Agenda item

Report of the Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Strategy & Infrastructure Planning) (PN8)

Condition 31 of planning permission no.  08/02472/CM (MW.0044/08) required the submission for approval of details of the external lighting to the Ardley Energy from Waste (EfW) site. The detailed scheme was approved by the Planning and Regulation Committee at its meeting on 12th May 2014. Part of the approval was that the scheme should be reviewed in November 2014. Further to this, a members’ site visit was carried out on the evening of 19th March 2015 in order to inform members’ consideration of the review of the external lighting. The purpose of this report is therefore to invite those members who attended the site visit to report back on what they saw and for the Committee to discuss and advise officers what aspects, if any, of the external lighting scheme approved pursuant to condition 31 they believe should be taken back to the site operator for review. Whilst the purpose of the site visit was to inform the review of the external lighting scheme, there was light spillage from within the EfW building. This does not form part of the approved external lighting scheme and so does not fall within the review approved as part of that. Nonetheless, observations with regard to this will also be taken back to the operator for consideration.

It is RECOMMENDED that members discuss what was seen at the site visit on 19^th March 2015 and advise officers:

i)           What, if any, aspects of the external lighting scheme for the Energy from Waste facility approved pursuant to condition 31 of planning permission no.  08/02472/CM (MW.0044/08) they believe the site operator should review;

ii)         Whether there are any concerns about  the impact of the internal lighting of the Energy from Waste facility that they would wish to be drawn to the attention of the site operator whilst recognising that strictly this is not controlled by the permission.

Condition 31 of planning permission no. 08/02472/CM (MW.0044/08) had required submission for approval of details of the external lighting at the Ardley Energy from Waste (EfW) site. The detailed scheme had been approved by the Planning & Regulation Committee on 12 May 2014 with part of that approval requiring that the scheme should be reviewed in November 2014. Further to that, a members’ site visit had been carried out on the evening of 19 March 2015 in order to inform members’ consideration of the review of the external lighting.

The purpose of the report now before the Committee (PN8) was to invite those members who had attended the site visit to report back and for the Committee to discuss and advise officers on what aspects, if any, of the external lighting scheme approved pursuant to condition 31 should be taken back to the site operator for review. The opportunity had also been taken to consider complaints regarding light spillage from within the EfW building and although that did not form part of the official review of the approved external lighting scheme any observations would be taken to the operator for their consideration.

Taking the chair for the duration of this item Councillor Owen thanked Viridor for their welcome and co-operation during the March site visit.

Introducing the report Mr Periam reminded the Committee that only the external lighting at the site could be the subject of review under condition 31 and that Viridor were under no obligation to address any issues which might be raised regarding light spillage from inside the facility.

Councillor Mrs Fulljames thanked those members who had been able to visit the site in March and although on that visit members had witnessed the external lights being turned down locally people had seen little difference. She referred to 3 submissions received from residents in Buckland, Middleton Stoney and Ardley and presented photographic evidence of the intrusion into the local landscape during both daylight hours and at night.  When the scheme had first been proposed it had been promised that a facility would be provided on the lines of the one at Colnbrook but the Ardley site was in a completely rural setting and had not been assimilated at all into the local setting.  External lighting was not being dimmed or lowered at all and internal light spillage through the multi-coloured panels increased the illumination at night-time as seen from the photographs.  That was unacceptable and Viridor should be asked to consider action to minimise that. She stressed that this was huge problem for residents and efforts were needed now to try and improve the situation.

Councillor Greene and Councillor Owen supported calls for Viridor to reduce the levels of external lighting and to find a solution to reduce light spillage at night.

Councillor Handley pointed out that planting to mitigate against the facility was still in its infancy and in say 10 years the situation could be expected to improve considerably.

Responding to Councillor Lilly Mr Periam confirmed that as far as he was aware no official complaints had been received during the facility’s first winter of operation but that the matter had, of course, been discussed at the local liaison group.

Councillor Lilly added that additional lighting would be needed during the winter months and of course required as part and parcel of health and safety requirements but felt common sense should prevail.

Councillor Reynolds believed that his scepticism regarding photomontages had been borne out on the grounds that what the Committee had been shown in the past bore no resemblance to what existed now. Furthermore he felt that people hadn’t complained because they felt nothing would be done.  He supported calls for a reduction in the levels of external lighting and for Viridor to consider mitigating the effects of light spillage.

Councillor Johnston had been surprised at the level of brightness on the visit. Supporting calls to seek to reduce levels of external lighting and also to mitigate against light spillage from inside the facility he suspected that there would be times during the night that the only part of the facility that needed to be lit internally was the control room. 

Councillor Purse concurred that what was there now bore no resemblance to earlier images. She accepted that light pollution existed in other areas but that was no reason to justify it elsewhere. There was also a valuable lesson to be learnt when dealing with such applications that external lighting should not be the only issue of concern but also light emanating from within a building and reflected light from its surface.

Councillor Bartholomew agreed that the Committee had been misled by the photomontages. A valuable lesson had been learned during this long process and he concurred with earlier calls for Viridor to review all aspects of lighting at the site.

RESOLVED:

(a)          with regard to Condition 31 – review of external lighting:

i)             That the staged switch-off of lighting approved pursuant to condition 31 of planning permission no. 08/02472/CM be implemented every evening/night;

ii)            Viridor to introduce measures to secure a further reduction in levels of external lighting in compliance with the minimum required for health and safety at all times wherever possible.

(b)          that In the light of concerns expressed by members of the Committee both at the meeting and on the basis of a recent visit to the site and by local residents that Viridor be requested to consider introducing measures at the Ardley EfW including:

(1)          the reduction of  internal lighting to the minimum required for health and safety at all times;

(2)          the minimisation of light drift from within the building including the provision of curtaining to be drawn during all hours of darkness;

(3)          measures to reduce the reflection of external light (including sunlight) back on to the surfaces of the building.