Elford Public Meeting

9th February 2015

Home Farm Planning Application

The public meeting was called by Elford Parish Council to inform residents of further information about the application to build a lagoon for the storage of liquid fertiliser.

The meeting was chaired by Councillor Richard Wain, Chair of the Parish Council. Attending to answer questions from the public were the applicant, Mr Paul Bridgen; planning consultant, Mr Hugh Gore of Tyler Parkes; odour consultant Mr Steve Pearson of ADAS; agent for Birmingham City Council, landlords, Mr Gavin Loynes of Bruton Knowles.

Also attending were Parish CouncillorsJane Batchelor, Tim Gilbert, Helen Newport, Richard Smith, Neil Taylor and Jason Standerwick, County Councillor Alan White, Clerk Mrs Margaret Jones, and over 100 residents. Apologies were received from Chris Pincher M.P. and several residents.

Richard Wain explained the background to the planning application, its deferral in September for further reports, and that it would be heard at the next Planning Committee on 23rd February.

Mr Gore described the two main considerations – the odour from the centrate and how it would be managed, and the construction traffic which would be governed by a management plan. He explained the details of these plans, and how the other concerns of the planning committee had been answered. Steve Pearson had attended to answer technical questions on the Odour Management Plan. The lagoon would be covered by floating clay balls to prevent odour emission. The Construction Vehicle Management Plan contained details of vehicle movements, frequency and timings, access via The Beck, and measures to prevent mud on the highway. Mr Gore emphasised that the delivery of fertiliser was not the subject of this planning application, but that the use of a lagoon would mean dispersing deliveries.

The following questions were asked by members of the public

  • Last year the village was subject to many lorry loads of fertiliser, why was so much needed for a farm of this size, up to 600 annual loads for construction and deliveries, when it would be far less costly to merely spread commercial fertilizer? Mr Bridgen explained that waste was being used to get energy, and that his crops had grown well using it last year. Without a lagoon deliveries had to be made more intensively within 3 or 4 week periods, with a lagoon deliveries could be made only once or twice a day.
  • Will the fertiliser be used for other purposes? Mr Bridgen said fertiliser is not coming in to be stored and then taken out. A third of the traffic will not come through the village but will take fertiliser to be spread on the other side of the river.
  • Is the main use for centrate from Biffa not material from Measham? 17 properties to the north of the farm were omitted from the odour report receptors yet suffered from the odour last year after deliveries from Measham.
  • Will BCC do all in its power to prevent Elford becoming a waste disposal site? Gavin Loynes, agent for the Elford estate, felt that the lagoon would make life better for the residents as the lorry movements would average one a day and mean that the fertiliser would be spread when conditions were right; he said that the Environmental Agency had visited the site several times and had no concerns.
  • Cllr Alan White asked for reassurances from BCC about the use of the digestate. The waste used last year from Measham had been from Mr Bridgen’s other company which was not governed by the lease. The terms of the lease mentioned not to cause nuisance or disturbance toneighbours and to use good husbandry on the land. Mr Loynessaid that the fertiliser was a by- product not waste, and in answer to a query about why the land it was spread on last year was not being used, said that Mr Bridgen as tenant should farm the land as he thought appropriate, which included leaving low lying land to sow in the Spring. Mr Bridgen added that the Environmental Agency had passed the material for use as fertiliser.
  • A resident queried the speed and risk to safety of the delivery vehicles, which were too high to see children on the pavement. Mr Bridgen said that drivers were told to do 15 mph not 30 in the village, to ensure the safety of children, and his drivers had not mounted any kerbs. Another resident said she had photographic evidence of this.
  • Will the Council guarantee that it will monitor the amount of waste put on the land? Mr Loynes said that Mr Bridgen would do this properly and the EA would monitor it, that he was not putting on more than the land needed but was making a long term investment; he was asked to ensure that Mr Bridgen was not using it as a loophole to dispose waste on it.
  • With regards to the Odour Management Report, a resident asked what did they propose to do? Mr Pearson explained that the report covered odour from the lagoon not from spreading, as it was concerned with the planning application. Would the lagoon make matters worse? - Modelling showed beneficial results as times for spreading could be chosen. To a query about odour units Mr Pearson replied that low levels could not be measured, dispersal modelling needed to be done.The lagoon itself wouldn’t have an effect on odour emissions.
  • Would people be able to complain about smell as a nuisance? Mr Pearson said that even if there was permission if a nuisance was caused then regulatory action could be taken, although courts would expect a few days a year of spreading in an agricultural area.
  • Could the village have a 7½ ton weight limit to prevent the use of 30 ton trucks in the village?
  • Would the lagoon be empty in the winter? Mr Bridgen said it would be filled from December for the following Spring. If deliveries were made frequently they would be made on fewer days, less deliveries per day would take longer. The lagoon would be empty some of the year and odour would not be noticed.
  • It was suggested that truck drivers could hold a bond to ensure that they observed the behaviours in the Construction Vehicle Management Plan.
  • Why could the Construction Vehicle Management Plan not also apply to delivery traffic too? Could Mr Bridgen give an assurance that he would avoid deliveries at weekends and school traffic times? Mr Bridgen said he would do the best he can.
  • Was the village going to experience the same problems as in Thurrock?
  • What dates would deliveries be made this year? Mr Bridgen could not confirm this yet.
  • Could lorry speeds be recorded on tachographs? Can drivers use hand free phones not mobiles?
  • Is Mr Bridgen going to inflict the sickening stench of last year on the village again, this wasn’t the normal smell of agricultural operations, otherwise visitors won’t come?
  • Is the odour report based on exact science? It is fairly cautious and can’t be measured until the lagoon is built.
  • A resident commented that it was disgraceful that the community was inconvenienced just for one man and there was a loud chorus of agreement.

Richard Wain concluded by thanking those who had attended for their input. He hoped it had been informative. Those wishing to comment to the District Council should do so by 18th February, and the Parish Council would send in its own representations. He thanked Mr Bridgen and his representatives for attending.