Archived decisions

Contact: John Priest - Ext: 7336 and Julia Davey - Ext: 6732

1. Summary

1.1. The Committee undertook a site visit on 17 December 2002 to consider the Marwell Zoo application in the light of local concerns.

2. Introduction

2.1. At the site visit the Committee met representatives of Winchester City Council, Owslebury Parish Council and a number of local residents. The comments of those present are outlined in the ensuing paragraphs. A copy of the briefing note for the site visit is attached as an appendix to this report.

3. Comments of the Chief Planning Adviser to the Committee

3.1. The Chief Planning Adviser described the application and drew particular attention to the third and latest proposed route from the zoo to the application site which entailed crossing Thompson's Lane rather than travelling along it. The land needed to achieve this third route was not actually in the control of the zoo but agreement had been reached with the landowner. The proposal would entail four vehicle movements per day. The compost created would be used for the planting of trees and the creation of a tree nursery on the site which would provide fodder for the animals in the zoo as well as trees for landscaping improvements on Marwell Park.

3.2. At the time of writing the briefing note 7 letters of objection had been received but since that time a further 11 objections had been made and are described in detail further down in this report. In summary they covered such matters as impact on a bridleway and an expanding development in the countryside.

3.3. The Chief Planning Adviser drew attention to the nearest properties to the application site and the current arrangements which entail the collection of four lorry loads of animal and litter waste per week which are then taken to a licenced tip site at Ringwood.

3.4. The Committee and local representatives then moved to the actual application site and were advised that a scheduled ancient monument is located just within the western site boundary and a 10 metre stand off would be needed to protect this monument.

4. Comments of Local Residents

4.1. Local residents drew attention to the adverse impact of the proposals on views from Hurst Lane and were also concerned about the danger of pollution to the watercourse from water flowing off the site into Bow Lake and then Fishers Pond. It was pointed out that water currently seeps through from the site onto adjacent land. In response the Chief Planning Adviser confirmed that effluent and run-off from the site is the responsibility of the Environment Agency who are consulted on applications and had not raised any objection in principle.

5. Comments of the Highways Adviser

5.1. Those present next viewed the access direct on to Thompson's Lane from the application site which would be used by vehicles taking excess compost away. It was currently an agricultural access and visibility splays would have to be improved if lorries were to use it. This would entail the loss of some trees and shrubs. It was pointed out that the County Council Landscape Architect would be evaluating all three accesses which had been proposed in relation to the application. It was also stressed that a landscaping scheme would have to be submitted.

5.2. The rear access to the zoo which would be used was then viewed and it was stated that it had historically only been used by service vehicles and staff vehicles; the only traffic increase as a result of this application would be the four movements per day.

6. Further Comments of the Chief Planning Adviser to the Committee since the site visit

6.1. A total of 19 objectors have raised representations to the application on the grounds outlined in the report of the Chief Planning Adviser to the Committee (the appendix to this report) with the following addition : that an alternative layout with plant, parking and offices located on the northern boundary of the site to reduce the visual impact of the development be provided.

6.2. The applicant has provided the following information in response to queries raised at the site visit and directly by the Chief Planning Adviser:-

(a) There will be no exportation of compost, and all compost will be used by the zoo for various projects such as landscaping and tree growing, etc. After the compost has been made it will have reduced by as much as 55% from the original waste.


(b) All environmental projects would be phased. Compost for future projects would be delivered by the same tractor and trailer going into Marwell Zoo to collect the animal waste. By transporting the compost on the outward journeys from the site into Marwell in the mornings, it would mean that no additional traffic movements would be created to deliver compost.


(c) A maximum of 24 tractor and trailer movements would take place along the service track and bridleway per 5 ½ day week. There would be no working on Sundays or Bank Holidays.


(d) The project will replace the Onyx lorries that currently collect animal waste.


(e) There will be no sale of compost from the application site.


(f) Minimal amounts of compost would have to be stored in the open within Environment Agency guidelines.


(g) No polytunnels would be used over the plants.


(h) Worm expansion beds as outlined in the proposed plan may be needed to create more dung compost in the future.


(i) An area approximately 150m x 4m would be concreted for parking, offices, temporary compost storage and plant. The site haul road would be hardcore.


(j) The operational area for composting and storage of compost would be within the proposed concrete hardstanding which would include leachate control mechanisms such as pump controls as approved by the Environment Agency.


(k) There would be up to 160 containerised bags of compost, each growing a tree, stood on the ground each day. However, because there are different types of trees with different growing rates, there would not always be 160 containerised bags standing on the ground. Certain species and dwarf tree varieties can only be grown at certain times of the year. If planning permission is granted, a detailed working plan would be submitted. Trees can be ready to use for fodder from 12 months upwards.


(l) The compost left in the containers, once trees have been cut for fodder, would be recycled through the plant for re-use.


(m) No trees would be sold off site as container grown stock.


(n) The trees would be grown in special plastic containers which vary in size to optimise growth and quality and to achieve a more manageable handling. The bags can be manufactured in green, as well as black, with a black UVA interior.


(o) There would be no excess of compost. The project is sustainable for many years.


(p) Animals at the zoo can eat between them 10 tonnes of fodder per day.


(q) The applicant would initially have a five year contract to implement the nursery and worm farm with Marwell Zoo.




6.3. The site, whilst adjacent to an existing grain store and compost bagging plant, is within rough grassland identified as countryside in the local plan. The application is therefore technically a departure from the development plan. The site is also within the proposed South Downs National Park

6.4. The main issue raised by the proposal is whether the need for the proposal justifies warranting a departure from the plan. In the balance of this issue, consideration needs to be given to if and how this proposal reduces impact on the environment, when compared to the existing method of waste disposal (i.e. refuse vehicles and to landfill) as well as the benefits of such a sustainable proposal versus any adverse visual or other significant impact it may cause.

6.5. The impact of the original point of access off Hurst Lane, and increased traffic along Hurst Lane and Thompson's Lane is considered to be reduced in planning terms because the access is now proposed to cross directly over Thompson's Lane from the rear service access of Marwell Zoo (as shown on the attached plan), which is also a bridleway.

6.6. The concerns local residents and the Parish Council have about the use of the rear access of Marwell by service vehicles is noted. However Winchester City Council consider this `service' track, also a bridleway, has permission to be used by service vehicles which would include the minimum traffic proposed by way of this application.

6.7. Similarly, the Rights of Way Section have no objection to the use of the bridleway by the proposed tractor and trailer movements, so long as maintenance of the bridleway would be the responsibility of the applicant. They state that if maintenance of the bridleway cannot be achieved through this application, then they would raise objection to the proposal. This stance however is not considered to be reasonable taking into account that only four tractor and trailer movements are proposed daily, compared to the significantly larger number of vehicles related to Marwell Zoo, which currently use the bridleway/service road on a daily basis and have apparently done so for a number of years.

6.8. Issues relating to groundwater and pollution control are matters for the Environment Agency, who have raised no objection in principle to the application. Concerns raised about amenity issues, such as noise, dust, odour and vermin are noted but it is considered these issues, along with other environmental concerns, can be adequately dealt with by an environmental management condition on any consent that may be granted. Similarly concerns about the scale of the development and future increase in traffic numbers can be dealt with by way of a condition permitting only the composting of waste from Marwell Zoo, and no sale of compost or sale of trees from the site.

6.9. Winchester City Council's objection stating that the development is contrary to policy because it represents the undesirable establishment of use which would be out of keeping with its surroundings and detrimental to the rural character of the area, is also noted. The proposed use of the land is largely agricultural. Indeed a number of farmers, including local farmers, have diversified their farming activities with on-site wormeries. It is considered therefore that the proposal is not out of keeping with the rural character of the area. The issue Winchester City Council raise about insufficient information is not considered to be justified now following additional information submitted by the applicant.

6.10. Finally the objections and concerns the Parish Council and local people have about why Marwell Zoo does not allow the development to take place within its existing boundaries are not matters within the County Council's control.

6.11.The Highways Adviser raises no objection to the proposal where the access runs from the rear of Marwell Zoo and straight across Thompson's Lane into the Marwell grain store land.

6.12. The Landscape Adviser raises no objection to the proposal and considers the location of plant and offices to the south of the site would be screened by the existing development (compost bagging plant and associated buildings)outside of the application area but adjacent to the southern boundary.

6.13. Technically the application is a departure from development plan policy because it is waste development in the countryside, however it is on land owned by the founder of Marwell which the Chief Executive of Marwell Zoo states will be bequeathed to Marwell Zoo on his death, and it is considered it could be operated without an adverse impact on the locality .

6.14. In conclusion, it is recommended that the permission for the proposal be granted subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That planning permission in respect of the proposed composting and worm farm and tree nursery to provide fodder and landscaping for Marwell Zoo on land adjacent to Thompson's Lane, Fishers Pond, near Colden Common (Application. No. 0202394HCM;) (HCC ref WR188), be granted subject to the conditions specified in the report of the Chief Planning Adviser to the Regulatory Committee (the appendix to this report), with the following amendments:-

(1) The use of the land as a wormery, composting facility and tree and plant
nursery shall cease within 5 years from the date of implementation of the
development; all hardstandings, plant machinery, buildings, lights, haul
roads, waste stockpiles, trees, tree containers, worm beds, worms and
ancillary services and facilities associated with the development shall be
removed off site and the land restored to agriculture within a further period
of 6 months in accordance with a scheme to be approved in writing by the
Waste Planning Authority within 6 months of the date of this permission.

(new condition)

Reason: To ensure the land is restored to its former agricultural condition
and quality.

(2) Colours of plastic containers to be used as compost containers shall
be agreed with the Waste Planning Authority in writing before used on the site.

(new condition)

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

(3) Prior to the commencement of the development a detailed scheme of
landscaping and screening, to visually enhance long distance views of the
site, particularly from Hurst Lane, shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing.

(new condition)

Reason: In the interests of local amenity

(4) The approved scheme of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting season
following the issue of this certificate and shall be so maintained thereafter. Within
5 years of planting trees, shrubs, or other plants that die, become diseased, are
removed or damaged, shall be replaced in the first available planting season with
others of a similar size and species in accordance with the details of the approved
scheme, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

(new condition)

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

(5) There shall be no sale of container grown trees from the site.

(new condition)

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

(6) There shall be no importation of material to the site other than waste from Marwell Zoo by the approved route unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

(new condition)


Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

(7) No use associated with the development, including tree container bags, planting, storage of equipment and waste, tracking of vehicles shall take place within the
10 metre buffer zone separating the site of archaeological interest from the development.

(new condition)

Reason: To ensure the protection of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Conditions 3 and 4 in the appendix shall refer to Plan C instead of " No E.01"

NB: The numbering of the conditions would be amended in the event of permission being
granted to form a more logical order.

8RR63203