Agenda item

Consideration was given to a report on planning application 25/0649/FUL - North And South Site, Stor Generating Plant, Seal Sands Link Road, Billingham - Erection of 2no external structures around existing power plant enclosure and associated works.

 

Planning permission was sought for the erection of two external structures around the existing power plans at Saltholme. 

 

The plants had their permits suspended until the noise issues were resolved and were non-operational.  The proposed structures were to reduce the noise levels that were causing disturbance to nearby residents in Cowpen Bewley Village.

 

The application had been considered by the Environmental Health Team and no objections had been raised.  The Environment Agency had confirmed that whilst they were considering the permit information, they were confident that the measures would resolve the issues with noise.  As detailed in the report it could not be properly measured or assessed until the applicant was allowed to implement the scheme as applied for and thereafter the noise predictions could be validated. The facility was already constructed, and it was essential that the mitigation work was undertaken.

 

The scheme had been considered in full in terms of visual impacts and other wider implications and it was considered that there were no adverse impacts that would warrant refusal of the application.

 

The application was recommended for approval with conditions as detailed within the report.

 

For information and to assist members a Glossary of Acoustic terms was attached to the report.

 

With regard to planning policy where an adopted or approved development plan contained relevant policies, Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 required that an application for planning permissions should be determined in accordance with the Development Plan(s) for the area, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.  In this case the relevant Development Plan was the Stockton on Tees Borough Council Local Plan 2019.

 

Section 143 of the Localism Act came into force on the 15 January 2012 and required the Local Planning Authority to take local finance considerations into account, this section s70(2) Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended requires in dealing with such an application the authority should have regard to a) the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, b) any local finance considerations, so far as material to the application and c) any other material considerations.

 

Consultees were notified and the comments that had been received were detailed within the report.

 

With regard to consultation neighbours had been notified and the application was advertised on site.  The comments that had been received were detailed within the report.

 

Overall, it was considered that the proposed scheme would not have an adverse impact on the area and would resolve the noise issues currently experienced by residents and the benefits of the proposed intervention were noted.

 

It was recommended that the application be approved with conditions for the reasons specified above.

 

The applicant attended the meeting and was given the opportunity to make representation. His comments could be summarised as follows:

 

- UK based operation founded 10 years ago and operate power sites across the country working to help the electricity system stay reliable in its transition to net zero.

 

- Saltholme is one of the UK’s most efficient plants. It is turned off most of the time and is intended to operate in low power generation or excess demand.

 

- The plant came into operation in late 2021 and it was noticed that the low frequency noise generated by the site was higher than the planning assessments predicted. For the past few years, we have undertaken a lot of independent noise assessments and consultations.

 

- A design has been developed and is before members today. We are confident that the design is robust and will alleviate all of the noise issues that have been flagged over the past few years.

 

- The EA and the Borough Council have confirmed that they are satisfied with the proposal and if the plan is approved, we intend to start the work immediately to alleviate the issues.

 

- Noise measurements will take place after the work has been completed to demonstrate that the works have been successful.

 

Objectors attended the meeting and were given the opportunity to make representation. Their comments could be summarised as follows:

 

- Respectfully request that the application is rejected.

 

- Residents have suffered torment, anguish and mental stress as a result of the operation of this site.

 

- The key issue is of the low frequency noise persistent and pulsating, which is widely acknowledged in the acoustics literature to cause not only annoyance but also mental stress.

- The issue was highlighted and predicted by our noise consultant to the original plant build being approved. Subsequent events had proven this analysis to be entirely correct.

 

- In this application, our noise consultant is again preaching caution, noting inconsistencies of approach and inadequate attention to the low frequency noise pattern. He states specifically that it is unlikely that measures would achieve the required reduction in low frequency.

 

- The applicants assessment is partially based on noise reduction that exists though a query about the previous recorded levels where the applicants’ consultant has used their own measured 66 decibels discounting earlier data showing peak levels of 72 decibels and doing this discrediting a reputable company that undertook those measurements. It is unclear whether the data is indeed incorrect or simply inconvenient.

 

- The applicant has referenced many times a benchmark Australian journal referencing a desirable level of low frequency noise. Indeed, they cite this six times the technical memorandum 11 in response to initial objections, as well as in their environmental noise impact assessment. When challenged however on the validity and acceptability of this paper, they discarded it coming back only to regulatory values.

 

- Prior to construction, we were promised a maximum of 1 decimal per background noise. They should be requested to stick to these targets.

 

- Fundamental issues relating to the benchmark noise data, the processing of the data and its analysis, notably as regards to the low frequency element remain unresolved, throwing into doubt predicted low frequency noise levels.

This all feels too much.

 

- There was sufficient doubt cast on the noise predictions, especially at low frequency that the proposed improvements will likely not alleviate the suffering of the residents.

 

- Residents must have absolute assurances about the noise alleviation measures.

 

- The Planning Committee received a comprehensive noise report from a nationally recognised expert on low frequency noise pollution, that report made a clear and specific prediction that residents would be impacted by noise from the site. That prediction has turned out to be devastatingly accurate.

 

- If the 3 further validation reports are not at agreed levels the site should be shut down otherwise residents will be in a noise pollution situation again.

 

- The sound meter should remain on the site boundary for the lifetime of this project, that way if there's a change in operation or equipment then the site remains in compliance.

- Since the suspension of the environmental permits peace and tranquilly have returned to residents.

 

- Residents have had limited use of their gardens due to the noise disturbance and some have moved out of their main bedroom due to the noise disturbance.

 

Officers were given the opportunity to respond to comments/issues raised. Their responses could be summarised as follows:

 

- The noise mitigation measures that are required must be installed to go through the verification process.

 

- The Environment Agency hold a lot of the power in this and they give consent for permit and they've got to be satisfied before they will lift the suspension of the permit, hopefully that will give the members a degree of comfort.

 

- There is a now a process that needs to be gone through before the plant can operate again.

 

- The requirements that are set out in the planning conditions align perfectly with the work of the Environment Agency also the British standard which has been employed throughout the assessment methodology is the accepted standard that is used in this type of instance.

 

- The conditions that have been changed allow for the works to proceed for validation to be completed and for it to be proven that this is the case.

 

- The Environment Agency in discussion with SBC will not lift the suspension until the conditions have been met and must continue to do so for the lifetime of the development.

 

Members were given the opportunity to ask questions / make comments. These could be summarised as follows:

 

- What role will the Council play in the monitoring of the situation?

 

- Hope the situation will be cured and know that officers of SBC and the EA will take action if necessary.

 

- Is the noise persistent whether the site is running or not?

 

Officers were given the opportunity to respond to comments/issues raised. Their responses could be summarised as follows:

 

- SBC will have a say in the location of the sound level meter on the site and will receive the data as part of the validation process. There will then be 3 further validation exercises to ensure that the noise is assessed over a period of time.

 

- The site doesn’t always generate noise just when operational.

 

A vote took place and the application was approved.

 

RESOLVED that planning application 25/0649/FUL be approved subject to the following conditions and informatives:-

 

1.         Time Limit

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

 

2.         Approved Plans

The development hereby approved shall be in accordance with the following approved plan(s);

 

 

Plan Reference Number     Date Received

L284_L_X_LP_1      24 March 2025

DE100-AR-GLA-001 REV A2        24 March 2025

DE100-AR-GLA-002 REV A2        24 March 2025

DE100-AR-GLA-003 REV A2        24 March 2025

DE100-AR-GLA-004 REV A2        24 March 2025

DE100-AR-GLA-005 REV A2        31 March 2025

DE100-AR-GLA-006 REV A2        31 March 2025

DE100-AR-GLA-007 REV A2        31 March 2025

DE100-AR-GLA-008 REV A2        24 March 2025

           

3.         On-site Sound Level Meter

Prior to bringing the facility back into use a sound level meter shall be installed at a location to be agreed in writing with the local planning authority in consultation with the Environmental Health Unit.

 

Data from the sound level meter, including third octave bands shall be provided to the Local Planning Authority as part of the validation report as referred to in condition 5 and thereafter upon request within a time period not exceeding 2 working days.

 

The sound level meter shall be in position for the first 12 months of the site becoming operational after the mitigation measures have been completed in full.

 

4.         Installation of Mitigation Measures

The site should operate in accordance with the acoustic mitigation measures specified within P2274-REP02-REV A-BDH for the lifetime of the proposal.

 

5.         Noise Validation Report

Within 28 days of the site becoming operational, a validation report shall be submitted with noise measurements taken at the site boundary, the identified noise sensitive receptors and the location of the sound level meter, to demonstrate compliance with table 1 and B1 of Technical Memorandum 12 Revision A (dated 03/06/2025) (Validation report).

 

Should the levels exceed the approved levels at any location, then a mitigation plan shall be submitted and approved in writing for measures to reduce the noise to those within the approved report.

 

All mitigation measures should then be implemented within an agreed timescale with the Local Planning Authority.

 

Following this, three further validation Reports will be provided to the local planning authority over three month intervals within a 12-month period demonstrating compliance with predicted post-mitigation rating limits.

 

Should the Validation Reports identify non-compliance with the noise levels as agreed,  the operator shall submit a mitigation plan and the mitigation measures shall be carried out in accordance with that mitigation plan as approved by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Upon acceptance of the validation report and for the lifetime of the development thereafter, operational noise levels arising from the development should not exceed the noise levels in Table 1 and Table B1 of Technical Memorandum 12 Revision A (dated 03/06/2025).

 

6.         Unexpected land Contamination

In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified, works must be halted on that part of the site affected by the unexpected contamination and it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken to the extent specified by the Local Planning Authority prior to resumption of the works. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report must be submitted in writing and approval by the Local Planning Authority.