Archived decisions

B. THE IMPORTATION OF CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTES,
INCLUDING CONCRETE, BRICK, EARTH SPOILS AND SUB-SOILS, IN
PLACE OF A PROPORTION OF THE RECYCLED SOILS PERMITTED UNDER
A GENERAL PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT ORDER (1995) AT PILGRIMS
FARM, STEPLAKE LANE, WELLOW WOOD ROAD, SHERFIELD
ENGLISH (TVS 09717)

With the concurrence of the Chairman, under Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, this report was included as an urgent item on the agenda to ensure expeditious consideration of the application.

1. Summary

1.1. The Committee undertook a site visit on 30 September 2002 to consider the Pilgrims Farm application following deferral at the September meeting of the Committee.

2. Introduction

2.1. At the site visit the Committee met representatives of Test Valley Borough Council, Melchet Park and Plaitford Parish Council, Sherfield English Parish Council, Wellow Parish Council and local residents. 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. Comments of the County Planning Officer

3.1. The County Planning Officer described the application which would entail the importation of inert waste materials to achieve land-raising on a 2.7 hectare area of agricultural land, the aim being to make the land more productive for grazing and silage. Particular attention was drawn to the advice of Test Valley Borough Council to the applicant that a scheme for the importation of 90,000 cubic metres of recycled soils over a 6 hectare area of the site fell within the General Permitted Development Order. The aim of the planning application was to replace some of the recycled soils permitted under the Order with inert construction and demolition waste. The importation of 90,000 cubic metres of material, comprising 65,500 cubic metres of waste and 25,000 cubic metres of recycled soil was proposed.

3.2. The County Planning Officer further advised that Counsel's opinion was being sought about the General Permitted Development Order and further information on the impact of the traffic generated on local roads was being sought.

4. Comments of the Test Valley Borough Council Representatives

4.1. The Borough Planning Officer confirmed that the Borough Council had agreed that the original scheme had fallen within the General Permitted Development Order provisions with the aim of improving the land for agriculture. Only certain issues had however been taken into account such as the appearance of the site and the impact on an adjoining SSSI. The Borough Council were also taking legal advice on their original decision on the matter.

4.2. A local Borough Councillor raised strong objections on the grounds of the unsuitability of the road for the lorry traffic which would be generated and possible contamination of the adjacent stream from materials being deposited at the site. He questioned the amount of agricultural improvement which would result.

5. Comments of the Parish Councils

5.1. The representative of Melchet Park and Plaitford Parish Council expressed concern about the current state of the site believing that tyres and asbestos had already been deposited there. It was hoped that the Environment Agency would examine the situation and take appropriate action.

5.2. The representative of Wellow Parish Council expressed support for the views which had just been voiced and felt that the whole area had suffered unduly from mineral extraction and waste disposal working at various sites over the years.

5.3. The representative of Sherfield English Parish Council objected to the size of vehicles which would visit the site and drew attention to the new playing field and low cost housing at the northern end of Steplake Lane.

6. Comments of the Agents for the Applicants

6.1. The agents for the applicants advised that the impact of lorries generated by the planning application would be the same as that permitted by the General Permitted Development Order. They felt that the proposed scheme differed slightly from the permitted development and would give the planning authority more control over the material to be deposited and the number of vehicles.

7. Comments of Local Residents

7.1. Local residents raised objection on the following points:-

    (i) The adverse impact of water flowing from the site into the Sherfield English stream and then the River Blackwater.

    (ii) Possible over-filling of the site to allow for settlement (in response it was stated that little allowance needs to be made for the settlement of inert waste materials when compared with household waste).

    (iii) Danger which would be caused by lorries backing out of the site (in response it was envisaged that a condition would be imposed on the permission, if granted, forbidding reversal into Steplake Road).

    (iv) The representative of the Ramblers' Association expressed strong opposition to the proposal on account of its adverse impact on nearby footpaths and a caravan site further down the road.

    (v) The Environment Agency does not possess sufficient staff resources to monitor sufficiently the operations of the site as required by the terms of the Waste Management Licence.

    (vi) Steplake Lane is totally unsuitable for use by the lorries which would be generated and is widely used by walkers and horse-riders and school buses. The road is particularly dangerous in winter as it is not salted or gritted.

8. Further Comments of the County Planning Officer

8.1. The comments concerning the impact this application might have on the water environment are noted. The concerns have merit but the Environment Agency are unable to sustain an objection as they believe the issues could be mitigated through conditions. Accordingly a refusal of permission on these grounds cannot be recommended.

8.2. Much of this case turns on the `fall back' situation caused by the `permission' under the General Permitted Development Order 1995 (GPDO). However, the Borough Council have taken legal advice on this matter and it is hoped that Members can be updated at the meeting.

8.3. In the meantime the County Council needs to make a decision on the merits of the waste application. The Council's own Counsel suggests that the criteria outlined in paragraph 6.63 of the Adopted Minerals and Waste Local Plan are relevant to the assessment of the present proposal. The Minerals and Waste Local Plan states that these waste disposal operations should only be permitted if they fulfil a number of criteria, including demonstrating that the operation would not have an unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact. The County Surveyor states that the proposals would lead to an unacceptable impact on the highway. Paragraph 6.63 also states that "the justification ... for agricultural land improvement is very questionable" in view of the current surplus of agricultural land.

8.4. Counsel also advises that if there is greater harm associated with the application proposals when compared to the realistic fall back position, then it is reasonable to withhold planning permission where there are sound and clear cut reasons supported by substantial evidence in respect of that greater harm.

8.5. The experience of the County Planning Officer would suggest that the works proposed under the GPDO would be of a low intensity because of the amount of recycled soils available, the transport cost of obtaining them and the limited number of sources. Conversely, the operations are more spasmodic and of higher intensity. An example of this is the situation at Carters Clay, off Branches Lane, Sherfield English. Therefore, the traffic patterns and impacts associated with the proposal would be more significant than if the works were achieved by the importation of recycled soils alone. The proposal would lead to an adverse impact on the safety and environmental quality of Steplake Lane. Thus, there is greater harm associated with the application proposals than associated with the `fall back' position.

8.6. It is further noted that the applicant asserts that the importation of waste would "achieve agricultural improvement more efficiently". This is taken to mean the project would be completed more quickly than under the `fall back' proposal. The estimated maximum 150 lorry movements a day therefore, is more than that which would occur otherwise.

8.7. The applicant has suggested that granting planning permission would offer the Waste Planning Authority more control over the implementation of the scheme as planning conditions could be attached. If the Waste Planning Authority was minded to grant planning permission it would be appropriate to attach conditions to ensure the development is safe, and to mitigate any unacceptable environmental and amenity effects. However, the County Surveyor advises that mitigation of the highway impacts associated with this proposal would involve measures that the County Planning Officer concludes would themselves lead to an unacceptable impact on the environmental amenity value of the Lane. It would not be acceptable or appropriate for the Waste Planning Authority to attach conditions that would have this effect and yet the Authority could not grant planning permission without mitigation measures.

8.8. Therefore, the recommendation is to refuse the application as the proposal would have a detrimental effect on the highway and amenity in the locality which is not out- weighed by the merits of the development.

Recommendation

That planning permission for the importation of construction and demolition waste for an agricultural improvement at Pilgrims Farm, Steplake Lane, Wellow Wood Road, Sherfield English (Application No. TVS 09717) be refused for the following reason:

    1. The impact of the proposal on the amenity and safety of the highway would cause harm which is not outweighed by the need for the development and this would be contrary to Policy MW7 of the Hampshire County Structure Plan and Policies 6(i) and 6(ii), 7(ii) 39 (including 6.63), and paragraph 6.63 and 42 of the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan.

8RR50102