Agenda item

A presentation (previously circulated) was given to the Panel by representatives of Michael Sparks Associates and First Renewable Developments. The presentation focused on the progress made on the development project since Members were last updated.

The presentation itemised the opportunities presented by the development which included addressing the climate and environment emergency, the transition towards Net Zero, investment in infrastructure for the future, addressing the energy crisis, assisting with food security and supply, developing existing energy infrastructure on site.

The presentation suggested that the Energy Park provided an opportunity to provide additional renewable energy and would have access to a major “132kV cable” on site. Anticipated benefits included jobs during construction and 5,500 jobs during operation of the site. Investment of £512m was envisaged during the construction phase, investment of £167m per annum into the local economy through wages and business rates of approximately £8m per annum. There would be an additional investment of £40m for the Energy Park on infrastructure.

The presentation included a summary of the concept behind the Energy Park proposal, the anticipated land use of the site, the energy criteria to be used on site for land usage, building height criteria to be implemented for new construction and details regarding anticipated traffic movements. Details regarding the Green Infrastructure, Landscape Strategy and Drainage Strategy were also provided.

Illustrative layout plans and details of proposed Development Zones were presented and the general design principles being proposed.

An additional presentation slide, to those circulated, addressing potential impact on local birdlife and biodiversity was also provided.

The presentation concluded with an indicative timeline for the planning process which would see a Masterplan adopted in July 2023, Outline Planning Application submitted in the Summer 2023 and subject to the granting of planning consent Reserved Matters for development plots to follow.

In addition to the presentation, NNC officers had compiled a detailed report regarding the Kettering Energy Park Draft Masterplan Document and how this Masterplan addressed the Joint Core Strategy Policy 26. The officer report provided an assessment of how the Masterplan addressed the respective criteria included within Policy 26.

Councillor Dearing sought clarification regarding land use on the site. It was stated by developer representatives that there had been interest in the site amounting to around 3 million sq.ft. of floorspace and currently 30% of that was for B2 uses, with the remainder B8 use.

Rob Harbour requested clarification regarding the potential height limits of the buildings on site, particularly those close to the “Round House.” It was noted that it was proposed to take mitigating measures to decrease the potential visibility impact that development of the site near to the Round House would cause. Further discussion would be needed during the formal planning process.

Rob Harbour also sought clarification regarding the level of interest in the site received to date, and whether this interest met the criteria stated in the Draft Masterplan. The developer representatives stated that the current level of interest had been generated by the unique criteria being applied to the site. The site would be different from many other sites currently available.

Rob Harbour queried why in the Energy Criteria, only a minimum of 50% of the energy demand from operations within the new units were to be provided by the on-site renewable infrastructure. It was suggested this was unambitious. Developer representatives stated that the aim was to achieve 100% but wind & solar energy production could not be guaranteed which was why it was important there was the ability to connect to the Grid. Energy from Biomass had been excluded as an option.

Councillor Brackenbury noted the proposal in relation to traffic movements and access to and egress from the site. Details of the proposed Movement Framework were included in the presentation.

Councillor Lee queried details relating to cycle lanes on site and the potential impact of development on existing trees and flora on site. Developer representatives confirmed that the illustration of cycleways in the presentation were not exact or detailed. During the planning process this would be addressed to ensure the safety of both cyclists and pedestrians was protected. In relation to the removal of existing trees this would be minimised as the aim would be to retain as many as possible. Other measures were proposed on site to mitigate any loss.

Councillor Carter noted the objective of 5,500 new jobs on site when fully occupied. Councillor Carter wondered whether any apprenticeships and links to local colleges etc could be established. The developer representatives confirmed dialogue could be established both during the building phase and the operational phase.

Councillor Carter also queried what the water reusage provision would be on site. It was confirmed that water efficiency was included in the Design Principles and there would be a sustainable drainage policy.

Simon Richardson confirmed that the Masterplan when approved would be regarded as a “material consideration.” The Panel’s attention was drawn in the report circulated as to whether the Draft Masterplan met the criteria of Policy 26 in full or part.

Councillor North welcomed the development but raised concern over the potential amount of B8 development on site. The land had not been designated as “employment land” and he was concerned that the site may be used for logistics, when it had been hoped for higher skilled and high-tech jobs to be created.

Councillor Brackenbury agreed that the site needed to be of mixed employment opportunities and not just B8 usage.

Councillor Dearing also raised concern regarding the potential for high levels of B8 on site and concerns regarding the potential limited types of businesses. Councillor Dearing had also hoped for a wider range of employment opportunities on the site.

Councillor Carter raised concern about the increase in traffic movements around the site and the potential for increased traffic congestion. In addition, Councillor Carter queried why Barton Seagrave Parish Council was not clearly included on the list of consultees; this was noted and would be corrected.

Several comments were made regarding the potential traffic/highway concerns, whether with traffic coming from the East of the site or the West. These would be picked-up at a later stage.

In conclusion, the Panel agreed for the Draft Masterplan to go forward for wider consultation, the outcome of which would be reported back in due course.

RESOLVED that: -

(i)      The policy-based review undertaken of the Draft Masterplan Document in how it met the policy requirements of the JCS be noted and endorsed; and

(ii)     The Draft Masterplan Document provided be endorsed for public consultation.