Archived decisions

Contact: John Priest - Ext: 7336

1. Summary

1.1. The Committee undertook a site visit on 8 July 2002 to consider the Alton recycling facility application in the light of local concerns.

2. Introduction

2.1. At the site visit the Committee met representatives of East Hampshire District Council, Alton Town Council, Froyle Parish Council and the Holybourne Village Association. The comments of those present are outlined in the ensuing paragraphs. A copy of the report for the site visit is attached as an appendix to this report.

3. Tour of the Site

3.1. Those present first walked round the site and noted that the whole existing building would be demolished together with two Nissan huts on the site and that the new building would cover the footprint of the existing structure. The existing concrete road would be retained and widened and landscaping reinforced in places including the side adjacent to the A31. A two storey office block would be provided together with a car park. Consideration would be given to serving the site by rail in the future.

4. Comments of the County Planning Officer

4.1. The County Planning Officer confirmed that a materials recycling facility and a waste transfer station which would be a continuation of the latter building would be provided together with a workshop. Access from and to the A31 would be left in/left out only and lorries visiting the site would have to use the roundabouts to the east and west of the site rather than any gaps in the central reservation. The initial throughput would be about 67,000 tonnes of waste per year rising to an expected 125,000 tonnes of waste a year by 2006 and would be made up of domestic collected waste, dry recyclables, Hampshire Waste Recycling Centre waste and commercial waste. It was envisaged that by 2006 the throughput would be 238 heavy goods vehicle movements per day and 100 people would be employed at the facility.

4.2. An environmental statement had accompanied the application and had met the requirements of the relevant regulations whilst the proposal was in accordance with the relevant policy contained in the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan. He confirmed that initial comments from consultees were included in the briefing note for the site visit and any further responses would be reported on the day of the committee.

5. Comments of the East Hampshire District Council Representatives

5.1. A local District Councillor was concerned about the extra mileage which the heavy goods vehicles would have to travel to visit the site and suggested a roundabout in the vicinity of the Hen and Chicken Public House. He also questioned the square shape of the office block rather than being of the same design as the remaining buildings on the site. In response Mr Collis of the applicants advised that a roundabout was not felt to be appropriate as the traffic loadings on the arms of the roundabout would not be equal and it was felt that the shape of the office block would be suitable as it would be located in a linear direction parallel with the road away from the main building.

6. Comments of the Alton Town Council, Froyle Parish Council and Holybourne Village Association Representatives

6.1. The Alton Town Council representative expressed general support for the proposals but had some concerns about the access proposals. He wondered about a possible change of use of the site to an incinerator in the future. The Froyle Parish Council chairman shared these concerns and was also worried about the possibility of 24 hour working. He felt that a visual simulation of the landscaping proposals would be useful as it was difficult to envisage the visual impact. The representative of the Holybourne Village Association was concerned about the short egress for traffic emerging onto the A31 in the light of the speed of traffic along that road. He was concerned about noise in general terms and excessive hours of working.

6.2. In response Mr Collis advised that it was intended to improve the egress onto the A31 from the site and this was being discussed with the County Surveyor's staff. The facility was sorely needed and would take up the whole site. There is no proposal for the site to be used for an incinerator. He stressed that 24 hour working was being requested so that it could be used in exceptional circumstances and should have no adverse noise impacts on nearby residents. The brown and green colours proposed for the building should enable it to merge into the overall scene.

7. Questions raised by Members of the Committee

7.1. In response to questions raised by Members of the Committee Mr Collis advised that traffic from Basingstoke would use the A339 past the Butts, this being a route currently used by heavy goods vehicles and that the slip road onto the A31 was felt to be suitable. The noise generated by the facility would be less than that generated at the Portsmouth materials recovery facility and the manoeuvre at the Bentley slip road could be comfortably undertaken by the lorries. He did not envisage the company funding works at the bridge adjacent to the Butts.

8. Further Comments of the County Planning Officer

8.1. The proposed development is in accordance with the development plan, as it complies with policy 46 of the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local plan being an existing industrial site.

8.2. Whilst a substantial building is proposed, the architectural treatment and colours are appropriate and would result in a well designed building for this location which has a countryside backdrop. The proposed two storey office building located near the entrance would be well contained visually by existing trees. The comments about the design are noted, however the conventional design as proposed is acceptable.

8.3. The highway routeing along the A31, using the Bentley slip road is acceptable and practical. Improvements to the slip road from the site onto the A31 are proposed. An issue has been raised concerning the use of the A339 past the Butts by large bulkers travelling between Basingstoke and the site. The applicant estimates that initially 3 loads (6 movements) rising to 5 loads (10 movements) per day would use this route, which is a lorry route. The alternative would be for these bulkers to travel longer distances via Hook and Farnham to approach the site via the A31 from the east. The issue is whether the difficulties caused by this small number of bulkers at the Butts warrants the additional mileage, and consequent environmental consequences of using a longer route. On balance insistence on the use of the longer route cannot be justified.

8.4. With regard to noise and odour, the assessments carried out show that there would not be an unacceptable impact. These issues can also be controlled by condition. An issue has been raised concerning the hours of working. The proposal is that there is no restriction, to allow flexibility to use the site at any time if required. In view of the site's location alongside the A31, the recognised need for a network of facilities within the county to operate outside normal working hours to maintain the waste management service, and the low level of impact identified through the environmental impact assessment it is considered that specifying hours of operation would be unnecessarily restrictive.

8.5. In conclusion it is considered that there is a clear need for the proposal to further the County's recycling requirements, and that the proposal fully accords with the development plan in meeting the requirements of the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan. It is noted that East Hampshire District Council' committee will meet the day after the Regulatory Committee and therefore the recommendation is subject to no further substantive issues being raised by the District Council.

Recommendation:

That, subject to a legal agreement to provide a financial contribution to highway safety works on the A31 and lorry routeing on the A31, and to no further significant issues being raised by East Hampshire District Council, planning permission in respect of the proposed materials recycling facility and waste transfer station at the former Gibbs-Palmer premises, Farnham Road, Upper Froyle, Alton (Application No: F33619/004) be granted subject to the following conditions:

Commencement

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five
years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990.

Landscape

2. Within 12 months of development commencing a detailed scheme of
landscaping for the perimeter of the site shall be submitted to the Waste
Planning Authority for approval in writing. The scheme shall specify the
types, size and species of all trees, shrubs to be planted, details of all trees to
be retained, details of fencing/enclosure of the site, phasing and timescales
for carrying out the works, and provision for future maintenance. Any trees
or shrubs which, within a period of five years from the date of planting, die,
are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in
the next planting season with others of similar size and species. The
scheme shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

Protection of Water Environment

3. No solid matter shall be deposited so that it passes or is likely to pass into any
watercourse.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment.

4. Any above ground oil storage tanks shall be sited on an impervious base
and surrounded by a suitable liquid-tight bunded compound. The bunded
area shall be capable of containing 110% of the volume of the largest tank
and all fill pipes, draw pipes and sight gauges should be enclosed within the
bund. The vent pipes should be directed downwards within the bund.

Reason: To prevent pollution of ground water

5. No sewage or trade effluent (including vehicle wash or vehicle steam
cleaning effluent) shall be discharged to any surface water drainage system.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment.

Noise and odour

6. Noise from the operation of the plant shall not exceed 53dB LAeq, 1 hour
when measured at the site boundary.

Reason: To prevent noise disturbance to the residents of the nearest houses

7. Prior to the waste transfer station becoming operational an Environmental
Management Scheme for the control of noise and odour at the site shall be
submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing. The
Scheme shall be implemented as approved for the duration of the site's
operation.

Reason: In the interest of local amenity.


Lighting

8. Prior to the plant being commissioned a lighting scheme shall be submitted to
the Waste Planning Authority in writing. The scheme shall include details of
all outside lighting, including floodlighting and safety lighting and measures
to prevent light pollution, including from illumination within the plant.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to limit light
pollution.

Highways

9. Prior to development commencing details of measures to be taken to prevent
mud from vehicles leaving the site being deposited on the public highway
shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing.
The measures shall be implemented as approved for the duration of the
construction.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

10. All vehicles shall turn left into the site, and turn left out of the site.
There shall be no right turn movements.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.


Restriction of Permitted Development Rights

11. Notwithstanding the provisions of Parts 4, 8 and 25 of Schedule 2 of the Town
and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any
order revoking and re-enacting that order):

(i) fixed plant or machinery, buildings, structures and erections shall not
be erected, extended, installed or replaced at the site without the prior
agreement of the Waste Planning Authority;

(ii) no telecommunications antenna shall be installed or erected without
the prior agreement of the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the area.



Storage

12. There shall be no outside storage of waste, unless otherwise agreed in writing
by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the area.

8RR42702