Contact: Julia Davey, ext 6732 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 This report considers an application for use of land for a permanent facility for the recycling of construction and demolition waste and associated development, including aggregate and compost importation for blending purposes, retention of concrete batching plant and extension of time for existing silt ponds for landfill purposes at Ridge Quarry, Ridge Lane, Ridge, near Romsey.

2. Site

2.1 The site, as shown on the attached plan, extends across 11.8 hectares of land due east of the A3090, Salisbury Road, Romsey, from where access to the site is gained via Ridge Lane. Current operations comprise a mineral processing plant, ready-mix concrete plant (operated by Hanson), inert landfill (Area 4), sorting, screening, recycling and crushing of inert waste, all with associated offices, workshops, mess facilities and silt lagoons.

2.2 The nearest houses to the site (as shown on the attached plan) are two tenanted properties owned by the Broadlands Estate, known as Nos. 1 and 2 Ranvilles Park Cottages. No. 1 has been let for a number of years to the Weighbridge Manager for the site, and No. 2 has been empty for a while. The gardens of these properties actually border the north-west edge of the site, separated from it by hedgerow planting and an earth bund. The façade of these cottages is approximately 20 metres from the nearest point of the western site boundary. Beyond these cottages, to the north-west, is Ranvilles Farm, the garden of which is approximately 90 metres from the northern boundary of the site, whilst the facade of the building is approximately 250 metres away from the site boundary.

2.3 Other houses close to the site, as shown on the attached plan, are located to the south-east of the site on Ridge Lane. These are Ridge Farm (a listed building) approximately 90 metres from the nearest point of the site boundary (at the haul road to Area 4); and Ridge Cottage, 250 metres from the nearest point of the application site boundary (the haul road). Beyond these properties to the south on Ridge Lane are The Old School and the School House, the facades of which lie 280 metres from the nearest point of the application site boundary (the haul road). There are other properties on the western edge of the A3090 dual carriageway close to, and on the junction of, Gardeners Lane with the A3090.

2.4 A public footpath (No. 10) separates landfill area No. 4 from the plant and recycling area. A Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) and ancient woodland lie adjacent to the east of the site.

2.5 In the region of 75,000 tonnes of inert material per year is currently imported into the site for recycling and the operation has a capacity of up to 125,000 tonnes per year.

2.6 Currently all materials being landfilled at the site are inert, arising from construction and demolition projects in the locality, the mineral processing activities on-site, mineral waste produced and the residue from the recycling operations taking place.

3. Proposal

3.1 Planning permission is sought to construct a permanent facility for the recycling of construction and demolition waste at Ridge Lane Quarry recycling and landfill site, which would include:

(i) retention of the concrete batching plant (including ancillary offices, workshop and lagoon);

(ii) replacement and upgrading of existing site offices and plant;

(iii) aggregate importation for re-sale and blending with recycled aggregates;

(iv) importation of compost and blending with silt and soil to produce improved soils for site restoration purposes and off-site sales;

(v) extension of time for the restoration of existing silt ponds (Area 4) for a further five years to provide for final disposal for materials that cannot be recycled or re-used;

(vi) reduction of site levels through minor extraction of existing minerals for development of plant site and lagoons; and

(vii) formation of screening bunds and associated landscaping.

3.2 The materials to be recycled would comprise sand, gravel, limestone, crushed and construction stone, and stone from the demolition of buildings or structures and excavation operations as currently processed at the site. The products of the recycling would be:

(i) recycled crushed aggregates (coarse) suitable for road and general construction as a base material;

(ii) recycled washed aggregates including those suitable for use in concrete;

(iii) recycled washed aggregates for blending with imported aggregates to produce an ` all-in' concreting aggregate;

(iv) screened soils suitable for general landscaping works; and

(v) manufactured soils suitable for site restoration works and general landscaping. This would be based on the silt cake, a by-product of the recycling which would be produced through a pressing process and blended with imported compost and screened soils to produce an improved soil. The process would also allow the recovery of water that would be recycled within the site.

3.3 The applicant states there would be some material that would not be able to be recycled for any beneficial use. Initially this would be disposed of in the remaining void space in Area 4 (silt ponds), but when these are filed in five years the material would be disposed of off-site.

3.4 A number of improvements to the site are proposed, including reducing the level of the primary processing area by an average of one metre. This excavation would result in 10,000m³ of materials to be used in the formation of screening bunds parallel to Ridge Lane. The existing sunken sand and gravel plant would be extended, involving the excavation of 1,000m³ of material that would be used to form a screening bund to protect Ranvilles Park Cottages.

3.5 The recycling area would have sufficient stockpiling capacity of approximately 25,000 tonnes of feed stock materials and 10,000 tonnes of products. An additional clean water pond would be provided should additional water be required for washing purposes. A crusher would be brought in approximately four times a year for a period of six weeks.

3.6 The concrete plant operated by Hanson Premix would use recycled materials wherever possible but it is proposed that imported aggregates would continue to be used for higher specification mixes where recycled products are not accepted. Primary aggregates are presently imported to the site from the Avon Valley and cement is also imported. The plant produces approximately 25,000m³ of ready-mix concrete, mainly for the south Hampshire market.

3.7 The application subject of this report is accompanied by topic assessments on landscape, ecology, noise, dust, hydrology, highways and information on need for the facility.

4. Development Plan

4.1 The policies most relevant to this proposal are:

(i) Hampshire County Structure Plan Review 1996-2011 (Adopted March 2000) Policies MW1 (waste hierarchy) and MW2 (need for the development and any adverse environmental impact caused by development); and

(ii) Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (HPSMWLP) (Adopted December 1998) Policies 6, 7, 8 (general considerations), 10 (conditions/legal agreements), 14 (restoration/aftercare), 25 (secondary aggregates), 37 (landfilling) and 46 (waste recycling facilities).

5. Consultations

5.1 The local Member, Councillor Mrs Barron, has been informed of the proposal.

5.2 Test Valley Borough Council - comments awaited.

5.3 Romsey Extra Parish Council strongly objects to the application and states it is totally contrary to policy. The Parish Council adds that there is no justification for the proposal and the application should be dealt with as a new application based on the land being restored to agriculture, as per the existing permission which was a temporary use. It should not be looked upon as a variation of the existing planning consent.

5.4 The Environment Agency has no objection in principle to the application.

5.5 The Highways Adviser states that Ridge Quarry has previously generated significant traffic which has been safely accommodated on the local highway network. An average of 122 movements per day will be generated by the proposals assuming a recycling rate of 90,000 tonnes. If the site were to be run at full capacity at a rate of 150,000 tonnes the average daily movements could increase to 155 movements per day. In general terms peak movements could be expected to be a maximum of double the daily average, ie about 240 movements per day. However, there will be days when movements will be well below the daily average of 122 movements.

5.6 The estimated average daily movements would be:

(i) inert recycling - 50 movements;

(ii) concrete plant - 54 movements;

(iii) compost/soils - 14 movements; and

(iv) aggregate importation for resale and blending - 4 movements.

5.7 In June 1999 when the activities at Ridge Quarry included mineral extraction, landfill and concrete batching, heavy goods vehicle (HGV) movements in and out of Ridge Lane totalled 366 over a 12 hour day. Nearly all of these movements have been assumed by the applicant to have been associated with Ridge Quarry. A total of 70% of these movements are stated by the applicant to be to and from the south on the A3090 and 30% towards Romsey. Since then traffic movements have reduced and present traffic movements principally relate to the inert recycling facility, inert landfill and concrete batching plant.

5.8 In the last five years there have been no accidents directly involving HGVs in the vicinity of Ridge Lane. The Highways Adviser does have concerns with the visibility to the left from the site entrance, which is obscured by signs resulting in a very limited visibility splay. This could be a potential danger to cars travelling along Ridge Lane. To conclude, the Highways Adviser has no strategic highway objection to the application, provided the signs at the site entrance are moved back to provide an adequate visibility splay.

5.9 The Rights of Way Manager - comments awaited.

5.10 The Environmental Health Officer states there is no real complaint history to the site and raises no objection in principle to the development subject to a more detailed BS4142 noise assessment being undertaken.

5.11 The Younger Generation Environmental Action Association (Romsey) objects to the application on the grounds that it conflicts with the Development Plan; there is no policy justification for it; and no overriding need or material considerations to indicate any determination other than refusal in accordance with the presumption required by Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The Association considers that the application represents a straightforward case of prematurity when the correct path is for it to be pursued through the local plan process.

5.12 Power Triangle Limited strongly recommends that the application be refused as being a significant departure from the local plan; for requesting a permanent industrial facility on an area designated for restoration to countryside and because it makes only a partial assessment of compliance with the developing Material Resource Strategy (MRS) requirements. Amongst the criteria agreed so far at MRS workshops are proximity to sources of waste and to markets for the recycled products as well as accessibility. Despite the claims in the application, Ridge does not seem to comply well with these criteria and has not been compared with potential alternatives. An approval at this stage, although commercially advantageous to the applicants, could prejudice subsequent but more environmentally appropriate locations. If the applicants were to resubmit the application when the MRS work items are completed, the County Council and the consultees would be able to assess how well it complies with those criteria and how it ranks against other candidates.

5.13 The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) raises no objections and notes that even if the land was restored to agriculture as proposed under the current permissions it would achieve the higher grades of Agricultural Land Classification (1, 2, 3a).

5.14 Wellow Parish Council objects to the application on the grounds of its environmental impact and notes that the application is a departure from the Development Plan. It considers that the earlier decision to grant a time limited approval should be reaffirmed and the land restored to agriculture. There is also concern about the additional traffic implications for the A36 which already carries a large number of heavy vehicles.

5.15 Councillor Woodhall, as neighbouring Member, has been informed of the proposal.

6. Representations

6.1 At the time of writing this report, nine letters of objection have been received to the application on the following grounds:

(i) contrary to development plan policy;

(ii) too premature ahead of the MRS;

(iii) concern about link to previous `Triangle' site as in same land ownership;

(iv) use incompatible with unsustainable countryside location;

(v) if a temporary approval is allowed to establish a use that is both contrary to policy and common sense then it makes a mockery of the planning process;

(vi) junction dangerous due to combination of slow laden lorry speed, fast cars, poor lighting and dirty surface;

(vii) entrance to site unsuitable;

(viii) site not close to waste source nor the consumer;

(ix) land should be restored to countryside;

(x) unfair on neighbours to the site;

(xi) roads much busier than they were when gravel extraction first started; and

(xii) the green belt around Romsey must be maintained.

7. Site Visit

7.1 In the light of local concerns the Committee undertook a site visit on 8 November 2004 and met representatives of Test Valley Borough Council, Romsey Extra Parish Council, Wellow Parish Council, local residents and the applicants.

7.2 The Chief Planning Adviser introduced the application and confirmed that the site had been used as a quarry for many years followed by restoration and these operations were coming to an end; a residual amount of landfill was still to be carried out in the top north-east corner of the site. He recognised that in normal circumstances the site would be restored to agriculture but the situation was currently changing, with strong emphasis being placed on recycling, and hence this proposal for a permanent facility for the recycling of construction and demolition waste.

7.3 The Chief Planning Adviser drew attention to the access to the site being off a dual carriageway, with the nearest houses in the vicinity being along Gardeners Lane on the other side of the dual carriageway and the two Ranville's Park Cottages, one of which was unoccupied and the other occupied by a member of staff from the quarry. Other nearby houses were Ranville's Farm and Ridge House.

7.4 A Test Valley Borough Council Member posed questions about possible alterations at the junction with the dual carriageway and the number of properties which would be affected by noise. In response it was stated that there were no proposals to alter the junction and a noise assessment had been carried out. Comments on noise would be included in the report. Another Member raised concerns about flooding which occurs to the south of the site. In response, the applicant stated that he would look into this problem which might need the provision of a larger culvert. The Environmental Health Officer advised that replies were awaited to some concerns which she had raised regarding noise whilst the Borough Planning Officer would be submitting to the County Council concerns raised about the implications for policy of the application.

7.5 The Romsey Extra Parish Council representative asked whether bunding would be provided and, in response, the applicant advised that a bund near Ranville's Park Cottages would be extended whilst another screen bank along Ridge Lane was being considered. As regards a concern raised about dust, he confirmed that a bowser is permanently on-site.

7.6 The Wellow Parish Council representative expressed concerns about extra traffic using the A36 and also the impact of such traffic on country lanes when the A36 is closed. In response the Chief Planning Adviser confirmed that some traffic would use the A36 as it is a strategic lorry route and full traffic details would be included in this report. Alternative routes when the A36 was closed would be dealt with when such closures occur.

7.7 Local residents confirmed the local understanding that the site would be restored when finished and requested that lighting should be directed away from Ridge Lane and that measures should be taken to mask better the view of the office building from Ridge Lane. In response it was confirmed that one of the proposed conditions, should permission be granted, covered restoration of the site should operations cease.

7.8 The applicant described the operations and drew particular attention to the proposal to do away with the silt ponds, to upgrade the equipment and to locate the plant at a lower level than at present. During the subsequent walk around the site attention was drawn to the screening along the bridleway which runs along the edge of the site, the areas of woodland which would be retained and the aim of lowering the stockpiles of material.

8. Chief Planning Adviser's Comments

8.1 The main issues raised by the proposal are:

(i) amenity impact on nearby houses by way of noise and dust;

(ii) visual impact;

(iii) traffic impact;

(iv) need for the development proposal; and

(v) conformity with the Development Plan.

8.2 The quarry and landfill site has operated at Ridge Lane for many years (the quarrying having been ongoing since the 1960s) without significant or regular complaint, and there is vehicular access onto the main A3090 Romsey-Ower dual carriageway without passing any houses on Ridge Lane. There are houses on the western edge of the dual carriageway which because of their proximity to the road, do suffer vehicular noise disturbance from the dual carriageway generally as well as from HGVs crossing out of Ridge Lane.

8.3 Similarly, the existing recycling facility has, until very recently, been operated without any complaint, to the knowledge of the County Council, since 1994. Two complaints have been received from a resident of Ridge Lane about recent increase in noise from the recycling facility and from a resident of Gardeners Lane about reversing bleepers.

8.4 Noise is considered to be the key amenity issue with regard to this permanent proposal. However, it is noted that the Environmental Health Officer raises no objection in principle to the proposal, subject to a BS4142 noise assessment, as opposed to the noise assessment submitted under MPG 11, being completed to her satisfaction. The applicant is providing this information. The applicant has incorporated a number of elements into the design of the facility to mitigate against any noise impact to local residents, including additional bunding and further lowering of ground levels. Further mitigation has also been discussed with the applicant to provide additional protection to properties on Ridge Lane by creating a screen bund on the south-east corner of the primary crushing area. If planning permission is granted for the development this amendment could be dealt with by way of planning permission. Similarly, conditions can be imposed relating to types of reversing alarms, height of bunds and stockpiles, as well as dust control.

8.5 It is acknowledged that the two houses known as 1 and 2 Ranvilles Park Cottages on the western boundary of the site are very close to the site boundary. The Weighbridge Manager has rented Cottage No. 1 for a number of years. The other cottage, No. 2, was rented by an estate farm worker but has been empty for a while now. The additional bunding proposed on the western boundary would provide additional noise mitigation from what exists on the site already if permission is granted but due to proximity, would be less able to offer full noise protection as the County Council would normally require. However, this is considered to be an unusual residential situation whereby the weighbridge manager for the site has lived without this additional protection for a number of years and whereby the tenancy of the cottages is controlled by the Broadlands Estate. Any future tenant for the Cottages would, it is assumed, enter a tenancy agreement in the full knowledge that the cottages are adjacent to such a facility, should permission be granted.

8.6 Vehicles accessing and egressing the site have never caused a highway safety problem in the locality or at the crossing point out of Ridge Lane and it is noted that the Highways Adviser raises no objection to the proposal.

8.7 The site is well hidden in the landscape and there have never been any visual issues except when stockpiles exceeded their five metre limit and became partially visible from the dual carriageway. It is noted the applicant has submitted landscaping proposals with the application and, in addition to these, the applicant has agreed to the principle of strengthening hedgerow planting on the western boundary of the site, which could be dealt with by way of condition if planning permission is granted for the development. This would further reduce the possibility of glimpsing the stocking area through the trees from the dual carriageway during the winter months.

8.8 The applicant has submitted a need assessment for the proposal and it is quite clear from the County Council's work concerning the MRS that additional major sites for processing construction and demolition spoil are needed. The Minerals and Waste Development Documents currently being prepared as part of the MRS are currently undergoing a period of stakeholder consultation. The Documents are at a very early stage of preparation and therefore hold very limited weight in the determination of planning applications at the current time. However, background work on the production of secondary aggregates and recycling of construction and demolition waste has indicated that there is a requirement for significant additional capacity to be found in the county (either at existing or new sites). These facilities would ideally have permanent planning permissions to enable the required levels of investment in plant and equipment to produce quality recycled products.

8.9 The applicant states the plant is currently processing 75,000 tonnes per annum at the existing temporary facility, which is of significance in relation to the county as a whole. It is considered that the retention at the least of this capacity is important in relation to efforts to divert material in Hampshire away from landfill and to manufacture secondary aggregates in order to reduce the demand for primary mineral resources.

8.10 Comments made regarding prematurity of determination of the application prior to the adoption of the relevant Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Documents are noted but this cannot be sustained as a reason for refusal. The County Council has a duty to determine this application on its merits and it unreasonable to defer a decision pending the finalisation of a Development Document that may take up to two years.

8.11 The application is a `departure' from the Development Plan because it proposes a permanent recycling and processing facility in the countryside contrary to existing mineral and waste planning policy. This is the crucial issue. The amenity and traffic issues, subject to completion of a satisfactory noise assessment and putting aside the special circumstances of the cottages adjacent to the site are not a basis for refusing permission. It is also quite evident that there is a need for the facility. So the question is whether the merits outweigh the policy concerns. On balance it is advised they do. There are not very many applications coming forward for developing major recycling proposals that can have a significant affect on the County's recycling rates and reduce pressure for landfill which have such a good highway access and so limited adverse impacts.

Recommendation

That, subject to a satisfactory BS4142 noise assessment being submitted and `departure' procedures being discharged, planning permission in respect of use of land for a permanent facility for the recycling of construction and demolition waste and associated development, including aggregate and compost importation for blending purposes, retention of concrete batching plant and extension of time for existing silt ponds at Ridge Quarry, Ridge Lane, Ridge, near Romsey (TVS4326/14) be granted for the following reason, subject to the following conditions:

Reason for Approval

It is considered that whilst the proposal would not be in accordance with the Development Plan (summary attached) with regards to the principle of industrial use on land designated as countryside, it would not materially harm the character of the area or the amenity of local residents and would be acceptable in terms of highway safety and convenience.

Conditions

Commencement

(1) Within three months of the date of this permissionan a development programme for the site shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance and within three months of its approval by the Waste Planning Authority. The programme shall include details ofinfrastructure development, including to the creation of the new lagoons, construction and relocation of offices and plant, and construction of new plant.

Reason: To ensure that the development proceeds in an environmentall acceptable manner.

Timescale

(2) The land fill of (Area 4) hereby permitted shall cease on or before 31 December 2009 and the site shall be restored in accordance with levels approved under planning permission no. TVS04326/12.

Reason: To ensure the remaining part of the landfill void is restored to currently approved levels.

Hours of Working

(3) Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority, no plant or machinery shall be operated except between the following hours: 0730-1800 Monday to Friday and 0730-1300 on Saturdays. There shall be no working on Sundays or recognised public holidays.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Landscape

(4) Within six months of the date of this permission 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 and shrubs to be planted; details of all trees to be retained; and 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 within the first planting season following approval .

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

(5) Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The bund capacity shall give 110% of the total volume for single and hydraulically linked tanks. If there is multiple tankage, the bund capacity shall be 110% of the largest tank or 25% of the total capacity of all tanks, whichever is the greatest. All filling points, vents, gauges and sight glasses and overflow pipes shall be located within the bund. There shall be no outlet connecting the bund to any drain, sewer or watercourse or discharging onto the ground. Associated pipework shall be located above ground where possible and protected from accidental damage.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment.

Noise, and Dust

(6) All vehicles, plant and machinery operated within the site shall be maintained in accordance with the manufacturers' specification at all times, and shall be fitted with and use effective silencers.

Reason: To minimise noise disturbance from operations at the site.

(7) Within three months of the date of this permission a dust suppression scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Waste Planning Authority in writing. The approved measures shall be implemented for the duration of the development.

Reason: In the interests of local amenities.

(8) Within three months of the date of this permission details of reversing alarms to be used by machinery and HGVs (including conrete lorries) using the site shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing and thereafter implemented in accordance with that approval.

Lighting

(9) Within three months of the date of this permission a lighting scheme shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority in writing. The scheme shall include details of all outside lighting, including floodlighting, safety lighting and illumination from within the plant, and measures to prevent light pollution. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance and within three months of the approval.

Reason: In the interests of visual highway safety.

Restoration

(10) If in the event of the view of Waste Planning Authority the permission hereby approved ceases on all or part of the site a restoration scheme shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority within three months of notification to the landowner/occupier. The restoration scheme shall be implemented as approved by the Waste Planning Authority.

After-Care

(11) After-care of the restored landfill site (Area 4) shall take place for a period of five years in accordance with planning permission TVS04326/12 unless otherwise agreed by the Waste Planning Authority in writing.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory restoration of the site.

Access

(12) Within three months of the date of this permission a scheme of improvements to the access of the site onto Ridge Lane shall be submitted for approval and implemented within one month of approval


(13) Measures shall be taken to ensure that wheel washing facilites are installed that effectively wash the wheels of vehicles befire tey enter the public highway froom the site. the public highway shall be kept free of mud created by site vehiles at all times.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

9066/JD