44
10:00 55 77 59 44
11:00 56 86 59 45
12:00 56 88 59 44
13:00 58 87 60 46
14:00 57 88 60 45
15:00 57 88 60 46
16:00 58 86 60 46
17:00 59 86 63 47
18:00 57 87 60 44
19:00 56 88 58 41
20:00 51 86 53 35
21:00 50 70 53 33
22:00 49 68 51 31
23:00 43 64 44 28
00:00 42 66 41 26
01:00 37 64 36 25
02:00 40 66 39 23
32 of 35
Start time LAeq, T LAF(max) LA10, T LA90, T
03:00 39 65 34 24
04:00 54 76 51 24
05:00 58 78 62 33
06:00 56 76 61 39
07:00 58 83 62 45
08:00 58 74 62 47
09:00 56 74 61 44
10:00 59 90 61 43
11:00 56 79 60 42
12:00 55 78 59 42
13:00 55 84 58 41
14:00 55 79 59 42
15:00 54 83 59 42
16:00 55 68 60 43
17:00 58 77 62 45
18:00 61 91 64 43
19:00 60 83 64 38
20:00 59 79 63 34
21:00 56 74 61 33
22:00 53 70 58 27
23:00 50 69 54 25
00:00 45 67 46 20
01:00 40 64 32 20
02:00 42 65 40 20
03:00 42 65 37 22
04:00 53 75 56 24
05:00 56 76 60 35
06:00 58 75 62 41
07:00 58 71 62 45
08:00 58 76 62 46
09:00 71 92 70 48
10:00 57 86 60 44
11:00 56 85 58 44
12:00 58 89 59 45
13:00 56 86 58 45
14:00 56 82 59 45
15:00 55 73 59 46
16:00 56 78 60 45
17:00 56 73 61 45
18:00 56 74 61 43
19:00 54 69 59 40
20:00 57 75 62 35
33 of 35
Start time LAeq, T LAF(max) LA10, T LA90, T
21:00 54 67 59 35
22:00 55 76 60 33
23:00 52 68 57 26
00:00 51 69 54 23
01:00 51 70 53 21
02:00 50 68 52 22
03:00 51 68 55 23
04:00 54 75 57 26
05:00 59 78 62 37
06:00 56 70 61 37
07:00 57 89 61 43
08:00 56 73 61 46
09:00 56 76 60 44
10:00 55 81 59 43
11:00 55 85 59 44
12:00 54 83 58 44
13:00 56 85 58 44
14:00 59 88 59 45
15:00 57 88 61 45
16:00 57 74 61 44
17:00 59 71 63 47
18:00 61 85 65 46
19:00 59 74 64 41
20:00 59 78 64 34
21:00 55 79 60 33
22:00 54 71 59 29
23:00 48 66 51 34
00:00 48 69 49 37
01:00 43 69 43 24
02:00 45 69 44 23
03:00 44 67 41 22
04:00 52 78 50 24
05:00 61 77 66 36
06:00 58 80 63 37
07:00 60 72 64 45
08:00 61 74 65 47
09:00 60 76 64 46
10:00 60 77 64 45
34 of 35
Appendix F – Noise Calculation Method and Calculation Sheet
Specific noise levels are predicted or measured in terms of the Equivalent
Continuous Noise Level, LAeq,T over a given reference time interval, T. In the
Technical Guidance document to the NPPF the time interval for daytime, evening
and night the reference time interval is 1 hour. In BS 4142: 1997 the reference time
interval for daytime is 1 hour and for night-time is 5 minutes, although the periods for
daytime and night-time are not defined.
The calculation method for any plant which is relatively fixed in location is that set out
in BS 5228: 2009 Part 1, Annex F, and is the “Method for activity LAeq” described in
section F.2.2 or the “Method for plant sound power level” described in section F.2.3.
The calculation method for site mobile plant such as lorries is that set out in
BS5228: 2009: Part 1, Annex F, and is the “Method for mobile plant using a regular
well defined route (e. g. haul roads)” described in section F. 2. 5.
Ground Absorption has been assumed as 90% soft ground between the proposed
development site and the receiver locations.
The method of assessing screening is that attributed to Maekawa as used in
BS 5228: 2009 and various other Government published documents. This method
uses the calculated path difference and octave band noise data for each noise
source over the frequency range stated in BS 5228: 2009.
The effects of ground absorption are not used in the calculations if screening has
been assessed and offers a higher attenuation.
The nearest distances to the respective dwellings, from the various items of plant,
have been used in an acoustic model for the site to calculate the reasonable worst
case LAeq,T site noise levels.
A summary site noise calculation sheet for one of the receiver locations is included
below.
35 of 35
Appendix F (continued)
WE
LL
AN
D W
AS
TE
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
4169
24-M
ay-1
3P
WC
Win
d C
orr
ection :
2dB
(A)
Receiv
er
Heig
ht
:4.0
m
PE
BB
LE
HA
LL
FA
RM
TH
ED
DIN
GW
OR
TH
FO
OD
WA
ST
E P
RO
CE
SS
ING
& E
LE
CT
RIC
ITY
GE
NE
RA
TIO
NB
uild
ing /
Barr
ier
Heig
ht
:5
m
Com
ments
on S
ound P
ow
er
Leve
ls &
Activi
tyP
ow
er
LW
AC
apacity
Sourc
e2 w
ay f
low
Speed
BS
5228
Ref
Pla
nt
Item
Att
enuation a
ssum
ed f
or
build
ings
LA
eq @
10 m
or
LW
A /
mO
n-t
ime %
Tonnes
Heig
ht
Q p
er
hour
V k
ph
Pla
nt
Set
back(m
)m
eth
od
1C
HP
genset
in I
SO
conta
iner
(1)
fans /
louvr
e70 d
B(A
) at
1 m
manufa
ctu
rer
guara
nte
e66
94
100
20
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
2C
HP
genset
in I
SO
conta
iner
(2)
fans /
louvr
e70 d
B(A
) at
1 m
manufa
ctu
rer
guara
nte
e66
94
100
20
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
3C
HP
genset
in I
SO
conta
iner
(3)
fans /
louvr
e70 d
B(A
) at
1 m
manufa
ctu
rer
guara
nte
e66
94
100
20
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
4C
HP
genset
in I
SO
conta
iner
(4)
fans /
louvr
e70 d
B(A
) at
1 m
manufa
ctu
rer
guara
nte
e66
94
100
20
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
5S
tack e
xhaust
(one f
or
each o
f fo
ur
sets
)70 d
B(A
) at
1 m
manufa
ctu
rer
guara
nte
e59
87
100
10
0m
back
1A
ctivi
ty
6R
eception b
uild
ing w
alls
108 d
B L
WA
-25 d
B f
or
build
ing
55
83
100
60
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
7R
eception b
uild
ing r
oof
108 d
B L
WA
-25 d
B f
or
build
ing
55
83
100
90
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
8R
eception b
uild
ing e
xhaust
70 d
B(A
) at
1 m
53
81
100
10
0m
back
1A
ctivi
ty
9R
eception b
uild
ing d
oor
Daytim
e o
nly
-10 d
B f
or
open d
oor7
098
100
20
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
10
Dig
este
r build
ing w
alls
108 d
B L
WA
-25 d
B f
or
build
ing
55
83
100
60
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
11
Dig
este
r build
ing r
oof
108 d
B L
WA
-25 d
B f
or
build
ing
55
83
100
90
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
12
Dig
este
r build
ing d
oor
Daytim
e o
nly
-10 d
B f
or
open d
oor7
098
100
20
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
13
Slu
rry t
anker
Daytim
e o
nly
Outs
ide b
uild
ings
78
106
100
30
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
14
HG
V m
ove
ments
Daytim
e o
nly
76
104
100
212
15
0m
back
4H
aul R
oad
15
Sourc
e 1
5 (
spare
Pla
nt
Item
)-1
027
-999
100
20
m b
ack
1A
ctivi
ty
Lo
cati
on
No
.1
Peb
ble
Hall F
arm
Receiv
er
Heig
ht
4.0
m A
OD
Site N
ois
e L
eve
l fo
r It
em
s 1
to 1
455
dB
LA
eq
, 1 h
ou
r, f
ree f
ield
Daytim
e (
Receiv
er
Heig
ht
1.5
m)
Site N
ois
e L
eve
l fo
r It
em
s 1
to 8
, 10 &
11
30
dB
LA
eq
, 5 m
inu
tes,
free f
ield
Nig
ht-
tim
e (
Receiv
er
Heig
ht
4.0
m)
Ref
Pla
nt
Item
Pla
nW
ork
ing
Gro
und
Work
ing
Sourc
eA
ngle
Range
Barr
ier
Barr
ier
Path
B
arr
ier
Soft
Gro
und
Resultant
Dis
tance
Dis
tance
Heig
ht
Heig
ht/
depth
Heig
ht
Degre
es
Metr
es
-Receiv
er
Heig
ht
Diff.
Att
en.
Gro
und %
Att
en.
LA
eq
1C
HP
gen
set
in IS
O c
on
tain
er
(1)
fan
s /
lo
uvre
500
500
0.0
0.0
2.0
00
480
5.0
0.2
21
15.1
90.0
4.9
18.9
2C
HP
gen
set
in IS
O c
on
tain
er
(2)
fan
s /
lo
uvre
500
500
0.0
0.0
2.0
00
480
5.0
0.2
21
15.1
90.0
4.9
18.9
3C
HP
gen
set
in IS
O c
on
tain
er
(3)
fan
s /
lo
uvre
500
500
0.0
0.0
2.0
00
480
5.0
0.2
21
15.1
90.0
4.9
18.9
4C
HP
gen
set
in IS
O c
on
tain
er
(4)
fan
s /
lo
uvre
500
500
0.0
0.0
2.0
00
480
5.0
0.2
21
15.1
90.0
4.9
18.9
5S
tack e
xh
au
st
(on
e f
or
each
of
fou
r sets
)500
500
0.0
0.0
10.0
00
480
5.0
-0.5
81
0.0
90.0
2.2
24.8
6R
ecep
tio
n b
uild
ing
walls
500
500
0.0
0.0
6.0
00
00.0
-1.0
00
0.0
90.0
4.0
19.0
7R
ecep
tio
n b
uild
ing
ro
of
500
500
0.0
0.0
9.0
00
00.0
-1.0
00
0.0
90.0
2.7
20.3
8R
ecep
tio
n b
uild
ing
exh
au
st
500
500
0.0
0.0
10.0
00
00.0
-1.0
00
0.0
90.0
2.2
18.8
9R
eception b
uild
ing d
oor
500
500
0.0
0.0
2.0
00
00.0
-1.0
00
0.0
90.0
4.9
33.1
10
Dig
este
r b
uild
ing
walls
500
500
0.0
0.0
6.0
00
00.0
-1.0
00
0.0
90.0
4.0
19.0
11
Dig
este
r b
uild
ing
ro
of
500
500
0.0
0.0
9.0
00
00.0
-1.0
00
0.0
90.0
2.7
20.3
12
Dig
este
r build
ing d
oor
500
500
0.0
0.0
2.0
00
00.0
-1.0
00
0.0
90.0
4.9
33.1
13
Slu
rry t
anker
500
500
0.0
0.0
3.0
00
00.0
-1.0
00
0.0
90.0
4.9
41.1
14
HG
V m
ove
ments
40
40
0.0
0.0
2.0
130
00
0.0
-1.0
00
0.0
0.0
0.0
54.6
15
Sourc
e 1
5 (
spare
Pla
nt
Item
)10000
10000
0.0
0.0
2.0
00
00.0
-1.0
00
0.0
0.0
0.0
-1085.0
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W007-01 PS / SE Appendix 14/06/2013
APPENDIX 7: Air Quality Assessment
GFE GF Environmental Limited
Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
June 2013
8 Alcotts Green Sandhurst Gloucester GL2 9PE Tel +44 (0) 1452 730240 Fax +44 (0) 1452 730240 Email [email protected]
Web: www.gf-environmental.co.uk
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
i
Table of Contents
Table of Contents i
Figures, Tables and Equations ii
Authorisation Sheet iii
Summary iv
1. Introduction 1 1.1 Background to the Study 1 1.2 ADMS Version 5 2
2. Modelling Input Data 3 2.1 Introduction 3 2.2 Site Location and Local Setting 3 2.3 Plant Details 4 2.4 Emissions Data 4 2.5 Atmospheric Chemistry 5 2.6 Background Air Quality 7 2.7 Meteorological Data 7 2.8 Local Environmental Conditions 8 2.9 Specific Receptors 10 2.10 Assessment Criteria 10
3. Preliminary Sensitivity Analysis 13 3.1 Introduction 13 3.2 Chimney Height Assessment 14
4. Detailed Modelling – Air Quality Assessment 18 4.1 Modelled Parameters 18 4.2 Determining Significance. 19 4.3 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 21 4.4 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 23 4.5 Particles (PM10) 23 4.6 Particles (PM2.5) 24 4.7 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) 25
5. Air Quality Predictions at Nearby Specific Receptors 27 5.1 Introduction 27 5.2 Results for Nitrogen Dioxide 27
6. Cumulative Impact Assessment with the Recently Approved Energy Recovery Facility at Pebble Hall 29
6.1 Introduction 29 6.2 Emissions Data 29 6.3 Nitrogen Dioxide 29
7. Conclusions 32 7.1 Introduction 32
Appendices 34
Appendix A Detailed Discussion on Model Input Data 35
Appendix B Output from the D1 Chimney Height Calculation 38
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
ii
Figures, Tables and Equations
Figure 2-1 The Local Setting Showing the Location of the Pebble Hall TAD Facility Development Site3 Figure 2-2 Source Locations and Building Layout (See Table 2-5 for Buildings Data) 4 Figure 2-3 Variation in Hourly Average NOX and Ozone Concentrations at the Market Harborough
AURN Site – February 2012 6 Figure 2-4 Coventry Windrose – 2012 8 Figure 3-1 Predicted Maximum Annual Average PC NO2 (µg m
-3) Associated with Different Stack
Heights – 4 CHP Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack 16 Figure 3-2 Predicted Maximum Annual Average NO2 Process Contribution Associated with Different
Stack Heights – 4 CHP Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack 17 Figure 4-1 Annual Average Predicted Environmental Concentration for NO2 – Four CHP Engines
Discharging Via a Common Stack 22 Figure 6-1 Maximum Annual Average Process Contribution for NO2 – Cumulative Impact of the TAD
Facility and the ERF Development 31
Table 2-1 Emission Source Parameters 5 Table 2-2 Modelled Pollutant Emissions Data 5 Table 2-3 Background Air Quality Data for the Theddingworth Area 7 Table 2-4 Modelled Meteorological Parameters 8 Table 2-5 Modelled Building Data 9 Table 2-6 Specific Receptors 10 Table 3-1 Results from Meteorological Data Sensitivity Analysis – PC NO2 13 Table 3-2 Results from Buildings Sensitivity Analysis – PC NO2 13 Table 3-3 Results from Terrain Effects Sensitivity Analysis – PC NO2 14 Table 3-4 Results from Surface Roughness Sensitivity Analysis – PC NO2 14 Table 3-5 Results from Iterative Chimney Height Assessment – Annual Average PC for NO2 15 Table 4-1 Emission Source Parameters used in the Detailed Assessment 18 Table 4-2 Modelled Emissions Data – Normal Operation 18 Table 4-3 Definition of Impact Magnitude for Changes in Annual Mean Nitrogen Dioxide and PM10
Concentration 19 Table 4-4 Air Quality Impact Descriptors for Changes to Annual Mean Nitrogen Dioxide
Concentrations 19 Table 4-5 Air Quality Impact Descriptors for Changes to Annual Mean PM10 Concentrations at a
Receptor 20 Table 4-6 Results from Detailed Assessment for Nitrogen Dioxide – Four CHP Engines Discharging
Via a Common Stack 21 Table 4-7 Modelling Predictions for Carbon Monoxide Due to Emissions from the Four CHP
Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack 23 Table 4-8 Maximum Process Contribution for Particles (PM10) Due to Emissions from the Four CHP
Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack 24 Table 4-9 Modelling Predictions for Particles (PM2.5) Due to Emissions from the Four CHP Engines
Discharging Via a Common Stack 25 Table 4-10 Maximum Process Contribution for VOCs Due to Emissions from the Four CHP Engines
Discharging Via a Common Stack 26 Table 5-1 Maximum Annual Average Process Contributions for NO2 at Specific Receptors 27 Table 6-1 Emission Source Parameters 29 Table 6-2 Modelled Pollutant Emissions Data 29 Table 6-3 Results from Detailed Assessment for Nitrogen Dioxide – Cumulative Impact of
Emissions from the Four CHP Engines and the ERF Development 30
Equation 1 Calculation of Annual Average NO2 Predicted Environmental Concentration (PEC) 5 Equation 2 Calculation of Hourly Average NO2 Predicted Environmental Concentration (PEC) 5 Equation 3 Calculation of Annual Average NO2 Predicted Environmental Concentration 35 Equation 4 Calculation of Hourly Average NO2 Predicted Environmental Concentration 35
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
iii
Authorisation Sheet
Client: Welland Waste Management Ltd
Project: Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Version: Final
PREPARED BY
Signature:
Name: Geoff Fynes
Position: Director, GF Environmental Ltd
Date: June 2013
AGREED BY
Signature:
Name: Mike Jordan
Position: Managing Director, Advanced Organics Ltd
Date: June 2013
DISTRIBUTION
Statutory Consultees
Welland Waste Management Ltd
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
iv
Summary
Detailed atmospheric dispersion modelling has been undertaken of emissions to atmosphere from four CHP engines associated with the proposed Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) facility to be built on the Pebble Hall site near Theddingworth, by Welland Waste Management Ltd. The modelling was undertaken using process data provided by technology providers to the development, Advanced Organics Ltd. Modelling was undertaken for scenarios that represented the Normal Operating conditions for the four CHP engines, operating at maximum output and discharging emissions to atmosphere via a 17m tall common stack.
The modelling was undertaken using ADMS Version 5 and was based upon the conclusions from a sensitivity analysis to determine which model parameters (buildings, terrain, surface roughness and meteorological data sets) would produce the most realistic set of predictions and then the set of worst-case predictions. Adjacent structures were shown to be likely to have a significant impact on the dispersion of emissions from the four CHP engines and therefore the buildings module was included within the modelling. Terrain effects were also shown to be significant and were included in the detailed assessment. It was concluded that a surface roughness factor of 0.3m and the 2008 hourly average meteorological data set for the nearby Coventry Airport measurement station should be used.
The model predicted that pollutant emissions from the four CHP engines would not result in exceedences of the objective limits defined within the Air Quality Regulations or relevant Environmental Assessment Levels from Environment Agency Horizontal Guidance Note H1 Annex F.
Modelling predicted that under normal operating conditions the maximum annual average Predicted Environmental Concentration for NO2 associated with emissions from the four CHP engines would be ~18 µg m
-3, approximately 46% of the 40 µg m
-3
annual objective value. The location of the maximum Process Contribution is close to the site boundary, and so will not affect local residents or people working nearby. The maximum annual average NO2 Process Contribution was predicted to be ~8 µg m
-3,
which is equivalent to ~29% of the AQS objective value. The maximum hourly average NO2 PC was predicted to be ~98 µg m
-3, or ~49% of the hourly average AQS of 200
µg m-3, and was predicted to occur within the confines of the site boundary.
Based on the Environmental Protection UK impact descriptive terms the potential impact on local air quality at the location of maximum Process Contribution, close to the site boundary, would be described as large with a slight adverse impact. The corresponding values at nearby residential receptors would be classified as small to imperceptible. Model predictions for nearby residential receptors indicated that annual NO2 Process Contributions at these locations were likely to be between ~2% and ~3% of the AQS objective. When taken in conjunction with the estimated background concentration of 10.4 µg m
-3 for 2013, the impact on local air quality of emissions of
NOX from the four CHP engines associated with the TAD facility can be screened out as insignificant.
Detailed modelling predicted that the maximum annual average PC for particles (PM10) was likely to be ~0.4 µg m
-3, ~1% of the 40 µg m
-3 objective limit, while the maximum
daily average PC was predicted to be ~1.1 µg m-3, equivalent to ~2% of the 50 µg m
-3
daily average objective value. The maximum annual average PM10 process contribution represents a small to imperceptible change in ambient concentration and likely to have a negligible impact on local air quality in the vicinity of the development, as defined by the Environmental Protection UK assessment criteria. Similar conclusions were drawn for emissions of carbon monoxide and volatile organic compounds.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
v
A cumulative impact assessment was undertaken for emissions from the proposed TAD facility and the approved energy recovery facility to be developed on the Pebble Hall site. The results from modelling confirmed that the cumulative impact of emissions from the two facilities would be well within relevant AQS objective values, and can be screened out as insignificant in relation to Environment Agency guidance.
The overall conclusion from detailed modelling of emissions from the proposed TAD facility to be built by Welland Waste Management Ltd at Pebble Hall, near Theddingworth, is that the potential impact on local air quality is likely to be low, and unlikely to pose a significant threat to the health of local residents or people working nearby.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
1
1. Introduction
1.1 Background to the Study
1.1.1 Welland Waste Management Ltd (WWM) is proposing to install a thermophilic aerobic
digestion (TAD) process on its premises at Pebble Hall, Theddingworth, Leicestershire.
The proposed development will provide waste treatment for two waste streams, oil-rich
food waste such as pork pies, sausages, chips, as well as general food waste.
Approximately 70% (28,000tpa) of incoming material will be comprised of oil rich food and
~30% (12,000tpa) will be comprised of general food waste.
1.1.2 Prior to the food waste being treated in the TAD it will be removed from the packaging, it
will then be fed into a homogenisation tank with screening system to ensure that the
particle size is less than 12mm, and that any non-organic fractions are removed; water will
be added as necessary. The waste will then be fed into a centrifuge to extract the oil. This
oil will then be transferred off site for refining into bio-diesel by third party organisations.
Four CHP engines are also to be installed within the TAD facility and will burn bio-diesel
fuel brought to site from third party producers, and will generate ~4 MWe of renewable
electricity to the local distribution network and up to ~4 MWth of thermal energy for use
within the drying processes associated with the TAD facility.
1.1.3 Planning permission was granted in 2008 for an energy recovery facility (ERF) on the
Pebble Hall site for a wood pyrolysis plant to be built in conjunction with Prestige Thermal
Energy (PTE) of South Africa. The air quality assessment considers the potential
cumulative impact of the TAD facility and the ERF to provide an estimate of potential worst
case air quality impacts when both developments are operational.
1.1.4 This report describes the data used in the modelling, the methodology adopted,
assumptions made and the results generated by the model. Modelling was based upon
emissions and process data supplied by Advanced Organics Ltd and its technology
providers, and site drawings of provided by GP Planning Ltd. Emissions data and fluegas
discharge characteristics of the gas engine associated with the ERF were provided by
PTE, the technology providers for the wood pyrolysis plant.
1.1.5 The objective of the atmospheric dispersion modelling exercise was to assess the potential
impact on local air quality of process emissions from the CHP engines associated with the
TAD facility to be built at Pebble Hall, Theddingworth, in terms of ground level
concentrations of pollutants designated by the UK Air Quality Regulations.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
2
1.2 ADMS Version 5
1.2.1 The modelling software used in the air quality assessment was ADMS Version 5, one of a
range of models available for modelling the impact on local air quality of pollutant
emissions to atmosphere. Those used routinely in the UK for this sort of application include
United States Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) models such as AERMOD, and
the ADMS models developed in the UK by Cambridge Environmental Research
Consultants (CERC)1.
1.2.2 The ADMS model can be used to assess ambient pollutant concentrations arising from a
wide variety of emissions sources associated with an industrial process. It can be used for
initial screening or more refined determination of ground level pollutant concentrations on
either a short-term basis (up to 24 hour averages) or longer term (monthly, quarterly or
annual averages).
ii 1 Cambridge Environmental Research Consultants Ltd, ADMS Version 5, November 2012
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
3
2. Modelling Input Data
2.1 Introduction
2.1.1 This section provides a summary of the input data used in the ADMS model.
2.2 Site Location and Local Setting
2.2.1 The site where the TAD facility is to be located is on land belonging to Pebble Hall Farm,
between Theddingworth and Husbands Bosworth. Figure 2-1 shows the local setting with
the location of the exhaust stacks associated with the CHP engines and the engine
exhaust of the ERF marked with red stars.
2.2.2 The area is predominantly rural and the specific receptors that were included in the
modelling are indicated by the numbered blue circles. The nearest residential properties
are ~600 metres to the north of the development site. The nearest sensitive ecological
receptor in the vicinity of the site is the Coombe Hill Hollow SSSI (Receptor No. 1), which is
designated as an acid grassland and heathland.
Figure 2-1 The Local Setting Showing the Location of the Pebble Hall TAD Facility Development Site
Ordnance Survey © Crown Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Licence number 100048653
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
4
2.3 Plant Details
2.3.1 ADMS requires that sources of emissions are defined in terms of dimensions, location and
physical characteristics of temperature and velocity. This modelling study has been carried
out to assess the potential impact on local air quality due to releases of atmospheric
pollutants from the four CHP engines associated with the proposed TAD facility.
2.3.2 The locations of the modelled stacks, relative to on-site buildings and structures are
presented in Figure 2-2. Buildings are discussed further in Section 2.8.4.
Figure 2-2 Source Locations and Building Layout (See Table 2-5 for Buildings Data)
2.4 Emissions Data
2.4.1 The operation of the TAD facility will be regulated by the Environment Agency in line with
the requirements of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) (Amendment)
Regulations 2013, as amended by the implementation of the EC Industrial Emissions
Directive (IED). Process information and pollutant emissions data for the TAD facility were
supplied by Advanced Organics Ltd2, and the corresponding data for the ERF were
supplied by PTE3, technology providers for the ERF development.
iv 2 Email communications from Mike Jordan of Advanced Organics Ltd.
3 Telephone conversation and subsequent email communication from Richard Bingham of Prestige Thermal
Energy
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
5
2.4.2 The four CHP engines associated with the TAD facility are housed separately in dedicated
enclosures, but the engine exhausts are likely to be co-located on a common support
structure. This has the added benefit of enhanced buoyancy effects as well as mitigating
the visual impact of the four engine exhausts, as they will be perceived by the casual
observer as a single stack. Emissions from the CHP engines were modelled as a single
common stack based upon the combined release from the four engines, as recommended
by best practice guidance for atmospheric dispersion modelling.
2.4.3 The modelled source and emissions data used in the preliminary sensitivity analysis are
summarised below.
Table 2-1 Emission Source Parameters
Parameter CHP Engine Exhausts (Common Stack)
Stack Height (m) 15
Stack Diameter (m) 1.0
Efflux Temperature (°C) 490
Efflux Velocity (m s-1) 20.5
Location (x,y) 466100,284524
Table 2-2 Modelled Pollutant Emissions Data
Pollutant CHP Engines (Common Stack)
Mass Emission Rate (g s
-1)
NOx 5.31
CO 5.24
Particulates 0.16
VOCs 0.61
2.4.4 The pollutant emission rates calculated for this condition represent a worst-case scenario
with emissions at the maximum likely to be allowable under the conditions of an
Environmental Permit that will be required prior to the operation of the TAD facility.
2.5 Atmospheric Chemistry
2.5.1 The atmospheric chemistry module in ADMS was not used for the current assessment.
Instead, an empirical approach recommended in the Environment Agency’s guidance4 on
the modelling of NOX emissions from combustion process, was used to calculate annual
average and hourly average NO2 ground-level concentrations from model reported
average NOX concentrations.
Equation 1 Calculation of Annual Average NO2 Predicted Environmental Concentration (PEC)
(Annual NOX Modelled x 0.7) + Annual NO2 Monitored
Equation 2 Calculation of Hourly Average NO2 Predicted Environmental Concentration (PEC)
(Hourly NOX Modelled x 0.35) + (Annual NO2 Monitored x 2)
v 4 http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Conversion_ratios_for__NOx_and_NO2_.pdf
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
6
2.5.2 This method may overestimate the PEC for NO2 in close proximity to the site as
conversion of NOX to NO2 is unlikely to be instantaneous, as it requires mixing of the plume
with the ambient air and its associated oxidant species. Local circumstances can also
affect the availability of atmospheric oxidants required for the conversion of NOX to NO2.
2.5.3 Atmospheric chemistry in the Theddingworth area is not constant, as shown by data
recorded at the Market Harborough AURN monitoring station, ~5 miles to the east, that
provide a reasonable indication of the air quality conditions in the area around the
development site in Theddingworth. Archive data for February 2012 show the variability of
hourly average NOX, NO2 and ozone concentrations, and indicate that the availability of
atmospheric oxidants such as ozone is significantly lower at certain times, and varies
significantly on a daily basis.
Figure 2-3 Variation in Hourly Average NOX and Ozone Concentrations at the Market Harborough AURN Site – February 2012
2.5.4 As can be seen, the NOX and ozone curves tend to mirror one another, with ozone
concentrations higher when the NOX concentrations are lower and vice versa. Similar
patterns are exhibited for other months throughout the year.
2.5.5 The NOX/NO2 concentrations are markedly higher when ozone concentrations are lower,
with NOX being the dominant species (higher levels of nitric oxide). Under these variable
conditions, the atmospheric transformation of NOX to NO2, associated with emissions from
the CHP engines associated with the TAD facility to be built at Pebble Hall, will be affected
to a varying degree. Accordingly, there is likely to be a proportion of the year when the
atmospheric chemistry in the Theddingworth area may be restricted in its capacity to
convert NOX to NO2 and the model predictions may overestimate the significance of annual
average NO2 predictions at receptors in the vicinity of the Pebble Hall site.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
7
2.6 Background Air Quality
2.6.1 Estimates of background concentrations for NOX, NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 are provided by
DEFRA5 at a resolution of 1km x 1km grid spacing.
2.6.2 The Pebble Hall development site is close to the Northamptonshire-Leicestershire border,
and data were obtained for 2013 for locations within Daventry and Harborough District
Councils. The data show that for the area in the vicinity of the proposed development site,
current and future estimates for background concentrations of the above pollutants, without
any Process Contribution from the proposed development, are well below their respective
Air Quality Standards.
2.6.3 Data for the grid squares immediately adjacent to the ERF development site were used to
provide the basis for assessment for the general area around the site, relative to existing
background concentrations. The air quality assessment for the TAD facility was based
upon the estimated background concentrations for 2013, and the estimated background
concentration for 2013 for nitrogen dioxide was 10.4 µg m-3, reflecting the rural
characteristics of the area around Theddingworth.
Table 2-3 Background Air Quality Data for the Theddingworth Area
Pollutant Annual Average Concentration (g/m3)*
NO2 10.4
NOx 14.2
PM10 15.2
PM2.5 10.0
* Average of concentrations at grid points 465500,285500 466500,285500 and 465500,284500
2.7 Meteorological Data
2.7.1 The prevailing and strongest winds in the area, as shown by the 2012 Coventry windrose
below, are from a southerly to westerly vector. A range of other wind directions are also
experienced frequently in the area. The Coventry Airport meteorological station is located
approximately 30 kilometres to the west of the Pebble Hall development site, and is
thought to provide the most representative data for the Theddingworth area.
LAQM.TG(09)6 recommends meteorological stations within 30km of an assessment area
as being suitable for detailed modelling.
vii 5 http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/maps/maps2010.html
6 Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance LAQM.TG(09), DEFRA, 2009.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
8
Figure 2-4 Coventry Windrose – 2012
2.7.2 All meteorological data used in the assessment was provided by Atmospheric Dispersion
Modelling (ADM) Ltd, which is an accredited distributor of meteorological data within the
UK. The meteorological data included nine parameters defined in Table 2-4.
Table 2-4 Modelled Meteorological Parameters
Parameter Description
YEAR Year of observation
TDAY Julian Day (1 to 366) of observation
THOUR Hour of Observation
T0C Temperature (ºC)
U Wind speed (m s-1)
PHI Wind Direction (nearest 10 degrees)
P Precipitation (mm)
CL Cloud cover (Oktas)
RHUM Relative Humidity (%)
2.8 Local Environmental Conditions
2.8.1 Local environmental conditions describe the factors that might influence the dispersion
process (such as nearby structures, sharply rising terrain, etc.) and also describe the
locations at which pollutant concentrations are to be predicted. These include:
Surface Roughness
2.8.2 Surface roughness defines the amount of near-ground turbulence that occurs as a
consequence of surface features, such as land use (i.e. agriculture, water bodies,
urbanisation, open parkland, etc.). A value of 0.5m is typical of open parkland and
suburbia. Agricultural areas may have a surface roughness of approximately 0.2m to 0.3m
whereas large cities may have a roughness of 1 to 1.5m.
0
0
3
1.5
6
3.1
10
5.1
16
8.2
(knots)
(m/s)
Wind speed
0°
22.5°
45°
67.5°
90°
112.5°
135°
157.5°
180°
202.5°
225°
247.5°
270°
292.5°
315°
337.5°
300
600
900
1200
1500
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
9
2.8.3 A surface roughness factor of 0.3m was considered likely for the area in the vicinity of the
development site, and was used in the sensitivity analysis.
Nearby Buildings and Structures
2.8.4 The proximity of solid structures, such as buildings, to an emission source can affect the
dispersion of a plume, particularly in the vicinity of that structure. The potential impact of
this occurring was assessed based on the buildings data presented in Table 2-5. The main
process building was included in the modelling. The dimensions of the modelled buildings
were taken from site drawings provided by GP Planning Ltd.
Table 2-5 Modelled Building Data
Building Height (m) Length (m) Width (m) Angle (o) Main Building
Gasifier Building 13 25 48.6 135 Yes for ERF
Canopy 13 25 16.6 135
TAD facility Main Building 1 9 29.9 34.4 33
TAD facility Main Building 2 9 42 20 33 Yes for CHP
engines
2.8.5 Building locations and dimensions were estimated from a combination of site plans
provided by GP Planning Ltd, and the GIS facility on the MAGIC website7.
Local Terrain
2.8.6 Local terrain can affect wind flow patterns and, consequently, can affect the dispersion of
atmospheric pollutants. The effects of terrain are not normally noticeable where the
gradient is less than 1:10. There is little in the way of steep terrain near to the development
site, nevertheless, terrain effects were included in the initial sensitivity analysis of the
detailed atmospheric dispersion modelling.
Output Grid
2.8.7 When setting up a receptor grid it is important to ensure that there are sufficient receptor
points to be able to predict the magnitude and location of the maximum Process
Contribution. If the grid of receptor points is too widely spaced, the maximum concentration
may be underestimated. The initial sensitivity analysis was undertaken using a 40m grid
spacing. Subsequent modelling was undertaken for an 8km x 8km grid with 80m spacing
to ensure that the full extent of the dispersion of emissions from the CHP engines could be
illustrated on the contour plots shown in Section 4.
ix 7 http://www.magic.gov.uk/MagicMap.aspx
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
10
2.9 Specific Receptors
2.9.1 Ten specific receptors were modelled indicating the location of nearby properties, farms
etc., where members of the general population may be exposed to airborne pollutants. The
nearby Coombe Hill Hollow SSSI was also included. The model was set to predict ground
level concentrations at the specific receptor locations, at an elevation of 1.5 metres, typical
of the breathing height of the general public. The locations of these specific receptors are
shown in Figure 1-1.
Table 2-6 Specific Receptors
Name Receptor X Y Distance from Source
(metres)
Coombe Hill Hollow SSSI 1 467900 283600 1,935
Hothorpe Hall 2 466905 285034 726
Pebble Hall 3 466083 285117 498
Dene Lodge 4 465877 285149 634
Woodside Farm 5 465706 285058 700
Home Farm 6 467726 285102 1,510
Bosworth Hall 7 464743 284381 1,564
Bosworth Mill Meadow SSSI 8 462859 282202 4,215
Theddingworth Lodge 9 465227 286766 2,355
Residence (S.E. Theddingworth) 10 466477 285464 826
2.9.2 Receptors 8 and 9 are outside of the Output Grid and therefore do not appear in
Figure 2-1, but calculations were still undertaken by the ADMS model at their specific
coordinates.
2.10 Assessment Criteria
2.10.1 The TAD facility will be subject to regulation by the Environment Agency, under the
Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2013, which will
incorporate the requirements of the EC Industrial Emissions Directive8, with associated
emission limit values (ELVs) for the following pollutants:
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX);
Particulates;
Carbon Monoxide (CO);
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs).
Nitrogen Dioxide
2.10.2 All combustion processes release a mixture of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) which comprise
varying proportions of nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). The majority of the NOX
that is released from combustion processes is in the form of NO, which subsequently
reacts with atmospheric oxidants such as ozone (O3) to form NO2.
2.10.3 The Air Quality Standards for NO2 include two objectives to be achieved by 31 December
2005:
x 8 Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on industrial emissions (integrated
pollution prevention and control) (recast)
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
11
An annual limit of 40 µg m-3
; and,
A limit for the one-hour mean of 200 µg m-3
, not to be exceeded more than 18 times a year (equivalent to the 99.79
th percentile).
Particulates
2.10.4 Solid matter suspended in the atmosphere which has particles with a diameter of less than
10 µm, is referred to as PM10. It should be noted that the regulation of emissions of
particulates from processes such as the gas engines associated with the proposed Pebble
Hall ERF development are associated with total particulate release, rather than the PM10
fraction.
2.10.5 The Air Quality Standards include the following objectives for PM10:
An annual limit of 40 µg m-3
, to be achieved by 2004;
A daily limit of 50 µg m-3
, not to be exceeded more than 35 times a year (the 90.41th
percentile) to be achieved by 2004;
A daily limit of 50 µg m-3
, not to be exceeded more than 7 times a year (the 98.08th
percentile) to be achieved by 2010; and,
An annual limit of 20 µg m-3
, to be achieved by 2010.
2.10.6 The 2010 objectives have yet to be formally incorporated into UK legislation.
Carbon Monoxide
2.10.7 Carbon monoxide (CO) is a gas formed by the incomplete combustion of carbon
containing fuels. In general, the more efficient the combustion process, the lower the
carbon monoxide emission. The main outdoor source of carbon monoxide is currently
emissions from road transport, in particular passenger vehicles, which in 2006 accounted
for almost 44% of total emissions in the UK of ~2.27 million tonne.
2.10.8 In their 1994 report, EPAQS recommended an air quality standard of 11.6 mg m-3 (10ppm)
as a running 8 hour mean. The EPAQS recommendation is intended to limit the exposure
of the population, including susceptible individuals, and specifies levels at which harm is
unlikely to occur.
2.10.9 The Air Quality Standards include an objective for CO to be achieved by 31 December
2003:
A limit of 10 mg m-3
expressed as a maximum daily 8 hour running mean value.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
2.10.10 Volatile Organic Compounds is a generic term applied to a range of organic hydrocarbon
substances that have a high vapour pressure and low water solubility. VOCs typically are
industrial solvents, and are often components of petroleum fuels, hydraulic fluids, paint
thinners, dry cleaning agents, etc.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
12
2.10.11 Benzene is likely to comprise a very small proportion (<5%) of any emissions of VOCs
from the CHP engines associated with the proposed TAD facility. Nevertheless, to provide
a worst case assessment of the potential impact on local air quality of emissions from the
TAD facility, reference was made to the AQS objective value for 2010 of 5 µg m-3.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
13
3. Preliminary Sensitivity Analysis
3.1 Introduction
3.1.1 A preliminary sensitivity analysis was undertaken on the basis of maximum emissions of
NOX from the four CHP engines discharging via a common stack, and their potential
impact on ambient NO2 concentrations. This is generally the most significant pollutant in
terms of Local Air Quality Management, particularly in relation to the annual average
objective value of 40 µg m-3. The initial sensitivity analysis was undertaken on the basis of
a stack height of 15 metres.
3.1.2 An initial review of the results from the sensitivity analysis indicated that the maximum
predicted Process Contribution would occur off-site. The assessment therefore considers
the maximum predicted Process Contribution across the modelled area (4km x 3.6km).
Meteorological Data
3.1.3 The results of the meteorological data sensitivity analysis for the Coventry meteorological
data are presented in Table 3-1, and indicate that the 2008 meteorological data resulted in
the highest predicted maximum annual average NO2 Process Concentration. The 2008
and 2010 meteorological data resulted in the highest hourly average NO2 Process
Contribution (~180 µg m-3).
Table 3-1 Results from Meteorological Data Sensitivity Analysis – PC NO2
Run Name Source Assessment
Levels (µg m-3)
Meteorological Data Year
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Annual Average CHP Engines
Common Stack
40 6.3 5.0 2.8 6.0 5.1
Hourly Average ** 200 180 165 70 97 180
* Note this run was based on: Surface Roughness – 0.3 metres; Building Effects Module – Inactive; Terrain Module – Inactive; Release Height – 15 m; Meteorological Data – Variable.
** Expressed as the 99.79th percentile
3.1.4 The highest annual average NO2 PC value was obtained using the 2008 meteorological
data, and this data set was used for a worst case assessment in subsequent detailed
modelling.
Building Effects
3.1.5 Modelling of building downwash effects was undertaken and the results are presented in
Table 3-2. The results clearly indicate that building effects result in elevated Process
Contributions of pollutants discharged from the 15 metre tall common stack of the CHP
engine exhausts, and so were included in subsequent detailed modelling.
Table 3-2 Results from Buildings Sensitivity Analysis – PC NO2
Run Name Source Assessment Levels (µg m
-3)
Buildings Module
Yes No
Annual Average CHP Engines Common
Stack
40 7.0 6.3
Hourly Average 200 180 180
* Note this run was based on: Surface Roughness – 0.3 metres; Building Effects Module – Variable; Terrain Module – Inactive; Release Height – 15m; Meteorological Data – Coventry 2008
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
14
Terrain
3.1.6 There is no significant terrain (>10%) in the vicinity of the Pebble Hall development site,
nevertheless, the potential impact of terrain effects was considered as part of the sensitivity
analysis. The results are shown in Table 3-3.
Table 3-3 Results from Terrain Effects Sensitivity Analysis – PC NO2
Run Name
Source Assessment Levels
(µg m-3)
Terrain Effects Module
Terrain & Buildings
Yes No
Annual Average CHP Engines
Common Stack
40 7.4 6.7 6.3
Hourly Average 200 68 68 180
* Note this run was based on: Surface Roughness –0.3 metres; Building Effects Module – Variable; Terrain Module – Variable; Release Height – 15m; Meteorological Data – Coventry 2008
3.1.7 The results confirm that terrain effects have a significant impact on model predictions for
the CHP engines, and when considered in conjunction with the “Buildings Effects” module
produces a further slight increase. It is unclear why there is a marked reduction in the
hourly average NO2 PC when terrain effects are considered. Terrain effects were included
in the detailed assessment.
Surface Roughness
3.1.8 The results of the dispersion modelling sensitivity analysis for surface roughness are
presented in Table 3-4.
Table 3-4 Results from Surface Roughness Sensitivity Analysis – PC NO2
Run Name Source Assessment Levels
(µg m-3)
Surface Roughness (m)
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5
Annual Average CHP Engines Common
Stack
40 6.4 7.1 6.7 8.0
Hourly Average 200 52 58 68 120
* Note this run was based on: Surface Roughness – Variable; Building Effects Module – Active; Terrain Module – Active; Release Height – 15m; Meteorological Data – Coventry 2008
3.1.9 The results indicate that a surface roughness of 0.5m would result in the highest annual
average NO2 PC (~8.0 µg m-3), as well as the highest hourly average NO2 PC (120
µg m-3). A surface roughness of 0.5m is used to define an environment dominated by
parkland and open suburbia, which is inappropriate for the locality in the vicinity of Pebble
Hall, therefore a surface roughness factor of 0.3m (maximum agricultural classification)
was selected as the appropriate description of the surrounding land use and was used in
subsequent detailed modelling.
3.1.10 In view of the open aspect of the Coventry Airport meteorological data measurement
station, a surface roughness factor of 0.1m was selected.
3.2 Chimney Height Assessment
3.2.1 Two approaches were adopted with regard to determining the most appropriate stack
height in relation to the common stack of the CHP engines, as follows:
Calculating stack height using the D1 calculation procedure; and,
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
15
Iterative modelling of stack height using the ADMS model.
3.2.2 The results of each approach are discussed in the following section.
D1 Chimney Height Calculation
3.2.3 The methodology defined in Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Pollution (HMIP, now the
Environment Agency) guidance note D1 was used to calculate the appropriate height of
the common stack associated with the CHP engines. As a minimum, the guidance
recommends that a stack is at least 3m taller than the height of the building on which the
emission stack is located, or near to. In this instance the minimum height for the common
stack would be ~12 metres as the adjacent building is 9 metres to the ridge.
3.2.4 The D1 chimney height methodology was followed based on discharge conditions and
emission rates defined in Table 2-1 and Table 2-2. Following this methodology, D1
determined the stack height for the common stack associated with the four CHP engines to
be ~17 metres. The printout from the D1 calculations is presented in Appendix B.
Iterative Modelling of Chimney Height
3.2.5 An iterative assessment of stack height was undertaken using the ADMS model to
determine what the appropriate stack height should be to facilitate effective dispersion of
atmospheric pollutants from the common stack of the four CHP engine exhausts. The
results of the modelling are presented in Table 3-5 and Figure 3-1 and, and are based
upon the maximum PC value across the receptor grid.
Table 3-5 Results from Iterative Chimney Height Assessment – Annual Average PC for NO2
Stack Height (m)*
Maximum Annual Average PC Common Stack of 4 CHP Engines
(g m-3)
Maximum Hourly Average PC Common Stack of 4 CHP Engines
(g m-3)
12 20.3 117.5
15 12.8 107.6
17 8.6 98.2
18 7.2 85.8
21 5.2 54.7
24 3.5 24.9
27 2.9 16.0
30 2.3 13.4
* Note modelling was based on: Surface Roughness – 0.3 metres; Building Effects Module – Active; Terrain Module – Active; Release Height – Variable; Meteorological Data – Coventry 2008
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
16
Figure 3-1 Predicted Maximum Annual Average PC NO2 (µg m-3) Associated with Different Stack Heights – 4 CHP Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack
20.3
12.8
8.6
7.2
5.2
3.52.9
2.3
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Concentra
on(ugm
-3)
ChimneyHeight(metres)
MaximumAnnualNO2PC
3.2.6 The results from the chimney height assessment for the four CHP engines discharging via
a common stack indicate that the maximum annual average NO2 Process Contribution
would be ~9 µg m-3 for the D1-calculated stack height of 17 metres. There is a distinct
change in the gradient of the line in the above figure for a chimney height of 17 metres,
which is indicative of the height required for emissions from the CHP engines to escape
from the effects of downwash associated with adjacent buildings and structures.
3.2.7 The results from the D1 calculation suggested a chimney height of 17 metres would
provide effective dispersion of emissions from the four CHP engines discharging from a
common stack, which is supported by the results from detailed modelling using the ADMS
Version 5 model.
3.2.8 When the impact of varying the chimney height of the common stack associated with the
four CHP engines is considered farther afield the following situation is apparent.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
17
Figure 3-2 Predicted Maximum Annual Average NO2 Process Contribution Associated with Different Stack Heights – 4 CHP Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack
3.2.9 The contour lines represent a maximum annual average NO2 Process Contribution of 0.4
µg m-3, or 1% of the AQS objective value. In line with Environment Agency guidance,
Process Contributions outside of the 0.4 µg m-3 contour lines can be screened out as
insignificant. The contour plots represent the case for a chimney height of 15 metres (blue),
18 metres (red), 21 metres (green), 24 metres (orange) and 27 metres (purple) and show
that there is little benefit, in terms of the extent of the area enclosed within the 0.4 µg m-3
contour line, from increasing the height of the chimney from 15 to 27 metres.
3.2.10 In view of the results shown in Figure 3-1, where there is a break in the slope at 17 metres
for the annual average process contribution, it is considered that a stack height of 17m is
the appropriate discharge height for the common stack associated with the four CHP
engine exhausts.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
18
4. Detailed Modelling – Air Quality Assessment
4.1 Modelled Parameters
4.1.1 Detailed atmospheric dispersion modelling of emissions from the four CHP engines
associated with the proposed TAD facility at Pebble Hall was undertaken on the basis of
the conclusions of the sensitivity analysis as follows:
Release height – 4 CHP engines via a common stack : 17m
Building module: active
Terrain effects: active
Surface roughness: 0.3 metres
Meteorological data: Coventry 2008
4.1.2 Modelling considered emissions from the four CHP engines associated with the proposed
TAD facility, both in isolation as well as cumulatively with those from the ERF as a
separate development within the Pebble Hall development site.
4.1.3 Emissions of NOX, CO, Particles (PM10) and VOCs were assessed in line with the Air
Quality Regulations and their objective limits (where applicable), or against specific
pollutant Environmental Assessment Limits (EALs) detailed in Environment Agency
Horizontal Guidance Note H1 Annex F.
4.1.4 Information on the discharge characteristics under normal operating condition were
supplied by Advanced Organics Ltd and are summarised below in Table 4-1 and
Table 4-2.
Table 4-1 Emission Source Parameters used in the Detailed Assessment
Parameter 4 CHP Engines - TAD Facility
Stack Height (m) 17
Stack Diameter (m) 1.0
Efflux Temperature (°C) 490
Efflux Velocity (m s-1
) 20.5
Location (x,y) 466100,284524
4.1.5 Pollutant emission rates were calculated from fluegas volumetric flowrate data and
achievable release data provided by Advance Organics Ltd’s technology providers (mg
Nm-3) for the CHP engines.
Table 4-2 Modelled Emissions Data – Normal Operation
Substance Discharge Rate (g/s) (mg Nm
-3)
TAD Facility
NOX 5.31 (921)*
CO 5.24 (910)
Particulates 0.16 (0.1)**
VOC 0.61 (105)
Note: * NOX emissions abated by 70% by hydrogen enrichment of the CHP fuel gas ** Particulate emission factor = 0.1 g/BHP/hr
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
19
4.1.6 The CHP engines will burn biodiesel fuels supplied commercially by third party suppliers
and it is expected that the environmental permit for the TAD facility will only include
emission limits for NOX, CO, particulates and VOCs for the CHP engines. Accordingly, the
assessment for the TAD facility focused solely on the pollutants listed in Table 4-2
Modelled Emissions Data – Normal Operation.
4.1.7 The results from detailed modelling of the Normal Operation Case are presented in the
following section. Results are presented in terms of the maximum Process Contribution
(PC), apart from those of Nitrogen Dioxide and Particles (PM10 and PM2.5) which are also
reported as the Predicted Environmental Concentration (PEC) taking into account the PC
and the estimated background concentration for the area.
4.2 Determining Significance.
NO2 and PM10
4.2.1 The descriptive terms for the impact significance for NO2 and PM10 are based on those
published in Development Control: Planning for Air Quality (2010 Update) prepared by
Environmental Protection UK. The descriptors are reproduced in Table 4-3, Table 4-4 and
Table 4-5 below.
Table 4-3 Definition of Impact Magnitude for Changes in Annual Mean Nitrogen Dioxide and PM10 Concentration
Magnitude of Change Annual Mean Nitrogen Dioxide Annual Mean PM10
Large Increase/decrease >4 μg/m3
Increase/decrease >1.8 μg/m3
Medium Increase/decrease 2 - 4 μg/m3 Increase/decrease 0.9 - 1.8 μg/m
3
Small Increase/decrease 0.4 - 2 μg/m3
Increase/decrease 0.2 - 0.9 μg/m3
Imperceptible Increase/decrease <0.4 μg/m3 Increase/decrease <0.2 μg/m
3
Table 4-4 Air Quality Impact Descriptors for Changes to Annual Mean Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations
Absolute Concentration in Relation to Standard Change in Concentration
Small Medium Large
Decrease concentration with scheme
Above standard without scheme (>40 µg m-3
) Slight Beneficial Moderate Beneficial Substantial Beneficial
Just Below Standard without scheme (36-40 µg m-3
) Slight Beneficial Moderate Beneficial Moderate Beneficial
Below standard without scheme (30-36 µg m-3
) Negligible Slight Beneficial Slight Beneficial
Well Below standard without scheme (<30 µg m-3
) Negligible Negligible Slight Beneficial
Increase With Scheme
Above standard with scheme (>40 µg m-3
) Slight Adverse Moderate Adverse Substantial Adverse
Just Below Standard with scheme (36-40 µg m-3
) Slight Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
Below standard with scheme (30-36 µg m-3
) Negligible Slight Adverse Slight Adverse
Well Below standard with scheme (<30 µg m-3
) Negligible Negligible Slight Adverse
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
20
Table 4-5 Air Quality Impact Descriptors for Changes to Annual Mean PM10 Concentrations at a Receptor
Absolute Concentration in Relation to Objective/Limit Value Change in Number of Days *
Small Medium Large
Increase with Scheme
Above Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (>35 days) Slight Adverse Moderate Adverse Substantial Adverse
Just Below Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (32 to 35
days) Slight Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
Below Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (26 to 32 days) Negligible Slight Adverse Slight Adverse
Well Below Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (<26 days) Negligible Negligible Slight Adverse
Decrease with Scheme
Above Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (>35 days) Slight
Beneficial
Moderate
Beneficial
Substantial
Beneficial
Just Below Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (32 to 35
days)
Slight
Beneficial
Moderate
Beneficial Moderate Beneficial
Below Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (26 to 32 days) Negligible Slight Beneficial Slight Beneficial
Well Below Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (<26 days) Negligible Negligible Slight Beneficial
Other Pollutants
4.2.2 The Environment Agency provides guidance for screening the significance of air quality
impacts associated with the operation of industrial processes9. For long term impacts the
EPR H1 Annex F guidance recommends a 1% significance threshold relative to a long
term AQS or environmental assessment level, with a corresponding 10% significance
threshold for the assessment of short term impacts.
4.2.3 For all other pollutants considered as part of this assessment the following assessment
thresholds were used, as recommended by the Environment Agency in EPR H1 Annex F:
xx 9 Environment Agency, Horizontal Guidance Note H1 Annex F – Air Emissions, December 2011
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
21
A PC of less than 1% of the annual average objective limit should be considered insignificant.
A PC less than 10% of the short-term (hourly) average objective limit should be considered insignificant.
4.3 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
4.3.1 The results of the NO2 modelling are presented in the following section, and represent the
values at the location of maximum Process Contribution across the 8km x 8km output grid.
The data presented are for both the Process Contributions (PC) and the Predicted
Environmental Concentration (PEC) for NO2. The PEC values take into account the
estimated background NO2 concentration and the conversion of the NOX released from the
process, based upon an empirical formula recommended by the Environment Agency10
.
The results for the four CHP engines are based upon the expected daily average emission
limit value to be incorporated into the environmental permit for the TAD facility, that will
prevail for the majority of the operational period.
4.3.2 The results of the NO2 modelling are presented in Table 4-6. The data presented are for
both the Process Contributions (PC) and the Predicted Environmental Concentration
(PEC) for NO2. The PEC values take into account the estimated background NO2
concentration of 10.4 µg m-3 for 2013, the year that the TAD facility is expected to be
commissioned, and the conversion of the NOX released from the process, based upon the
empirical formula approved of by the Environment Agency.
4.3.3 The maximum reported values for the CHP engines are predicted by modelling to occur at
a location ~200 metres to the north-east of the point of release, and reduce significantly
with distance from the site. The results are discussed in the following sections.
Table 4-6 Results from Detailed Assessment for Nitrogen Dioxide – Four CHP Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack
Pollutant Statistic Exceedence Threshold
Averaging Period
Concentration (µg m
-3)
PC/PEC Expressed as %AQS/EAL
(%)
NOX
Annual (PC) 30 - ~11 ~38
Short Term
99.79% (PC) - 1hr ~280 -
NO2
Annual (PEC) 40 - ~18 ~46
Annual (PC) 40 - ~8.0 ~20
Short Term
99.79% (PEC) 200 1hr ~120 ~59
Short Term
99.79% (PC) - 1hr ~98 ~49
4.3.4 The model predicted that when the TAD facility is operational, the maximum annual
average NO2 PEC, taking into account the process contribution (PC) and the estimated
background NO2 concentration for 2013 (10.4 µg m-3 for the modelled output area), would
be ~18 µg m-3, or ~46% of the 40 µg m
-3 annual objective value.
xxi 10
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Conversion_ratios_for__NOx_and_NO2_.pdf
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
22
4.3.5 The maximum annual average NO2 PC across the receptor grid was predicted to be
~8 µg m-3, or ~20% of the annual objective value. In terms of the Environmental Protection
(UK) impact descriptors, the maximum annual average NO2 Process Contribution
represents a large change with a slight adverse impact on local air quality.
4.3.6 The maximum hourly average NO2 PC was predicted to be ~98 µg m-3, expressed as the
99.79th percentile value, and about half of the 200 µg m
-3 objective limit. The location of the
maximum hourly average Process Contribution is ~90 metres to the south-west of the
common stack and is within the site boundary.
4.3.7 The above estimates are based upon worst case emissions, and an estimated background
concentration value of 10.4 µg m-3 for the year 2013 when the TAD facility is expected to
become operational. It should also be noted that the data above relate to the point of
maximum process contribution, which is greater than corresponding values across the
remainder of the modelled output grid. Process contributions are predicted to decrease
rapidly with distance from the stack (See Section 5).
4.3.8 The annual average Predicted Environmental Concentration (existing background plus
Process Contribution) for NO2, associated with the operation of the four CHP engines,
discharging via a common stack, is presented graphically in Figure 4-1.
Figure 4-1 Annual Average Predicted Environmental Concentration for NO2 – Four CHP Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack
Ordnance Survey © Crown Copyright: All rights reserved. License No. 100048653
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
23
4.3.9 The 0.4 µg m-3 contour line, highlighted in orange, represents an increase equivalent to 1%
of the annual AQS objective value (40 µg m-3) above background. Therefore, in all areas
outside this contour, the Process Contribution may be regarded as insignificant in relation
to the Environment Agency’s screening criteria set out in Horizontal Guidance Note H1
Annex F.
4.3.10 The annual average NO2 Process Contribution in Theddingworth represents a value of
about 1 to 2% of the annual objective value for NO2, with the corresponding values at
Hothorpe Hall equivalent to ~2% to ~3% of the AQS objective. Nevertheless, when taken
in consideration with estimated background concentrations from the DEFRA Background
Maps (2010) website, the PEC value in Theddingworth represents a value that is about a
quarter of the AQS objective value. In terms of the Environmental Protection UK impact
descriptors the predicted increases in annual average NO2 concentrations in
Theddingworth, due to emissions of NOX from the four CHP engines, represent a small
change with a negligible impact on local air quality.
4.3.11 In relation to Environment Agency guidance for the assessment of long term air quality
impacts, the annual average NO2 predicted environmental concentrations are well below
the 70% insignificance threshold and can be screened out as insignificant.
4.4 Carbon Monoxide (CO)
4.4.1 The results from detailed modelling of carbon monoxide are presented in Table 4-7.
Table 4-7 Modelling Predictions for Carbon Monoxide Due to Emissions from the Four CHP Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack
Statistic Exceedence Threshold
Averaging Period
Process Contribution
Biomass CHP Plant (µg m-3)
PC as %AQS/EAL Biomass CHP
Plant (%)
Annual PC -
8hrsR
~11 -
Short Term PC 100%
10,000 ~220 ~2
4.4.2 Detailed modelling predicted that the maximum 8 hour rolling average ground-level
Process Contribution for CO associated with the emissions from the four CHP engines
associated with the proposed TAD facility would be ~2% of the AQS objective value of
10,000 µg m-3. The predicted PC is considerably below the Environment Agency’s 10%
insignificance threshold and can be screened out as being insignificant.
4.5 Particles (PM10)
4.5.1 The results from detailed modelling of particulates (PM10) are presented in Table 4-9, and
are presented in the context of the Process Contribution and the resultant Predicted
Environmental Concentration, taking into account the estimated annual average
background concentration for 2013 of 15.2 µg m-3.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
24
Table 4-8 Maximum Process Contribution for Particles (PM10) Due to Emissions from the Four CHP Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack
Statistic Exceedence Threshold
Averaging Period
Process Contribution
(µg m-3)
Process Contribution as %AQS
(%)
Annual PC 40 -
~0.4 ~1
Annual PEC ~16 ~39
Short Term PC 90.41%
50 24 Hour
~1.1 ~2
Short Term PEC 90.41%
~16 ~33
4.5.2 Detailed modelling predicted that the maximum annual average PC for particles (PM10)
due to emissions from the four CHP engines discharging via a common stack was
predicted to be ~0.4 µg m-3, which is ~1% of the 40 µg m
-3 objective limit, and can be
screened out as insignificant. The maximum annual average process contribution was
estimated to be ~0.4 µg m-3, representing a small change in ambient concentration with an
associated negligible impact on local air quality in the vicinity of the development, as
defined by the Environmental Protection UK assessment criteria.
4.5.3 The maximum daily average PC, expressed as the 90.41% value, was predicted to be
~1.1 µg m-3, and equivalent to ~2% of the 50 µg m
-3 daily average objective value, and can
also be screened out as insignificant.
4.5.4 Taking the background into consideration with the Process Contribution predicted by
modelling, the annual average Predicted Environmental Concentration for PM10 due to
emissions from the four CHP engines was predicted to be ~16 µg m-3, or ~33% of the
objective value of 40 µg m-3.
4.5.5 No exceedences of the AQS for Particles (PM10) were predicted as a result of the
operation of the four CHP engines associated with the TAD facility, and the results indicate
that emissions of Particles (PM10) will have an insignificant impact on local air quality in the
vicinity of the site. Accordingly, emissions of Particles (PM10) were screened out as
insignificant and do not require further assessment.
4.6 Particles (PM2.5)
4.6.1 The implementation of EC Directive 2008/50/EC introduced two new objective values for
Particles (PM2.5) with a Stage 1 Limit Value of 25 µg m-3, expressed as an annual average
and to be met by 1 January 2015, and a Stage 2 Limit Value of 20 µg m-3, expressed as an
annual average and to be met by 1 January 2020. The 2015 Limit Value is also the “Target
Value” for 1 January 2010.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
25
4.6.2 Modelling was undertaken assuming that all of the particulate matter released from the
proposed biomass CHP plant was PM2.5, and so represents an absolute worst case
scenario. The results from detailed modelling of Particles (PM2.5) are presented in
Table 4-9, and are presented in the context of the annual average Process Contribution
and the resultant Predicted Environmental Concentration, taking into account the
estimated annual average background concentration of 10.0 µg m-3 for 2013.
Table 4-9 Modelling Predictions for Particles (PM2.5) Due to Emissions from the Four CHP Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack
Statistic Exceedence Threshold
Averaging Period
Process Contribution
(µg m-3
)
Process Contribution as %AQS
(%)
Annual PC
25 24hr
~0.4 ~1.6
Annual PEC
~10.4 ~42
4.6.3 The results from modelling for Particles (PM2.5), assuming that all of the particulate
emission is PM2.5, predicted that the maximum annual average PC for Particles (PM2.5)
associated with emissions from the four CHP engines was likely to be ~0.4 µg m-3; ~2% of
the 2015 limit value of 25 µg m-3, and ~3% of the 20 µg m
-3 limit value for 2020, and
therefore marginally significant in relation to Environment Agency guidance.
4.6.4 In terms of the Environmental Protection UK impact descriptors, based upon those for
PM10, the increase in PM2.5 concentrations arising from emissions from the four CHP
engines associated with the TAD facility, assuming that all of the particulate emission is
PM2.5, is likely to be small and have a negligible impact on local air quality.
4.6.5 Taking the estimated background concentrations into consideration with the Process
Contribution predicted by modelling, the maximum annual average Predicted
Environmental Concentration for PM2.5 was estimated to be ~10.4 µg m-3, or approximately
42% of the objective value of 25 µg m-3, and can be screened out as insignificant in
relation to Environment Agency guidance
4.7 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
4.7.1 There are no assessment levels for total VOC emissions as they comprise a mixture of
organic compounds. Furthermore, there is no information available about the proportion of
benzene that may be present in the total VOC emission from the biomass combustion
plants, although, it is likely to be a very small percentage of the total. In order to provide a
worst-case assessment, the annual average Process Contribution for VOCs was
compared against the annual AQS objective value for 2010 for benzene of 5 µg m-3.
4.7.2 The results from detailed modelling of VOCs are presented in Table 4-10.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
26
Table 4-10 Maximum Process Contribution for VOCs Due to Emissions from the Four CHP Engines Discharging Via a Common Stack
Statistic Exceedence Threshold Averaging Period Process Contribution
(µg m-3
)
Process Contribution as %AQS
(%)
Annual 5 24hr
1.3 ~26
Short Term 100% - ~16 -
4.7.3 The model predicted a maximum annual average Process Contribution of ~1.3 g m-3 for
total VOC emissions from the four CHP engines, which represents a value that is ~26% of
the benzene AQS. Bearing in mind that benzene will comprise only a very small
percentage of the total VOC emissions, and that the assessment is based upon a worst
case assumption for VOC emissions, the results can probably be screened out as
insignificant, and the overall environmental impact may be described as negligible, and
requires no further assessment.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
27
5. Air Quality Predictions at Nearby Specific Receptors
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 Specific receptors were included in the detailed atmospheric modelling in order to assess
the potential impact on local air quality of emissions from the four CHP engines associated
with the proposed TAD facility. The following discussion relates to issues associated with
NO2 only.
5.1.2 The preliminary sensitivity analysis undertaken to assess the significance of local
environmental aspects identified the 2008 meteorological data for Coventry as providing
worst case dispersion in relation to the location of the maximum annual average NO2
Process Contribution. However, the significance of the prevailing meteorological conditions
may vary depending upon the location of a receptor in relation to distance and direction
from the emission source. Accordingly, the assessment for the specific receptor locations
was undertaken for the 2008 to 2012 hourly average meteorological data and the
maximum value is highlighted in the following table.
5.2 Results for Nitrogen Dioxide
5.2.1 The maximum annual average PC and PEC values for NO2 at the various specific receptor
locations, due to emissions of NOX from the gas engines associated with the pebble Hall
ERF, are presented below.
Table 5-1 Maximum Annual Average Process Contributions for NO2 at Specific Receptors
Name Receptor
Number
Annual Average NO2 Process Contribution (µg m-3)
2008 %AQS 2009 %AQS 2010 %AQS 2011 %AQS 2012 %AQS
Coombe Hill Hollow SSSI
1 0.10 0.2% 0.12 0.3% 0.21 0.5% 0.12 0.3% 0.15 0.4%
Hothorpe Hall 2 1.09 2.7% 0.86 2.2% 0.48 1.2% 1.04 2.6% 0.92 2.3%
Pebble Hall 3 0.57 1.4% 1.02 2.5% 0.76 1.9% 0.90 2.2% 0.89 2.2%
Dene Lodge 4 0.36 0.9% 0.58 1.5% 0.55 1.4% 0.50 1.2% 0.40 1.0%
Woodside Farm 5 0.23 0.6% 0.36 0.9% 0.49 1.2% 0.32 0.8% 0.26 0.7%
Home Farm 6 0.32 0.8% 0.26 0.7% 0.17 0.4% 0.29 0.7% 0.28 0.7%
Bosworth Hall 7 0.17 0.4% 0.10 0.3% 0.11 0.3% 0.11 0.3% 0.13 0.3%
SSSI SW of N Kilwort
8 0.10 0.2% 0.08 0.2% 0.06 0.1% 0.05 0.1% 0.06 0.2%
Theddingworth Lodge
9 0.06 0.1% 0.13 0.3% 0.12 0.3% 0.11 0.3% 0.08 0.2%
Residence in Theddingworth
10 0.69 1.7% 0.84 2.1% 0.50 1.3% 0.91 2.3% 0.70 1.7%
5.2.2 Values in red denote the maximum annual average NO2 Process Contribution for the five
meteorological data years considered. As can be seen, 2008 was the most significant
meteorological data set at four of the specific receptors, followed by 2009 (3 specific
receptors), then 2010 (2 specific receptors) and 2011 (1 specific receptor).
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
28
5.2.3 Values in blue denote where the maximum annual average Process Contribution is greater
than the 1% insignificance threshold recommended by the Environment Agency for the
assessment of long term impacts. However, where there is an exceedence of this
threshold it is only marginal at ~2 to ~3% of the AQS objective, and unlikely to have a
significant impact on people living and working at the respective locations. These values
represent a small to imperceptible increase in ambient NO2 concentrations in terms of
the Environmental Protection UK assessment criteria, and can be regarded as negligible
in terms of their significance at these locations, taking into account the existing background
NO2 concentration (10.4 µg m-3 estimated to be the annual average for 2013).
5.2.4 Annual average NO2 Process Contributions at the two nearby SSSIs, Receptor 1 and
Receptor 9 are ~0.1 to ~0.2 µg m-3 and are unlikely to have a significant impact on the
designated species at the two habitat sites.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
29
6. Cumulative Impact Assessment with the Recently Approved Energy Recovery Facility at Pebble Hall
6.1 Introduction
6.1.1 Planning permission was granted in 2008 for an energy recovery facility (ERF) to be built
on the Pebble Hall site. Accordingly, the air quality assessment for the TAD facility was
extended to include a cumulative impact assessment of emissions from the four CHP
engines with those from the gas engine associated with the ERF development.
6.1.2 The ADMS model was configured to calculate Process Contributions to ground level
concentrations of nitrogen dioxide across a 8km x 8km grid, in addition to the specific
receptors considered in the previous section. The results are presented in the following
section.
6.2 Emissions Data
6.2.1 The modelled source and emissions data are summarised below.
Table 6-1 Emission Source Parameters
Parameter CHP Engine Exhausts (Common Stack)
ERF Development Gas Engine
Stack Height (m) 17 15
Stack Diameter (m) 1.0 1.1
Efflux Temperature (°C) 490 120
Efflux Velocity (m s-1) 20.5 20.5
Location (x,y) 466100,284524 466282,284661
Table 6-2 Modelled Pollutant Emissions Data
Pollutant
Mass Emission Rate (g s
-1)
CHP Engines (Common Stack)
ERF Development Gas Engine
NOx 5.31 2.71
CO 5.24 0.14
Particulates 0.16 0.68
VOCs 0.61 0.14
6.2.2 The pollutant emission rates calculated for this condition represent a worst-case scenario
with emissions at the maximum likely to be allowable under the conditions of an
Environmental Permit that will be required prior to operation of the TAD facility.
6.3 Nitrogen Dioxide
6.3.1 The results of the NO2 modelling are presented in Table 6-3 and relate to the worst case
situation when the CHP engines associated with the TAD facility are operating at the same
time as ERF development.
6.3.2 The maximum reported values are predicted by modelling to occur at a location ~320
metres to the north-east of the common stack associated with the four CHP engines, and
reduce significantly with distance from the site.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
30
Table 6-3 Results from Detailed Assessment for Nitrogen Dioxide – Cumulative Impact of Emissions from the Four CHP Engines and the ERF Development
Pollutant Statistic Exceedence Threshold
Units Averaging
Period
Concentration (µg m
-3)
(Exceedences)
PC/PEC Expressed as a Percentage of
the AQS/EAL (%)
NOX
Annual (PC) 30
µg m-3
- ~20 ~67
Short Term
99.79%
(PC)
- 1hr ~280 -
NO2
Annual
(PEC) 40
µg m-3
- ~25 ~61
Annual (PC) 40 - ~14 ~35
Short Term
99.79%
(PEC)
200 1hr ~64 ~32
Short Term
99.79%
(PC)
- 1hr ~43 ~21
6.3.3 The maximum annual average NO2 PC across the receptor grid due to the cumulative
impact of emissions from the four CHP engines associated with the TAD facility and those
from the ERF development was ~14 µg m-3, or about one third of the annual average
objective value. The location of the maximum Process Contribution is predicted to be
~320m to the north-east of the common stack associated with the CHP engines, near to
the site boundary. When considered in conjunction with the estimated background
concentration for 2013 of 10.4 µg m-3, the maximum PEC value is likely to be ~25 µg m
-3,
or ~61% of the AQS objective value. Accordingly, in line with Environment Agency
guidance in EPR H1 Annex F, the cumulative impact of emissions from the four CHP
engines associated with the TAD facility and the ERF development can be screened out
as insignificant.
6.3.4 In terms of the Environmental Protection UK impact descriptors the cumulative increase in
annual average NO2 concentrations represents a large increase but will have a slight
adverse impact due to the existing good air quality in the area, as indicated by the DEFRA
data. The annual average Process Contribution for NO2, associated with the cumulative
impact of emissions from the two facilities is presented graphically in Figure 6-1.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
31
Figure 6-1 Maximum Annual Average Process Contribution for NO2 – Cumulative Impact of the TAD Facility and the ERF Development
Ordnance Survey © Crown Copyright: All rights reserved. License No. 100048653
6.3.5 The 0.4 µg m-3 contour line, highlighted in orange, represents an increase equivalent to 1%
of the annual AQS objective value (40 µg m-3) above background. Therefore, in all areas
outside this contour, the Process Contribution may be regarded as insignificant in relation
to the Environment Agency’s screening criteria set out in Horizontal Guidance Note H1
Annex F.
6.3.6 The dashed blue line shows the extent of the 0.4 µg m-3 contour line for the four CHP
engines associated with the proposed TAD facility operating in isolation. The cumulative
impact of the emissions from the ERF development results in an increase in the extent of
the 0.4 µg m-3 contour (orange line) by about 1km to the north-east of the Pebble Hall
development site. Process contributions at nearby residential receptors are equivalent to
about 3 to 4% of the AQS objective value. Nevertheless, the Predicted Environmental
Concentration is ~12 µg m-3, and the cumulative impact of emissions from the TAD facility
and the ERF can be screened out as insignificant in relation to Environment Agency
guidance.
6.3.7 Similar conclusions were drawn for the other pollutants considered.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
32
7. Conclusions
7.1 Introduction
7.1.1 Detailed atmospheric dispersion modelling has been undertaken of emissions to
atmosphere from four CHP engines associated with the proposed Thermophilic Aerobic
Digestion (TAD) facility to be built on the Pebble Hall site near Theddingworth, by Welland
Waste Management Ltd. The modelling was undertaken using process data provided by
technology providers to the development, Advanced Organics Ltd. Modelling was
undertaken for scenarios that represented the Normal Operating conditions for the four
CHP engines, operating at maximum output and discharging emissions to atmosphere via
a 17m tall common stack.
7.1.2 The modelling was undertaken using ADMS Version 5 and was based upon the
conclusions from a sensitivity analysis to determine which model parameters (buildings,
terrain, surface roughness and meteorological data sets) would produce the most realistic
set of predictions and then the set of worst-case predictions. Adjacent structures were
shown to be likely to have a significant impact on the dispersion of emissions from the four
CHP engines and therefore the buildings module was included within the modelling.
Terrain effects were also shown to be significant and were included in the detailed
assessment. It was concluded that a surface roughness factor of 0.3m and the 2008 hourly
average meteorological data set for the nearby Coventry Airport measurement station
should be used.
7.1.3 The model predicted that pollutant emissions from the four CHP engines would not result
in exceedences of the objective limits defined within the Air Quality Regulations or relevant
Environmental Assessment Levels from Environment Agency Horizontal Guidance Note
H1 Annex F.
7.1.4 Modelling predicted that under normal operating conditions the maximum annual average
Predicted Environmental Concentration for NO2 associated with emissions from the four
CHP engines would be ~18 µg m-3, approximately 46% of the 40 µg m
-3 annual objective
value. The location of the maximum Process Contribution is close to the site boundary,
and so will not affect local residents or people working nearby. The maximum annual
average NO2 Process Contribution was predicted to be ~8 µg m-3, which is equivalent to
~29% of the AQS objective value. The maximum hourly average NO2 PC was predicted to
be ~98 µg m-3, or ~49% of the hourly average AQS of 200 µg m
-3, and was predicted to
occur within the confines of the site boundary.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
33
7.1.5 Based on the Environmental Protection UK impact descriptive terms the potential impact
on local air quality at the location of maximum Process Contribution, close to the site
boundary, would be described as large with a slight adverse impact. The corresponding
values at nearby residential receptors would be classified as small to imperceptible.
Model predictions for nearby residential receptors indicated that annual NO2 Process
Contributions at these locations were likely to be between ~2% and ~3% of the AQS
objective. When taken in conjunction with the estimated background concentration of 10.4
µg m-3 for 2013, the impact on local air quality of emissions of NOX from the four CHP
engines associated with the TAD facility can be screened out as insignificant.
7.1.6 Detailed modelling predicted that the maximum annual average PC for particles (PM10)
was likely to be ~0.4 µg m-3, ~1% of the 40 µg m
-3 objective limit, while the maximum daily
average PC was predicted to be ~1.1 µg m-3, equivalent to ~2% of the 50 µg m
-3 daily
average objective value. The maximum annual average PM10 process contribution
represents a small to imperceptible change in ambient concentration and likely to have a
negligible impact on local air quality in the vicinity of the development, as defined by the
Environmental Protection UK assessment criteria. Similar conclusions were drawn for
emissions of carbon monoxide and volatile organic compounds.
7.1.7 A cumulative impact assessment was undertaken for emissions from the proposed TAD
facility and the approved energy recovery facility to be developed on the Pebble Hall site.
The results from modelling confirmed that the cumulative impact of emissions from the two
facilities would be well within relevant AQS objective values, and can be screened out as
insignificant in relation to Environment Agency guidance.
7.1.8 The overall conclusion from detailed modelling of emissions from the proposed TAD facility
to be built by Welland Waste Management Ltd at Pebble Hall, near Theddingworth, is that
the potential impact on local air quality is likely to be low, and unlikely to pose a significant
threat to the health of local residents or people working nearby.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
34
Appendices
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
35
Appendix A Detailed Discussion on Model Input Data
Atmospheric Chemistry
A component of the ADMS model contains algorithms to calculate the chemical reactions
in the atmosphere between nitric oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and ozone (O3) and
the resultant concentration of each pollutant within the plume.
In England and Wales the Environment Agency has traditionally preferred a methodology
for calculating annual average and hourly average NO2 ground-level concentration based
upon conversion of NOX model predictions as shown in Equation 3 and Equation 4:
Equation 3 Calculation of Annual Average NO2 Predicted Environmental Concentration
(Annual NOX Modelled x 0.7) + Annual NO2 Monitored
Equation 4 Calculation of Hourly Average NO2 Predicted Environmental Concentration
(Hourly NOX Modelled x 0.35) + (Annual NO2 Monitored x 2)
This methodology is likely to overestimate the PEC for NO2 in close proximity to the site as
conversion of NOX to NO2 is unlikely to be instantaneous as it requires mixing of the plume
with the ambient air and its associated oxidant species (O3, etc.). Accordingly, applying the
70% conversion of NOX to NO2 at locations close to the point of release may overestimate
significantly the potential NO2 concentrations at these locations. As the plume migrates
away from the stack it disperses and mixes with the ambient air resulting in lower
concentrations of pollutants, so the PC for NOX and hence associated NO2, will be lower
farther afield. Furthermore, the oxidising potential of the atmosphere in the vicinity of the
Pebble Hall ERF development site is known to vary significantly throughout the year, as
shown by measurement data from the nearby AURN monitoring station at Market
Harborough.
Meteorological Data
When modelling plume dispersion, the following meteorological data are required as a
minimum:
wind speed (m s-1
)
wind direction (degrees)
cloud cover (Oktas)
mixing height
For the purpose of this exercise, meteorological data for 2008 to 2012 from the nearby
Coventry Airport measurement station, were utilised. The windrose for 2012 is shown in
Figure 2-4.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
36
The data indicated a predominance of winds from a westerly direction, with additional
dominant components from a south-westerly and north-westerly direction. The
meteorological data included nine parameters defined in Table 2-4.
Local Environmental Conditions
Local environmental conditions describe the factors that might influence the dispersion
process (such as nearby structures, sharply rising terrain, etc.) and also describe the
locations at which pollutant concentrations are to be predicted. These include:
Surface Roughness
It is sometimes necessary to define a term, which describes the degree of ground
turbulence caused by the passage of wind across surface structures, also called the
surface roughness. The degree of ground turbulence is much greater in urban areas (due
to the presence of tall buildings) than in rural areas (which contain smaller obstacles at the
surface). The dispersion model may require the user to select “urban” or “rural” conditions,
or to specify a “surface roughness length” according to defined criteria. Calculations of
dispersion, which take account of the greater aerodynamic roughness of the surface
structures in urban areas, tend to predict higher concentrations closer to the stack than
calculations under equivalent conditions, which assume typical rural roughness.
For the purpose of this model a surface roughness factor of 0.3m was chosen,
characteristic of the maximum value applied to agricultural areas.
Nearby Buildings and Structures
If the stack is located on the top of a building, or adjacent to a tall building, then the size of
these buildings may need to be considered. As a general guide, building downwash
problems (where emissions are caught in the turbulent wake caused by wind blowing
around the building) may occur if the stack height is less than 2½ times the height of the
building upon which it sits. Adjacent buildings may need to be taken into account if they are
within about 5 stack heights of the point of release.
To take account of local building effects, models generally require information related to
the dimensions and location of the structures with respect to the stack. The building data
used in this modelling exercise are presented in Table 2-5.
The building adjacent to the CHP engines was considered to be the “main building” that
could potentially affect the dispersion characteristics of emissions from the common stack
associated with the four engines.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
37
Complex Terrain Data
The presence of steep hills in the vicinity of a stack may affect the dispersion of pollutants.
During more stable conditions, an elevated plume may impact upon a nearby hillside,
resulting in much higher ground level concentrations than would occur over flat terrain. The
more sophisticated models can take account of these terrain effects, and require the input
of contour heights in the immediate area surrounding the stack. Terrain effects are unlikely
to be significant where the hills have a slope of less than about 10%.
There is no significant terrain in the Theddingworth area, although the preliminary
sensitivity analysis incorporated an assessment of the significance of terrain as a
precautionary measure. The results showed that when considered in conjunction with
building downwash effects, the effects of terrain increased model predictions significantly.
Accordingly, terrain effects were included as part of the detailed assessment.
Output Grid and Specific Points
It is necessary to define the locations at which ground level concentrations are to be
calculated by the model. In selecting receptor locations, it is general practice to identify the
nearest, sensitive locations to the chimney stack, such as residential housing, hospitals
etc.
Many models allow the user to specify a “grid” of receptor locations. However, when
setting up a receptor grid it is important to ensure that there are sufficient receptor points to
able to predict the magnitude and location of the maximum concentration. If the grid of
receptor points is too widely spaced, the maximum concentration may be missed.
A receptor grid covering an area 8,000 m x 8,000 m in a 101 x 101 grid was incorporated
into the model in order to assess the potential impact of pollutant emissions from the CHP
engines associated with the TAD facility to be developed at Pebble Hall. The model was
set to predict concentrations at ground level.
Specific receptor locations were included in the model representing the location of nearby
residential properties, schools, allotments, playing fields, etc. identified from Ordnance
Survey mapping data.
GFE Welland Waste Management Ltd
Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion (TAD) Facility, Pebble Hall, Theddingworth
Y:\JOBS\JOBS\W001 Welland Waste Management\W001-07 TAD\W001-07 Incoming Data\W001-07 Consultants\GFE155 Welland Waste Management Ltd - Air Quality Assessment - Pebble Hall TAD Facility - 210613.docx
38
Appendix B Output from the D1 Chimney Height Calculation
D1 Chimney Height Calculation - Welland WM TAD - Common Stack - 090613.xlsx
Prepared by G Fynes 10/06/2013 Page 1
Calculation of Chimney Height Using Method in Technical Guidance Note D1Welland Waste Management - TAD Facility - Common StackCalculations Based on Data Supplied by Advance OrganicsJune 9, 2013
Gas Temp C 490 Heat Release MWthGas Temp K 763 3.49 Q<1 a -1.2132Stack Diameter 1.000 0.79 m2 b 0.4927Gas Rate m3/s 16.100 Q>1 a -1.2765Gas Velocity m/s 20.50 b 0.5089FG O2 (%) NA If emissions data available, x -1.7604Building Height m 9 enter in appropriate Cell in y 4.5972FG H2O (%) NA Column C (19 to 27). z -10.2410Std O2 (%) NA Otherwise Enter Discharge Rates
Discharge Discharge Discharge Guideline Background PollutionConc. Conc. Rate Concentration Concentration Index
(mg/Sm3) (mg/m3) (g/s) (mg/m3) (mg/m3) (m3/s)NOx 5.310 4.40 0.028 1215 NOxNO2 1.859 0.2 0.021 10371 NO2NO 3.452 4.4 0.008 786 NOCO 5.242 10 0.120 531 COPM10 0.164 0.3 0.015 576 PM10Total 10371 Total
Case for Single Building
Ub M Min Um Um U Corrected Height(m) (m4/s2) (m) (m) Chimney Height Above Building
(Metres) (Metres)5.85 122 3.8 12.8 17.0 8.00Case for Multiple Buildings within 5Um 5Um = 63.9 metres CHECK THAT D<5Um
Building No. Distance Height Height Width Length K T(metres) (metres) (H) (B) (metres) (Min H & B) (H+1.5K)
Main Building 7 1 9 9 42 55 9 22.5
Hm Tm U Is U>Tm? Corr. Disch. Ht.(Hmax) (Tmax) Min Um&Ub (1=Y, 0=N) (Metres)9 22.5 5.9 0 17.0
229 122.75
XS Area
GP PLANNING LTD PLANNING STATEMENT
W007-01 PS / SE Appendix 14/06/2013
APPENDIX 8: Connection to National Grid System
Pond
Pond
BOSWORTH RD (P262)
HUSBANDS
93/7837 (33E0262)
Woodside
Issues
THEDDINGWORTH
ROAD
Lodge
Pond
A 43
04
115.8m
Dene
Pond
Farm
110.9m
108.8m
Pond
Spring
Pond
Ponds
MP 21
Track
Track
River Welland
Pond
Riv
er
Wella
nd
Pond
Lake
Pond
3
Wry Furlong
under
duct
river
THEDDINGWORTH
BROXHILL FARM
93/7987 (33E0420)
Broxhill Buildings
Bungalow
Pond
Riv
er
Welland
Long Spinney
The
Pond
Pond
Issues
Cattle Grid
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SAM
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SAM
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SAM
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
3P2S
3P2S
3P2S
3P2S
2P1S
3P2S
3P2S
2P1S
THEDDINGWORTH (G426)
93/7817 (33D3426)
THEDDINGWORTH
HARBOROUGH RD (P264)
93/7836 (33E0264)
Corner Nook
Folly
Chapel
The Lodge
126.5m
Tall Trees
Weir
Chapel
Old Folly
6
Laurels Farm
Ho
ST
ATIO
N
RO
AD
Croft
Post
Cottage
126.
4m
Pebble Hall
River
Wella
nd
Rise
Hothorpe Hall
Bakehouse Cottage
Sch
GP
Hall
HOT
HORPE R
OA
D
Farm
8
Hothorpe
Pond
1
House
Ris
e
El Sub Sta
Bra
mbles
The Bungalo
ws
Sun
2
MAIN STREET
MP
(Conference Centre)
4
GPHill-
Cote
1
134.4m
111.3m
The Cottage
Da
msid
e Spin
ney
118.6m
Church
3
Hill Vie
w
Farm
6
All Saint
s’
2
TO
MS
CL
OSE
1
House
1
A 43
04
2
4
Pebble Cottage
The
Padd
ocks
Flat
Track
The
Robert’s
Compton
High
Ponds
New
MO
WSLE
Y
RO
AD
5
Theddingworth
Sluice
Haddon House
BOSWORTH
ROAD
Forge
War
Me
ml
GP
LB
Homeside
Theddingworth
Congregational
Spencerdene
The
Spring
3
Manor
(Private)
Manse
4
116.4m
Lych
Gate
North Lodge
Beeches Farm
Cottages
The
Sluice
Taylors Cottage
The
Cottage
1
3
119.8m
1
Garden
Mid
dle Cottage
128.0m
Beeches
1
Box Bush
House
130.5
m
CG
Little
Cemetery
1
TCB
The Homestead
Farm
Sluice
CG
131.1
m
Grosvenor
Hill
1
3
Coun
cil H
ouse
s
Bank
South View
Lark’s
Pond
Church
124.4m
Home
6
128.9
m
Beeches
Old
Knallings
Chen-wydh
The
Nook
13
School
The
Old
Farmhouse
The
The
Leighs
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
THEDDINGWORTH
STATION RD (P829)
93/7832 (33E0829)113.4m
Station House
Pp
103.6m
Manor Farm
Pond
Pond
Pond
Pond
ST
ATIO
N
RO
AD
Pond
Disman
tled R
ailw
ay
Pond
106.4m
MO
WSLEY R
OA
D
111.9m
113.7m
Pond
103.6m
ASNW
AS
NW
AS
NW
AS
NW
AS
NW
ASNW
ASNW ASNW
ASNW
AS
NW
AS
NW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
AS
NW
AS
NW
AS
NW
AS
NW
AS
NW
AS
NW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
AS
NW
AS
NW
AS
NW
AS
NW
AS
NW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
ASNW
AS
NW
AS
NW
IVY LODGE FARM (P367)
93/7819 (33E0367)
Pond
Canal
Pond
128.6m
150.9m
HIL
L
Ivy
114.3m
Union
Pond
Pond
Pond
128.9m
Hollow Spinney
Theddingworth
166.4m
Grand
Pp
Farm
MIL
L
114.0m
Lodge
Laughton Hills
Towing Path
117.3m
THE LODGE (P418) LAUGHTON HILLS
93/7821 (33E0418)
LAUGHTON HILLS (P258)
93/7820 (33E0258)
LodgePond
172.3m
GP
The Lodge
172.0m
Farm
170.9m
Cattle Grid
Court
164.0m
Pond
Tennis
Manor
Cattle Grid
168.5m
170.1m
Farm
Laughton
168.6m
Hill Farm
SSSI
SS
SI
SSSISSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SS
SI
SS
SI
SS
SI
SS
SI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SS
SI
SS
SI
SS
SI
SSSI
SSSI
SSSI
SS
SI
SS
SI
SS
SI
SSSI
SSSI
SS
SI
SSSI
SIBBERTOFT SEWAGE WORKS
92/3338 (43E2213)
Sinks
River Welland
Ponds
Spring
Issues
Pond
Pond
Outfall
Barn-hill Spinney
Coombe-hill Spinney
Path (u
m)
106.7m
107.6m 107.0m
121.0m
109.4m
Pond
(um)
Path
107.9m
Spring
Issues
105.8m
117.3m
Pond
Nichol’s Hill Spinney
113.4m
NOSWORTHY
92/3329 (43E2080)
HOTHORPE HOME FARM BUNGALOW
92/3330 (43E2221)
HOTHORPE HALL
92/3331 (43E2081)
Welland
HOT
HORPE R
OA
D
The Cottage
THEDDINGWORTH
ROAD
River We
lland
101.8m
1
Greylag
Play Area
Pen-y-Bryn
106.7m
A 43
04
113.4m
102.4m
Sewage Works
102.7m
108.5m
105.5m
Buckle Hill
2
108.8m
104.5m
113.1m
GP
Paddocks
103.0m
Beeches Cottages
7
107.6m
Cottage
123.6m
Tudor
Sunnie Brae
Pond
Pond
Farm
Home
THEDDINGWORTH GRAIN DRYER (P263)
93/7833 (33E0263)
SKINNERS NEW FARM FIELD RD (P957) THEDDINGWORTH
93/7834 (33E0957)
Drain
Pond
Pond
Disman
tled R
ailw
ay
Cattle Grid
103.0m
Pond
98.4m
Pond
105.8m
101.2m
99.8m
99.1m
111.3m
Pond
97.5
m
HARBOROUGH ROAD
100.0m
Weir
A 4304
The Oaks
Cattle Grid
GP
Riv
er
Welland
SCOBOROUGH LODGE FARM (P909)
93/7818 (33E0909)
Pond
110.9m
Pond
103.3m
Towin
g Path
Pond
Pond
Gran
d Unio
n Ca
nal
Track
113.4m
Spring
BU
NKE
RS
HILL
109.4m
Pond
Pond
1P1P
LUBBENHAM
LAUGHTON RD
BUNKERS YARD (P937)
92/3002 (33E0937)
(P259) FARM
BUNKERS HILL
92/3003 (33E0259)
159.8m
Pond
Towing Path
Bunker’s
Hill Farm
LAUGHTON ROAD
164.8m
160.4m
158.0m
Pond
Grand Union Canal
154.8m
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
THE COOMBES
92/0470 (43E0096)
159.4m
The Coombes
Coombes
126.5m
Track
Track
Post
164.6m
SIB
BERT
OFT
RO
AD
Track
137.5m
Track
Track
Issues
Tank
Cottage
133.7m
Track
Pond
Track
Sinks
Berberis Spinney
Track
Te
nnis
Sibbertoft Wood
Guide
Co
urt
Issues
Rough-hill Spinney
Trac
k
SWINGLERS
92/3332 (43E2079)
MARSTON LODGE
92/3333 (43E2078)
Essex Farm
103.6m
Pond
Drain
104.2m
Trac
k
Pond
Pond
Issues
Pond
Pond
Pond
GP
SIB
BE
RT
OFT
RO
AD
Issues
Marston Lodge
RISHWORTH FM
92/3328 (43E2061)
97.2m
Pond
Victoria Spinney
102.4m
Pond
GP
Trussell
100.9m
Hall
Union Spinney
Pond
Recorder’s Spinney
FB
Pond
Pond
Pond
Mill Hill Farm
Pond
Track
THEDDINGWORTH ROAD
SC
OB
OR
OU
GH
RO
AD
Snipe Spinney
Pond
109.1m
Ash Spinney
FB
106.4m
Pond
Pheasant Spinney
Pond
Maidstone Spinney
Pavilion
Bullacre Spinney
Pond
Cricket Ground
98.5m
Mickleborough Spinney
Pond
Marston
110.3m
Mill Hill Farm Cottage
Track
Mast
Track
2P1S
THE PEAR TREE (P265)
93/7835 (33E0265)
PAPILLON HALL
92/3327 (43E2062)
Track
Scoborough
A 430
4
River
Wella
nd
THEDDINGWORTH
Papillon Hall Farm
101.6m
Bramfield
ROAD
The
102.1m
Weir
Pond
109.7m
Lodge
113.0m
Homes
Foot
Railw
ay
113.5m
Pond
101.2m
110.8m
Pond
103.6m
100.2m
101.2m
Cottage
Pond
ROAD
Disman
tled
Scoborough
105.1m
Park
Bridge
Weir
Ford
SCOBOROUGH
Bramfield
99.0m
LB
8
13
21
4
1
29
9
6
25
2a
2b
18
17
23
28
Pond
Pear Tree Cottage
11
3
2
7
24
16
22
15
7b
5
10
20
Pond
Dismantled
Railway
Pond
Pond
Pond
Pond
Pond
Track
Pond
Pond
Lower Lodge
Pond
Lodge
Scoborough
Farm
300HDA (33kV
)
3 x 400 1c Cu X
LPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu
XLP
E 33k
V
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
92ZNVD1
UNKNOWN
EARTHWIRE
92ZNVD2
UNKNOWN
92ZNVD3
UNKNOWN
92ZNVD4
UNKNOWN
92ZNVD5
UNKNOWN
92ZNVD6
UNKNOWN
EARTHWIRE
138.1m
LAUGHTON ROAD
129.0m
Pond
Wells
132.9m
Towin
g Pat
h
113.6m
GP
103.1m
107.7m
BU
NKE
RS
HILL
Far Cottage
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
STARRS LODGE
92/3323 (43E2058)
Track
115.6m
Pond
Pond
DIC
K’S HIL
L
Track
Marston Wood
Track
Starr’s Lodge
Pond
Castle Yard
Motte and Bailey
Track
Track
Track
Pond
Pond
MARSTON LODGE MARSTON TRUSSELL
92/5375 (43E3303)
Cattle
Grid
101.5m
110.0m
FB
109.7m
109.4m
105.5m
108.2m
FB
107.6m
DIC
K’S HIL
L
Pond
104.2m
Track
Woodland View Farm
Track
SA
M
SAM
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
1Pcrossed in PC400 to keepRed and Blue connection
village phasing correct.
2P1S
1P
2P1S
RECTORY FARM WATSON
92/3324 (43E2059)
RECTORY FARM COTTAGES
92/3325 (43E2261)
MARSTON TRUSSELL
92/3326 (43E2060)
1 x
150
Marston
94.5m
16
Rectory Farm Cottages
21
17
13
Pond
Trussell
20
GP
Moat
Hall
The
24
4 5
34
95.4m
18
35
96.9m
32
97.8m
FARNDON ROAD
Tennis
10
95.7m
Limes
Croft
28
3
2
The Lake
Church
SIB
BERT
OFT
RO
AD
93.9m
22
2
Lodge
FB
Rectory Farm
Shelter
14
Linden
The
19
Vine
St Nicholas’s
27
94.8m
94.2m
GP
30
15
Hall
9
1
LUBENHAM ROAD
Stables
Water
Fairthorne
Court
Overflow
The Cedars
The
House
TCB
Track
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
Cattle Grid
THEDDINGWORTH ROAD
37
145
Papillon Fields Farm
87.5m
Sewage
88.2m
Foot
99.2m
River
Wella
nd
88.9m
36
Weir
95.9m
RO
AD
Plantation
Drain
Works
Pond
Bridge
Pond
LU
BE
NH
AM
Pond
98.4m
98.8m
The Bungalow
39
92.5m
101.4m
MA
RS
TO
N
RO
AD
Highfield
38
River
Wella
nd
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
Ponds
96.3m
LAUGHTON ROAD
Pond
Pond
100.0m
Pond
Spring
Track
97.5m
Pond
94.5m
Pond
Pond
90.1m
95.8m
Pond
Pond
Drain
Pond
Dismantled Railway
Ponds
(P268)
HOLMES FARM
92/3005 (33E0268)
104.1m
Holme’s
Farm
Cattle
100.9m
Cattle Grid
Water
Yd
Pond
Grid
Pond
1
352
THE GRANGE HART
92/3320 (43E2055)
Track
Farndon
109.1m
Pond
106.4m
East Farndon
MARSTON TRUSSELL ROAD
98.8m
FARNDON ROAD
103.0m
96.3m
Grange
Ponds
94.8m
97.5m
Guide Post
Spinney
Ash Tree Barn
Water
Pond
100.6m
Paddocks
The
Farndon Grange
Farndon
House
Grange
Barn
The
Coach
House
SAM SAM SAM SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
MS
AM
SA
MS
AM
SA
MS
AM
SA
MS
AM
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SAM SAM SAM SAM SAM SAM
SA
MS
AM
SA
MS
AM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
MS
AM
SAM
1P
1P
THORPE LUBENHAM HALL LUBENHAM
92/3563 (43D2050)
1- SPARE
2- 0.06 3c Cu
470028, 286976
Track
GP
Track
MAIN STREET
Foot
River Welland
Track
Moat
Pond
84.7m
Cattle
Thorpe
Hall
84.0m
FARNDON ROAD
Pump
Welland
Fn
Cattle Grid
House
Long Spinney
Grid
Bridge
87.0m
Foot Bridge
Lubenham
141
Dismantled Railway
Field
Pond
85.0m
Foot Bridge
River
Grid
Cattle Grid
Plantation
FB
Cattle
Pond
Upper Highfield
Cattle Grid
SA
MS
AM
SA
MS
AM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
MS
AM
SA
MS
AM
1P
1P
1P
1P
4 X 185CNE (LV) TAILS
185Al/CuCNE (LV) TAILS
185AL XLPE 3x1 (11kV) TAILS
3P2S
2P1S
2P1S
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c
Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu X
LPE 33kV
LUBENHAM SOUTH
92/3564 (43E2131)
COVENTRY ROAD LUBENHAM
92/3566 (43E2187)
LUBENHAM
92/3565 (43D2051)
WESTGATE LANE LUBENHAM
92/0257 (43D9870)
FOXTON RD LUBENHAM
92/3558 (43E2186)
MANOR FM LUBENHAM
92/3559 (43E2169)
470371, 287370
1 - SPARE DUCT
2 - 0.1 Cu 11kV
War
21
1
25
3
26
96.5m
17
13
TH
E
GR
EE
N
(Track)
Pond
Manor Farm
6
1
4
31
99.4m
12
Pond
19
2
MIL
L
HIL
L
32
39
WASHPIT LANE
CHURCH WALK
River Welland
42
12
11
Weir
House
Lubenham
Yew
3
91
l
31
13
19
1
Knights-
49
Track
137
A 4304
56
Meridian
LAUGHTON ROAD
50
97
1
5
86.2m
14
(PH)
86.0m
3
6
CLOSE
TCB
TOWER
91.7m
27
Gardens
HARBOROUGH ROAD
Barleycroft
Allotment
61
54
33
10
Dismantled Railway
4
9
41
6
Orchard
Pond
43
5
Path (um)
House
85.4m
11
2
6
66
Lime Tree
Spring
139
92.9m
21
51
38
Pond
35
84
19
2
23
13
1
19
64
11
105
MP 15
99
82
59
1
WESTLAND
CLOSE
88.6m
19a
3
5
LA
NE
PAGET ROAD
Pond
and Horses
51
1
Moat
19
88.3m
Pond
Hall
31
Recreation
25
2
COURT
All Saints’ Church
Allotment
ACORN
17
9
39
1
87.5m
96.2m
House
84.3m
42
21a
FO
XT
ON
RO
AD
13
GP
47
2
RU
SH
ES
LA
NE
8
21
14
Path (u
m)
56
41
14a
118
68
35
90.1m
86.8m
24
ll
Pond
CHURCH WALK
41
1
61
35
6
Pond
Meml
10
Mill Mound
31
Gardens
2
and Wash
94
Tree
10
FB
l
51
63
89.5m
55
MP
16
OL
D
HA
LL
LA
NE
23
113
13
12
20
144
17
11
24
52
16
2
98
13
1818
41
15
78
24
40
29
93.3m
SC
HO
OL
LA
NE
1
96
28
hayes
The Coach
16
62
23
THE GREEN
38
MAIN STREET
CONNELL CLOSE 36
80
19
10
Marton
21
48
Ground
House
85.5m
8
Sheep Pens
4
54
23
WES
TG
AT
E
1
Drain
20
22
Brooklyn
House
House
The
Chestnuts
House
Beech
Ashtree
Summer House
1
5
THE HA
WT
HORNS
13
18
The Old
Police
House
Lubenham All Saints
C of E
Primary School
The
Rowans
Beechcroft
ESS
Moat House
44
1
Pineridge
Cherry Angel
28
StablesPine Lodge
Pine Grange
The
Old Hall
47
Issues
Pond
Pond
97.5m
Pond
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SAMSAM
SAM
SA
MS
AM
SA
MS
AM
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
2P1S
1 - SPARE
2 - 0.1 4c Cu
471638, 284876
EXACT ARRANGEMENT UNKNOWN
The Crest
Orchard House
Pond
Church Cottage
GP
145.4m
Issues
Linden
The Old Coach House
Red Brick Cottage
Old School House
Cottage
Grey Walls
Orchard Cottage
PondLea
Fern
137.5m
MAIN S
TR
EE
T
Finn
Green
Pond
The
Fernhill House
Garden
House
Pond
Pond
Farrer Cottages
2
4
1
3
FarrarFarm
Rowan House
Ferendone House
SA
MS
AM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
SA
M
SA
M
SA
M
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
M
SA
MS
AM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SAM
SA
MS
AM
SA
M
THE LEALANDS
92/3336 (43E2161)
THE DALES BELTON
92/3334 (43E2054)
EAST FARNDON
92/3475 (43D2063)
130.1m
Cottage
117.7m
Pond
128.0m
Elms
Path (u
m)
Hall
6
War Memorial
The Judith
Hall
Council H
ouses
138.7m
113.1m
5
10
107.0m
12
Bleasdale
Horseshoe
Cottage
Foxglo
ves
The Wharri
1
Hilltop
HA
RB
OR
OU
GH
RO
AD
Manor
Rowanden
The Dales
99.7m
Spring
Pond
The Limes
4
123.7m
Kenwood
East
111.6m
Farm
The Laurels
94.2m
The Cedars
Pond
East Farndon
93.6m
28
Hillside
East
Rose
Moyargot
117.7m
14
Hillcrest
Wren Cottage
THE LE
AL
AN
D
124.7m
93.6m
111.6m
Trough
Bramble
Pond
LU
BE
NH
AM
RO
AD
Sunnybays
The Briars
Sheep Pens
Stone
21
Pond
Yewgarth
Pond
Kiln YardHillview
138.1m
GP
15
Ivy House
Home
Greenfields
MAI
N STREET
Spring
field
The
The Old Bakehouse
Farndon GP
TC
B
The Old
Post
Office
Brown Gable
Spring Cottage
Sunnyside
1
Beauchamp House
139.6m
TH
E
LE
AL
AN
D
Twin
25
Farm
Farm
Ponds
Farndon
Manor Cottage
Cottage
BAC
K LA
NE
Hawthorn Cottage
Cottage
18
2
Elmbridge
Spring
view
18a
House
Downfield
MARSTON LANE
Mast
Bell
5
Rydal
HO
ME
1
FA
RM
House
TheOld
CL
OS
E
Windmill
Jackdaw
View
Cottage
Pheasant View
The Spinneys
Mill House
FARNDON FIELDS STRAWBERRY CENTRE
92/5483 (43E9546)
WELLAND FARM LUBENHAM
92/0419 (43E0060)
95.6m
19
Track
23
Pond
30
91.6m
1
Pond
115
86.9m
27
Pond
113
36
15
Pond
2
2
Judith Stone
FB
Pond
MIL
LE
RS
GA
RD
EN
S
Pond
Dismantled Railway
98.5m
37
Pond
98.9m
111
Pond
Pond
1
14
RIL
EY
CL
OS
E
32
31
96.0m
River
Wella
nd
LUBENHA
M
ROAD
Pond
Welland Farm House
5P1S
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu
XLPE 33kV
WELLAND LODGE
92/3482 (43D3167)
1 - SPARE
2 - 0.3 4c AL
471900,287003
A 4304
LUBENHAM HILL
Pond
Lay-by
Track
Spring
Pond
Issues
A 4304
Pond
Spring
River
Wella
nd
Pond
HARBOROUGH ROAD
101
87
109
99
98.0m
83.4m
107
85.1m
86.9m
105
84.1m
Lubenham Hill Lake
Archway
House
ESS
The Arc
Business
Centre
Pond
Pond
Pond
Pond
Issues
Pond
Pond
Market Harborough
Golf Course
2P2S
depth 1.20m
depth 1.10m
3P1S
2P
3w 300 HDA 33kV DUAL CIRCUIT
3w 300 HDA 33kV DUAL CIRCUIT
3 x 0.4 1c AL 33kV
0.4 AL 33kV
0.4 AL 33kV
3w 300 HDA 33kV DUAL CIRCUIT
3w 300 HDA 33kV DUAL CIRCUIT
3 x 0.4 1c AL 33kV
0.4
AL 33kV 06/19
69
HOPTON FIELDS MARKET HARBOROUGH
92/3472 (43D2197)
BOOTH
92/3335 (43E2053)
92ZRMC28
33
92ZRMC29
34
92ZRMC30
35
92ZRMC31
36
92ZRMC32
37
92ZRMC33
38
92ZRMC34
39
92ZSCD83
33
92ZSCD84
34
92ZSCD85
35
92ZSCD86
36
92ZSCD87
37
92ZSCD88
38
92ZSCD89
39
Earthwire
472819, 285967
1 - 0.15 4c Al
2 - SPARE DUCT
472966, 285959
1 - AR - 0.15 Al 11kV
2 - AR - UNKNOWN 4c
55
51
63
14
56
GP
48
9
11
6
16
25
Pond
1
17
93.1m
7
30
RAINSBOROUGH GARDENS
13
1
14
16
13
1
5
25
Pond
29
67
22
19
75
41
Issues
57
26
MA
URIC
E
RD
HOPTON FIELDS
Drain
25
2
HARBORO
UGH RO
AD
13
66
P
12
24
58
36
BA
RN
AR
DG
DNS
13
13
El
Sub
Sta
89.7m
Brierley Farm
Pond
16
11
32
39
2
32
GERRARD
2
51
40
New House Farm
39
7
46
Pond
WATSON AVENUE
Pond
LIN
DS
EY
GD
NS
12
14
34
Pond
1
13
GDNS
75a
P628
P534
P535
P536
P348
P614
P347
P345
P344
P332-333
P621
P622
P334
P335
P336
P339
P338
P337P340
P341
P342
P343
P598
P592-P297
P619
P618
P617
P616
P615P607
P605
P606
P608P609-P610
P611-613
P627
P626
P625
P624
P623
P620
P350
P351
P352
P353
P354
P355
P356
P349
P374
P375
P376
P403
P377
P385
P386
P428-433
P422
P423
P421
P420
P419
P418
P468
P390
P391
P392
P393
P394
P395
P397
P389
P388
P387
P396
P398
P399
P400
P401
P402
P404
P405
P406
P407
P408
P409
P410
P411
P412
P413
P414P415
P416P417
P464
P465
P463
P466
P467
P427
P381
P382
P384
P383
depth 1.10m
depth 1.10m
1P
3P2S
3P1S
1P
1P
2P1S
4P3S 3P3S
depth 1.20m
2P
depth 1.20m
3P1S
depth 1.20
m
depth 0.90m
depth 0.90m
2P
8P1S
2P
1P
1P
4P1S
6P3S
6P3S
4P3S
2P1S
4P1S
2P1S
2P2S
1x300CNE (LV) TAIL
3x185CNE (LV) TAILS
95PIAS (11kV) TAILS
33kV TILES & STEEL PLATE
2P1S
33kV TILES
1 x 120CNE (LV) TAIL
3 x 185CNE (LV) TAILS
2 x 185PIAS (11kV) TAILS
1P1P
33kV TILES
Split Duct with 33kV TILES
2P1S
1P
2P1S
3x185CNE (LV) TAILS
Embedded (Non-CN) network
Contact ’The Electricity Network Company (GTC)’ for details
Embedded (Non-CN) network
Contact ’The Electricity Network Company (GTC)’ for details
Embedded (Non-CN) network
Contact ’The Electricity Network Company (GTC)’ for details
Embedded (Non-CN) network
Contact ’The Electricity Network Company (GTC)’ for details
Embedded (Non-CN) network
Contact ’The Electricity Network Company (GTC)’ for details
Embedded (Non-CN) network
Contact ’The Electricity Network Company (GTC)’ for details
EN
0.4 AL 33kV
0.4 AL 33kV
0.4
AL 33kV
0.4
AL 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
3 x
400 1c
Cu
XLPE 33
kV
3 x 400 1c Cu XLPE 33kV
0.4
AL 33kV 07/19
69
0.4
AL 33k
V 07/19
69
300 AL 33kV 09/1971
LUBENHAM HILL
92/3483 (43D2049)
REGENT PARK FARNDON ROAD
92/3489 (43D2254)
WELLAND PARK ROAD
92/3497 (43D2122)
SKIPPON CLOSE
92/3505 (43D2265)
MARKET HARBOROUGH
ROCHESTER GARDENS
92/3468 (43D2143)
RAINSBOROUGH GDNS
92/3473 (43D2170)
FARNDON FIELDS EMBEDDED NETWORK
92/0719 (43D0657)
MARKET HARBOROUGH
CROMWELL CRESCENT
92/3474 (43D2130)
33KV/11KV S/STN
FARNDON ROAD
92/0046 (43P0018)
FRESHMAN WAY EMBEDDED
92/5624
UNKNOWN SIZE 33kV
Deco
m
472245, 286951
UNSURE OF CABLE LOCATIONSARRANGEMENT ONLY
472423, 286877
1. SPARE2. 0.3 4c Al
3. 0.15 Al 11kV NC
472992, 286051
UNSURE OF CABLE LOCATION
ARRANGEMENT ONLY
UNSURE OF CABLE LOCATION
ARRANGEMENT ONLY
472990, 286116
472995, 286124 &
UNSURE OF CABLE LOCATION
ARRANGEMENT ONLY
472989, 286234
472924, 286373
1. 0.1 Cu 11kV2. SPARE
UNSURE OF CABLE LOCATION
ARRANGEMENT ONLY
472834, 286440
472722, 286363
1. 0.1 4c Cu2. SPARE
1. 0.15 Al 11kV
472721, 286338
2. SPARE
2. SPARE1. UNKNOWN 4c
472734, 286303
472743, 286126
UNSURE OF CABLE ROUTE
ARRANGEMENT ONLY
2
79.6m
61
BALFO
UR
GAR
DENS
Garage
170
36
5
39
99
14
Garage
34
10
DE LIS
LE CL
20
243
25
66
56
53
159
68
El
Sub
Sta
Nursery
El Sub Sta
80.8m
224
225
SKIPP
ONCLOSE
31
2
Pavilion
78
53
136
22
158
14
136
16
2
31
18
PRID
E P
LA
CE
20
20
BU
TLE
R
GA
RD
ENS
33
13
6
CL
OS
E
51
217
236
13
5
Warehouse
65
226
24
10
1
32
35
19
159
4
33
16
Pond
21
11
20
2
84
110
9
6
29
40
1
100
52
27
Pond
26
4
41
7
WILLOW CRESCENT
22
87.8m
21
17
2
84
MO
NT
RO
SE
86
120
18
4
13
23
46
25
79.2m
9
255
11
6
20
20
180
Sub Sta
13
7
1
21
78.6m
22
Waterfurrows
1
35
1
30
144
121
STRATTON CLOSE
140
44
130
7
41
ESSEX GARDENS
Weir
35
13
12
9
8
5
RUGBY CLOSE
292623
2520
221916
7 to 15
6
1
104
14
116
39
FAR
ND
ON R
OA
D
8
RAIN
SB
OR
OU
GH
El S
ub Sta
HOWARD WAY
El
Sub
Sta
HA
RRIS
ON
CL
GA
RD
ENS
30
7476
80
9
11
13
15
17
20
8
67
172
FLEETWOOD CLOSE
4
51
10
207
10
57
1 6
Welland Park
138
31
17
72
21
70
2
80.2m
57
162
29
153
45
30
45
Depot
6
101
GR
EN
VIL
LE
GA
RD
EN
S
HUNTINGDON GARDENS
Burford GreenASTLEY CLOSE
ST
UART R
OA
D
IRETON ROAD
Burf
ord
Clo
se
El Sub Sta
PEAR TREE GARDENS
WELLAND PARK ROAD
Bowling
Green
Bowling
Green
Tennis Courts
(Recreation Ground)
157
195
28
El Sub Sta
FB
11
72
70
68
88
9294
8684
96
LUBENHAM HILL
CR
OM
WE
LL
CR
ES
CE
NT
End
1
3
Works
WESTERN AVENUE
86.3m
MAURI
CEROAD
38
134
45
1
2
22
12
2
4
6
14
10
27
Riverside
Court
257
1
4
ELM DRIVE
6
81
22
56
120
LB
Track
RO
CH
ES
TE
R
GA
RD
EN
S
23
108
7
121
7
Hall
1
El
FLEETWOOD GARDENS
2
235
113
5
13
13
29
115
13
173
83.2m
24
34
45
1
1
2
171
81
10
7
LB
32
1
20
1
16
183
23
178
67
7
78
2
13
13
16
Issues
244
80.8m
132
66
160
168
4
81
River Welland
13
158
90
34
31
28
53a
30
135
6a
Farndon Court
1 to 14
35
5
1
53
65
61
13
1
77
39
74
12
71
77
99
184
182
94
1
83
RHODES CLOSE
FA
RN
DA
LE
VIE
W
15
13
Works
10
4
7
23
15
7
19
12
3
13
22
127
Water
2
5
92
3
4
10
SP
RIN
GHIL
L
GA
RD
ENS
1
7
SU
MM
ER
S
WA
Y
1
261
7
17
10
14
14
20
1
3
8
2
25
18
El Sub Sta
Garage
8
2
15
12
9
7
6 1
12a
33
42
10
2527 27a
23
28
21
38
18a 1819
Barking House
Filtration
House44
45
49
48
46
Farndon Business Cenre
3941
Posts
Skateboard Park
Drain
18
PlaygroundGas
Gov
Gracelands
(Mobile Homes Park)
ME
DO
RA
CL
OSE
FRES
HM
AN
WA
Y
SOUT
HWOLD CLO
SE
ESS
19
3
BRID
EG
RO
OM
ST
RE
ET
ESS
7
8 to 16
1
BRIN
GT
ON
CL
OS
E
MARMION CLOSE
21
13
20
6
1
24
5
1
22
25
32
11
31
29
42
10
27
8
56
48
46
4
1
16
2
2
41
2P
2P
2P2S
0.3AL (LV) TAILS
2P1S
2P1S
2P1S
50AL (LV)
MARKET HARBOROUGH
1P1S
4P1S
2P
3P2S
3P1S
2P1S
CONSUMER
95 PIAS
CABLE
3P2S
185Al/CuCNE (LV) TAILS
2P1S
5W
1P
3P1S
2P1S
2P1S
2P
2P1S
2P1S
3P2S
4P2S
2P1S
3P
WOODLANDS
92/3520 (43D2176)
CHARLES ST
92/3518 (43D2121)BROOKFIELD RD
92/3484 (43D2225)
LOGAN ST MARKET HARBOROUGH
92/5475 (43D2120)
FAIRLAWN
92/3517 (43D2138)
UNION WHARF
92/5362 (43D3226)
MARKET HARBOROUGH
COVENTRY ROAD HOSPITAL
92/3494 (43D2048)
HOME WELLAND HOUSE
92/3512 (43D2233)
MARKET HARBROUGH
JUNIOR SCHOOL
92/3429 (43D2151)
2 - 0.06 Cu 11kV
1 - SPARE
472869, 287853
472838, 287892
472415, 287987
2 - 0.15 Al 11kV
1 - 0.3 4c Al
472765, 287633
0.15 Al 11kV NC
0.15 Al 11kV NC
SPARE
OF CABLES
UNKNOWN ARRANGEMENT
SPARE
OF CABLES
UNKNOWN ARRANGEMENT
472601, 287583
0.06 Cu 11kV NC
0.3 4c Al
1 - SPARE
472515, 287507
472516, 287499
472561, 287432
1 - SPARE
2 - SPARE
2 - 0.06 Cu 11kV NC
2 - 0.06 Cu 11kV NC
1 - SPARE
3 - 0.06 Cu 11kV NC
1 - 0.06 Cu 11kV NC
2 - 0.06 Cu 11kV NC
472593, 287399
472594, 287397
1 - 0.06 Cu 11kV NC2 - SPARE
472560, 287291
1 - SPARE
2 - 0.06 Cu 11kV NC
472488, 287247
2 - 0.15 Al 11kV NC1 - SPARE
472603, 287190
1 - SPARE
2 - 0.06 Cu 11kV
472472, 287105
2 - SPARE
472793, 287123
1 - 0.075 4c Cu
472790, 287021
1 - 0.3 Al 11kV2 - SPARE
2 - 0.1 4c Cu
1 - 0.3 4c Cu
472959, 287162
IN DUCTS 3 - 4UNKNOWN CABLES
IN DUCTS 3 - 4UNKNOWN CABLES
3 - 0.04 Cu 11kV NC
4 - 0.04 Cu 11kV NC
0.3 4c Cu
0.1 4c Cu
472969, 287161
Welland
7
13
20
91
71
1a
141
SPENCER
STREET
49
80.8m
1
34
13
23
16
79
47
30 to 84
38
15
46
STEV
ENS ST
REET
34
5
1
1
23
5
36
3
6
El S
ub Sta
69
Cricket Ground
Chestnut
62
36
76
84
92
3
1
1
44
22
54
42
19
5
48
1
30
1
31
39
1 to 4
62
16
39
68
31
NO
RB
UR
Y
CL
OSE
67
10
Giffard Ct
23
2
9
4
8
2
House
Manse
HORSEF
AIR C
LOSE
Manse
LOGAN COURT
15
B 6047
2
26
125
45
18
14
31
3
130
13
7
El
StaSub
4
13
27
37
13
31
13
42
52
14
2
Welland
Park
1
32
A 4304
5
24
28
21
27
AD
AMS
WO
OD
CL
OSE
1
2
22
60
64
2
2a
Holly
94.2m
LEIC
ESTER R
OA
D
1
3
1
4
9
89
2
10
16
7
85
93.0m
28
FAIRFIEL
D
RO
AD
5
THE
2
1
15
24
28
12
1
3
To
win
g
Path
120
46
34
11
14
FB
33
70
15
24a
17
37
13
68
1
80
30
POPLARS COURT
Hospital
2
5a
1
4
73
93
Sub
El
30
18
54
Windsor
9
89a
91a
1
21
117
2
22
3
40
43
The Willows
91
Recreation Ground
Homewelland
19
Cedar
9
5 to 7
House
24b
16
35
PASTURES
5
50
38
8
13
30
36
3
43
43
19
18
24
Centre
Pavilion
Grand
Unio
n
Canal
67
Weir
47
12
11
CL
HILLCREST
41
78
114
103
62
71
38
16
4
NO
RT
HLEIG
H
GR
OVE
15
Allotment Gardens
11
66
15
Hornbea
m
House
19
AUSTIN
S CLOSE
45
49
THE FIRS
1
50
77
29
32
1
53
4
HEART
H STREET
56
85
21
2
12
50
6
1
5
9
1
17
21
62
10
3
1
86
26
1
6
56
95
1
5
Poplars
Spring
A 4304
7
55
2
33
Market
15
34
El
24
80.5m
4
Mast
Sub
100
2
2
21
El Sub Sta
1
18
19
CL
OS
E
THE
FIELDHEAD
B 6047
42
6
22
PCS
2
BeechHouse
HIGHF
IELD
STREET
66
15
27
1
BR
OO
KFIE
LD
RO
AD
Issues
12
87.2
m
24
60
20
6
6
El S
ub Sta
49
31
100
Union Inn
Hotel
1
21
32
89
3
7
1
1
29
1
1
143
51
10
100
8
7
29
25
69
47
2
Club
19
7
18
26
7
44
2
14
The Boathouse
The Warehouse
The Dockhouse
1 to
4
66b
2
StationFire
11
5
Sub
6
88
84.7
m
1
CHARLES S
TREET
44
6
18
18
54
95
50
House
22
1a
8
3
7
17
13
1
18
80
Oakle
y
Me
ws
19
11
7
26
HIL
L
6
5
16
BIRTLEY COPPICE
GA
RD
EN
S
31
20
Police
Ad
miral Ct
FA
RN
DO
NR
OA
D
1 to 45
10
9
71
Youth
Playground
2
30
House
12
12
16
Sta
WES
TFIE
LD
56
18
1 to 4
5 to 8
41
6
16
7
11
10
4
1
SPIN
NE
Y
CL
49
Harborough
Wharf Cottage
11
LB
13
Ground
Recreation
159
House
Fairlawn
TCB
SOUTHLEIGH GROVE
1a
1
66a
14
102
39
FAIRWAY
17
14
3
7
62a
El Sub Sta
El S
ub St
aGA
RDIN
ER ST
REET
House
14
Union Wharf
13
PH
MP 5
9
39
NELSON
STREET
34
C of E
52
LB
VIC
TO
RIA
AV
EN
UE
55
A 4304
4
LB
16
EDWARD ROAD
21
58
AVENUE
82.9m
22
29
101 20
21
13
13
8
CL
AR
KE ST
REET
A 4304
28
13a
36
29
12
Bank
FB
17
8
35
59
EAST STREET
28
48
105
LUBENHAM HILL
LO
GA
N
CR
ES
CE
NT
FB
38a
MORLEY
STREET
1b
19
HIGHCRO
SS S
TREET
56
Woodlawn
19
TH
E
WO
OD
LA
ND
SKNO
LL ST
REET
Pond
4
24
Sta
Pump
WOODLANDS
61
62
3
43
COVENTRY ROAD
104
55
60
16
84.7
m
16
95 24
Knoll
23
89
LB
20
34
25
118
73
6
25
10
13
12
19
HARCO
URT ST
REET
9
WA
RT
NA
BY ST
REET
LB
50
1
40
Wharf
30
99.1m
FB
24
68
4
27
16
101
40
33
22
18
86
16
3
Primary School
Station
3432
17
52
132
41
1
66
Pond
El
Court
LB
Sta
90.2
m
24
6
8
9
93a
64
9
River
LO
GA
N ST
REET
14
The TollHouse
1
11a
38
4
Terminal Warehouse
The Co
ach Hou
ses
121
14a
2b
1c
1
1a1b
3
Canalsi
de
1 to 10
Ha
milt
on
Cottages
The
Cottage
The
Gate
House ESS
1
6
3
4
1 to 4
2
5
Bowden Mews
Victoria
Mews
Community
Centre
59
7
HIL
L
TO
P
CL
OS
E
12a
1
38a
58a
60
60a
58
2P1S
2P1S
2P1S
2P
2P
2P
3P2S
1P
185AL XLPE 3x1 (11kV) TAILS
6P1S
2P
2P
MARKET HARBOROUGH
LEICESTER ROAD
92/3519 (43D2113)
TYME CROSSE GARDENS
92/5374 (43D3182)
ST LUKES HOSPITAL
92/0688 (43D0646)
1, 2 - SPARE DUCT
3 - 0.06 Cu 11kV DISC
472732, 288015
472697, 288054
1 - SPARE DUCT
2 - 0.15 3c Al 11kV
20
Hillcrest
1
20
14
2
17
32
3
3
35
Lodge
36
5
13
9
30
11
Ambulance
24
9
TH
E
WO
OD
LA
ND
S
14
20
3
Pond
103.8m
17
22
26
2
20a
31
34
11
21
5
18
10
28
THE W
OODLA
NDS
Station
FB
10
15 2
VIC
TO
RIA
AV
EN
UE
HILLCREST AVE
EDWARD
ROAD
20
GP
12
47
40
2
39
2
7
13
829
63
49
43
TIM
SON CLOSE
94
28
53
89
79
SubSta
To
win
g Path
El
16
69
75
14
17
24
CO
ALES
GA
RDE
NS
Pond
2
18
B 6047
TYMECROSSE
21
44
5
6
2
18
AL
VIN
GT
ON
WA
Y
GA
RD
ENS
63
57
81
1
69
11
KESTIAN CLOSE
82
1
TURNPIKE CLOSE
1
34
8
38
49
9
1512
2
1
7
24
12
1
5
13
9-11
El Sub Sta
Holly B
ank
Helmdon
House
Wheatcroft
Lodge
Yew
Tree
House
Hospital
St Luke’s
Lay-b
y
ESS
Issues
Sinks
3P1S
4P2S
2P
2P1S
2P1S
3w 300 HDA 33kV DUAL CIRCUIT
3w 300 HDA 33kV DUAL CIRCUIT
RITCHIE PARK
92/3471 (43D2180)
92ZRMC25
30
92ZRMC26
31
92ZRMC27
32
92ZSCD80
30
92ZSCD81
31
92ZSCD82
32
BIS
HO
P
29
5
9
1
104
98
2
83
113
Pond
15
CLOSE
22
6
17
78
50
103
109
GA
RD
ENS
3
88
1
101
9
68
6
14
RIT
CHIE P
AR
K
2
DALLISON CLOSE
13
87
RAINSBOROUGH
12
JA
CKS
ON
CL
OS
E
13
8
19
7
102
14
VAUGHAN CLOSE
4 13
3
1
1
El Sub Sta
1
4
7
ARGYLE PARK
110
23
CL
OS
E
85
38
1
81
2
11
77
7
10
1
18
SELBY
2
100
97
Farndon Fields
Primary School
4 x 300CNE Tails
2P1S
2P
2P1S
2P1S
3P1S
3P3S
95PIAS (11kV,decom)
95PIAS (11kV,decom)
1 duct
185AS (11kV,decom)185AS (11kV,decom)
95AS (11kV,decom)
0.15AL (11kV,decom)
185AS (11kV,decom)
0.15AL (11kV,decom)
0.15AL (11kV) decom
95AS (11kV,decom)
2 ducts
95AS (11kV,decom)
2P1S
2P1S
3P1S
1P
2P1S
2P1S
2P1S
2P1S
2P1S
2xALK
WESTERN AVENUE
92/5367 (43D2123)
STUART ROAD
92/3506 (43D2135)
473002, 286046
473156, 286658
1 - 0.06 Cu 11kV EW
2 - SPARE EW DUCT
3 - SPARE EW DUCT
2x 0.3 4c CU EW
1x 0.3 4c AL EW
OF LV CABLES
UNKNOWN ARRANGEMENT
473158, 286675
1 - 0 4c UNKNOWN2 - SPARE
2 x EW DUCT
2 - SPARE1 - 0.3 4c Al
3 - 0.3 4c Cu
2 x EW DUCT
121
43
1
5
1
84
21
13
16
145
75
CROMWELL CRESCENT
WELLAND PARK ROAD
44
58
87
31
45
10
5
27
21
63
37
3
6
PW
11
TCB
1
LB
49
9
20
30
38
69
12
37
13
20
12
13
NA
SE
BY
CL
OS
E
Sutton Court
14
123
6
8
4
2
(PH)
1
Hill
Castlerigg
5
7
River Wel
land
29
42
37
45
Welland Park
47
LE
NT
HA
LL S
QU
AR
E
44
129
46
Community College
20
1
18
29
47
RO
WA
N
AV
EN
UE
Track
28
9
99
25
21
Langdale
Walk
51
47 to 61
33
El Sub Sta
108
59
36
18
1
Ro
wan
Ave
nue
El Sub Sta
Car
Park
54
13
12
PCs
38
13
36
26
2
2a
21
Welland Park
8690
146
19
118
15
46 to 58
6
50
Allotment Gardens
12
56
33
34
10
30
28
29
7
39
3736
35
96
24
115
13
Hall
22
20
32
2
GREEN LANE
34
46a
13
49
85
1
82.0m
79.2m
32
45
12
35
14
3
8
2
11
88
12
29
42a
23
5
9
18
35
1
1
Lenthall House
4
26
2
54
97
45
16
40
NA
SE
BY
SQ
UA
RE
52
30
130
66
FAIRF
AX
RO
AD
18
36
1
2
1
21
82
48
Monument
10
10
14
20
48
27
2
1
Whitehaven
12
Robin
16
23
6
34
STUART ROAD
1917
12
36
34
87
46
1731
2
62
1
9
1
4
11
22
42
13
WESTERN AVENUE
40
RUPERT ROAD
13
1
43
55
61
13
Chy
Aviary
Gas Gov
New Haven
106
56
92
37
60
70 to 80
(Secondary School)
Lentall
Square
3 to 15
(Recreation Ground)
Burford Green
Playground
Sports Court
1a
3P2S
2P1S
4P1S
1P
3P2S
1P1S
1P1S
2P1S
2P1S
2P1S
2P1S
2P1S
2P1S
4P2S
2P1S
2P1S
2P
2P2S
4P2S
1P
2P1S
7P1S
4 x 0.3AL (LV) Tails
2P1S
2P1S
1P
3P1S
Embedded (Non-CN) network
Contact ’The Electricity Network Company (GTC)’ for details
Embedded (Non-CN) network
Contact ’The Electricity Network Company (GTC)’ for details
ENEN
43D2111
ABBEY ST
92/3420 (43D2172)
CO-OP COVENTRY ROAD
92/3496 (43D2237)
OXFORD HOUSE
92/3418 (43D2108)
MARKET HARBOROUGH
PARKHOUSE ESTATE
92/3430 (43D2111)
1,2 - 0.3 Al 11kV
473007, 287111
473300, 287367
1 - 0.06 Cu 11kV
2 - 0.1 4c Cu
473340, 287583
1 - SPARE DUCT
2 - 0.3 4c Al
473041, 287767
1 - SPARE DUCT
2 - 0.1 4c Cu
Sub
ST
REET
14
23
Club
a
Ald
winckles
57
BU
RN
MIL
L
RO
AD
2
20
2
10
81.1
m
93.0m
32
18
13
SCHO
OL LANE
Chur
ch
2
3
Park
7
20
29
Works
16
11
3
(Car Park)
B 4304
Bank
85.0m
49
15
86
39
Paddock
14
49
13
3 2
24
Posts
LB
7
82.0m
The
Retr
eat
The Commons
67
48
Register
1
3
Amb
40
69
70
PH
1
54
11
53
42
7
56
Hind Ya
rd
1
5
35
Car
GOWARD STREET
39
11
2
10
25
45
22
29
83.8m
26
TCB
Hall
91
13
Colle
ge
4
2
8
PA
RK
DRIV
E
Church
31
14
15
Yard
40
18
Hotel
17
19
76
1
Bowling Green
3
Car
4
26
20
13
45
83.2m
Yard
9
44
5
17
34
35
63
20
2
5
1
13
78.6m
23
to
18
Sta
33
25
60
77.1
m
Talb
ot Ya
rd
19
1
66a
15
11
FIR TREE
WALK
21
41
13
65
50
10
Club
61
LEIC
ESTER R
OA
D
52
17
Park
Path
House
Jubilee
38
6
Brooke
House
28
34
51
87.8m
35
Park Mews
51
81.7m
36
40
64
18
9
28
36
3
85.0m
A 4304
31
Church
13
3
Letter
Box
Tel Ex
62
PH
YE
OM
AN
RY
CO
UR
T
Works
Manor
Walk
30
8
Car ParkSchool
Market Harborough
C Of E Primary
Arboretum
77.7m
1
4
9
Sta
FAIR
FIE
LD
RO
AD
48
41
30
Surgery
27
7 to 10
A 43
04
Court
B 6047
1 to 10
Northbank
35
36a
55
13
Hotel
32b
23
49
1
6
St
Martins
Yard
Three Cro
wns
Yard
Hotel
2
5
58
32
1 to 22
HOLLY CLOSE
4
66
Office
1
16a
El
75
2
1
2
40
THE OVAL
Park
Welland
to 30
67
1
3
43
El Sub Sta
Angel
1
35
13
17
Memor
ial
42
17
22
37
11
1 to 6
Garage
96.3m
Hall
66
11
28
KIN
G’S
20
71
79.6m
44
68
30
40a
Sta
1
69
70
19 PH
Bank
4
32
61
28
3
Angel C
ourt
Sub
1
28
7
16
Park
5
6
1
63
7
83.5m
39
21
31
11 to 20
99a
Mille
r’s
2
1
Club
HIG
H S
TR
EET
Hall
25
DO
DDRID
GE R
OAD
7 to 911
LB
5
1
5
15
ABBEY
STREET
1
68
5
2
COVENTRY ROAD
35
20
18
14
13
Cort’s
Yard
Hall
NELSON STREET
to 40
Post11
4
1
78.0m
Hall
2
El
Angel Stre
et
PH
LB
2a
2
8
HE
YG
AT
E S
TR
EE
T
BOWDEN LANE
20
1
4
1
2
3
14
8b8a
811
10
4
7
1 to 3
11
14
17
5
1 to 9
1 to 12
ESS
23
Clarke
Matthew
House
11a
Manse
OLDSCHOOL
MEW
S
5
1
6
2
7
3
8
4
The
Maltings
22
Goddard
Court
Joules
Yard
Ps
Langton
Court
1 to
10
11 to 20
Plou
ghman
s Yard
2
1
2a
7
42a
Pegasus
Court
1 to 25
Benn
ett’s
Plac
e
12
1a
Pumping Station
FB
St Joseph’s
Catholic
Primary
School
8a
7
1to
6
14 to 22
El
Sta
Sub
8
10
The
Old
Fire Stati
on An
nex
CHURCH
3
30
Chur
ch
185AL, decom
CONSUMER’S CABLE
2 x 185AL XLPE 3x1 (11kV) [o] TAILS
ROBERT SMYTH SCHOOL
92/0466 (43D0050)
MARKET HARBOROUGH
BURNMILL ROAD NORTH
92/3412 (43D2185)
BURNMILL RD
92/3411 (43D2110)
110
2
School
88
92
112
2
Tennis Courts
75
Smyth
8
1
15
24
77
El Sub Sta
14
122
Robert
102
73
24
112.9m
81
20
26
21
119.1m
Beeches
The
The
33
37
104.0m
El Sub Sta
Substation
Customer
33kV Cable
33kV PoC
MA
Y be
prese
nt in this area.
Ele
ctricit
y assets o
wne
d by ID
NO’s (I
nde
pe
nde
nt
Net
work
Operators)
PL
EA
SE
NO
TE:
This pla
n
ON
LY sho
ws assets o
wne
d by
Western
Po
wer
Distrib
utio
n.
and it’s accuracy cannot be
guarantee
d.
Inf
or
matio
n is giv
en as a guid
e
only
Designs and Patents Act 1988 unless that Act provides a relevant exception to copyright the copy must not be copied without prior permission of the copyright owner.
WPD Copyright: This copy has been made by or with the authority of Western Power Distribution (WPD) pursuant to Section 47 of the Copyright
H.M. STATIONERY OFFICE, CROWN COPYRIGHT RESERVED. LICENCE No.NA27318X
WORKS TO BE DISMANTLED SHOWN
TRAFFIC SENSITIVE AREA YES/NO
UNDERGROUND CABLES OVERHEAD LINES
132KV 33KV 11KV
L.V. SERVICE STREET LTG.
HV EARTH LV EARTH
132KV 33KV
11KV L.V.
SERVICE STREET LTG.
PYLON POLE STAY
HOUSE METER POSITIONS - EXTERNAL
INTERNAL
PROPOSALS COLOURED PINK
REPRODUCED FROM THE ORDNANCE SURVEY MAP WITH THE SANCTION OF THE CONTROLLER OF
SURF TELECOMS PILOT CABLESS S P P
TITLE
REV. DATE SCHEME PROGRESS BLOCK DRN CHK’D
ELECTRODE
EARTH
Serving the Midlands, South West and Wales
DISTRIBUTIONWESTERN POWER
.
.
.
DEVELOPER.
BUILDER.
ARCHITECT Drg. No.
O.S. MAP.
PARISH.
11kV DIAG.
LV. DIAG.
PLAN No. 1614695
Enq No. of1614695 1 1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A
15/05/13
INITIAL PROPOSAL
PEBBLE HALL FARM
SERVICES CABLE SIZES AS SHOWN
ALKATHENE TUBE
DUCT &
@ A3
Licence Nos. 100022488, 100024877, 100021807. CARE SHOULD BE EXERCISED TO ENSURE THE PRECISE POSITION OF THE WPD APPARATUS IF WORK IS TO BE EXECUTED IN ITS VICINITY. If in doubt, contact your local WPD office.
Based upon the Ordnance Surveys map with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Crown Copyright Reserved. Western Power Distribution, Avonbank, Feeder Road, Bristol. BS2 0TB.
N
SCALE 1:20000
DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT
PROPOSED USE OF A BUILDING TO FOOD WASTE PROCESSING BY MEANS OF THERMAL AEROBIC DIGESTION AND USE OF BIOFUEL FROM FOOD DERIVED
OIL FOR GENERATION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY
PEBBLE HALL FARM, THEDDINGWORTH ROAD, MARSTON TRUSSELL, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE, LE17 6NJ
WELLAND WASTE MANAGEMENT LTD
June 2013 Version 1 Final
DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT
W001-07 D&A / SE 21/06/2013
DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT
Introduction
This design and access statement forms part of the suite of planning application documents that have been submitted by GP Planning Ltd to Northamptonshire County Council. The documents have been submitted on behalf of Welland Waste Management Limited, and relate to a planning application that seeks to gain permission for the extension and change of use of an existing grain store building to include a Thermal Aerobic Digester (TAD) to produce agricultural fertiliser granules and renewable energy. The Design and Access Statement accords with industry guidance, Design and Access Statements how to read, write and use them (CABE, 2007). The Design and Access Statement considers the following in relation to the proposed development:
Use of the Site
Amount of Development Layout Scale Landscape Appearance Access
Use of Site
Pebble Hall Farm is located South of the A4304 (Bosworth Road), Theddingworth in the Northern part of the District of Daventry as shown on drawing GPP/WWM/MT/12/01 (Site Location Plan). It is approximately 1.8 km East of the village of Husbands Bosworth. Pebble Hall Farm is an agriculturally based operation that has been the subject of farm diversification, mainly as a result of the BSE crisis. By a series of grants of planning permission over a number of years, the site has established a variety of industrial/commercial concerns and a waste management operation as part of the diversification of the farm. The site is located in an area of open countryside, which by virtue of Policy EN1 of the Daventry Local Plan (saved policies), is designated as being in an area of ‘Special Landscape’. The proposed change of use relates to the building contained within the red line boundary on drawing GPP/WWM/MT/12/01 which benefits from planning permission for B8 use, but is temporarily being used as a grain storage building for the agricultural activities. It is 1680 m2 in size. The proposed application is comprised of the following:
An extension to the application building. A change of use of the application building from a grain store to include a thermal aerobic
digester (TAD) The TAD will be housed within the existing grain store and accept food waste from the sub-region to turn it into agricultural fertiliser pellets. The capacity of the plant will be a maximum of 40,000 tonnes per annum (tpa), which will produce up to 10,000 tonnes of product. In order to include the TAD the development building will be extended on its North-West side by 12.2m by 18.3m.
DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT
W001-07 D&A / SE 21/06/2013
Amount of built development
The amount of built development for the site relates to the proposed extension to the North-West elevation. This extension to the existing building measures 12.2m x 18.3m. It will carry on the slope of the roof of the existing building. The highest point will measure 9m and the minimum point will measure 5.4m in height. The total floor area of the extension equals 223m2. See GPP/WWM/PH/12/05.
Layout
The arrangement of the site has been developed with a view to maximising both the efficiency and safety of the industrial operations, and limiting the impacts upon the surrounding landscape and environment. The extension of the building will be to the North-East elevation and will allow the entire TAD process to be enclosed within the existing building. There will be two storage tanks placed outside the North-West elevation and a diesel storage tank and a generator placed outside the South-West elevation. The extension will be surrounded with hard standing in order to ease the HGV movements. The soil bund will be moved further North to accommodate the extension to the building. The bund will be reconfigured in order to provide effective screening for the extension. For the detailed site layout plan see drawing GPP/WWM/PH/12/03.
Scale
The scale of development relates to the size of the proposed development in relation to the surrounding context. The site covers 9964m2. The extension to the development building will equal 223m2. This is a relatively small compared to the size of the existing building which equals 1680m2. There will be associated machinery and offices located outside the building, as shown on the Site Layout Plan GPP/WWM/PH/12/03. The stack height will be 17metres high by 0.5 metres in diameter.
Landscaping
A soil bund will be placed along the North-East side of the building and extension. This bund will screen the site, therefore reducing any negative impact on visual amenity. See GPP-WWM-PH-12-03. Numerous approved landscaping features have been implemented on the site. See Drawing GPP-CL-PH-09-04. Specifically, the 8787m2 of native woodland planting to the North-East of the site will provide effective screening for the proposed extension. The grass seeded area on the soil bund will also have this effect.
Appearance
This TAD will be fully enclosed within the extended building, therefore reducing any detrimental effects to visual amenity. The extension will be made of the same material as the existing building, cladding is Juniper Green plastisol coated steel sheeting. There will be two storage tanks placed outside the North-West elevation and a diesel storage tank and a generator placed outside the South-West elevation. These will be effectively screened by the soil bund and not easily seen from a distance. The stack height is only 5 metres above the height of the rising land to the south and is very small in diameter (0.5 metres). The elevations are illustrated in Drawing GPP/WWM/PH/12/05.
DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT
W001-07 D&A / SE 21/06/2013
Lighting
The current lights on the existing building will be retained. No other fixed lighting will be used without prior approval of the Local Planning Authority. All lights will be switched off when the site is not in use.
Access
Access to the site is gained from the A4304. The existing access to the site crosses the Northamptonshire and Leicestershire county boundaries. It is surfaced in concrete and is approximately 560 metres long. There is a weighbridge located at the end of the access track. HGVs will be weighed at this point and then travel through the site to the application building. See GPP/WWM/PH/12/02. No access for members of the public to the site is to be provided. Only authorised people will be allowed on site. The access currently has a traffic counter.