The Planning Committee of Staffordshire Council met on Thursday, 02 October 2025, to discuss and make decisions on three significant planning applications. The committee resolved to refuse the application for a clinical waste treatment facility at Hickson Industrial Estate, approved an extension to extraction areas at Hintz Quarry, and permitted a variation to conditions for an alternative fuel facility at Cauldon Cement Works.

Clinical Waste Treatment Facility Application Refused

The committee considered an application by InWaste Hickson Limited for a change of use at the Hickson Industrial Estate to operate a clinical waste treatment facility. The application had been appealed to the Planning Inspectorate, and the committee was asked to confirm what its decision would have been had it been able to determine the application.

The case officer, David Bray, explained that the proposed facility would process 3,504 tonnes per annum of clinical, medical, and hazardous wastes. While technical consultees raised no objections, citing that the facility would be located in an existing building on a recognised industrial estate and would create 20 jobs, concerns were raised regarding its location. The Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Joint Waste Local Plan policies require waste management facilities to be located close to where waste arises and to minimise transport impacts. The officer concluded that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposed regional-scale facility met the locational criteria, nor that it was sustainably located. Material planning objections, including health risks, proximity to Sir Peter's Primary School and residential properties, and emissions, were considered to outweigh the material planning benefits.

Amelia Garner, a resident and parent, spoke against the application, highlighting the proximity of the proposed incinerator to the primary school, stating that 80 metres is not a safe distance, it's a direct exposure zone. She raised concerns about potential health risks to children, the applicant's lack of proven track record, and inadequate community consultation. Councillor Brendan McCowan, Chairman of Hickson Parish Council, echoed these concerns, describing the applicant as a shadowy company with no previous experience and the application as hoodwink.

Dudley Saunders, the planning agent for InWaste Hickson Limited, spoke in support, stating that the facility would address a national shortfall in clinical waste treatment, support local industry decarbonisation, and provide skilled employment. He asserted that statutory consultees had confirmed the environmental impacts were acceptable.

Councillor Neil Parton raised questions about fire risks, the openness of the company regarding what would be incinerated, and potential compensation for local residents. The case officer responded that the fire service had no objections and that fire prevention plans would be part of the environmental permit. Regarding openness, it was stated that the type of waste was not a material planning consideration.

Ultimately, the committee unanimously resolved to refuse the application, confirming that had they been able to determine it, planning permission would have been refused. The reasons cited included failure to demonstrate compliance with the spatial strategy of the Joint Waste Local Plan and the proposal not representing sustainable development.

Extension to Hintz Quarry Approved

The committee approved an application by Tarmac Trading Limited and CEMEX UK Operations Limited for a proposed extension to the extraction area and consolidation with existing planning permission at Hintz Quarry, Watling Street, Tamworth. The extension involves an additional 4.2 hectares of agricultural land.

The case officer, Matthew Broom, explained that the proposal would allow for the extraction of approximately 1.4 million tonnes of sand and gravel, in addition to the 1.5 million tonnes of permitted reserves. The extraction operations were anticipated to continue for around six years, concluding by the end of 2031. The proposed afteruses include nature conservation, such as heathland, acid grassland, and woodland, as well as the reinstatement of agricultural land and public rights of way, with restoration completed by the end of 2033.

Concerns were raised by Councillor Neil Parton regarding the progress of restoration in other parts of the quarry, the return of land to farmland, and the number of trees affected by the proposed demolition. The case officer clarified that restoration is progressive, and the land would be restored to farmland where appropriate, with biodiversity net gain being a key focus.

Councillor Mike Rose questioned the reliance on aggregate for HS2, given its reduced scope, and the historical value of the cottages to be demolished. The case officer confirmed that Tarmac has contracts for specific sections of HS2 and that Hintz Quarry would serve other markets. Regarding the cottages, historical records indicated they dated back to the late 19th century, but they did not warrant protection for their historic value. A condition was recommended for a bat survey and historical record before demolition.

The committee voted unanimously to permit the development, subject to the completion of a Section 106 legal agreement and the imposition of conditions.

Variation of Conditions at Cauldon Cement Works Permitted

The committee permitted an application by Geocycle UK Limited to revise the feedstock mix for the alternative fuel facility at Cauldon Cement Works, Earlsway, Staffordshire. The application sought to remove the liquid fuel element from the permitted feedstock mix and revise it to 100% solid fuel.

The case officer, Isabel Shortland, explained that the proposal would update the approved layout to reflect solid fuel only and introduce a second over-road pipeline to feed high calorific value materials directly to the cement works. While there was no change to the total quality of feedstock or operating hours, the proportionate increase in solid fuels would result in an increase of one vehicle load per full working day.

Objections were received from Waterhouses Parish Council, citing concerns about repeated escapes of plastic waste from the existing conveyor system. Chris Hinton, representing the parish council, stated that they objected to the proposal to extend solid fuel storage until it could be demonstrated that the conveyor system was functioning in compliance with the original consent, i.e. not releasing plastic into the surrounding environment.

Joel Jessop, the planning agent for the applicant, highlighted that the alternative fuels facility was operational and had already facilitated a reduction in carbon emissions and diverted waste from landfill. He explained that the liquid fuel elements were never built due to changing market desirability and that the current proposal aimed to improve efficiency and environmental performance. He acknowledged an operational issue with the existing conveyor system, stating that rubber seals had worn prematurely, but that remedial work had been carried out and the issue resolved.

Councillor Neil Parton suggested a team be set up to monitor escaped plastic. The case officer clarified that the Environment Agency and the planning regulation team monitor the site and that the operator conducts daily inspections. A condition was recommended to control litter outside the site boundary.

Councillor Warwick McKenzie commended the applicant for burning plastic, stating, every tonne that they burn is a tonne that we don't have to bury. Councillor Val Chapman noted the environmental advice team's recommendation for tree protection measures. Councillor Nicholas Lakin raised concerns about the use of plastics derived from oil and inquired about future proposals for green energy. The agent responded that he was not privy to the company's wider green energy proposals.

The committee voted unanimously to permit the proposed development, approving the variation of planning conditions.