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

1. Summary

1.1 Planning permission is sought for a recycling facility for processing of inert construction and demolition material at Rookery Farm Landfill Site, Botley Road, Swanwick. There is considerable local objection to the proposal. The matter was deferred from the 20 July 2005 Regulatory Committee meeting to clarify issues relating to noise, dust, vibration and highways impacts. It is recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.

2. Introduction

2.1 On 20 July 2005 the Regulatory Committee deferred making a decision on the proposal for a recycling facility for processing of inert construction and demolition material at Rookery Farm Landfill Site, Botley Road, Swanwick pending clarification on a number of issues:

(i) Noise impact;

(ii) Traffic movements;

(iii) Dust; and

(iv) Vibration.

2.2 In addition, Members asked for a full response to the queries raised by Mr Hall in his deputation to the Regulatory Committee in July 2005 and details of the County Council's reasons for refusal of the original application for infilling at Rookery Farm.

2.3 The original committee report is attached as Appendix 1. A response to the queries raised by Mr Hall at the July Regulatory Committee is attached as Appendix 2. A summary of the County Council's reasons for refusal of the original application for infilling at Rookery Farm is attached as Appendix 3.

3. Noise Impact

3.1 There is concern from local residents that the noise tests have not adequately assessed the implications of the proposal. Specifically, there is concern the noise surveys have not taken sufficient account of the likely increases in activity associated with the proposed development. The monitoring of lorry movements over recent years demonstrates a significant increase in activity at the site. The proposal is considered unlikely to further increase activity over recent levels. It is therefore considered that the noise assessments provide a reasonable basis on which to make a judgement about the likely noise impact of the proposal.

3.2 There is an additional concern that noise surveys have not assessed the implications of all the proposed plant. The ISVR noise survey was conducted with all the principal plant on site, including the crusher. Since the Regulatory Committee meeting on 20 July the operators have decided that the use of the trommell has become unnecessary which will reduce the noise levels recorded by ISVR.

3.3 It is considered that the ISVR noise report provides an accurate and independent assessment of the impact that can be reasonably expected if planning permission was granted. The report concludes that, although the noise from plant operations was audible at the monitoring positions "the objective effect of the plant noise appears marginal". The proposals are unlikely to exceed accepted noise standards for sites of this type and are not louder than the M27, which is the dominant source of background noise. The Environmental Health Officer (EHO) is satisfied with the conclusions of the ISVR noise report.

3.4 At the Regulatory Committee meeting on 20 July Members sought guidance on the likely impact that the `type' or `quality' of the noise would have on local residents. In order to address this issue the advice of the EHO was sought, which was that since the meeting of 20 July 2005 no complaints had been received about the operation of the site. The EHO has undertaken monitoring visits that indicate no noise nuisance from the operations that were being undertaken at the site at that time. To date the EHO has not served a noise abatement notice on the site operator, although the granting of planning permission would not preclude him from serving such a notice in the future.

3.5 The EHO has suggested that a temporary consent, for five years, would enable further monitoring of the detailed impacts. On balance however, it is considered that the acceptability of the proposal in noise quality terms is a subjective judgement and it is considered that a temporary consent or a refusal on these grounds could not be sustained.

3.6 A noise monitoring scheme has been submitted, which proposes quarterly monitoring with survey results to be submitted to the County Council. The principle of the scheme has been agreed although the comments of ISVR and the EHO are awaited on the location of monitoring points.

4. Traffic Movements

4.1 Lorry movements to the site have increased in recent years in parallel with an increase in activity at the site. It is unlikely that the current proposal will result in a further increase in movements, particularly as the condition on the previous permission restricting the number of lorry movements to 240 will be applied to any new permission.

4.2 There is local concern that the figures concerning lorry movements do not include those movements associated with the importation of compost and sand for blending purposes. The 240 movement limit relates to all lorry movements to and from the site. The Highways Adviser recommends that, subject to a condition to restrict the number of movements to 240, the proposal is acceptable in highway terms.

4.3 There is no evidence to suggest that the Inspector's recommendation or the Secretary of State's decision was predicated on the creation of a Park Gate bypass. Indeed, the Inspector's report states that "I do not consider that the traffic generated by the proposal would seriously detract from the amenity of Park Gate".

5. Dust

5.1 A dust monitoring and management scheme has been submitted to mitigate any potential dust impact. This scheme includes the installation of an automated sprinkler system to damp the haul road and stockpiled materials during dry periods and particularly when the wind is blowing from the south-west towards Swanwick Lane. The comments of the EHO are awaited on the acceptability of the scheme.

5.2 It is the intention of the operator to maintain the planting to the north of the site to reduce the impact of any airborne dust particles.

6. Vibration

6.1 There is local concern that vibrations resulting from noise will damage the foundations of listed buildings at the adjacent Rookery Farm and on Swanwick Lane. The risk of damage to listed buildings due to vibration is no more likely than the risk to any other buildings. However ISVR Consultants, also expert in vibration issues, consider it is unusual for ground vibration to cause damage to any buildings in the UK. Therefore, the impact of the proposal is not considered significant in this respect.

7. Conclusion

7.1 On balance it is considered that the environmental impacts of the proposal are within acceptable limits in planning terms. Furthermore, the impacts of the proposal must be balanced with the environmental benefits derived from reducing mineral extraction elsewhere by recycling secondary aggregates and a reduction in waste being landfilled. It is recommended, therefore, that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.

Recommendation

That planning permission in respect of the recycling facility for processing of inert construction and demolition material at Rookery Farm Landfill Site, Botley Road, Swanwick (P/04/1522/MW) be granted for the following reason, subject to the following conditions.

Reason for Approval

It is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan (summary attached) and the impact on the amenity of local residents would be acceptable. In addition, the proposal would be acceptable in terms of highway safety and convenience.

Conditions

Timescale

(1) The recycling operations hereby permitted shall cease on or before 31 December 2019 or by the completion of the Rookery Farm landfill site, whichever is the sooner.

Reason: To minimise the duration of disturbance from the recycling operations.

Hours of Working

(2) Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority no heavy goods vehicles shall enter or leave the site and no plant or machinery shall be operated except between the following hours: 0730-1730 Monday to Friday and 0730-1230 Saturday. There shall be no working on Sunday or recognised public holidays.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Noise, Dust and Odour

(3) Noise levels during operations shall not exceed 55dB(A) LAeq (1 hour) (freefield) at the locations identified on plan entitled `Noise Monitoring Plan'. The operator shall take such measures as may be necessary to ensure that the approved levels are not exceeded.

Reason: To prevent noise disturbance to the residents of the nearest houses.

(4) A noise monitoring scheme shall be submitted within two weeks of the date of the permission. The scheme shall be implemented in full for the duration of the operations, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To prevent noise disturbance to the residents of the nearest houses.

(5) A dust suppression scheme shall be submitted within two weeks of the date of this permission and shall be implemented in full for the duration of the operations, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

(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) Details of a noise attenuation bund to be erected on the northern boundary of the application site shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority within one month of the date of this permission. The bund shall be erected within three months of the date of approval in writing from the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Highways

(8) The total number of lorry movements in connection with the landfill and recycling at Rookery Farm shall not exceed 240 per day (120 in and 120 out). A record of all lorries entering and leaving the site shall be kept at the site office and made available to the Waste Planning Authority within seven days of a written request.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the amenity of the local area.

(9) All lorries leaving the site shall use the wheel cleaning facilities indicated on Drawing No. RB-EB/ROO/PRO/05. No lorry shall leave the site unless its wheels have been cleaned sufficiently to prevent mud being carried onto the highway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

(10) All loaded vehicles entering or leaving the site shall be sheeted and/or netted to prevent material escaping from the vehicles and being deposited on the highway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity.

Lighting

(11) There shall be no lighting on site other than 6 No. 500 watt halogen lights at a maximum height of six metres. All lighting must face into the site.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Restoration

(12) A programme of restoration for the whole site (Application No. FBC 7803/4 landfill and recycling area), including phases 2, 3 and 4 of the landfill site, shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority by 31 January 2006 and thereafter implemented as approved. The restoration programme shall include, amongst other measures, the cessation of recycling by 31 December 2019 and the completion of tipping by 31 December 2024, and final restoration of the site within one year of the latter date.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory restoration of the site.

Aftercare

(13) An aftercare scheme requiring that such steps as may be necessary to bring each phase of the land restored (including phases 2, 3 and 4 of landfill - Application No. FBC 7803/4) to the required standard for use for agriculture shall be submitted for the approval of the Waste Planning Authority not later than two years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory restoration of the site.

Miscellaneous

(14) No stockpiles shall exceed five metres in height. A line shall be painted on the lighting column, or other permanent structure agreed in writing with the Waste Planning Authority, to clearly indicate five metres in height.

Reason: To protect the local visual amenity.

(15) Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority, no plant or machinery shall be brought onto the site other than a mobile crushing unit, a screening unit, a hydraulic excavator, a wheeled loading shovel, washing plant and bulldozer.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

649/NC

APPENDIX 1

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

1. Summary

1.1 Planning permission is sought for a recycling facility for processing of inert construction and demolition material at Rookery Farm Landfill Site, Botley Road, Swanwick. There is considerable local objection to the proposal. The principal issues relate to noise, dust and highways impacts. It is recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.

2. Site

2.1 The application site is of some 2.56 hectares and is located within the existing landfill site at Rookery Farm, Botley Road, near Swanwick. The M27 lies to the south of the landfill site and there are residential properties to the north and east. The access to the application site from Botley Road is shared with the landfill site and there are houses opposite the site entrance.

2.2 The recycling of construction and demolition waste has taken place at the site since 1995 (Planning Permission P/94/0698/ML). This permission expired in December 2004.

3. Proposal

3.1 The proposal is for a recycling facility for processing of inert construction and demolition material at Rookery Farm Landfill Site. A recent survey of the landfill void gives an estimated life for inert waste disposal in excess of 15 years. A temporary permission for 15 years is sought to enable the residue from the recycling operation to be disposed of in Phases 2 and 3 of the approved landfill, whilst restricting the importation of other waste to conserve the void. After 15 years it is proposed to remove the recycling plant and complete the landfill with imported waste material.

3.2 It is proposed to import a maximum of 200,000 tonnes of construction and demolition waste per annum, with approximately 85% being recycled. The imported material will be sorted, crushed, washed and graded to produce secondary aggregates that will be suitable for re-use in construction projects. It is proposed to import materials such as clay, sand, gravel, limestone, crushed stone, chalk, road planings, construction stone and stone from the demolition of buildings, structures or road excavation. The recycled aggregate will be stored in existing bays prior to sale.

3.3 It is difficult to produce a sand product through recycling. Accordingly, to meet the demand for a concrete aggregate it is proposed to import up to 5,000 tonnes of sand per annum, which will be blended with recycled aggregate. Soils will be recycled and blended with imported compost to produce soils for sale off-site and use in the restoration of the adjacent landfill. It is proposed to import up to 5,000 tonnes of compost per annum for this purpose.

3.4 It is proposed to locate a mobile crusher, a trommel and screening unit, and a hydraulic excavator to feed the crusher and screeners. It is also proposed to use a self-contained washing plant to clean the recycled aggregate.

3.5 The proposal will generate an average of 94 lorry movements per day (47 in and 47 out) at commencement, rising to an average of 124 movements (62 in and 62 out). The combined lorry movements generated by the landfill and the current proposal will not exceed 240 (120 in and 120 out) movements per day, which is the current restriction imposed on the landfill site. The restriction of 240 lorry movements is a maximum for all activity at the site.

3.6 The proposed hours of operation accord with those of the landfill site and are as follows:

Monday to Friday: 0730 hours - 1730 hours

Saturday: 0730 hours - 1230 hours.

3.7 It is not proposed to operate on Sunday or public holidays.

3.8 It is proposed to create a three metre high screening bund on the western elevation and to retain the existing bund to the east. The landfill site will provide further screening.

3.9 It is also proposed to replace the existing two-storey office and welfare facility building with a modern unit. A two-storey building is proposed to enable adequate checks of waste materials being imported in lorries prior to tipping.

4. Development Plan

4.1 Hampshire County Structure Plan Review 1996-2011 (Adopted March 2000) MW1 refers to the waste management hierarchy; MW2 refers to environmental impacts; MW6 refers to the production of secondary and recycled aggregates.

4.2 Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (Adopted December 1998) Policies 6 and 7 refer to environmental impacts; Policy 25 refers to the use of land and the erection of plant and buildings for the production or supply of secondary or substitute aggregate materials; and Policy 46 refers to waste processing and recycling.

5. Consultations

5.1 The Environmental Health Officer (EHO) (Fareham Borough Council) has previously raised concerns about the impacts of the proposal on local amenity in terms of increased noise and dust. The EHO is satisfied with the findings of the ISVR noise survey (see paragraph 5.6 below). However, he notes that the activities on the site continue to result in noise complaints.

5.2 Fareham Borough Council raises objection on the following grounds:

(i) that the proposal will have an adverse impact upon highway safety in light of the routeing of vehicles through Park Gate. The planning permission (No. P/94/0698/MW) restricts the number of lorry movements to 240 per day. However, circumstances on the local highway network have since changed (eg permission has been granted for a considerable number of housing units in the area and the western and eastern bypasses around Park Gate have not been constructed);

(ii) the proposal has the potential to give rise to adverse noise and dust impacts upon dwellings to the east of the site (notably at Rookery Farm);

(iii) there is concern over the proposed importation of sand to the site and the increase in vehicle movements that this would generate;

(iv) if permission is granted, careful consideration should be given to the placement of any aggregates and materials in relation to neighbouring properties; and

(v) if permission is granted, request that the facility be covered in order to mitigate against potential noise and dust nuisance.

5.3 The Environment Agency raises no objections to the proposal.

5.4 The Highways Adviser raises no objections to the proposal subject to a restriction of 240 lorry movements (120 in and 120 out) per day in total - inclusive of the movements generated by both the landfill and recycling operations.

5.5 The local Member, Councillor Woodward, raises objection on the grounds that the proposal will give rise to unacceptable noise, dust and highway impacts. Councillor Woodward supports the reasons for objection provided by Fareham Borough Council.

5.6 The independent noise assessment commissioned by the County Council from ISVR acoustic consultants concluded that the previous studies were carried out in a "professional manner" and that although the noise from the plant operations was audible at the monitoring positions "the objective effect of the plant noise appears marginal". Indeed, the proposals are unlikely to exceed acceptable noise standards. However, the noise impact on properties on Swanwick Lane could be further reduced by creating a bund to the north of the plant site.

6. Representations

6.1 To date 12 letters of representation from local residents and a petition with 53 names on it have been received. The main reasons for objection relate to an increase in noise, dust, traffic and an adverse impact on the local landscape. In addition, it is considered by local residents that the site is an important habitat with scarce species and that the proposal will create vibrations which will damage listed buildings. A petition with 23 names on it in support of the application has been received from users of the site.

7. Background

7.1 The planning application was originally submitted on 29 September 2004. On 24 November 2004 the application was deferred from the meeting of the Regulatory Committee to allow adequate consideration of further noise information. On 13 December 2004 there was a Regulatory Committee Inspection of the application site.

7.2 In light of the concerns of local residents, Fareham Borough Council and the EHO regarding noise, the County Council commissioned an independent noise assessment from ISVR acoustic consultants. This was completed in May 2005 and a copy has been placed on the planning register at Fareham Borough Council.

8. Report of Member Site Inspection

8.1 In light of local concerns Members undertook a site inspection on 4 July 2005 and met representatives from Fareham Borough Council, local residents and the applicants.

8.2 The Chief Planning Adviser explained that at a previous inspection of Rookery Farm on 29 September 2004 the main issues raised had been traffic routing and noise pollution. Since that time determination of the application had been deferred while an independent noise assessment was undertaken. This was completed in May 2005. The Chief Planning Adviser went on to give a brief description of the application and reported that it had not been altered since the previous site visit.

8.3 Representatives of Fareham Borough Council highlighted their main concerns as increased noise and dust from the recycling facility and the alleged adverse impact of additional traffic movements on the local highway network. This was seen as a particular problem following confirmation that the Park Gate bypass would not be constructed and increased housing in the area.

8.4 Councillor Ellerton of Fareham Borough Council concurred that, due to the increased housing, there was considerable pressure on the local road network which would only be heightened by the additional traffic from the recycling facility.

8.5 Local resident, Mr Hall, identified a number of buildings in the locality and reported that many of them were listed and had no solid foundations, which made them particularly vulnerable to vibrations caused both by heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) accessing the site and from the landfill/recycling facility itself. Mr Hall also commented on the suitability of Park Gate, a single lane road, to accommodate increased traffic volumes.

8.6 Local resident, Mrs Foreman, informed those present of the wildlife, including badgers, which inhabited the area to the north of the existing landfill site. This area had existing permission for landfill. Mrs Foreman also commented on the visual impact from Swanwick Lane of the proposal.

8.7 Local resident, Mr Berry, suggested that contrary to the independent noise report, he believed that the increase in activity at the site, which would result from the granting of the permissions, would inevitably lead to further noise issues for local residents.

8.8 Concerns were raised with regard to additional vehicle movements, however the applicant confirmed that the application only allowed for 240 vehicle movements per day which was not an increase on the existing permission. Local residents requested information on how many HGV movements there currently were and how many were expected should the permission be granted. The Chief Planning Officer confirmed that this information would be contained in the report received by the Committee, which would be circulated before the meeting.

9. Chief Planning Adviser's Comments

9.1 The Hampshire County Structure Plan policies MW1 and MW6 and Policy 25 of the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan promote the use of substitute aggregate materials. In summary, they state that permission will normally be granted for facilities to supply these materials within Hampshire provided that the location is suitable for the proposed development (referring to the locational criteria within Policy 46 of the Minerals and Waste Local Plan); and the development would not be likely to cause unacceptable impacts. In principle the proposal accords with these policies.

9.2 The proposal is for the recycling of construction and demolition waste and the production of secondary aggregates and recycled soils. Policy 46(iii) of the Minerals and Waste Local Plan states that the Waste Planning Authority will normally permit the use of land for the recycling of waste provided that the proposed site is located at a waste disposal facility, the development is connected with the waste disposal operation, and is for a temporary period commensurate with the operational life of that facility. The proposal therefore accords with the locational criteria within Policy 46.

9.3 It is therefore the detailed impacts of the proposal that are crucial to the decision. The key environmental issues relate to noise, dust and traffic movements.

9.4 A noise assessment has been submitted in support of the proposal. The report concludes that the proposed recycling operations will have no significant impact on the noise levels generated by the existing landfill site because the motorway is the most prominent noise source in the area. Moreover, noise related to the landfill and the recycling activities is considered to be at low risk of causing a statutory nuisance to local residents.

9.5 The validity of these findings has been questioned by local residents, Fareham Borough Council and the EHO. In response to these concerns, a number of noise mitigation measures were implemented, including an earth bund between the haul road and Rookery Farm properties and alterations to the plant. A further noise report was submitted by the applicant to take account of these measures. The report concludes that noise levels are within acceptable standards. However, the EHO and local residents continued to question the validity and the reliability of the findings.

9.6 The County Council appointed an independent noise consultant to carry out a further noise assessment in response to these concerns. This assessment concludes that the previous studies were carried out in a "professional manner" and that although the noise from the plant operations was audible at the monitoring positions "the objective effect of the plant noise appears marginal". Moreover, the proposals are unlikely to exceed accepted noise standards.

9.7 These conclusions are disputed by local residents who argue that the site is currently operating at a reduced capacity and thus the impacts of the proposal are not being accurately assessed. It is noted that the level of site activity is linked to the construction and demolition industry in the area and therefore fluctuates. However, it is considered that any increase in site activity will have a minimal effect on noise provided that the plant site is not relocated closer to residential properties. Furthermore, the intensity of any activities at the site can be satisfactorily controlled through planning conditions.

9.8 It is noted that the noise from the plant is distinguishable from the dominant background noise level (ie the M27 motorway) and may be perceived as being greater. However, the evidence is that the proposal will not give rise to an unacceptable noise impact that could be sustained as a reason to refuse planning permission.

9.9 There is local concern regarding the impacts of dust created by the proposal. This is largely an operational issue that can be satisfactorily addressed by conditions. It is proposed to damp down the haul road, the operational area and the stockpiles and to install dust suppression on the soil screener and crushing plant.

9.10 The proposal is located within an existing landfill site and on the same site as the existing recycling facility, permission for which expired in December 2004. Therefore the site is not considered to be of significant ecological value. The visual impact of the proposal is also considered marginal due to its location within the landfill site and the proposed erection of screening bunds.

9.11 Local residents and Fareham Borough Council are concerned that the proposal will result in an increase in lorry movements to the detriment of highway safety and amenity. The previous planning permission for recycling (Planning Permission P/94/0698/ML) restricted lorry movements to 240 per day (inclusive of the landfill operation). Whilst it is noted that the number of lorry movements associated with the site fluctuates, in general the number of lorries has increased in recent years (although the site rarely reached the 240 movement limit). Since the original recycling permission was granted, Fareham Borough Council has permitted new development within the Park Gate and Swanwick area. There is local concern that there is a cumulative impact on the highway that will be exacerbated by the proposal. However, after examination of all the issues, the Highways Adviser raises no objection to the proposal, subject to a condition to restrict lorry movements to a maximum of 240 per day to include all lorry movements to and from both the landfill site and the recycling proposal together.

9.12 There is local concern that vibrations resulting from noise will damage the foundations of listed buildings at the adjacent Rookery Farm. This concern is noted. However, the impact of the proposal is not considered significant in this respect.

9.13 In determining the weight to be attached to the environmental impacts of the proposal, it is important to make a comparison between the likely impacts if permission is approved and those which can be anticipated if permission is refused. If permission was refused then the operator could continue to import waste to the landfill (Planning Permission No. FBC 7803/4) which has approximately one million cubic metres of capacity left with limited planning condition.

9.14 It should also be noted that this proposal provides an opportunity to impose modern planning conditions on the old landfill permission, including restoration and aftercare programmes which currently are lacking.

9.15 On balance it is considered that the environmental impacts of the proposal are within acceptable limits. Furthermore, the impacts of the proposal must be balanced with the environmental benefits derived from reducing mineral extraction elsewhere by recycling secondary aggregates and a reduction in waste being landfilled. It is recommended, therefore, that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.

Recommendation

That planning permission in respect of the recycling facility for processing of inert construction and demolition material at Rookery Farm Landfill Site, Botley Road, Swanwick (P/04/1522/MW) be granted permission for the following reason subject to the following conditions.

Reason for Approval

It is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan (summary attached) and the impact on the amenity of local residents would be acceptable. In addition, the proposal would be acceptable in terms of highway safety and convenience.

Conditions

Timescale

(1) The recycling operations hereby permitted shall cease on or before 31 December 2019 or by the completion of the Rookery Farm landfill site, whichever is the sooner.

Reason: To minimise the duration of disturbance from the recycling operations.

Hours of Working

(2) Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority no heavy goods vehicles shall enter or leave the site and no plant or machinery shall be operated except between the following hours: 0730-1730 Monday to Friday and 0730-1230 Saturday. There shall be no working on Sunday or recognised public holidays.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Noise, Dust and Odour

(3) Noise during operations shall not exceed 55dB(A) LAeq (1 hour) (freefield) when measured at the monitoring points identified on plan entitled `Noise Monitoring Plan'. The operators shall take such measures as may be necessary to ensure that the approved levels are not exceeded.

Reason: To prevent noise disturbance to the residents of the nearest houses.

(4) A scheme for the monitoring of noise levels shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority within one month of the granting of this permission and shall include provision for quarterly monitoring. The scheme shall be implemented within one month of approval.

Reason: To prevent noise disturbance to the residents of the nearest houses.

(5) A scheme for the suppression of dust shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority within one month of the date of this permission. The scheme shall be implemented on approval.

Reason: In the interests of local amenities.

(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) Details of a noise attenuation bund to be erected on the northern boundary of the application site shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority within one month of the date of this permission. The bund shall be erected within three months of approval in writing from the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Highways

(8) The total number of lorry movements in connection with the landfill and recycling at Rookery Farm shall not exceed 240 per day. A record of all lorries using the site shall be kept at the site office and made available to the Waste Planning Authority within seven days of a written request.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the amenity of the local area.

(9) All lorries leaving the site shall use the wheel cleaning facilities indicated on Drg. No. RB-EB/ROO/PRO/05. No lorry shall leave the site unless its wheels have been cleaned sufficiently to prevent mud being carried onto the highway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

(10) All loaded vehicles leaving the site shall be sheeted and/or netted to prevent material escaping from the vehicles and being deposited on the highway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity.

Lighting

(11) There shall be no lighting on site other than 6 No. 500 watt halogen lights at a maximum height of six metres. All lighting must face into the site.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Restoration

(12) A programme of restoration for the whole site (Application No. FBC 7803/4 landfill and recycling area), including phases 2, 3 and 4 of the landfill site, shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority by 31 January 2006 and thereafter implemented as approved. The restoration programme shall include, amongst other measures, the cessation of recycling by 31 December 2019 and the completion of tipping by 31 December 2024, and final restoration of the site within one year of the latter date.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory restoration of the site.

Aftercare

(13) An aftercare scheme requiring that such steps as may be necessary to bring each phase of the land restored (including phases 2, 3 and 4 of landfill - Application No. FBC 7803/4) to the required standard for use for agriculture shall be submitted for the approval of the Waste Planning Authority not later than two years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory restoration of the site.

Miscellaneous

(14) No stockpiles shall exceed five metres in height. A line shall be painted on the lighting column, or other permanent structure agreed in writing with the Waste Planning Authority, to clearly indicate five metres in height.

Reason: To protect the local visual amenity.

(15) Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Waste Planning Authority, no plant or machinery shall be brought onto the site other than a mobile crushing unit, a trommel, a screening unit, a hydraulic excavator, a wheeled loading shovel, washing plant and dozer.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

401/NC

Annexe to Reasons for Conditions

(as required by Article 22 of the Town and Country Planning

(General Procedure) Order 1995 - as amended)

__________________________________________________________________

Hampshire County Structure Plan (Review) 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. reuse 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 aftercare of the site to a high standard and to a landform compatible with the local landscape and suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use.

Policy MW6

Planning authorities will seek a reduction in the quantity of waste requiring treatment or disposal, including a significant reduction in the quantity of non-inert waste disposed by landfilling.

The waste planning authorities will seek, through policies and proposals in the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan and day-to-day development control, the provision of sufficient facilities to meet the need for the management of all unavoidable waste (excluding special waste) arising in Hampshire.

Having regard to Policy MW1(v), permission will be granted for:

(i) facilities for the re-use and recycling of waste, including the production of secondary and recycled aggregate materials;

(ii) facilities for composting, anaerobic digestion, incineration with energy recovery and other methods of resource recovery waste processing sufficient only to cater for unavoidable non-inert waste which is not re-used or recycled;

(iii) landfill capacity sufficient only for the disposal of unavoidable waste which is not re-used, recycled or processed; and

(iv) waste transfer stations to serve areas of local waste processing and disposal facility shortage;

provided that the development would not have unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact.

Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (Adopted) 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 watertable 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 25

Secondary aggregates

The Mineral Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for the use of land and the erection of plant and buildings for the production or supply of secondary or substitute aggregate materials (including aggregates produced from waste materials) provided they are satisfied that:

(i) the location is suitable for the development proposed; and

(ii) the development would not be likely to cause unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact.

In assessing the suitability of proposed sites for the production or supply of secondary or substitute aggregate materials the Mineral Planning Authority will have particular regard to the criteria for the location of waste recycling facilities in Policy 46.

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.

APPENDIX 2

Comments of the Chief Planning Adviser on the queries raised during deputations at the Regulatory Committee on 20 July 2005

APPENDIX 3

Notes on Rookery Farm Landfill Appeal

On 10 March 1986 the Roads and Development Sub-Committee of the County Council refused planning permission for the infilling of land with imported material and restoration to agricultural use at Rookery Farm, Swanwick (App. No. 7803/4) for the following reasons:

(i) the proposal would adversely affect the landscape; and

(ii) the proposal would be inappropriate in relation to surrounding views, particularly those from the M27, housing to the south of the motorway and the A3051.

(iii) the proposal would result in the loss of grade 2 and 3a agricultural land.

This refusal was subsequently appealed. In addition to the reasons for refusal above, local residents raised the issue of lorry movements on the local highway network. The Secretary of State considered that the proposed landform was acceptable and that the landscape issues could be satisfactorily mitigated. The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (now Defra) withdrew their objection to the loss of agricultural land. The Secretary of State did not consider the local highway issues to be as significant as to withhold planning permission.

On 12 March 1987 the Secretary of State resolved to allow the appeal and granted planning permission subject to the following conditions:

(i) No filling shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority details of the formation of the motorway bund, together with details of the material to be used, the batter of the southern slope and the finished levels of fill.

(ii) No filling shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority a scheme for landscaping the whole site, which shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection during the course of the filling operations.

(iii) All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of the infilling; and trees or plants which within 5 years from the completion of the infilling die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the local planning authority gives written consent to any variation.

(iv) The land shall be filled in three phases as indicated on Sheet 6 accompanying the application and each phase restored and returned to agricultural use on completion in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

(v) No infilling shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority details of the storage of sub and top soil stripped from the site.

(vi) Means of vehicular access to the site shall be from the existing access only, some 60m to the north of the motorway bridge.

(vii) No infilling shall take place until the existing access to the site has been widened, surfaced with concrete as far as the wheelwash, and its sight lines improved in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority.

(viii) No filling shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved by Southern Water and the local planning authority details of stream diversion works and arrangements for arterial drainage.