Proposed schedule of main modifications

Amend Policy DM1 to the following:

'Proposals for waste management facilities will be supported permitted in the following general locations, as shown in the matrix below, subject to there being no unacceptable environmental impacts.

Community sites - locations where people already travel for local services e.g. local shopping centres, leisure centres, supermarkets, schools etc.

Employment land - areas which are already used, or are allocated, for employment related uses such as industrial estates, business parks or technology parks etc. and which are compatible with waste management land uses.

Previously developed land/derelict land - land that is no longer needed or has been abandoned. This includes land which has previously been used for some form of permanent, built, development that is no longer used but could also include mineral workings requiring restoration* or un-restored/poorly restored colliery land where there are no formal restoration requirements.

Open countryside/agricultural land - rural land, including farmland, which is not covered by any other environmental designation, especially where this enables the re-use of farm or forestry buildings.

Green Belt - land within the Green Belt where very special circumstances can be demonstrated for inappropriate development or where development is considered not to be inappropriate development.

This could include derelict or previously developed land or mineral workings. All proposals will be subject to Green Belt policies.

*Once mineral sites are restored, or where provision for restoration has been made, these are considered green field sites.'

Add the following text to paragraph 8.7:

'The NPPW states that waste planning authorities should consider a broad range of locations for waste management facilities including industrial sites and look for opportunities to co-locate waste management facilities together and/ or alongside complementary activities. Some of the benefits of co-location are described below in paragraph 8.9 and therefore opportunities for integrated waste management will be encouraged, subject to the proposal satisfying other policies, in particular Policy DM10: Cumulative Impacts. Where possible, priority should be given to suitable previously developed land to promote reuse of these sites. As there are a wide range of different waste management technologies, and others may emerge in the future, it is important to consider the characteristics/land use requirements and likely environmental impacts of the different types of waste management process and the intensity of the operation proposed. Most waste management uses/facilities are industrial in nature and can be enclosed in a building but there some operations which may need to be carried out in the open air such as composting, wastewater treatment and some crushing and screening operations.'

Add the following text to paragraph 8.8:

'For waste management facilities that require a building, or are likely to involve significant vehicle movements, the emphasis is on areas that are already used, or are allocated, for employment such as industrial estates or logistics (warehousing and distribution) parks. The proposed waste management facility will need to be compatible with the existing businesses and facilities in the area, with the proposed facility not placing unreasonable restrictions on these as per the agent of change principle. Operations that need to be carried out in the open air should be located well away from uses which are sensitive to noise and dust.'

Amend the policy to read:

'Proposals for waste management facilities will be supported permitted where it can be demonstrated that any potential adverse impacts on health, wellbeing and amenity arising from the construction, operation and, where relevant, restoration phase and any associated transport movements, are avoided or adequately mitigated to an acceptable level having regard to sensitive receptors.

The types of impacts that need to be considered include, but are not restricted to:

• Noise, lighting and vibrations
• Air quality, including airborne emissions and dust
• Odour
• Litter and windblown material
• Vermin, birds and pests
• Visual Impacts
• Traffic impacts
• Stability of the land at and around the site, both above and below ground level
• Loss of designated open/green space'

Amend the policy to read:

'1) Planning permission Proposals for waste management facilities will be granted permitted where it can be demonstrated that the design of development:

a) Is of an appropriate scale, form, layout, orientation and materials for its location;

b) Provides well designed and appropriate boundary treatments (including security features and screening) and site landscaping that reflect the function and character of the development, and is well-integrated into its surroundings and helps screen the development to mitigate any visual impacts; and

c) Avoids harmful Minimises impacts to and, where possible, enhances the natural and historic environment and surrounding landscape.

d) Minimises the loss of best and most versatile agricultural land and protect soils.

2) Proposals should also be designed to incorporate sustainable features, including those which:

a) Minimise greenhouse gas emissions, including through energy efficiency, using renewable energy and green building construction techniques

b) Ensure resilience and enable adaptation to climate change by taking into account flood risk and building orientation

c) Minimise water consumption by using water recycling and sustainable surface water drainage where possible to avoid and reduce flooding

d) Minimise the waste generated by re-using or recycling materials, buildings and infrastructure

e) Minimise the loss of best and most versatile agricultural land and high-quality soil

f) Encourage Facilitate employees to use sustainable modes of transport where practical, with proposals that generate a significant amount of vehicle movements accompanied by a travel plan.'

Add the following text to paragraph 8.36:

'Good design of waste facilities is important to ensure not only that the facility can operate and function well throughout its lifetime, but it can positively contribute to the character and quality of the local area. Through good layout, using the appropriate height and form as well as the right materials that are sympathetic to the local areas character, this will help waste facilities be understood and accepted as essential infrastructure which can be modern and not associated with negative impacts, such as odour and dirt. Design therefore can help to minimise and mitigate impacts that are often associated with waste sites and help facilities comply with Policy DM2 and the 'agent of change' principle by ensuring it does not place unreasonable restrictions on existing businesses and facilities. For example, through good landscaping and use of appropriate fencing this can help enhance local character, improve biodiversity, as well as reducing environmental emissions such as noise and litter.'

Add the below paragraph following paragraph 8.36:

'Well-designed boundary treatments can also help to integrate waste facilities into the area whilst also providing functional uses. For example, visual screening of a facility can be part of the mitigation measures used to help minimise visual and landscape impacts, as required by Policy DM4: Landscape protection. Such treatments then should reflect the character of the development and ensure it is well integrated into its surroundings.'

Paragraph 8.37 will also be moved to follow paragraph 8.38 to ensure the flow of the justification text.

To amend paragraph 8.38 to:

'To integrate waste development within the local area, facilities should seek to minimise avoid impacts on the landscape, natural and historic environment, seeking to protect and where possible enhance. Where there are impacts, then mitigation will be required and any proposals will need to demonstrate these are adequate as set out in the relevant development management policies of DM4, DM5 and DM6.'

To amend paragraph 8.44 to the following and move to follow paragraph 8.38:

'Agricultural land and high-quality soils are a vital natural and economic resource therefore and so it is important to protect the highest quality land from development that would harm the long-term soil quality and agricultural potential. The preference therefore will be to locate sites on poorer quality land to minimise the loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land (grades 1, 2 and 3a) and high-quality soils. However, if this is not possible, the facility should be designed to minimise the loss of best and most versatile agricultural land, for example such as minimising the footprint of the building utilising land efficiently. Soils are vital for supporting ecosystems and facilitating drainage. Development could potentially affect soil quality, for example through contamination, and so proposals should seek to protect soils and consider and address any potential impact to soil quality.'

To amend paragraph 8.45 to read:

'For proposals which would generate significant employment and so a significant amount of vehicle movements, a travel plan will need to be submitted. A travel plan is a long-term management strategy that seeks to deliver sustainable transport objectives and should be fully integrated into the design of any proposal. Facilities should then be designed to encourage enable employees to travel to work using sustainable modes of transport. For , for example, providing cycle storage sheds and adequate changing facilities to encourage employees to cycle to work. Travel Plans should be developed alongside, or form part of, the Transport Assessment or Statement as required by Policy DM12- Highway Safety and Vehicle Movements/ Routeing.'

Amend Policy DM4 to read:

1. 'Proposals for waste development will be supported permitted where it can be demonstrated that they will not have an adverse impact on the character and distinctiveness of the landscape.

2. Development that would have an unacceptable impact on the landscape interest will only be permitted where there is no available alternative and the need for development outweighs the landscape interest. In such cases appropriate mitigation measures will be required.

3. Proposals for waste development should be designed so they are sympathetic to, and compatible with, the landscape character. Landscape treatment, planting and restoration proposals should take account of the relevant landscape character policy area as set out in the Nottinghamshire Landscape Character Assessments covering Nottinghamshire and Nottingham and should refer to the associated species lists.'

Amend Policy DM5 to read:

1. 'Proposals for waste development will be supported permitted where it can be demonstrated that:
   1. They will not adversely affect the integrity of an European site (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, including as a result of changes to air or water quality, hydrology, noise, light and dust), unless there are no alternative solutions, imperative reasons of overriding public interest and necessary compensatory measures can be secured in accordance with the requirements of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, as amended;
   2. They are not likely to give rise to an adverse effect on a Site of Special Scientific Interest, except where the need for and benefits of the development clearly outweigh the importance of the site and where no suitable alternative exists;
   3. They are not likely to give rise to the loss or deterioration of Local Sites (Local Wildlife Sites or Local Geological Sites) except where the need for and benefits of the development in that location outweigh the impacts;
   4. They would not result in the loss of populations of a priority species or areas of priority habitat except where the need for and benefits of the development in that location outweigh the impacts; and
   5. Development that would result in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats will only be permitted where there are wholly exceptional reasons and a suitable compensation strategy exists.

2. Where impacts on designated sites or priority habitats or species cannot be avoided, then:
   1. In the case of European sites, mitigation must be secured which will ensure that there would be no adverse effect on the integrity of the site(s). Where mitigation is not possible and the applicant relies upon imperative reasons of overriding public interest, the Councils will need to be satisfied that any necessary compensatory measures can be secured.
   2. In all other cases, adequate mitigation relative to the scale of the impact and the importance of the resource must be put in place, with compensation measures secured as a last resort.

3. Proposals should enhance biodiversity and geological resources by ensuring that waste development:
   1. Retains, protects, restores and enhances features of biodiversity or geological interest, and provides for appropriate management of these features, and in doing so contributes to targets within the Nottinghamshire Local Biodiversity Action Plan and maximises gains in accordance with local plan targets and as a minimum provide 10% as per national requirements;
   2. Makes provision for habitat adaptation and species migration, allowing species to respond to the impacts of climate change; and
   3. Maintains and enhances ecological networks, both within the County and beyond, through the protection and creation, where appropriate, of priority habitats and corridors, and linkages and steppingstones between such areas, contributing to the creation of the national Nature Recovery Network.

Amend Policy DM6 to the following:

1. Proposals for waste development will be supported permitted where heritage assets and their settings are conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance. Where possible, enhancement of the historic environment will be encouraged.

2. Proposals, as a first principle, should avoid harm to the significance of heritage assets and their setting historic environment. Proposals likely to cause If harm may occur, then this should be mitigated to protect to the significance of a heritage asset, including its and their setting. s, Where harm cannot be mitigated, the Council will consider the will be subject to the policy requirements set out in the NPPF, relating to the tests of harm including striking an appropriate balance between harm and significant public benefits.

3. Proposals that would affect the significance of any heritage asset and/ or its setting, designated or non-designated, will need to be accompanied by a Heritage Statement which, as a minimum, should:

a) Provide sufficient detail proportionate to the significance and the level of impact on the heritage asset including its setting;

b) Describe and assess the significance of the asset and/ or its setting to determine its architectural, historic, artistic or archaeological interest;

c) Include archaeological assessments, followed by field evaluation where necessary, where there are heritage assets with archaeological interest to understand the character, condition and extent of archaeological remains;

c) d) Identify the impact of the development on the special character significance of the heritage of the asset, including any cumulative impacts;

d) e) Where some harm is unavoidable, P provide clear and convincing justification for any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage asset, from its alteration or destruction, or from development within its setting; and

e) f) Agree Identify the mitigation measures to overcome of the impacts on the significance of the heritage assets, including their fabric, their setting, their amenity value and arrangements for reinstatement.

Amend the supporting text for Policy DM6 to:

'Where proposals would result in the total or part loss of a heritage asset, applicants for waste proposals will be required to record and advance understanding of the significance of the heritage asset in a manner appropriate to its importance, with this made available to the public. The information should be will be submitted updated to the Historic Environment Record in accordance with those records requirements.'

Amend Policy DM7 to:

'Flood Risk

1. Proposals for waste management facilities will be supported permitted where they are located in low flood risk areas. Where this is not possible and proposals are within an area with a known risk of flooding, including potential risk in the future, they will need to demonstrate the Sequential Test has been applied and a Flood Risk Assessment and Exception Test undertaken where required.

2. Proposals for waste management facilities will be permitted supported where it can be demonstrated there will be no unacceptable impact on the integrity and function of floodplains and there is no increased risk of flooding on the site or elsewhere.

3. Proposals should also, where appropriate, include Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDs), incorporating rainwater harvesting, to manage surface water run-off.

Water Resources

4. Proposals for waste management facilities will be supported permitted where it can be demonstrated that there will be no unacceptable impacts on the quantity and quality of water resources, including groundwater and surface water, taking account of Source Protection Zones, the status of surface watercourses and waterbodies and groundwater bodies. Where possible, proposals should include measures to enhance water quality.

5. For landfill and landraising schemes, proposals will need to demonstrate the ground / geological conditions are suitable.'

Amend Policy DM8 to:

'Proposals for waste development will be supported permitted where it can be demonstrated this will not have an unacceptable impact on the existing rights of way network and its users. Where this is not possible, satisfactory proposals for temporary or permanent diversions, which are of at least an equivalent interest or quality, must be provided and improvements and enhancements to the rights of way network will be sought where practical.'

Amend Policy DM10 to:

'Proposals for waste management development will be supported permitted where it can be demonstrated that there are no unacceptable cumulative impacts on the environment, health or on the amenity of a local community.'

Amend Policy DM11 to:

'Proposals for waste development within Airfield Safeguarding areas will be supported permitted where it can be demonstrated that the proposed development during the construction, operational and, where relevant, restoration and after use phases, will not result in any unacceptable adverse impacts on aviation safety.'

Amend Policy DM12 to the following:

1. 'Proposals for waste management facilities where sustainable alternative modes of transporting waste are not viable or practical will be supported permitted where it can be demonstrated through a transport assessment or statement that:
   1. The highway network including any necessary improvements can satisfactorily and safely accommodate the vehicle movements, including peaks in vehicle movements, likely to be generated;
   2. The vehicle movements likely to be generated would not cause an unacceptable impact on the environment and/or disturbance to local amenity;
   3. Measures have been put in place to minimise the impact of additional vehicle movements, for example directional signage, wheel washing, street cleansing, sheeting of load;.
   4. Where appropriate, adequate vehicle routeing schemes have been put in place to minimise the impact of traffic on local communities; and
   5. Adequate provision has been provided for safe vehicle manoeuvring and loading along with sufficient vehicle parking and EV charging points.

Add the following explanatory text to paragraph 8.148:

'To enable safe movement onto the highway and to prevent further impacts, development proposals should design sites that enable sufficient space for the safe manoeuvring of vehicles, loading/ unloading and parking, for both HGV's and private vehicles as well as access for emergency services. Charging points for electrical vehicles should also be available for use by off- site and on-site mobile plant and vehicles associated with the proposal and should be considered in any parking layout. This will help to encourage the use of low or zero emission vehicles and reduce greenhouse gas emissions as per Policy SP5: Climate Change.'