Agenda item

Application 13/02190/FU - Position statement on proposals for erection and installation of an Energy Recovery Facility (using autoclave and pyrolysis and an Anaerobic Digestion Facility, integrated education/visitor centre, provision of rail freight handling infrastructure and new industrial link road access to site via Knowsthorpe Gate, parking and landscaping - Land at Bridgewater Road Cross Green

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the current position in respect of an application for the erection and installation of an Energy Recovery Facility (using Autoclave and Pyrolysis) and an Anaerobic Digestion Facility, an integrated education/visitor centre, provision of rail freight handling infrastructure and a new industrial link road access to the site via Knowsthorpe Gate, associated parking and landscaping


(report attached)




  Having noted that Councillor Ingham had commented on the proposals, for clarification, the Panel’s Legal Adviser advised that provided Councillor Ingham had not made up her mind on the proposals and was prepared to consider all the information before the Panel, then her earlier support did not prevent her from taking part in the decision

  Councillor Ingham advised that she had not made up her mind in respect of the proposals being considered


  Plans, photographs and graphics were displayed at the meeting.  A Members site visit had taken place earlier in the day

  Members considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer on the current position in relation to an application for an Energy Recovery Facility at Bridgewater Road, Cross Green.  A late written representation on behalf of the applicants had been circulated to Panel Members prior to the meeting.  Members were advised that no pre-application presentation had been made to Panel on the proposals

  Officers outlined the proposals which were for a waste management facility capable of treating up to 195,000 tonnes of waste per annum, together with associated infrastructure, highways, rail freight handling infrastructure, visitor centre, car parking and landscaping.  Members were informed that the site was not safeguarded or allocated for waste purposes in the Natural Resources and Waste Local Plan

  The waste process was explained to Panel with Members being informed that Officers did not question the benefits of the proposals but that with the exception of the road link, the proposals were not tied to this site with Officers of the view that the scheme could be delivered on two other sites

  Members were also informed that Officers considered that the proposals were not sufficiently robust; that the proposals needed to be considered in the context of the wider area and in the context of the aspirations for Aire Valley Leeds.  The development of the wider site would also necessitate the relocation of the existing asphalt plant currently located to the north

  The Panel’s Legal Adviser advised of a legal issue in respect of matters relating to this application and referred to the Minerals and Waste Local Plan, which showed an allocation of the site for rail use.  As the minerals policies 13 and 14 in the Local Plan - which dealt with minerals transport – had been successfully challenged in the High Court, these two policies had to be remitted back to the Planning Inspectorate for re-examination and until they were, they must be treated as not forming part of the Adopted Plan

  The Chief Planning Officer referred to the emerging plan for Aire Valley Leeds, which sought to amalgamate land at Yarn Street and the former Copperfields College site over the river, for housing use, with concerns being raised about the adequacy of the screening proposed

  The promotion of tourism along this area, down  to St Aidan’s was also a factor and that consideration had to be given to building heights, chimneys and loss of vegetation

  Members were referred to the section of the submitted report which set out the adopted policy on waste proposals at other locations

  The Panel considered how to proceed

  In response to the specific points raised in the report Members provided the following comments:

·  that Members agree that the proposed development could be better sited on an allocated waste management site elsewhere in Leeds

·  that Members agree that the principle of development is contrary to UDPR policy H3(H3 – A1:A45), and the draft AAP’s emerging policies

·  that the general approach to access issues was good, particularly the proposal to go under the railway, but that further information would be required

·  that further information from the applicants and assurances to confirm that the emissions from the installation would be acceptable, as recommended by Public Health England would be required

·  that the loss of vegetation was not acceptable and that there was insufficient detail in the landscaping proposals

·  that the current design and layout were not acceptable in the context of the Aire Valley river corridor and in relation to the existing and proposed surrounding land uses

·  that the facility would be too close to the proposed new houses

·  that additional information on the flood risk issue and the consequences for use of the proposed link road would be required

·  to agree with advice that intrusive site investigation would be required to determine coal mining legacy issues and that, if viable, Members would wish to see the removal of surface coal from the site

In summing up the comments made the Chair stated that Panel was

not minded to approve the proposals on this site, however the technology proposed was impressive and that such a facility would be encouraged in a designated location.  The Chief Planning Officer stated that he would be willing to work with the applicants on this

  RESOLVED – To note the report, the Panel’s comments on the specific issues raised in the report and the view that Panel was not minded to approve the proposals on the site



Supporting documents: