Hampshire County Council Regulatory Committee 5 January 2005 Applicant: Silverlake Garage Replacement Building to Provide Automotive Treatment Facility and Extension to Storage Area at Silverlake Garage, Row Ash, Botley Road, Shedfield (Application No. HCC/2004/0291) (County Council Ref. WR200) Report of the Chief Planning Adviser to the Regulatory Committee

Item 10

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

1. Summary

1.1 This report considers an application to construct an automotive treatment building and associated facilities at Silverlake Garage, Botley Road, Shedfield. The proposal includes a 1.2 hectare concrete storage yard extension to the rear of the existing premises into land designated as countryside in the Winchester and District Local Plan.

1.2 The recommendation is to grant approval subject to conditions.

2. Site and Background

2.1 The site, as shown on the attached plan, extends across 3.37 hectares of land north of the A334 Botley Road, Shedfield from where it gains access. Of this land 1.2 hectares is agricultural, designated as countryside, and does not form part of the existing garage premises. This agricultural land is part of a larger agricultural holding owned by the applicant. Three properties, owned by the applicant (and tenanted), border the access and car park on either side of the site frontage. These are No. 1 Row Ash Cottages to the east and Nos.1 and 2 Rowash Bungalows to the west. No.2 Rowash Bungalows, which is not directly adjacent to the site, is privately owned.

2.2 To the west of the site, approximately three metres below the application site lies a narrow stream valley of wet woodland. This land, up to the middle of the stream line from the western site boundary, is also owned by the applicant. To the north of the site beyond the arable fields is Lyons Copse Meadows Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). Beyond the wet woodland to the west is the private Lake Road, the nearest property to which is approximately 80 metres from the site boundary. To the south, the site is bordered by the A334 beyond which are open fields with two houses at Raglington Farm to the south east and a public footpath to the south west.

2.3 The business comprises a motor salvage and workshop building, car storage on external racks, car breaking, car crushing and car part sales. It has been in existence for over 50 years, although the boundaries of the site have extended particularly to the west beyond the original footprint.

2.4 It is understood there have been no complaints about operations on the site from neighbours, although in the past there has been a complaint about the site burglar alarm going off in the middle of the night, which was resolved. Since the submission of the application, concern has been raised about car transporters vehicles parking on the A334 waiting to turn into the site. Officers have witnessed this problem, which appears to be occurring because there is not enough space for two vehicles to pass between the existing workshop and the eastern site boundary.

2.5 On 2 September 1997, Winchester City Council granted planning permission for a new motor salvage building (approximately 8.0 metres high to the ridge), extension to car sales and workshop building and a new access. It is understood that this permission has not been implemented. There are no conditions currently controlling planning matters such as noise and hours of working for the site. There is some enforcement history to the site concerning trees that have been felled to the west of the existing boundary in the ownership of the applicant and which were the subject of a tree preservation order. Winchester City Council is also investigating whether or not the applicant has extended the site to the west without planning permission.

3. Proposal

3.1 Planning permission is sought to construct an automative treatment building and associated facilities at Silverlake Garage, Shedfield which would involve, amongst other things, dealing with end of life vehicles (ELVs) in accordance with the requirements of EU legislation (see Appendix 2).

3.2 The proposal is to demolish all existing structures on the site and replace with a new modern building, which would incorporate appropriate noise reduction measures, be energy efficient and, where practical, incorporate recycled materials. The existing crane and modern crusher currently on site would be relocated and screened. The proposal also includes the use of 1.2 hectares of arable land owned by the applicant adjoining the existing site to the rear. This would provide additional vehicular storage.

3.3 The major part of the building would be given over to de-pollution bays where vehicles are stripped down to basic metal, and petrol and diesel fuels, batteries, etc are removed. On completion, the vehicle shell is moved by forklift machine to the external crusher site.

3.4 Waste fluids extracted from vehicles in the de-pollution bays are taken to storage tanks located outside the building, which would be bunded.

3.5 Currently there are 60 car visitors per day (120 movements), 6 HGV loads per day and 25 staff. It is proposed to increase staff by 10, which may increase the traffic movements by 20 movements per day (10 in and 10 out). Parking for both public and staff cars would be provided. It is envisaged that traffic to the site would not increase as a result of the development as the company proposes to use its satellite site in Southampton, and possibly a new satellite site in Portsmouth, to distribute spare parts. The number of customers visiting Silverlake would be reduced and the Southampton site (and possibly a site in the future in Portsmouth) supplied by one commercial trip per day. The applicant hopes to minimise traffic movements further by expanding internet trading.

3.6 New landscaping is proposed including:

(i) A 15 metre wide native tree woodland belt to the east of the site linking with the proposed native woodland to the north;

(ii) A nature conservation management scheme for that part of the wet woodland to the west in the applicant's ownership;

(iii) Additional native woodland planting to the south west of the site (currently scrubland);

(iv) Additional native tree and shrub planting along the site frontage together with raised native shrub beds in the car parking areas; and

(v) Moving the western boundary of the proposed hardstanding extension to the north away from the canopy of existing woodland trees creating a buffer zone.

3.7 Planting along the site frontage will help to integrate the new building into the surrounding area and enhance the immediate locality. The existing access would be moved slightly further west away from the wall of an existing house (owned and leased by the applicant). Trees proposed at the frontage would include 20-25 year old specimens, creating an immediate landscape impression.

3.8 Sustainable design principles will be included into the new building and the car parking area. The applicant is currently seeking advice from the County Council on grey water recycling, SUD's drainage, use of recycled aggregate for the car parking area and solar panels as a method of heating hot water.

3.9 The applicant states that current and proposed hours of working at the site are:

Office hours: Monday-Saturday 8.00-1800 hours and 9.30-1300 on Sundays (no bank holiday working.

The crusher: 7.30-1900 Monday - Friday and 7.30-1700 on Saturdays (no working Sundays and Bank Holidays.

Emergency Vehicles - Maximum of one per night seven days a week (including bank holidays)

3.10 The applicant considers that an integral part of the scheme is to offer schools the opportunity to visit the facility to learn and understand the recycling process. The building design will address this use by children. Local events, such as the Southern Road Safety Event, could also be hosted.

4. Development Plan

4.1 Hampshire County Structure Plan Review 1996 - 2011 (Adopted March 2000) MW1, MW2 (Hierarchy of waste and need for facility); C1, C2, EC3, EC4

Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (Adopted December 1998) - 6,7, (general policies) 46 (waste recycling) 48, 50 (scrap yards).

Winchester District Local Plan: E.2, C.1, C.13, EN.5, EN.7, T.8, T.9, T11

Winchester District Local Plan Review: E2, C.1, C6, C.9, C.16, RD04.43, DP.1, DP5, DP14, T1, T2

4.2 Copies of the Winchester District Local Plan are available for inspection at the Environment Departments' library. Copies of the policies will be made available at the Committee.

5. Consultations

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

5.2 Winchester City Council objects to the proposal on the following grounds:

5.3 The proposed development is contrary to policies C1, C2, EC3, EC4 of the Hampshire County Structure Plan Review; proposals : E.2, C.1, C.13, EN.5, EN.7, T.8, T.9, T11 of the Winchester District Local Plan; and proposals E2, C.1, C6, C.9, C.16, RD04.43, DP.1, DP5, DP14, T1, T2 of the Winchester District Local Plan Review in that:

(i) The proposal includes an expansion of the site into the open countryside and will result in a more intensive commercial use here, which would be out of keeping with its surroundings because of its scale of operation.

(ii) The proposal would be detrimental to the rural character of the area.

(iii) There is no overriding justification for this development in this area of the countryside.

(iv) The level of proposed use and activity is not considered appropriate in this remote, unsustainable rural location.

(v) The development would increase dependency upon car use in this rural location.

(vi) Additional vehicle movements as a result of the proposal will be detrimental to the amenities of the adjacent residential properties;

(vii) Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the development can be carried out without causing material harm to the protected trees in the adjacent woodland; landscape character I the area; visual amenity in the surrounding area; and harm to the nearby water course and SINCs.

5.4 The Environmental Health Officer raises no objection to the application subject to conditions limiting the hours of operation to 08.00 - 18.00 hours Monday to Friday and 08.00 - 13.00 on Saturdays.

5.5 The Environment Agency Southern raises no objection to the proposal.

5.6 Shedfield Parish Council objects to the proposal for the following reasons:

(i) The applicant has blatantly ignored successive planning conditions imposed and these must all be enforced before consideration is given to any additional application.

(ii) The site is in the local gap and is over development of the area.

5.7 Also at an informal meeting of the Parish Council, three members of the Parish Council asked that the following points be made:

(i) This is an inappropriate and intensive over development of the site.

(ii) There is concern about vehicle movement in and out of the site onto a main road (60mph).

(iii) This application if allowed would cause substantial harm to the character and appearance of the area.

(iv) There are already two pending enforcements: removal of trees and development of the site by approximately 1050m2 without planning permission being investigated.

(v) Additional noise and chemical pollutions impact on a rural environment.

(vi) Concern over chemical run off into a major water course.

(vii) This site is bounded by a line of protected trees.

5.8 Curdridge Parish Council raises no objection to the proposal so long as the site would not be extended again in the future. It adds that there should be screening to the west of the site to protect residents of Lake Road.

5.9 Defence Estates Safeguarding Plans raises no objection to the proposal.

5.10 BAA Safeguarding - comments are awaited.

5.11 Development Control Highways raises no objection to the application subject to conditions addressing setting gates back from the road, providing 10m kerb radii at the site entrance, providing visibility splays of 4.5x160m to the west and 2.4x160 metres to the east. Development Control Highways has also asked for justification for the proposed car and cycle parking.

5.12 The comments of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) are awaited.

5.13 Mark Oaten MP objects to the proposal on the grounds that the proposed expansion of the building and storage/operational facilities in what is now a rural area would have a devastating impact and would be more suited to an urban industrial area.

6. Representations

6.1 There have been 16 letters of objection to the proposal. The main reasons for objection may be summarised as follows:

(i) Departure from the Development Plan - The one hectare extension of the yard into agricultural land is a departure from the Plan as it is over intensive development in the countryside and the use would be better suited to an industrial site near an urban centre.

(ii) Visual impact - The existing business is already a blot on the landscape; the proposed stacked cars would be visible through the woodland form the cottages on Lake Road; the proposed building is more suited to a retail park; there would be no guarantee to prevent felling of more protected trees; or cars stacked too high

(iii) Amenity - Noise impact from reversing alarms would further impact on amenity and wildlife; intrusive existing security systems including bright lights; proposed opening hours are too long

(iv) Highway Safety- Traffic would increase onto an already busy road that has seen more traffic since the Whiteley and Knowle Village developments were built. There is poor visibility from the existing access, which is not adequate to cope with vehicles/transporters parking on the main road or in lay-by opposite whilst waiting for space to enter the site.

(v) Pollution/drainage - Potential pollution issue, the nearby River is tidal up to Lake Road and the woods regularly flood in Winter when high tide causing flooding on Lake Road and if polluted could feed into YMCA lake at Fairthorne Manor which children use; small children also play in the wood.

(vi) Other- The visit of some members and officers to an ELV facility in Daventry may have influenced them in favour of the proposal.

7. Site Visit

7.1 In the light of local concerns the Committee undertook a site visit on 13 December 2004 and met representatives of Winchester City Council's Environmental Health Department, Curdridge Parish Council and the Shedfield Society, a local tenant farmer and the agent for the applicants.

7.2 The Chief Planning Adviser described the application and advised that the proposed facilities would treat end of life vehicles, which are regarded as hazardous waste. She described the present activities on the site and pointed out the three nearest properties, and the properties on the Lake Road which, at their nearest, were approximately 80 metres from the western site boundary. Attention was also drawn to the watercourse which flows an average of 30 metres from the edge of the site and the public footpath across the A334 south west of the site together with Broadcroft House forming part of Raglington Farm complex to the south east.

7.3 The Chief Planning Adviser explained that the proposal would entail the use of approximately 1.2 hectares of arable land owned by the applicant adjoining the existing site to the rear to provide additional vehicle storage. She outlined the planting proposed to be undertaken as part of the application which would entail native woodland planting to the east and south west of the site and along the site frontage. It was also proposed to move the western boundary of the proposed hard standing extension to the north away from the canopy of existing protected woodland trees, thereby creating a buffer zone.

7.4 The Chief Planning Adviser pointed out the existing building on the site that would be demolished and indicated where a new building approximately 54 metres long and 8 metres high to the ridge would be constructed and extra car parking provided, and how the access to the site would be widened and moved slightly further west away from Rowash Cottages. Current traffic movements consisted of approximatley120 movements per day by customers (60 in and 60 out), 12 heavy goods vehicle movements and approximately 20 staff movements.

7.5 The representative of Winchester City Council's Environmental Health Department raised no objection in principle to the proposal. She advised of possible concerns about noise and odour from oils which could be dealt with by way of condition should planning permission be granted. She had received no complaints recently and was happy with the concept of moving the crusher away from its current position near to Row Ash Cottages.

7.6 Mr. Stone, the agent for the applicants, felt that the new building would screen the rear of the yard from the road and a reduction in the number of heavy goods vehicles leaving the site would occur.

7.7 The representative of Curdridge Parish Council advised that the Council was not objecting as concerns about screening had been addressed. She did not feel that Lake Road residents would be adversely affected. The Parish Council would, however, prefer that if permission was granted, that the site would not be extended further in the future.

7.8 The representative of the Shedfield Society spoke of his concerns over the intensification of the site and further encroachment into the countryside. The tenant farmer commented that he would discuss his concerns about land drainage with the agent for the applicants.

8 Chief Planning Advisers Comments

8.1 The proposal is, in part, a departure from the Development Plan because the 1.2 hectares of agricultural land proposed for additional vehicular storage is designated as countryside in the Winchester District Local Plan. Nevertheless, every planning application must be considered on its merits. The issue in this case is whether the merits of the application warrant overriding the policy presumption against this type development in the countryside.

8.2 The main issues raised by the proposal are:

Part departure from the Development Plan;

Need for the development;

Visual impact;

Amenity impact;

Traffic impact;

Ecological impact on adjacent woodland; and

Pollution Impact.

Part Departure from the Development Plan

8.3 That part of the proposal, the buildings, crusher and parking areas, within the existing site boundary is in accordance with the Development Plan. However, the 1.2 hectare extension of hard standing proposed to the rear is a departure from the development plan because it proposes vehicular storage on land designated as countryside.

8.4 The Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan is no different from the other relevant development plans in allowing departures from policy in exceptional circumstances. Where application for a departure are made applicants are required to justify the exceptional reasons for overriding planning policy or other objections (paragraphs 161-162). Policy 50 of the Local Plan states that the Waste Planning Authority will grant planning permission for the handling, transfer or dismantling of scrap vehicles or other scrap metal provided it is satisfied that the development will be carried out on land which is permitted or allocated for general industrial use and that the development would be not be likely to cause un acceptable environmental, traffic or other impact.

Need

8.5 The End of Life Vehicles Regulations require all end of life vehicles, including abandoned vehicles, to be processed and de-polluted at an ATF. It is essential that there is an adequate network of ATF's within and surrounding Hampshire to ensure that local residents and district authorities do not have to travel unreasonably long distances to dispose of vehicles. The application site is located in a central position in the south of the county and there are no ATF's in the immediate vicinity. The nearest registered ELV centres to the site are based in Portsmouth, Southampton and Winchester There is a local and regional need to provide End of Live Vehicle facilities to ensure that the EU Directive and National Regulations are met.

Visual Impact

8.6 In 1997 Winchester City Council granted planning permission for a new motor salvage building, and extension to the car sales/workshop building and new access on the site (WO5767/10). The permission has not been implemented. There are currently no modern planning conditions governing all the activities taking place on the site at present.

8.7 The existing site does nothing visually to enhance the environment. The car parking area is separated from the A334 by a chain link fence and there is no planting to soften the visual impact of the parking area or the existing building and associated metal fencing. To the rear of the building cars are stacked four high on the western boundary directly adjacent to the protected trees. A chain link and metal fence separates the northern boundary from the agricultural land beyond. There is no planting to screen the vehicles from the surrounding agricultural landscape.

8.8 The proposal involves the construction of a new building set further back from the road than the existing. The increased height and length would screen any cars stacked behind, the additional space to the front allows for tree planting amongst the car parking areas and along the street frontage using native trees and shrubs. The northern proposed extended boundary would be screened by the planting of small woodland and the new eastern boundary would be screened by a 15-metre belt of native deciduous trees. There would be a planted buffer zone on the western edge of the proposed storage area. The amount of proposed planting is significant and would add to the biodiversity and improve the landscape character of the area.

Amenity Impacts

8.9 The Environmental Health Officer raises no objection to the proposal subject to conditions including hours of working. The hours of working proposed by the applicant reflect existing practice and are longer than those proposed by the Environmental Health Officer. The impact of reversing bleepers, lighting and security alarms can be controlled by planning conditions in the event that planning permission is granted.

Highway Impact

8.10 There are existing highway safety issues with the current site access and layout. Car transporters frequently park on the A334 waiting to gain access to the rear of the site when another vehicle is attempting to leave the site. Car transporters have been witnessed revering into the site involving cross highway movements on the A334. The application addresses the issue of visibility, width of the access and gates and the ability for transporters to turn within the site and exit in a forward direction. It is noted that the highway officer raises no objection to the proposal subject to conditions.

Ecological Impact on Adjacent Woodland

8.11 The importance of the existing woodland is not in doubt. As a result of discussions with the City Council and Chief Planning Adviser, the applicant is undertaking a tree survey of the woodland edge and a topographical survey of the site. Currently none of the woodland in the vicinity is managed and the applicant has agreed to submit a management scheme for the woodland in his ownership as well as some amendments to the landscape scheme. These matters would be covered by condition on any permission granted which could also address a replanting programme if required. The drainage scheme required by the Environment Agency will ensure that no pollutants enter the watercourse or woodland.

Pollution Impact

8.12 The Environment Agency raise no objection subject to a pre-commencement condition, should permission be granted, requiring the submission of and implementation of a foul drainage scheme. There should be no pollution impact from the proposed development because the existing site already has a sealed drainage and reinforced concrete surface approved by the Environment Agency and the northern extension area would have a similar sealed drainage system to prevent run off into the surrounding area.

Conclusions

8.13 The major issue raised by this proposal is whether the need for this development in a rural location warrants a part departure from policy by way of the proposed 1.2 hectare extension into the countryside.

8.14 The need for more ELV facilities in Hampshire is not in question: they are required by European and National legislation. At the recent visit to a similar facility in Daventry arranged to provide officers of Hampshire County Council, Winchester City Council and County and District members with a better understanding of the nature of such developments, it was suggested that ELV centres should ideally be sited every 15 miles. Currently there is no such facility between Portsmouth and Southampton. In terms of this criterion the application site is well placed.

8.15 There is no doubt that the proposed building is large and of modern design to suit the purpose for which it is intended. In that respect the objections about the scale and design of the building raised by Winchester City Council and others are acknowledged. However, an assessment of the style and scale of the proposal and its impact on local amenity should not be taken in isolation and should be assessed in the context of the landscaping proposed around it. What is proposed by way of built form and landscape design is considered to be a significant aesthetic improvement on the development that exists now: an old building, chain link fencing and no frontage planting or indeed planting anywhere within the site.

8.16 There is a concern that the additional vehicle movements as a result of the proposal will be detrimental to the amenities of the adjacent residents. However the Environmental Health Officer raises no objection to the proposal subject to conditions. The proposal also increases the distance between the access and nearest property and amongst other things relocates the crusher further north away from the adjacent houses with intervening additional buffer planting. There are currently no composite planning conditions for the site. Conditions can be attached to any permission granted addressing issues such as hours of working, types of revering alarm, lighting and security alarms.

8.17 There is an understandable concern about a potential increase in traffic, visibility at the existing access and congestion caused by car transporters and vehicles parking on the road. Additional activity at the site may also increase dependency on car use in this rural location. However, Highway Advisor raises no objection to the development subject to conditions and that improvements to the access and visibility splays are proposed. These improvements would obviate the need for vehicles of any size to park on the A334 and therefore would improve highway safety. The applicant's suggestion that the proposal may well decrease traffic with the development of a computerised parts ordering system and the delivery of parts to other satellite locations is unproven. Irrespective of that outcome the highway improvements are considered to be beneficial.

8.18 The concerns that the proposal contains insufficient information to demonstrate that the development can be carried out without causing material harm to the protected trees in the adjacent woodland; landscape character of the area; visual amenity in the surrounding area; and harm to the nearby water course and SINC's is considered unfounded given the landscape and management proposals accepted as necessary by the applicant. The topographical survey of the site will aid monitoring of the existing and proposed development if granted. Concerns about pollution contaminating areas used by the public and especially children are natural given the nature of the development proposed but will be addressed in the drainage scheme which the Environment Agency will have to agree before development can take place.

8.19 Finally, it is acknowledged that the existing business is in a rural location. But it is a well established business employing over 20 staff and delivering a service important to the whole community.

8.20 Having examined all the environmental issues it is considered that potential impacts relating to noise, visual amenity, pollution, lighting, drainage, woodland management, protection of the woodland, access visibility and highway issues have either been addressed by the application already, or can be dealt with by way of condition on any permission that may be granted. Accordingly it is considered that, on balance, the merits of the development outweigh the environmental impacts and that permission should be granted for the development subject to conditions.

Recommendation

That subject to the `departure' procedures being discharged, planning permission in respect of replacement building to provide automotive treatment facility and extension to storage area at Silverlake Garage, Row Ash, Botley Road, Shedfield(W05767/11) be granted for the following reason subject to the following conditions:

Reason for Approval

The proposal whilst including a proposed extension into an area designated as countryside in the Winchester District Local Plan 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. 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.

2. The Waste Planning Authority shall be given 2 weeks prior notice of the intended date of implementation of the development in writing.

Reason: In order that the Waste Planning Authority can fully monitor the development in accordance with this permission.

Working Programme

3. Prior to development commencing a detailed timetable for implementation of the development shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing. The approved scheme shall be carried out as approved.

Reason: To enable the Waste Planning Authority to adequately control the development and to minimise its impact on the amenities of the local area.

Hours of Working

4. All work relating to the implementation of the development hereby approved, including works of demolition or preparation prior to operations, shall only take place between the hours of 0800 and 1800 Monday-Friday and 0800 and 1300 Saturdays and at no time on Sundays or Bank Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenties of nearby properties during the construction period.

5. No machinery shall be operated, no process shall be carried out and no deliveries taken at or dispatched from the site except between the hours of 0730 and 1800 Monday- Friday and 0730 and 1700 on Saturdays and 0930 and 1300 hours on Sundays, (with the exception of the crusher which shall not operate on Sundays). There shall be no activity of any sort taking place on Bank Holidays with the exception of emergency abandoned vehicle deliveries whereby one delivery may enter the site at any time outside of these permitted hours, including Sundays and bank holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties.

6. No materials shall at any time be burnt on site.

Reason: To protect the amenity of occupiers of nearby premises and in the interest of public health.

7. Measures shall be put in place to suppress and minimise dust and odour emissions arising from any process or activity on the site.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the occupiers of nearby premises and in the interest of public health.

Landscape

8. Landscaping shall be implemented in accordance with a revised scheme based on plan number 2114:104 but to include 15 metre wide screen planting to the east of the site and a buffer zone to the west of the extension area, as well as use of only native deciduos trees and shrubs. This scheme shall be submitted within 3 months of the date of this certificate and the woodland and buffer planting to the north, west and east of the extension area implemented within the first planting season following the written approval of the revised scheme or within 6 months of the date of implementation of the development whichever is the sooner. The frontage planting shall be implemented within the first planting season following completion of the car park, fencing , gates and visbility splays.Any trees which within 3 years become diseased, die or fial by some other cause are to be replaced with a tree of similar size and species.

Reason: In the interests of landscape character of the area.

9. Within one month of the date of this permission a topograhical survey of the site and , a tree survey of the protected woodland edge west of the site shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To facilitate monitoring of the construction and operation of the development.

10. Within six months of the date of implemenation of the development a scheme for the long term management of the protected woodland to the west of the site in the applicants ownership to increase the nature conservation value and health of the woodland shall be submitted to the Waste Planning authority for approval in wiritng and therafter implemnted in accordance with that approval.

Reason: To protect and enhance the existing woodland and increase its value for nature conservation.

Protection of Water Environment

11. 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.

12. No development shall commence until a scheme of agricultural drainage to collect water around the perimer of the northern most part of the site, and for alterations to the existing agricultural drainage system currently beneath the proposed northern yard extension, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority and implemented in accordance with that approval prior to the development commencing or as otherwise agreed by the Waste Planning Authority in writing.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment.

13. 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.

14. Prior to development commencing a scheme for the provision and implementaion of foul drainage works shall be submitted to the waste Planning Authority for approval in writing and therafter implenetd within three months of that approval.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment.

Noise

15. Prior to development commencing an Environmental Management Scheme for the control of noiseat 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 interests of local amenity.

16. 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.

17. Prioir to the development commencing details of low tonal reversing alrms to be used on the site are to be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing.

Reason: To protect the amenities of nearby residents.

Lighting and alarm systems

18. Prior to the development commencing 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 and prolonged disturbace from intruder alarms..

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of nearby residents safety.

Highways

19. Prior to development commencing re-alignment of the access and kerbing as illustrated on approved drawing number 2114:101a shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Waste Planning Authority.The access gates to the A334 shall be set back from the road providing 10m kerb radii and visibility splays of 4.5x160 metres to the west and 2.4x160 metres to the east.

Reason: In the interests of local amenities of adjacent property and.highway safety.

20. Measures shall be taken to prevent mud and spoil from vehicles leaving the site during the demolition works being deposited on the public highway. These measures shall be implemented before the development commences and thereafter maintained. No vehicle shall leave the site unless its wheels have been cleaned sufficiently to prevent mud being carried on to the public highway. In the event that any mud or spoil is deposited on the highway, it shall be cleaned off at the end of each working day.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

21. Prior to the de-pollution facility being commissioned the site access surface shall be improved and resurfaced with a non-migratory material for the first 15 metres within the site.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

Materials

22. Samples and/or details of the materials and finishes to be used for the external walls, windows and roofs of the proposed buildings, external surfaces and details of fencing and shrub bed retaining walls, shall be submitted to and approved by the Waste Planning Authority in writing before the development commences. Materials shall incorporate a significant proportion of recycled materials where practically possible and shall be described in the submission.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to secure a satisfactory sustainable development.

23. A scheme of sustainable energy design and practices adopted in the new building and/or for drainage of external areas shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority within 3 months of the date of this certificate to demonstrate how the development contributes towards sustainable design . Concepts to be included may promote grey water recycling, SUD's drainage for the car park, energy efficient lighting and heating systems (e.g.solar panels).

Reason: To promote sustainable design and practicein Hampshire.

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers
The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.
NB the list excludes:
1.	Published works.
2.	Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

TITLE: Silverlake Garage	LOCATION
Replacement building to provide automotive treatment facility and extension to storage area (Application No. W05767/11) (County Council Ref. WR200)

APPENDIX

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY STRUCTURE PLAN 1996-2011 (REVIEW)

(ADOPTED MARCH 2000)

Policy MW1

Planning authorities will, through policies and proposals in local plans and day-to day development control:

(i) seek to ensure an adequate supply of minerals and provision of waste management facilities to meet needs having regard to the need to: maintain the environmental quality and diversity of Hampshire, including the protection of living conditions; safeguard important socio-economic interests; prevent pollution; and protect features of particular environmental or historical importance including those listed in Policy MW3, Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation and historic parks and gardens;

(ii) seek environmental enhancement and public benefits through minerals and waste development;

(iii) conserve and prevent unnecessary sterilisation of mineral resources and encourage efficient use of materials;

(iv) encourage the use of secondary and recycled aggregate materials; and

(v) seek the management of waste in accordance with the following hierarchy;

1. reduction of waste;

2. re-use of waste;

3. recovery of waste (recycling, composting, energy from waste);

and

4. waste disposal;

having regard to the proximity principle and the principle of best practical environmental option.

Policy MW2

Permission will be granted for minerals and waste development provided the mineral/waste planning authority is satisfied that:

(i) any adverse environmental or other impacts that the development would be likely to cause are outweighed by a clearly established need for the development; and

(ii) the proposals, where applicable, include a satisfactory scheme of working and landscaping including details of lorry routeing and, in all cases, include satisfactory measures to ensure that the development would not have any unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact; and

(iii) the proposals, where applicable, provide for the satisfactory and prompt restoration and after-care of the site to a high standard and to a landform compatible with the local landscape and suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use.

HAMPSHIRE, PORTSMOUTH AND SOUTHAMPTON MINERALS AND WASTE LOCAL PLAN (ADOPTED 17 DECEMBER 1998)

Policy 6

Permission will be granted for minerals and waste development provided the Mineral/Waste Planning Authority is satisfied that:

(i) there is a clearly established need for the development (as assessed in relation to the other relevant policies of the Plan) which outweighs any adverse environmental or other impact that the development would be likely to cause; and

(ii) the development would not be likely to give rise to an unacceptable level of adverse environmental, traffic or other impact, pollution risk or danger to public health, particularly in respect of any of the factors specified in Policy 7 and measures would be taken to ensure that any such impacts would, as far as is practicable, be minimised; and

(iii) the proposals provide for the satisfactory working or operation and landscaping of the site and for its satisfactory restoration and landscaping at the cessation of the operations or use or at the end of the life of the facility to a condition suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use which is compatible with adjoining land uses and the planning policies for the area.

Notwithstanding any need there may be for waste disposal, permission will not normally be granted for mineral extraction with restoration by infilling with waste materials unless there is a need for the mineral to be extracted.

Policy 7

The Mineral and Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for minerals and waste development provided they are satisfied that, where appropriate, the proposed development pays due regard to:

(i) the relationship of the proposal site to other properties and land uses (particularly residential and other environmentally sensitive properties) and the likely effects of the proposed development on the locality by reason of noise, dust, smoke, fumes, illumination or any other factor and the need for buffer zones between the development and residential and other properties;

(ii) the likely volume and nature of traffic that would be generated by the proposed development and the suitability of the proposed access to the site and of the road network that would be affected, in terms of highway capacity and safety and environmental impact, and whether any highway improvements required could be carried out satisfactorily without causing unacceptable environmental impact;

(iii) the likely visual impact of the proposed development and the need for additional planting and screening, including planting in advance of the commencement of the development;

(iv) the need to safeguard the character and amenities of individual settlements and to safeguard open gaps between settlements from permanent development which would cause long-term harm to the function of the land;

(v) the likely effects of the proposed development on and the need to protect and safeguard sites of nature conservation, geological, archaeological, historic, architectural and landscape importance and their settings;

(vi) the extent and quality of agricultural land to be taken by the proposed development and the proposals for its subsequent restoration and the likely effects of the proposals on farm structure and management;

(vii) the likely effects of the proposed development on and the need to maintain the distinctive character of the landscape; the likely effects of the proposed development on and the need to safeguard and protect individual species, habitats and landscape features, including woodland, trees and hedgerows; and the likely effects of the proposed development on forestry and woodland management;

(viii) the likely effects of the proposed development on sites used for recreation and public rights of way and the need to protect or secure the satisfactory diversion of public rights of way;

(ix) the likely effects of the proposed development on and the need to safeguard the flow and quality of watercourses, water supplies, floodplains, groundwater, the drainage of the site and adjoining land and the level of the water table in the locality and the likely effects of the proposed development on the immediate setting of any river;

(x) any potential danger to aircraft from birds being attracted to the site;

(xi) the possible amenity implications of any landfill gas that might be generated at the site and of any provisions that might need to be made to deal with it; and

(xii) the likely cumulative impact of the proposed development in combination with any other significant development taking place or permitted to take place in the locality and the need to minimise the impact of mineral extraction and waste disposal operations by securing, where appropriate, the phased release of sites and progression of working and restoration.

Policy 46

The Waste Planning Authorities will normally permit the use of land and the erection of plant and buildings for the recycling, transfer, storage and other treatment or handling of waste (excluding waste processing facilities covered by Policy 45) provided that:

(i) the proposed site is located near to the likely source(s) of waste and/or the market(s) for the recycled or recovered materials; and

(ii) the proposed site is located close to and has adequate access to the Hampshire Lorry Route Network (as shown on the proposals map), so that the development would not be likely to cause unacceptable traffic impact (including the environmental impact of traffic) on the local highway network; and

(iii) the proposed site is located:

(a) within an existing industrial site or on land which is permitted or allocated for industrial development; or

(b) within an area of land in the countryside that has already been disturbed by permanent development (a brownfield site); or

(c) at a waste disposal landfill or landraising site provided that the proposed development is connected with the waste disposal operation and is for a temporary period commensurate with the operational life of the waste disposal facility; and

(iv) the proposed site is located and the proposal includes adequate measures to ensure that no unacceptable impact would be likely to be caused to the occupants or users of houses, other residential buildings, schools, hospitals and other environmentally sensitive buildings and land uses by reason of noise, dust, fumes, smell or other cause; and

(v) the proposed site is located so as to avoid unacceptable impact on landscape, nature conservation and archaeological interests; and

(vi) the proposed site is located and the proposal includes adequate measures to ensure that there would be no significant risk of pollution or danger to public health or safety; and

(vii) the proposed site is located and, if necessary, the proposal includes landscaping measures to ensure that the development would not cause unacceptable visual intrusion.

Policy 48

Any proposals to extend or increase the capacity of the existing special waste treatment and incineration plant at Charleston Road, Fawley will be considered against the national and regional need for special waste treatment and incineration facilities and the environmental and safety implications of the proposed development.

Policy 50

The Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for the handling, transfer or dismantling of scrap vehicles or other scrap metal provided they are satisfied that the development will be carried out on land which is permitted or allocated for general industrial use and that the development would not be likely to cause unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact.

APPENDIX 2

The European Commission End of Life Vehicle Directive

1. The European Commission End of Life Vehicle Directive (ELV) came into force in October 2000, requiring implementation by member states by April 2002. The requirements of the Directive have been transposed into legislation and the ELV Regulations came into force in Great Britain in November 2003. The key objective of this legislation is to prevent waste from ELVs and promote the collection, re-use and recycling of their components to protect the environment.

2. The Directive classifies ELVs as hazardous waste, which is required to be de-polluted prior to dismantling, crushing and/or shredding. This process of de-pollution involves the removal of all hazardous materials, including batteries, waste oils and other fluids, components containing mercury and potentially explosive components such as air bags.

3. The Regulations require that all ELVs have to be treated at authorised treatment facilities (ATFs). All ATFs require a Waste Management Licence and the Environment Agency required licences to be submitted prior to February 2004. Silverlake Garage is currently licenced (AEWML 19851) and has a certificate of Registration under the Control of Pollution Act.

4. The ELV system has been linked with the DVLA system so that vehicles that have been registered as ELVs remain scrap cars. Abandoned vehicles classify as ELVs and are hazardous waste until they have been de-polluted.

5. It is understood that local authorities have a legal obligation to ensure that any ELVs that they decommission or have been found abandoned, are de-polluted according to the law by a licensed registered ATF.

9112app2/JD