Non-Technical Summary Environmental Statement

Transcription

1 Non-Technical Summary Environmental Statement Redevelopment of Summers Poultry, Cank Farm, Tanworth-in-Arden Summers Poultry Products Ltd.

2 Client: Project No: Summers Poultry Products Ltd Report Status: Final Project Manager/Author: James Magor Approved (signature): Matt Royall Date: This report has been prepared by ENVIRON with all reasonable skill, care and diligence, and taking account of the manpower and resources devoted to it by agreement with the client. This report is confidential to the client, and ENVIRON accepts no responsibility whatsoever to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known, unless formally agreed by ENVIRON beforehand. Any such party relies upon the report at their own risk. ENVIRON disclaims any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the agreed scope of the work. VERSION CONTROL RECORD ISSUE DESCRIPTION OF STATUS DATE REVIEWER INITIALS AUTHORS INITIALS A First Draft 7/12/09 MR JM 1 First Client Issue (Draft) 7/12/09 MR JM 2 Second Client Issue (Final) 8/12/09 MR JM

3 CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION AIR QUALITY NOISE AND VIBRATION ECOLOGY AND NATURE CONSERVATION TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT TOWNSCAPE AND VIEWS ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE SOILS, GEOLOGY AND CONTAMINATION WATER QUALITY AND HYDROLOGY SOCIO-ECONOMICS OVERALL CONCLUSION 33 Issue: 2 ENVIRON

4 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND ENVIRON UK Limited (ENVIRON) was commissioned by Summers Poultry Products Ltd. ( the Client ) to carry out an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed extension of the existing chicken slaughterhouse located at Cank Farm, Well Lane, Tanworthin-Arden, B94 5AH (NGR: , ). The location of the proposed development is shown in Figure 1.1. Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number Plotted Scale - 1:35000 This map was created with Promap. Figure 1.1: Site Location Plan Issue: 2 1 ENVIRON

5 1.1.2 An Environmental Statement (ES) was previously prepared by ENVIRON (reference: 65- C11352_01, dated May 2007) (referred to herein as the 2007 ES ) and submitted to Stratford-on-Avon District Council (SADC) on 16th May 2007 in support of a planning application for the extension to the existing slaughterhouse and alterations to the internal access, parking and turning areas (reference: 07/01412/FUL). The planning application was refused in August 2007, an appeal was dismissed in June 2008 and an unsuccessful High Court Challenge was made in February ENVIRON understands the primary reasons for refusal relate to the effect the enlargement of the building would have on the openness of the Green Belt and the impact of the extended building on the character and appearance of the area The scope of the 2007 ES was determined by means of a verbal scoping opinion provided by Stratford-on-Avon District Council (SADC). This verbal communication stated that an assessment of potential highway implications, odour and waste was required. Subsequently, an informal Scoping Study was undertaken by ENVIRON (reference: 65-C11352_1, dated February 2007). As part of the Scoping Study, ENVIRON informally contacted key statutory bodies for their opinions on the significant environmental issues associated with the proposed redevelopment The scope of this ES (2009) was determined by means of review of the 2007 ES, consideration of the SADC Planning Application decision, the Planning Application Appeal decision and consultation with SADC personnel. In addition, the informal Scoping Study, undertaken in February 2007, was considered The ES has been prepared by ENVIRON, with assistance and input from other members of the Project Team, as follows: Stansgate Planning Consultants Planning Policy, as well as elements of Landscape and Visual Character and Socio-economics sections; AM Architectural Design Ltd. Masterplanning; David Tucker Associates Transportation Assessment; and Topographic Visual Impact photographic montages. 1.2 EXISTING SITE DESCRIPTION The proposed development site is located in Tanworth-in-Arden, approximately 16km to the south of Birmingham City Centre. The northern site boundary is formed by Well Lane and a residential property, Cank Farm, is located adjacent to the south-eastern site boundary. The Issue: 2 2 ENVIRON

6 village of Tanworth-in-Arden is located to the north of the site and the surrounding land to the south, east and west comprises open land in agricultural use. The existing site layout is shown in Figure THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed development is shown in Figure 3.1. The key elements of the development are as follows: an extension which will consolidate slaughterhouse operations within a single footprint. All slaughterhouse operations and waste storage facilities will be managed under one roof ; and all temporary buildings ( Portakabins ) and International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) Containers are to be retained on-site; all be it three Portakabins are to be relocated. The weighbridge is to be relocated and the proposed parking area is essentially the same as existing The extensions to the existing buildings will be erected on previously developed land, which is currently used for vehicle parking, material storage and deliveries. The proposed development would not encroach into woodland or farmland and would be contained within the existing site boundary (i.e. the existing planning unit) The proposed south elevation of the slaughter room and recessed offal room will be timber clad and therefore more agricultural in appearance. Such cladding is more appropriate to its rural setting than the metal walls of the existing lawful slaughterhouse. The lairage will be clad with green netting, sufficient to screen waiting lorries and provide ventilation for the birds. It will have a green/brown canvas roof. These materials will give the building a softer appearance than metal walls and roof and will provide contrast to the adjacent timber cladding The proposed development is not intended to accommodate an increase in operations at the site. There will be no employment of additional staff, with the exception of construction workers during the construction phase, and the number of birds processed at the site will not be increased, following completion of the development. Indeed, during the proposed redevelopment works, the existing cutting room will be removed from the premises and this section of the existing slaughterhouse will be used for refrigeration. 25 jobs associated with cutting operations will be lost. Issue: 2 3 ENVIRON

7 1.3.5 The aim of the proposed development is to move existing operations (which currently take place externally) internally, to mitigate current environmental issues such as odour and to comply with the requirements of the Food Standard Agency and the Meat Hygiene Service. 1.4 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES The aim of the proposed development is to move existing operations (which currently take place externally) internally, to mitigate current environmental issues such as odour and to comply with the requirements of the Food Standard Agency (FSA) and the Meat Hygiene Service. The do nothing option is contrary to the Food Hygiene (England) Regulations 2005, the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter and Killing) Regulations 1995, and the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and exposes Cank Farm to investigation and prosecution by the FSA and Stratford-on-Avon District Council. Non-compliance with the new regulations may lead to the business being fined and even imprisonment of the Directors. Therefore failure to undertake the proposed development will result in closure of the slaughterhouse During the proposed redevelopment works, the existing cutting room will be removed from the premises and this section of the existing slaughterhouse will be used for refrigeration. Therefore, to a certain degree, refurbishment is already proposed in the development works. However, further reconfiguration to accommodate a lairage, refrigeration, sanitary staff facilities, offal room and bio-filter within the shell of the existing building is not possible. The processing of poultry requires the segregation of many operational rooms and associated specialist plant. Even if the premises could physically be entirely reconfigured to accommodate all essential functional requirements (without recourse to extensions), very low productivity levels would render the business unviable There are no buildings within or adjacent to the slaughterhouse premises capable of conversion to a lairage, refrigeration rooms, changing rooms or offal/biofilter room. In fact, there are no empty or redundant buildings at all within a 200m radius of the site. The nearest available buildings are the four dilapidated agricultural buildings located at the east end of Cank Farm, some 200m from the slaughterhouse. These buildings are not capable of conversion to a modern, efficient slaughterhouse. Furthermore, it is not realistic to manage a single slaughterhouse with operations split between two sites, 200m apart. For example, the lairage, refrigeration rooms and offal/biofilter room must be physically attached to the operational rooms of the slaughterhouse. Although it is possible to convert a redundant agricultural building to a temporary transit lairage and construct a drive between it and the slaughterhouse, another lairage of the same dimensions would need to be created at the slaughterhouse so that birds are unloaded uncover. Hence the conversion of redundant Issue: 2 4 ENVIRON

8 buildings on nearby land (whether at Cank Farm or elsewhere) is impractical and will not replace the need to improve facilities at the slaughterhouse ENVIRON understands that the Client has undertaken a search of viable sites for relocation. Fourteen sites were identified during the initial search process, reduced to three sites with favourable agent responses; one in Perry Barr and two in Redditch. Further detailed investigation revealed that purchasing a site on an industrial estate in the region large enough to accommodate an equivalent slaughterhouse varies between 2m and 3m. The cost to extend Cank Farm is approximately 5m. The costs to fit-out and/or redevelop the three alternative sites vary between 14m and 16m. The Client is therefore unable to fund a relocation strategy. Furthermore, the three alternative locations are located nearer to houses, shops and schools than Cank Farm is to its neighbours. Opposition from future host local residents, shops, businesses, schools and political representatives is to be expected It is not the intention of the Client to prove that alternative sites for an equivalent sized slaughterhouse do not exist. Rather, the relocation exercise was useful because it helped to illustrate the difficulties and costs of relocating the slaughterhouse. It is simply not desirable or viable to relocate to a brownfield site at three times the cost, where the business will probably encounter just as much local hostility, if not more, than from their current host community. Relocation is not a credible fall-back position. If Cank Farm cannot modernise in situ, permanent closure is the more likely outcome. 1.5 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY The EIA has been carried out in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (hereafter referred to as the EIA Regulations). The EIA Regulations require that before permission is granted for certain types of development, an EIA must be undertaken The scope of the 2007 ES was determined by means of a verbal scoping opinion provided by Stratford-on-Avon District Council (SADC). This verbal communication stated that an assessment of potential highway implications, odour and waste was required. Subsequently, an informal Scoping Study was undertaken by ENVIRON (reference: 65-C11352_1, dated February 2007). The scope of this ES (2009) was determined by means of review of the 2007 ES, consideration of the SADC Planning Application decision, the Planning Application Appeal decision and consultation with SADC personnel. In addition, the informal Scoping Study, undertaken in February 2007, was considered. Issue: 2 5 ENVIRON

9 1.5.3 Environmental impacts may be both negative and positive. The criteria used in this assessment are as follows: Major Positive or Major Negative effect where the development would cause a significant improvement (or deterioration) to the existing environment; Moderate Positive or Moderate Negative effect where the development would cause a noticeable improvement (or deterioration) to the existing environment; Minor Positive or Minor Negative effect where the development would cause a barely perceptible improvement (or deterioration) to the existing environment; and Insignificant no noticeable improvement or deterioration to the existing environment. 1.6 PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK During the evolution of the proposals for the application site, a range of planning policy documents have been considered. The guidance within each of these documents has been used to guide the scope and content of the submitted planning application and the relevant parts of this guidance have been used in the EIA. National Planning Policy and Guidance At the national level, specific guidance has been used in the assessment of the impacts of the proposed development on the environment. These include adherence to policies set out in Government Planning Policy Guidelines (PPGs), Planning Policy Statements (PPSs) and the use of British Standard methodologies. Regional and Local Planning Policy The contents of the West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS11) January 2008, formerly RPG11, makes reference to agriculture and farm diversification (PA15). The proposed development supports and relies upon local contract poultry farmers. Cank Farm slaughterhouse is a general industrial process (class B2) that supplements farm income gained from arable and grazing on the 134 acre Summers holding. The slaughterhouse also supplements farm income from local contract poultry farmers. The slaughterhouse is an Issue: 2 6 ENVIRON

10 important food processing activity important to the survival of eleven farms comprising the Summers holding and other contract farmers According to Policy PR2: Green Belt Policy of the Local Plan Review, extensions to industrial buildings in the Green Belt are inappropriate development, and can only be justified under very special circumstances. The policy is fundamentally one of restraint, with emphasis placed on protecting the Green Belt from proposals which threaten its rural character. Hence the development can only be justified by very special circumstances. The weight to be given to very special circumstances, if they exist at all, will be balanced by the degree of harm to the openness of the Green Belt The very special circumstances advanced by the applicant are similar to those made in the context of the 2007 planning application; namely: the regulatory framework and necessity for compliance with the Food Hygiene (England) Regulations 2005, the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter and Killing) Regulations 1995, and the Environmental Protection Act 1990; the protection and enhancement of the living conditions of local residents; and employment. Although economic arguments are not a main plank of the case in favour of development, it is noteworthy that there has been a shift in Stratford-on-Avon District corporate policy since 2007, insofar as the Council now places greater weight upon the prosperity and (in this case) the survival of existing businesses In principle, the need to comply with the law is capable of amounting to a very special circumstance for the purpose of the green belt balance. In the case of Cank Farm, as a result of the scheme being re-worked arising from its green belt location, in qualitative terms the approach taken to compliance with the regulations is sufficiently robust to clearly to outweigh green belt considerations. For example, convincing evidence has been submitted to explain why refurbishment is not an alternative to extensions. On the other hand, refurbishment will offset the need to erect some extensions, namely part of the refrigeration requirement. In all, the substantial amendment to the proposed extensions and the refurbishment of buildings will considerably lessen the harm to openness of the green belt compared to the 2007 scheme. This will be achieved in a manner that will reduce revenue, reduce the workforce and requires the remaining staff and government inspectors to continue working from within poor quality structures; all considerable concessions to Green Belt policy For the purposes of the green belt balancing exercise, the substantial benefits of the scheme clearly outweigh the harm by virtue of inappropriateness, harm to the purposes and objectives Issue: 2 7 ENVIRON

11 of green belt policy and the particular harm to openness resulting from the proposed extensions. Accordingly, very special circumstances exist to justify planning permission as an exception to green belt policy. Issue: 2 8 ENVIRON

12 Figure 1.2: Existing Site Layout Issue: 2 9 ENVIRON

13 Figure 1.3: Proposed Scheme Design Issue: 2 10 ENVIRON

14 2.0 AIR QUALITY 2.1 BACKGROUND This section examines the implications of the proposed development on air quality and odour. The assessment includes a review of existing air quality and odour. It predicts and evaluates the impacts on air quality of the development, arising from construction of the extension and operations at the slaughterhouse. Potential sources of emissions and odours are identified and assessed in the context of existing air quality, emission sources and the nature and location of receptors. 2.2 REDEVELOPMENT WORKS AND OPERATIONAL IMPACTS During the initial phase of the redevelopment, which comprises extension to the existing buildings, there are two potentially significant sources of emissions that could affect air quality: construction dust and emissions from construction vehicles and/or machinery It is inevitable that during the redevelopment, construction activities will cause the mobilisation of dust through earthmoving and excavation works, material storage and handling, the movement of vehicles over unpaved or soiled surfaces, and finishing activities such as brick cutting and grinding. However, with respect to the typical dust generating activities, the proposed development at Summers Poultry will comprise extension of existing buildings. No demolition of existing structures will be undertaken at the subject site. Furthermore, the proposed extensions are considered to be relatively small-scale and hence earth moving and major excavation works are likely to be minimal. Therefore, the potential for dust generation at the subject site is considered to be limited Due to the small-scale operations, the prudent use of good site planning and management will ensure effective dust control. Particular attention will be paid to operations, which must unavoidably, take place close to the site boundaries During the construction phase, heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) will require access to the site to deliver and remove materials. Earthmoving plant and other mobile machinery will work on the site and generators and cranes are likely to be in operation. All of these machines produce exhaust emissions; of particular concern are emissions of fine particulates. The majority of HGVs will be diesel powered, which emit significantly more PM 10 than petrol vehicles. Due to Issue: 2 11 ENVIRON

15 the nature of the operations and the scale of the proposed extensions, the number of vehicles and construction machines utilised at the site is likely to be minimal. It is anticipated that the emissions from construction vehicles and construction plant will be negligible. 2.3 TRAFFIC RELATED EMISSIONS The proposed development is not intended to facilitate an increase in operations at the subject site and consequently the number of vehicles accessing the site following the development will be consistent with existing traffic flows A survey of the traffic generation arising from the current operations was undertaken by the site management during the year from April 2006 to March 2007 and a recent review indicated no material change to traffic generation. The traffic survey identified the existing HGV/van flows to and from the site are at a relatively low level with an average of approximately 47 daily movements (23.5 in, 23.5 out). In addition, traffic movements generated by 96 staff are at a modest level, with a maximum of 58 separate traffic movements (2 x 29 vehicles). This low level of traffic relates to the fact that the majority of staff arrive by minibus or car share and only 15 staff arrive in a vehicle where they are the single occupant. The proposed extensions will result in a loss of 25 jobs and therefore there will be a reduction in car and minibus traffic As a result of the proposed development, the import and export of chicken and related products will remain broadly the same, although no cutting will take place on site. This will mean that traffic levels will reduce, as will the number of staff. It is clear therefore that the proposed development will result in a reduction in current transport generation arising from the site and it is considered that the impact of traffic related emissions will be negligible. 2.4 ODOUR EMISSIONS Following liaison with Mr Nick Ellison of Stratford-on-Avon District Council (SADC) Environmental Health Department and analysis of complaints data relating to Summers Poultry, the potential for odours arising from operations at the site exists Following analysis of the odour complaints and a site survey undertaken by ENVIRON, the primary sources of odour were identified as external storage of waste material and air extraction from the de-feathering room and scolding tank. Issue: 2 12 ENVIRON

16 2.4.3 The proposed development comprises an extension to the existing buildings. This will consolidate the business within a single, rectangular footprint, with internal materials / waste storage facilities. Relocating the waste material storage areas from their current external location to a dedicated internal waste storage area will serve to mitigate the odour emissions from the site To further mitigate process odours, a biological filtration unit is to be installed at the site. Internal ventilation and air extracted from the de-feathering room and scolding tank will be directed to the filtration unit, as will exhaust air from the waste storage area. Furthermore, the air extraction equipment will create negative pressure within internal areas, minimising leakage of odours from doors and loading areas The bio-filtration process removes odorous compounds and other air pollutants, such as volatile organic compounds (VOC), from waste air. In a bio-filter, the pollutants are "consumed" by the micro-organisms, and degraded into biomass, water and CO 2. This allows the filter material to continually regenerate itself. The bio-filtration process results in a complete decomposition of the pollutants, creating no hazardous by-products as the bio-filter material is an organic, biodegradable material that can be readily composted after use The bio-filter is a proven technology, typically used for the removal of odour from wastewater treatment facilities, landfills and the food processing industry The enclosure of the waste products within the process building, together with the correct use of the bio-filtration unit will ensure that odour impacts from the process are minimised. 2.5 CONCLUSIONS Dust impacts will be controlled during the construction phase through the implementation of management provisions. Given the scale of the extension, the number of construction vehicles and plant required is considered to be minimal. Therefore, the potential for dust generation during the construction phase is considered to be limited There will be no increase in operations at the site as a result of the proposed development. Therefore, the impact of traffic related emissions will be negligible Following liaison with the Local Authority regarding odour emissions from Summers Poultry, analysis of complaints data relating to the site and a site survey, it was identified that the existing operations have given rise to odour complaints at nearby sensitive receptors. The Issue: 2 13 ENVIRON

17 proposed development includes provision for a dedicated internal waste storage area and the installation of bio-filtration unit to remove odours from extracted air from all internal areas, prior to venting to atmosphere. As a result, odour emissions should be significantly reduced from the site. Therefore, it is considered that the impact of the proposed development on odour emissions at the site will be a major beneficial effect In conclusion, the overall environmental impact of the impact of the proposed development on odour emissions at the site will be a major beneficial effect. Issue: 2 14 ENVIRON

18 3.0 NOISE AND VIBRATION 3.1 BACKGROUND Noise can be defined as unwanted or undesirable sound derived from sources such as road traffic, industry or construction work that interferes with normal activities such as conversation, sleeping or recreation. Related to noise is vibration, which results from the transmission of low frequency energy typically through the medium of ground or buildings. It results in small movements of the transmitting medium, which can cause discomfort if the movements are large enough This chapter identifies the potential noise and vibration impacts that the proposed scheme is likely to have on existing receptors in the vicinity. The nearest sensitive receptors to the site are residential properties; the nearest of which is considered to be Ravinstone located c.100m to the northwest of the site. The assessment is based upon the results of an environmental noise survey undertaken by Acoustic Associates. 3.2 CONSTRUCTION ISSUES The potential impacts from construction noise and vibration during redevelopment of the subject site have been assessed. Given the scale of the construction phase the potential impacts are therefore likely to be limited to the noisiest activities such as excavation works to clear the existing hardstanding and concreting operations for the footprint of the proposed buildings. In order to give an indication as to the likely noise level at the nearest sensitive receptors during these activities, noise predictions have been undertaken in accordance with the procedures presented in BS 5228 for the control of noise at construction and open sites The noise predictions indicate that noise levels during construction are not predicted to exceed the target noise criteria at any of the identified sensitive receptors Given the scale of the development and current traffic flows on the surrounding road network, it is considered unlikely that any perceptible increase in road traffic noise level over the day will occur at any receptor location during the construction phase. Issue: 2 15 ENVIRON

19 3.3 OPERATIONAL ISSUES The proposed extension to the existing facilities at Summers Poultry, Cank Farm will include the provision of additional refrigeration plant which is likely to run through the night. The existing background noise level in this instance is considered to include the current operations at Summers Poultry Cank Farm Compliance with the target noise criterion for building services plant will minimise the likelihood of complaints in accordance with BS 4142 eliminating the need for mitigation measures. 3.4 CONCLUSIONS Given that there is no intended increase in operations at the site following completion of the development, no potential adverse impacts have been identified due to vehicle movements to and from the site Limiting noise levels have been set for all proposed building services plant, providing that the rating noise levels from the building services plant do not exceed the stated design criteria, whether through the application of noise control techniques or otherwise, the impact of noise from such sources is predicted to be negligible. Issue: 2 16 ENVIRON

20 4.0 ECOLOGY AND NATURE CONSERVATION 4.1 BACKGROUND This section sets out an assessment of the ecological resources of the site, establishes a 'baseline' of ecological quality and sensitivities as well as considering the sensitivities and ecological quality of the wider area. The potential effects of the development on these resources are then assessed and evaluated. Finally, measures for the mitigation of negative or undesirable effects are proposed as well as possible improvement measures to enhance the site in terms of its biodiversity interests. 4.2 CONSTRUCTION ISSUES Development is proposed to take place throughout the application area. Except for a small few patches of tall ruderal habitat and cypress tree species the majority of the application area comprises hardstanding and metal clad buildings of low habitat value. The application area offers very poor habitat for protected species and no evidence was found during the survey. There are no statutory designated sites of nature importance within 2 km of the site and the seven non-statutory sites for nature conservation importance are considered to be of sufficient distance from the site to not be affected by the development proposals: 4.3 OPERATIONAL ISSUES Once construction of the development is complete, the site will be of a similar layout and intensity of use to that which is already experienced. As such no additional impacts on terrestrial ecology are likely to occur during the operational lifetime of the development In accordance with PPS 9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, any development proposals should aim to promote opportunities for the incorporation of beneficial biodiversity features within the design of development. For example, landscaping to provide ecological enhancement should be carried out. A landscaped bund will be constructed adjacent to the southern site boundary and will be planted with locally native tree, shrub and herbaceous species. However, whereas berry-producing species, such as Sorbus sp, may be planted in order to attract birds, these species are not considered appropriate at Cank Farm given the nature of site operations. Issue: 2 17 ENVIRON

21 4.4 CONCLUSIONS On the basis of the Ecology survey, the application area offers very poor habitat for protected species and no evidence was found during the survey. The species recorded can be described as common or abundant in similar places across much of the Midlands No protected, Red Data Book or Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) species were recorded within the site area during the extended Ecology Survey; the data obtained from Warwickshire Biological Records Centre (WBRC) has re-iterated this. According to WBRC, records of protected species in the surrounding area are also limited Ecological enhancement measures and management methods will be designed to ensure that the ecology of the site and surrounding area is protected during construction and a landscaped bund will be constructed adjacent to the southern site boundary and will be planted with locally native tree, shrub and herbaceous species The proposed development will have a negligible effect on ecology and nature conservation. Issue: 2 18 ENVIRON

22 5.0 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT 5.1 BACKGROUND This section assesses the potential impacts of the proposed development on traffic and transport on the surrounding road network. This assessment draws on the Transport Assessment (TA) which is a separate document submitted in support of the planning application. The TA has been prepared by David Tucker Associates (DTA). 5.2 BASELINE CONDITIONS Summers Poultry is located on the south-eastern side of the village of Tanworth-in-Arden, approximately 5km to the south of the M42/A435 interchange (Junction 3) and approximately 16km to the south of Birmingham city centre. The village is linked to the nearby A435 and A3400 by a network of minor roads. Junction 3 on the M42 provides access to the wider motorway network including the M40, M5 and M The slaughterhouse employs 96 staff, of which 86 live in Birmingham, 3 live in Tanworth-in- Arden and 7 live at other locations. Due to the concentration of staff living in Birmingham, a staff minibus is provided and many of the staff car share A survey of traffic generation arising from the current operations was undertaken by the site management during the year from April 2006 to March 2007 and a recent review indicated no material change to traffic generation. The traffic survey indicates that there are a maximum of 58 traffic movements (2 x 29 vehicles) per day, generated by the staff. Reportedly, only 15 staff arrive in a car where they are the only occupant. Furthermore, the survey indicates that average daily traffic flow of Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) and delivery vehicles is 47 daily movements (23.5 in, 23.5 out) According to the TA, all HGV movements are advised to use Danzey Green Lane and Tanworth Lane, to the south-east of the site, to access the A3400. This avoids HGVs travelling through the village of Tanworth-in-Arden. Similarly, all delivery vehicles are advised to travel north-east, via Tom Hill and Broad Lane, when travelling to Birmingham. Again this avoids the need for vans to pass through the village. Issue: 2 19 ENVIRON

23 5.3 TRAFFIC IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT The proposed development is not intended to accommodate an increase in operations at the site. The import and export of chicken and related products will remain broadly the same, although no cutting will take place on site. This will mean that traffic levels will reduce, as will the number of staff. It is clear therefore that the proposed development will result in a reduction in current transport generation arising from the site. 5.4 CONCLUSIONS The TA concludes that the proposed development will not have a significant transport impact and therefore there are no transport grounds for refusing the application Given that there will be no increase in operations as a result of the proposed development and there will be a reduction in current transport generation arising from the site, the proposed development will have a negligible effect on traffic and transport. Issue: 2 20 ENVIRON

24 6.0 TOWNSCAPE AND VIEWS 6.1 BACKGROUND Landscape and visual impacts can result from the activity of development construction and also from operational effects generated by that development. Landscape impacts are those that affect the fabric and character of the landscape whilst visual impacts are those that affect views. The assessment has been carried out in accordance with current best practice and involved a combination of desk-based assessment and field study Summers Poultry is located approximately 250m to the south-east of Tanworth-in-Arden village centre, with the northern site boundary formed by Well Lane. The site s immediate context is rural, the surrounding land to the south, east and west comprises open land of agricultural appearance. Cank Farm is located adjacent to the south-eastern site boundary and the associated farm land forms the southern and eastern site boundary. The land to the west is occupied by woodland, with Ravinstone residential property located approximately 100m to the north-west. A railway line is located c.800m to the east, the River Alne is located approximately 650m east and a tributary of the River Alne is located approximately 200m south of the site at its nearest point Whilst the surroundings are primarily rural, there are numerous isolated residential properties in the vicinity of the site. The village of Tanworth-in-Arden is located c.250m to the north-west, and Wood End and Gilbert s Green are located further to the north-west. To the south, the small villages of the Danzey Green and Trap s Green are both located approximately 1km from the subject site. 6.2 THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed development involves the retention of the existing slaughterhouse buildings, subject to internal alterations, and the erection of extensions. All portacabins and containers are retained; albeit three portacabins are relocated. The proposed parking arrangements are essentially the same as existing, with staff and visitor parking at the front (north) and lorry parking at the rear (south). The extensions will be erected on previously-developed land; that is, the mixture of exposed soil and concrete hardstanding currently used for parking, turning and storage. The resultant building does not encroach into woodland or farmland and is comfortably contained within the existing planning unit. The proposed extensions are Issue: 2 21 ENVIRON

25 approximately the same height as existing. No trees will be felled, other than a small number of conifers necessary to realign the internal access The site is fairly flat and is enclosed to the north, east and west by existing landscaping. Indeed, there is a woodland area of conifers to act as a strong visual buffer between the site and the village. There are open views to the south, where the land falls away to the River Alne. 6.3 PREDICTED EFFECTS A survey of the surrounding area, to determine views of the site from public rights of way in the vicinity of the site, was carried out in August 2009 and September The primary views of the site were from the south of the site View 1 is taken from footpath SD250, 400m south of the slaughterhouse. This is taken from the outer zone. From here the slaughterhouse is visible and the view has been addressed in four ways: View 1a The existing view of the slaughterhouse; View 1b A photomontage of the slaughterhouse if the existing lairage were removed; View 1c A photomontage of the proposed slaughterhouse, without landscaping; and View 1d A photomontage of the proposed slaughterhouse, with landscaping and in 15 years time View 2 is taken from Forde Hall Lane 600m south of the slaughterhouse. This is taken from the outer zone. As with view 1, from view 2 the slaughterhouse is visible and the view has been addressed in four ways: View 2a The existing view of the slaughterhouse; View 2b A photomontage of the slaughterhouse if the existing lairage were removed; View 2c A photomontage of the proposed slaughterhouse, without landscaping; and View 2d A photomontage of the proposed slaughterhouse, with landscaping and in 15 years time Views 1 and 2 (presented in the photographs below) are similar, although it is only from Forde Hall Lane that the slaughterhouse and the village are seen in the same vista. From this perspective, the slaughterhouse is seen lying eastward and outside the Conservation Area, separated from the village by a coniferous wood and mature native trees. The ridge height of the existing and proposed buildings sit lower than any listed buildings visible from Forde Hall Lane. The building does not break the skyline and behind it is a backdrop of trees. Any impact on the setting of the Conservation Area and listed buildings is minimal. Issue: 2 22 ENVIRON

26 Issue: 2 23 ENVIRON

27 Issue: 2 24 ENVIRON

28 6.3.5 Photomontages demonstrate that from distant vantage points there is little perceived difference between the existing lawful slaughterhouse and the proposed building. The irregular profile and grey metal sheeting of the lawful building has a more striking appearance than the cleaner lines and softer colours and textures used on the proposed extensions. Furthermore, as existing, offal disposal and the unloading of chickens from waiting lorries take place out in the open. Lorries park and manoeuvre on hardstanding to the south of the building, in full view of the footpath and Forde Hall Lane. Taken together, the proposed extensions and the landscaped bund will screen such activities and therefore enhance views. 6.4 CONCLUSIONS An assessment of the potential impacts of the extension to Summers Poultry, in relation to the landscape and visual character of the surrounding area, has been carried out. The visual impact has been considered in terms of the inner zone, in which the site is directly visible from nearby areas at ground-level, and the outer zone, in which the site is visible from more distant, elevated areas Views of Summers Poultry from the inner zone are defined by the surrounding built pattern, topography and established vegetation. As a result, existing views of the slaughterhouse buildings are from the public footpath to the south of the site. Topographical constraints and the presence of established mature vegetation, obstruct views of the site from the north, east and west Further away, outer zone views of the slaughterhouse buildings from the village of Tanworthin-Arden are entirely obscured by the topography and woodland in the north and west of the site. In fact, the slaughterhouse can only be seen from two vantage points in the public domain; one point on footpath 250 and a short section on Forde Hall Lane. From these distant perspectives, the existing lawful slaughterhouse (without lairage) is visible. The proposed extension will add a modest amount of mass to the profile of the building. However, the introduction of earthbunding, landscaping and appropriate materials will minimise impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the setting of the rural landscape, the Conservation Area and listed buildings. Overall, the proposed development is considered to have a minor negative impact on townscape and views. Although, in 15 years it is anticipated that mature landscaping will entirely obscure outer zone views of the proposed extensions. Issue: 2 25 ENVIRON

29 7.0 ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE 7.1 BACKGROUND This section deals with the assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed development on the cultural heritage and archaeological resources of the site and surrounding study area. The assessment has been prepared in accordance with PPG 16: Archaeology and Planning, and Guidance for an Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment (Institute of Field Archaeologists 1999). This included consultation with Warwickshire County Council and English Heritage. 7.2 BASELINE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS A review of the Listed Building and Archaeological Records provided by Warwickshire County Council (WCC) has shown that there are no listed or historic buildings on the development site. There are however numerous listed buildings in the vicinity of the site to the north-west, within the village of Tanworth-in-Arden. 7.3 CONCLUSIONS In conclusion, given the nature of the development works to be undertaken at Summers Poultry, the overall environmental impact of the proposed development on archaeology and cultural heritage is considered to be negligible. Consequently it is considered that no specific mitigation measures will be required during the proposed development. Issue: 2 26 ENVIRON

30 8.0 SOILS, GEOLOGY AND CONTAMINATION 8.1 BACKGROUND This section of the assessment discusses the historical and current use of the proposed development site in relation to the issue of contaminated land and the underlying geology and hydrogeology The site was predominantly undeveloped until the 1970s when the buildings which form Cank Farm were constructed on-site. Additional buildings were constructed on the 1990s when the site adopted approximately its current configuration. 8.2 CONTAMINANT SOURCES / MITIGATION MEASURES A site survey was undertaken by ENVIRON on 12 th August 2009 and discussions were held with site personnel. A summary of the key environmental impacts and their mitigation is provided below: any imported fill to be used during the development will be inert, uncontaminated material and will not lead to the degradation of soil or groundwater quality underlying the site; a Type III asbestos survey should be undertaken prior to commencement of any development work and any asbestos found should be removed (or enclosed) in accordance with all relevant UK legislation; and the disposal of any excavated soils will comply with all applicable waste management regulations. 8.3 CONCLUSIONS Overall, the impact of the proposed development on soils, geology and contamination is considered to be Minor Positive, as a result of the proposed mitigation measures. Issue: 2 27 ENVIRON

31 9.0 WATER QUALITY AND HYDROLOGY 9.1 BACKGROUND This section deals with the assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed development on water quality and hydrology in the study area. The study area is defined as that within a 1km radius of the site, although a number of issues are considered at the river catchment level. The assessment of effects encompasses surface water and groundwater quality, surface water and groundwater resources (in terms of water quantity) and flooding The nearest surface water feature is a pond located approximately 60m south of the site. The River Alne is located approximately 650m east of the site at its nearest point. A tributary of the River Alne is located approximately 200m south of the site at its nearest point The groundwater vulnerability map of the area (Northern Cotswolds, Sheet 30, scale 1:100,000) shows the solid geology directly underlying the site is classified as a non-aquifer and a minor aquifer in the north-west section of the site The Environment Agency flood map indicates that the site lies outside the indicative floodplain of the River Stour and, following consultation with the Environment Agency (EA), is known to be located in Flood Zone 1 and therefore has little or no risk of flooding (annual probability is less than 0.1%). 9.2 CONSTRUCTION ISSUES With regard to new potential sources of contamination associated with the proposed redevelopment, at this stage it is envisaged that any new sources of contamination are unlikely as the redevelopment will comprise extensions to existing buildings. The development is also likely to comprise an upgrade of existing waste and materials storage facilities which will include the appropriate storage of oils and fuels in accordance with the Control of Pollution (Oil Storage) (England) Regulations It is considered that, with these measures in place, the overall impacts of the construction phase of the development will be Insignificant. Issue: 2 28 ENVIRON

32 9.3 OPERATIONAL ISSUES The proposed development site is shown to lie outside the indicative floodplain of the River Alne and is known to be located in Flood Zone 1 (this means that the site has an annual risk of flooding of less than 0.1%, classified as a low probability). In addition, the development proposal covers an area of less than 1 ha. Therefore, the proposals do not require a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and this has been agreed with the Environment Agency According to site personnel, storm water drainage at the site currently comprises infiltration. The storm water run-off from the areas of impermeable concrete hardstanding is directed to the unsurfaced areas of the site. This system is considered to be sustainable because of the rural setting and the use of infiltration methods to control runoff at source. Furthermore, topographically the site slopes gently to the south-east, directing surface water run-off to the adjacent farmland The proposed development is not intended to facilitate an increase in operations at the site. Consequently, it is anticipated that there will be no increase in water demand as a result of the proposed development The principal source of contamination from routine operation of the site is hydrocarbon contamination from vehicles parked on site. The primary site car park is unsurfaced and located to the north of the main building. Storm water drains by infiltration or runoff to adjacent farmland and does not comprise oil interception. However, given the underlying geology (minor and non-aquifer) this is not considered to pose a significant risk of groundwater contamination and the current drainage system is considered to be sustainable The proposed development at Summers Poultry will not significantly increase the impermeable surfacing at the site. Consequently the existing drainage system and surface water management at the site is considered sufficient and no upgrade or alteration to the existing storm water drainage will be undertaken. 9.4 CONCLUSIONS Given the location and nature of the nearest sensitive receptors, the overall environmental impact of the proposed development in relation to water quality and hydrology is considered to be Insignificant. Issue: 2 29 ENVIRON

33 10.0 SOCIO-ECONOMICS 10.1 BACKGROUND This section, prepared by Stansgate Planning LLP, assesses the likely socio-economic effects of the application proposals. It focuses on both baseline socio-economic considerations and the estimated likely overall impact of the various effects, which are likely to impact on human well-being. This includes assessing the implications of the proposed development on employment, amenity, demographics and economy of the region SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LOCAL AREA The village of Tanworth-in-Arden is located to the north of Stratford-on-Avon District, approximately 2km to the south-west of the junction between the M40 and M42 motorways. A slaughterhouse began operating from Cank Farm, Well Lane in Under the name Summers Poultry Products Ltd, the business specialises in Halal Chicken and employs 96 people. The majority of these workers reside in the Birmingham conurbation and share minibus transportation to the site. The Directors of the company live in the parish of Tanworthin-Arden. In addition, a full-time vet and four meat inspectors (employed by Defra) are present on-site. The slaughterhouse is under constant scrutiny and must abide by food hygiene regulations The proposed development is not intended to facilitate an increase in operations at the site and will not result in the employment of additional workers (except for construction workers). In fact, 25 jobs will be lost. However, failure to comply with new hygiene regulations exposes Cank Farm to investigation and prosecution by the Food Standards Agency and the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). Indeed, investigation is inevitable given that four employees are obliged by law to inspect food handling on a daily basis. Non-compliance with the new regulations may lead to the business being fined and even imprisonment of the Directors The applicant has examined possible relocation to provide an equivalent-sized facility on industrial land in Birmingham, Solihull, Redditch or Warwickshire. The evidence of this exercise is within Appendices 21 to 26 of Mr Murphy s Proof of Evidence submitted to the public inquiry (ref APP/J3720/A/07/ /NWF). During a search from October 2007 to February 2008, 14 sites emerged from the initial search process, reduced to three sites with Issue: 2 30 ENVIRON