Archived decisions

Contact: Neil Chester, ext 6496 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 Planning permission is sought to demolish the existing building and erect a new building, upgrade the existing hardstanding and install a drainage system at the scrap yard, Bishops Lane, Shirrell Heath. Local residents object to the proposal. The recommendation is that planning permission be refused.

2. Site

2.1 The application site comprises an area of 0.523 hectares and is located adjacent to a house and directly off Bishop's Lane, Shirrell Heath (see attached location plan). Bishop's Lane is an unadopted road serving some ten residential properties and the application site. There are open fields to the north, south and east of the site.

3. Proposal

3.1 In 1993 Winchester City Council granted a Certificate of Lawful Use (CLU) to use the site for "buying scrap vehicles and scrap metal and salvaging spare parts of scrapped vehicles and selling salvaged metals and salvaged vehicle spare parts". The use of the site as a scrap yard was therefore established at that time.

3.2 The proposal is to replace the existing dilapidated building on the site and to replace the existing tarmac hardstanding, which is in a poor state of repair, with a concrete base. The proposal is also to install an enclosed drainage system and a separator for surface water. It is necessary to improve this infrastructure to comply with the Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994.

3.3 The proposed building is approximately 90 metres square with a ridge height of 5 metres. The building and the hardstanding are within the area covered by the CLU application. The drainage system however, is within an area of rough ground adjacent to the existing scrap yard.

4. Development Plan

4.1 Hampshire County Structure Plan Review 1996 - 2011 (Adopted March 2000) MW1 refers to the waste management hierarchy; and MW2 refers to environmental impacts.

4.2 Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (Adopted December 1998) Policies 6 and 7 refer to environmental impacts; Policy 50 refers to scrap yard development; and Policy 53 relates to ancillary development.

5. Consultations

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

5.2 Shedfield Parish Council raises objection to the proposal for the following reasons:

(i) the site has not been used since before the issuing of the Certificate of Lawfulness, therefore the property has no use and planning permission is required for the resumption of any activity on the site;

(ii) this will permit a scrap yard into a rural area;

(iii) access to the site is through a very narrow private road which is unsuitable;

(iv) the use of the site would have an adverse effect on the visual amenity of the area and would prejudice quiet enjoyment;

(v) there is a stream at the bottom of the site which must be protected from chemical contamination;

(vi) there are insufficient details provided on the use of the site to clearly assess the environment impacts of the proposal such as noise, vehicle movements, etc; and

(vii) the operational site is only 0.2 hectares whilst the overall site is 0.5 hectares.

5.3 The Environmental Health Officer (Winchester City Council) raises concerns over the potential for noise disturbance from vehicle movements and breaking of scrap vehicles. The recommendation is that if permission is granted, a condition restricting the hours of operation be imposed to mitigate against potential impacts.

5.4 Winchester City Council objects to the proposal on the grounds that the proposal is contrary to the Development Plan as it is considered likely to result in a more intensive commercial use which would be out of keeping with its surroundings because of its scale of operation.

5.5 The Environment Agency raises no objections subject to conditions.

5.6 The Highways Adviser notes that there is a CLU for this site but, nevertheless raises concerns over the suitability of Bishops Lane for use by HGVs, including whether there is adequate space for passing along the Lane.

6. Representations

6.1 There have been 23 letters of objection to the proposal. The reasons for objection are as follows:

(i) the use of the site as a scrap yard was abandoned some years ago;

(ii) the site is accessed along an unmade road which is unsuitable for large vehicles;

(iii) there is no need for a scrap yard in this area;

(iv) the environment around Bishop's Lane is of wildlife value;

(v) there is risk of pollution from the scrap yard, which raises health and safety issues;

(vi) the proposal is within a semi-rural area and adjacent to the countryside; and

(vii) the use of the scrap yard will result in increased noise to the detriment of local residents.

7. Chief Planning Advisers Comments

7.1 A proposal to improve the infrastructure at an established scrap yard would accord with the principle of Policy 53 of the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (adopted 1998). However, according to local residents, the use has been abandoned.

7.2 The principal guidance on the issue of abandonment is provided by case law. Consideration of the following criteria must be made: (i) the physical condition of the [land]; (ii) the period of non-use; (iii) whether there had been any other use; and (iv) evidence regarding the owner's intentions. However, the courts have also determined that an appropriate test of abandonment would be the view taken by a `reasonable man' with knowledge of all of the relevant circumstances. Moreover, the intention of the owner to resume a use is not decisive.

7.3 There is considerable evidence in support of the case for abandonment. Local residents claim that the `scrap yard' has not been used for a period in excess of 5 years and thus it has been abandoned. Whilst the applicant refutes this claim, it is supported by the appearance of the site, which is overgrown and dilapidated.

7.4 Under the Waste Management Licensing Regulations (WML) 1994 the operator of a scrap yard is required to register an exemption under those Regulations with the Environment Agency (EA). It is an offence to carry on an exempt activity without registration. The EA has confirmed that it has no record of issuing an exemption certificate for a scrap yard at Bishops Lane, Shirrell Heath. Further, in the event that an activity permanently ceases, any exemption would be removed from the register. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that either the use has not operated since 1995, when the WML Regulations were applied to scrap metal activities, or the use has been carried out illegally.

7.5 Prior to 2002 a scrap metal yard required a licence under the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 1964, issued by the relevant local authority to operate as a scrap dealer. It is understood from the Environmental Health Officer that the site in Bishops Lane held such a licence. However, when the licensing regime changed in 2002, scrap yards were required to apply for a licence under the Motor Salvage Operators Regulations 2002. Winchester District Council invited the owner of the Shirrell Heath site to register under the revised regulations, however no application was received. This also suggests the use of the site as a scrap yard has ceased.

7.6 It is noted that a recent set of photographs of the site indicate that `scrap' material, including a bus, car and a pile of exhausts, has been removed from the site suggesting that some activity has taken place. However on consideration of the evidence, this minor activity does not constitute implementation of the use detailed in the CLU.

7.7 The current proposal has been promoted on the basis of the CLU granted in 1993. It is considered, however, that the use has been abandoned. Policy 53 states that permission will normally be granted for ancillary development within or adjacent to an existing facility. Therefore, the current proposal does not accord with Policy 53.

7.8 The District Council and local residents are also concerned that the proposal will result in an intensification of the use permitted by the CLU in 1993. This concern is noted. It is likely that increasing and improving the infrastructure at the site will enable a greater throughput of waste material. In turn, this will generate increased traffic movements and increased noise. The Environmental Health Officer (EHO) raises concern over the impact of increased noise on local amenity. Bishops Lane is a narrow and unadopted road, which could not sustain significant numbers of lorry movements.

7.9 Local residents are also concerned that the proposal will impact upon the ecological value of the area. However, as both the building and hardstanding are replacements of existing it is unlikely that they will adversely impact on any wildlife value in the area. Furthermore, there are no statutory designations in the vicinity of the proposal.

7.10 There is local concern that the proposal will result in pollution impacts. The Environment Agency has no objection to the proposal subject to conditions. Furthermore, the proposal is to improve the on-site drainage to address the issue of pollution.

7.11 On balance, it is considered that the use of the site as a scrap yard has been abandoned and therefore the proposal is contrary to Policy 53 of the Minerals and Waste Local Plan. In addition, the proposal would facilitate an unacceptable intensification of the use permitted by CLU in 1993. Therefore the recommendation is that planning permission be refused.

Recommendation

That planning permission in respect of demolition of existing building and erection of new building, upgrade existing hardstanding and installation of drainage system at The Scrap Yard, Bishops Lane, Shirrell Heath (04/03023/HCS) be refused permission for the following reasons:

Reasons for Refusal

1. It is considered that the use of the site as a scrap yard has been abandoned and therefore the proposal is contrary to Policy 53 of the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan as it is not located within the boundary of or adjacent to a waste facility; and

2. It is considered that the proposal would facilitate an intensification of use, which would be unacceptable in terms of highway safety and convenience, and the impact on local amenity.

9160/NC