29 Managing waste

29 Managing waste

National policy 

29.1 The NPPF identifies that it should be read in conjunction with its planning policy for waste.  The National Planning Policy for Waste (NPPW) was published in October 2014 and refers to the Waste Management Plan for England (2013), which sets out the government’s ambition to work towards a more sustainable and efficient approach to resource use and management. The NPPW “aims to help achieve sustainable waste management by securing adequate provision of new waste management facilities of the right type, in the right place and at the right time”.

29.2 Net self-sufficiency is an approach applied in waste planning to establish how much capacity should be planned for in each waste plan area.  This follows the polluter pays principle whereby the area that produces the pollution (in this case waste) is responsible for ensuring its safe management.  This is not specifically required by the NPPW, but is applied to ensure that sufficient capacity is provided to manage the tonnage of waste equivalent to that predicted to arise within the plan area during the plan period.  As waste is transported across administrative boundaries, there is no expectation that every tonne of waste produced in CWaC needs to be managed within CWaC.

29.3 Article 4 of the revised EU Waste Framework Directive (Directive 2008/98/EC) sets out five steps for dealing with waste, ranked according to environmental impact.  This is the waste hierarchy of prevention, preparing for re-use, recycling, other recovery, disposal.  In England the application of the waste hierarchy is a legal requirement set out in the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011.

29.4 The Waste Prevention Programme for England (2023) aims to: design out waste; implement systems and services to reduce waste including collection services and encouraging reuse and repair; improve data and information including product passports. 

Evidence base 

Key issues

  • Need to aim for net self-sufficiency in waste management.
  • It is likely that amounts and types of waste will change significantly over time, as a result of changes to government policy on waste and recycling, relevant financial incentives and costs and due to changes in population and industry.  It is likely that there will be increased movement towards zero avoidable waste and a circular economy, with more emphasis on minimising resource use and wase and increased re-use and recycling.  
  • CWaC has sufficient capacity throughout the Plan period to meet the projected management requirements for: recycling and composting; other recovery; and the recovery of inert waste.
  • CWaC has a predicted shortfall of non-inert landfill from 2037.  However, this forecast shortfall is more than offset by the substantial surplus in ‘other recovery’ capacity.  Demand for landfill is declining and the aim should be to divert 100% of waste from landfill.  As a result, landfill is becoming more of a sub-regional or regional resource, rather than every authority providing a landfill site.  The current Local Plan allocated a site at Kinderton Lodge for landfill and this site was granted planning permission and initial works were undertaken.  However, the site did not become operational and as the clay was not extracted in time to meet the requirements in the conditions, the permission has now lapsed.  This indicates that there was insufficient market demand for landfill within Cheshire West and Chester.  As such, a replacement landfill site is not proposed.  
  • Frodsham and Tattenhall Household Waste Recycling Centres ideally need to be improved or relocated.  Detailed work has been undertaken to assess options for relocation and no suitable sites have been found.  It may be possible to extend and improve the existing site in Frodsham.  Chester Household Waste Recycling Centre has been extended and improved since the current Local Plan was adopted.

Current adopted policy

Local Plan

Policy reference

Policy summary

Local Plan (Part One)

ENV 8 Managing waste

Identifies how the waste management needs of the borough will be met and sets out the waste hierarchy.  It safeguards existing waste sites and sites within permission for waste uses and states that sites should be identified for replacement Household Waste Recycling Centres in Chester, Frodsham and Tattenhall.  It sets out the circumstances under which proposals for other waste management facilities would be supported.

Local Plan (Part Two)

DM 54 Waste management facilities

Sets criteria for proposals for waste management development.  This includes locating new large scale waste management facilities at Protos, Lostock Works or Kinderton Lodge and smaller scale sites on or close to existing operational or permitted waste management sites or in industrial areas.
It also identifies that biomass or combined heat and power proposals should be located close to users of heat outputs.  It sets requirements for farm scale anaerobic digestion plants and proposals for new or alternative waste uses at existing or consented waste sites.

Local Plan (Part Two)

DM 55 Sites for replacement household waste recycling facilities

Identifies criteria for proposals for Household Waste Recycling Centres, including specific requirements for sites in Frodsham and Tattenhall.

Suggested policy approach

29.5 The waste management needs in the borough will be met by:

  • minimising resource use and waste
  • managing waste as a resource
  • delivering sustainable waste management
  • providing waste management infrastructure

29.6 The current waste hierarchy is:

  1. Prevention
  2. Preparation for reuse
  3. Recycling and composting
  4. Other recovery / energy generation
  5. Disposal as a last resort

29.7 The Waste Needs Assessment (2023) identifies that there is sufficient waste management capacity in existing sites and sites with planning permission to meet the projected management requirements up to 2045. As such, we are not proposing any further waste allocations, but existing sites and sites with planning permission will need to be safeguarded. The Waste Needs Assessment included Kinderton Lodge landfill site and still identified a shortfall in landfill provision from 2037. However, it identified that the forecast shortfall would be more than offset by the substantial surplus in ‘other recovery’ capacity. The term ‘other recovery’ includes operations that manage waste using something other than recycling, composting or anaerobic digestion. ‘Other recovery’ includes energy from waste. 

29.8 Without Kinderton Lodge the cumulative shortfall in landfill requirements is 327,195 tonnes by 2045. The forecast surplus in ‘other recovery’ is 973,495 tonnes by 2045. This is significantly more than the landfill shortfall and as such there is no need to allocate or safeguard the Kinderton Lodge landfill site for waste uses and there is no requirement to make any other landfill allocation. 

29.9 The approach is consistent with the principle of net self-sufficiency, allowing for cross boundary flows and managing waste at one of the most appropriate installations.

29.10 It is proposed that Local Plan (Part One) policy ENV 8 is combined with Local Plan (Part Two) policy DM 54. Local Plan (Part Two) policy DM 55 covers household waste recycling centres and as it is unlikely that new sites will be found in Tattenhall or Frodsham, a separate policy is not required. The suggested policy approach would include sufficient detail to assess any potential new household waste recycling centre applications.

MW 1

Managing waste

To achieve sustainable waste management:

  • Existing waste management facilities are safeguarded against redevelopment for non-waste uses that would sterilise the infrastructure or prejudice its waste use, throughput and/or capacity;
  • Plots/sites with consented capacity for waste management uses at Protos (Ellesmere Port) and Lostock Works (Northwich) are safeguarded against alternative development that would prejudice its waste use, throughput and/or capacity;
  • Existing waste management facilities and sites with planning permission for waste uses are safeguarded against the encroachment of incompatible uses. Proposed non-waste developments must not prejudice the current or future waste use of the waste management facility site in terms of capacity and/or throughput. Any potential impacts must be minimised and if, after applying the ‘agent of change’ principle, there is still some risk of constraint to the waste operation, the development will only be supported if the merits of the development clearly outweigh the effect on the safeguarded site;
  • Waste management plans are required for proposals that are expected to generate significant volumes or specific types of waste (e.g. equestrian development and dog parks);
  • The Council will encourage the use of sustainable construction techniques that promote the reuse and recycling of building materials, maximise opportunities for the recycling and composting of waste on all new development proposals (residential and non-residential) and reduce CO2 emissions;
  • Existing and planned port and rail infrastructure are safeguarded, in order to maximise opportunities for sustainable transport on the Manchester ship canal and rail network.

Redevelopment of all or part of a safeguarded site to a non-waste use will only be supported if:

  • the waste management facility is no longer needed; or
  • the waste management capacity can be relocated or provided and delivered elsewhere in an appropriate and sustainable location.

All proposals for waste management facilities, or extensions/alterations to such facilities must:   

  • Demonstrate that waste is being managed at the highest achievable level within the waste hierarchy;
  • Maximise opportunities to share infrastructure (e.g. sustainable transport options or pipelines) with other waste developments or other facilities;
  • Provide information on the type and source of the waste being managed, the distance travelled and proposed methods of transport for importation and exportation of material. When assessing proposals the Council will take into account the desirability to manage waste close to its source, reduce the need for waste to travel and to maximise opportunities for use of sustainable modes of transport;
  • Integrate into the existing network of waste management sites in the borough and maximise opportunities for co-location with other waste management operations, where this would not result in intensification of uses that would cause significant adverse harm to the environment or communities in the local area;  
  • demonstrate how they meet the locational criteria set out in the National Planning Policy for Waste (Appendix B) or any revisions to this document; and
  • Set out arrangements for the management and operation of the facility, including hours of operation.

Energy recovery development should be used to divert residual waste from landfill and will only be permitted where: 

  • Other waste treatment options further up the waste hierarchy are not feasible;
  • The development provides for uses of both heat and power; and
  • The development maximises the use of and provides sustainable management arrangements for waste treatment residues arising from the facility.

Proposals for biomass plants and other facilities which use waste material to produce heat or combined heat and power should wherever possible be located close to existing or potential users of heat outputs.

Farm scale anaerobic digestion plants will be supported, particularly where they allow for sharing of facilities between linked farms. Inputs of material should be derived primarily from farm wastes which arise from the farm unit. Energy and other outputs from the process should also primarily be used on the farm unit. Where additional inputs and outputs of material and energy are required to make the facility viable, they should come from, and be used within, the local area. The location of facilities on farms should avoid high quality agricultural land.

Question MW 1

Do you agree with the suggested policy approach towards managing waste, as set out in MW 1 ‘Managing waste’ above? If not please suggest how it could be amended?

Question MW 2

The Waste Needs Assessment (2023) identifies that there is sufficient waste management capacity in existing sites and sites with planning permission to meet the projected management requirements up to 2045 (apart from landfill).  However, we are not proposing to limit waste management development or prevent future developments due to a lack of ‘need’, as there will be waste flows between authority areas.  Any new proposals for waste developments would be assessed on their own merits and against the criteria identified above.  Do you agree with this approach?  Please provide reasons for your answer.

Question MW 3

We do not currently have an operational landfill site within Cheshire West and we are not proposing to allocate a site for landfill.  Do you agree with this approach?  Please provide reasons for your answer.

Question MW 4

It is proposed that at Protos, only existing built waste uses, sites under construction for waste uses and individual plots with extant planning permission for waste uses will be safeguarded for waste use.  On the other remaining plots at Protos, waste uses would be acceptable, as would development associated with reducing carbon emissions or sustainable energy generation (as set out in suggested policy approach EP 3 ‘Origin - Protos’ ).  This is different to the policy approach in the current Local Plan, which safeguards the whole of Protos for waste uses.  Do you agree with this approach?  Please explain your answer.