Hampshire County Council Regulatory Committee 18 April 2007 Applicant: Veolia Environmental Services Redevelopment of existing site to provide a replacement Waste Transfer Station and Household Waste Recycling Centre, demolition of former incinerator building and two redundant buildings and temporary extension of time for retention of existing Waste Transfer Station (until redevelopment commences) at Bury Road/Normandy Way, Marchwood (Application No. 07/89251) (County Council Ref: NF018) Report of the Chief Planning Adviser to the Regulatory Committee

Item 7

Contact: Peter Chadwick, ext 6728 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 Planning permission is sought for the redevelopment of the former Marchwood Incinerator and adjacent Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC) involving the demolition of the former incinerator building, construction of a new waste transfer station and ancillary infrastructure, and the redevelopment and enlargement of the HWRC. It is also proposed to provide a temporary waste transfer facility as an interim measure and to continue the existing waste transfer operations until the temporary facility is available. The main issues are the need for additional waste infrastructure in this part of Hampshire, the potential amenity impacts for local residents in terms of noise, smell and traffic, and the visual impact of the building, taking into account that the site is within the Strategic Gap.

1.2 This proposal was considered by the Regulatory Committee on 14 March 2007 and the previous report is attached as Appendix 2. At the meeting deputations by Councillor Harrison (the local Member), Marchwood Parish Council and a local resident made reference to `promises' by the County Council that the site would be returned to green fields when no longer required for an incinerator. The Committee resolved to defer consideration to allow for further information regarding the conditions of the original planning permission for the municipal incinerator and replacement waste transfer station to be reported at the next meeting.

1.3 The planning history (see Section 4 below) confirms that the original consents for the Marchwood Incinerator and the HWRC were permanent consents. There is no reinstatement requirement under these consents. The planning permission for the new Energy Recovery Facility (ERF) at the Marchwood industrial estate does not include any requirements for the previous incinerator site. The planning permission for use of the old incinerator as a waste transfer station does include a restoration condition requiring the demolition of the old incinerator and clearance of the site. The condition does not specify the restored land use, and does not require reinstatement to a green field.

1.4 The deputations to Committee also raised health as an issue. This proposal is for a waste transfer facility, where the waste would be handled within a building, and an HWRC. There is no record of these types of facilities giving rise to specific health issues for local residents.

1.5 Representations were also made in writing by Councillor Thierry, New Forest District Council's Environment Portfolio holder, concerning the adverse implications for the waste collection service. This issue is very similar to that raised at a recent planning appeal in the New Forest National Park, where the Inspector upheld the argument that any relatively minor adverse impacts were outweighed by the advantages in sustainability in reducing the amount of locally-generated waste needing to be disposed of at a distant landfill.

1.6 It is considered there is a significant need for this facility to meet the County, City and District Councils' waste management needs and requirements, as well as the commercial requirement of the applicant. The operation of the site is not likely to give rise to noise or smell problems for local residents. Bury Road and Jacobs Gutter Lane are suitable for taking lorry traffic and there is no need for lorries to travel through Marchwood. Whilst located in the Strategic Gap, the proposals are well-designed within an existing area of development, ie a `brownfield site,' adjacent to Slow Hill Copse Wastewater Treatment Works and, together with the existing and proposed landscaping, would not undermine the purpose of the Gap. Consequently it is considered that the proposals are in accordance with national and local waste policy and it is recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.

2. Recommendation

That planning permission in respect of the redevelopment of existing site to provide a replacement Waste Transfer Station and Household Waste Recycling Centre, demolition of former incinerator building and two redundant buildings and temporary extension of time for retention of existing Waste Transfer Station (until redevelopment commences) at Bury Road/Normandy Way, Marchwood (Application No. 07/89251) be granted for the following reason, and subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1.

Reason for Approval

It is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan (summary attached in Appendix 3) and 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.

3. Site

3.1 The site, as shown on the attached plan, comprises an area of 2.4 hectares and is located next to the junction of Bury Road and Normandy Way on the outskirts of Marchwood. Two high voltage power lines cross the site. The site contains the former Marchwood Incinerator building and adjoins an established HWRC. To the west of the site is Slowhill Copse Waste Water Treatment Works. To the north are Eling and Bury Marshes Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Solent and Maritime Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area (SPA)/RAMSAR. The site is within the Totton/Eling and Marchwood Strategic Gap. The nearest houses, other than those on the site to be demolished, are approximately 200 metres away.

4. Planning History

Marchwood Incinerator

4.1 Outline planning consent (NFR.15988/1) was granted to New Forest Rural District Council by the County Council for "erection of refuse disposal plant comprising an incinerator and depot with ancillary buildings" in January 1971. Subsequently the County Council granted the details (NFR.15988/2) pursuant to the outline consent in May 1973. The planning permission was permanent with no conditions concerning decommissioning nor reinstatement should the incinerator cease operating. The Marchwood Incinerator opened in 1975 and continued operating through to 1996, when it ceased operation due to the introduction of more stringent pollution control requirements.

Energy Recovery Facility, Marchwood Industrial Estate

4.2 Planning permission (69546) for a new Energy Recovery Incinerator at the nearby Marchwood Industrial Park was granted in July 2001. This has now been constructed and is fully operational. There are no requirements under this planning permission relating to the former incinerator site. However the former incinerator site is referred to in the planning statement accompanying the planning application (dated 2000). In this it states that:

"Until 1996, when it closed due to new air quality standards, Hampshire County Council, and latterly Hampshire Waste Services, operated a waste incinerator on the junction of Normandy Way and Bury Road. The building still stands and is currently used as a Waste Transfer Station where household waste is "bulked up" for onward delivery to landfill sites near Ringwood. The County Council has developed a Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC) on adjacent land".

"The Energy Recovery Facility project is completely separate from the old incinerator. The need for a Waste Transfer Station will be greatly reduced. The remaining waste transfer requirements will be provided at the ERF. The existing building will be removed once the new Energy Recovery Facility is commissioned and, when this happens, the old incinerator building will be demolished and the site returned to the landowner, Hampshire County Council".

4.3 This planning application was considered by the County Council's Planning and Transportation Committee on 11 December 2000. In relation to the old incinerator the report to Committee stated:

"Marchwood Parish Council refers to the demolition of the old incinerator. When planning permission was granted for the modification of the incinerator building to use it as a waste transfer station, conditions were imposed requiring the use to cease by 31 December 2003, after which the incinerator will be demolished. Therefore, it is not necessary to include these provisions in this planning application as it is already a requirement."

Household Waste Recycling Centre

4.4 In 1991 planning permission (046905) was granted for the HWRC on land next to the incinerator. A previous permission granted in 1983 was not implemented and so expired. The HWRC has a separate public access from Normandy Way with servicing access through the Incinerator site. This is a permanent consent. There are no conditions concerning decommissioning or reinstatement if no longer used for an HWRC.

Temporary Waste Transfer Station

4.5 In 1996 planning permission (00059238M) was granted to use the former incinerator building as a Waste Transfer Station. The stated purpose was to maintain the waste management service until a new ERF came into operation. Consequently this was a temporary consent for the period to 31 December 2004 or the commissioning of the new plant, whichever was the sooner. As part of this permission the chimney stack and large items of pollution control equipment were removed prior to the site being used for waste transfer. Subsequent planning applications (68501, 78369 and 85849) extended the period of temporary use to 31 December 2006. The consent included conditions requiring the demolition of the incinerator building and restoration of the site. These state:

(i) Condition 1 - The development hereby permitted shall be for a limited period expiring on 31 December 2006. On or before this date, the use of the waste transfer station shall cease and the incinerator building shall be demolished, unless prior consent of the Waste Planning Authority has been obtained in writing for a further period of use.

(ii) Condition 2 - All buildings, structures, hardstandings and plant shall be removed from the site by 31 December 2006 or the cessation of the use of the waste transfer station, whichever is the sooner. A scheme for the restoration of the site shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing within six months of the date of this consent. The site shall be restored in accordance with the approved scheme.

4.6 The conditions do not specify the restored land use, therefore the restoration works would be to demolish the buildings and structures and clear the site.

Future Uses

4.7 Marchwood Parish Council has, in the past, raised the issue of the future use of the site, and strongly advocated use as public open space following the cessation of use as a waste transfer station. The response from the County Council as landowner has been that if and when the site is no longer required for waste management the County Council will consider the future use in terms of its own operational requirements, and will take into account the Parish Council's wish for the site to become public open space. No commitment was given that the site would be reinstated to greenfield or public open space.

5. Chief Planning Adviser's Comments

5.1 The planning permissions for an incinerator and depot and for an HWRC were permanent consents, with no requirement for removal or reinstatement when no longer needed for these uses. The planning permission for the temporary waste transfer station does have a restoration condition, the effect of which is to require the demolition of the building and structures and clearance of the site. This is consistent with the planning statement submitted with the Energy Recovery Facility, when it is stated that the old incinerator building would be demolished and the land returned to the County Council. Therefore it would be left as a cleared brownfield site. It is also noted that at no time has the County Council as land owner has made any assurances that the site would be returned to open space or `greenfield' status.

5.2 At the last meeting of the Committee the issue of potential health hazard was raised in the deputations. Government advice on health issues in relation to waste facilities is in Planning Policy Statement 10 (PPS 10) `Planning for Sustainable Waste Management'. This states "Modern, appropriately located, well-run and well-regulated, waste management facilities operated in line with current pollution control techniques and standards should pose little risk to human health." In any event this proposal is for a waste transfer facility, where the waste would be handled within a building, and an HWRC, and there is no record of these types of facilities giving rise to specific health issues for local residents.

5.3 Representations were also made in writing by Councillor Thierry, New Forest District Council's Environment Portfolio holder, concerning the implications for the waste collection service. He stated that if this site was not available there would be significant additional mileage across the National Park for their vehicles. This issue is very similar to that raised in a recent planning appeal (Inspector's decision dated 14 February 2007) in the New Forest National Park concerning lorry traffic associated with a waste transfer station at Sway. In that case the Inspector upheld the appeal, commenting:

"On balance therefore I consider any relatively minor adverse environmental or other impacts the appeal proposal may have would be outweighed by the advantages to be gained in overall sustainability terms in reducing the amount of locally-generated waste that needs to be disposed of at a landfill some 35 kilometres distance. In this respect the proposal would satisfy PPS10, criteria (i) of Policy MW2, and Policies 6 and 8."

Similar issues arise with the current planning application in relation to Government guidance in PPS10 and the need for sustainable waste management facilities.

5.4 In addition to PPS10, guidance on waste facilities is also provided in Regional Planning Guidance for the South East (RPG9) - Waste and Minerals June 2006. With regard to the location of waste management facilities, it identifies compatible land uses to include previous or existing industrial land use, contaminated or derelict land and land on or adjoining sewage treatment works. In addition it states that waste management facilities should not be precluded from the Green Belt.(NB Strategic Gaps have a similar function to Green Belts, but they do not have the weight as a material consideration.)

6. Conclusion

6.1 There is a clear commitment that the former incinerator building shall be demolished and the site cleared. This is a requirement of the planning consent for the temporary transfer station, and is also consistent with the planning statement accompanying the ERF application. Therefore it would be left as a cleared brownfield site. There is no commitment to cease using the site for any purpose and return it to greenfield/open space.

6.2 It is considered there is a significant need for this facility to meet the community waste management needs and requirements, as well as the commercial requirement of the applicant. The operation of the site is not likely to give rise to noise or smell problems for local residents, and Bury Road and Jacobs Gutter Lane are suitable for taking lorry traffic and there is not the need for lorries to travel through Marchwood. Whilst within the Strategic Gap, the proposals are within the existing developed area and adjacent to Slow Hill Copse Wastewater Treatment Works. Moreover, the proposed building is well-designed and, together with the existing and proposed landscaping, would not undermine the purpose of the Strategic Gap. Consequently it is considered the proposals are in accordance with both national and local waste policy and it is recommended to grant planning permission.

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	LOCATION
Redevelopment of existing site to provide a replacement Waste Transfer Station and Household Waste Recycling Centre, demolition of former incinerator building and two redundant buildings and temporary extension of time for retention of existing Waste Transfer Station (until redevelopment commences) at Bury Road/Normandy Way, Marchwood (Application No: 07/89251) (County Council Ref: NF018)	Environment Department Room 130

1238/PDC

APPENDIX 1

Conditions

Timescale

(1) The redevelopment of the site hereby permitted shall commence within four months of the date of this consent unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the orderly development of the site.

(2) The use of the existing incinerator building for waste transfer shall cease within three months following the date of commencement of the redevelopment of the site or when the new temporary transfer station has been constructed, whichever is the sooner, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the orderly development of the site.

(3) The existing incinerator building shall be demolished down to bunker level within six months following the date of commencement of the redevelopment of the site, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To secure the demolition of the existing building in the interests of visual amenity.

(4) The new temporary waste transfer facility shall cease operation within 12 months following the date of commencement of the redevelopment of the site or the commissioning of the new waste transfer station, whichever is the sooner, unless otherwise ageed in writing by the Waste Plannnig Authority.

Reason: The temporary facility is not suitable for permanent retention.

Phasing

(5) The development shall be implemented in accordance with the phasing as shown on drawing MARCH/06/002 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To secure orderly development.

(6) Prior to the commencement of Phase 5 a detailed design for the Household Waste Recycling Centre shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing. The Household Waste Recycling Centre shall be constructed in accordance with the approved detailed design.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory development.

Materials

(7) Prior to construction of the permanent waste transfer station commencing details and samples of materials to be used for the external surfaces of the waste transfer building shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

Lighting

(8) Prior to the plant being commissioned 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.

Reason: In the interests of visual highway safety.

Protection of Water Environment

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

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment.

(10) Prior to commencement of development a scheme to deal with the risks associated wih potential contamination of the site shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing. The scheme shall include:

(i) a desk study identifying all previous uses, potential contaminants associated with those uses, a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors, and potential risks arising from contamination;

(ii) a site investigation based on the desk study;

(iii) details of any remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken; and

(iv) report confirming any remediation measures have been undertaken and measures for monitoring.

Reason: To ensure the site and the proposed use are assessed in order to ensure that it does not present a risk of pollution to controlled waters.

(11) If contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site development shall cease until an addendum to the Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority. The requirements of the addendum to the Method Statement shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: To ensure there is not pollution to controlled waters.

(12) There shall be no infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground unless agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure no pollution to controlled waters.

(13) There shall be no piling or foundation designs using penetrative methods unless previously agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure no pollution of controlled waters.

(14) Prior to the construction of the permanent waste transfer station commencing measures to protect the public sewers shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing. The measures shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: In order to protect the public sewer.

Highways

(15) Prior to the redevelopment commencing measures to be taken to prevent mud from vehicles leaving the site during construction works from being deposited on the highway shall be submitted to the Waste Plannnig Authority for approval in writing. The measures shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

Hours of Working

(16) 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:

Waste Transfer Facility:

0700-1800 hours Monday to Sunday, including public holidays except Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Year's Day.

Household Waste Recycling Centre:

0800-1900 hours Monday to Sunday (1 April to 31 Sepember);

0800-1600 hours Monday to Sunday (1 October to 31 March); and

Site closed Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Year's Day.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Noise, Dust and Odour

(17) Prior to the redevelopment commencing an Environmental Management Scheme for the control of noise and odour at 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.

Landscaping

(18) Within 12 months of the redevelopment commencing a detailed scheme of additional landscaping for the perimeter of the site shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing. The scheme shall specify the types, size and species (the majority of which should be native) of all trees and shrubs to be planted; details of all trees to be retained; and details of fencing/enclosure of the site, phasing and timescales for carrying out the works, and provision for future maintenance. Any trees or shrubs which, within a period of five years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

APPENDIX 2

Hampshire County Council Regulatory Committee 14 March 2007 Applicant: Veolia Environmental Services Redevelopment of existing site to provide a replacement waste transfer station and household waste recycling centre, demolition of former incinerator building and two redundant buildings and temporary extension of time for retention of existing waste transfer station (until redevelopment commences) at Bury Road/Normandy Way, Marchwood. (Application No: 07/89251)(County Council Ref: NF018) Report of the Chief Planning Adviser to the Regulatory Committee

Item 7

Contact: Peter Chadwick, ext 6728 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 Planning permission is sought for the redevelopment of the former Marchwood Incinerator and adjacent Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC) involving the demolition of the former incinerator building, construction of a new waste transfer station and ancillary infrastructure, and the redevelopment and enlargement of the HWRC. It is also proposed to provide a temporary waste transfer facility as an interim measure and to continue the existing waste transfer operations until the temporary facility is available. The main issues are the need for additional waste infrastructure in this part of Hampshire, the potential amenity impacts for local residents in terms of noise, smell and traffic, and the visual impact of the building taking into account the site is within the Strategic Gap.

1.2 It is considered there is a significant need for this facility to meet the County, City and District Councils' waste management needs and requirements, as well as the commercial requirement of the applicant. The operation of the site is not likely to give rise to noise or smell problems for local residents. Bury Road/Jacobs Gutter Lane are suitable for taking the lorry traffic and there is no need for lorries to travel through Marchwood. Whilst located in the Strategic Gap, the proposals are well-designed within an existing area of development, ie a `brownfield site' and, together with the existing and proposed landscaping, would not undermine the purpose of the Gap. Consequently it is considered the proposals are in accordance with policy and it is recommended that planning permission be granted.

2. Recommendation

That planning permission in respect of the redevelopment of existing site to provide a replacement waste transfer station and household waste recycling centre, demolition of former incinerator building and two redundant buildings and temporary extension of time for retention of existing waste transfer station (until redevelopment commences) at Bury Road/Normandy Way, Marchwood (07/89251) be granted for the following reason, and subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1.

Reason for Approval

It is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan (summary attached in Appendix 2) and 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.

3. Site

3.1 The site, as shown on the attached plan, comprises an area of 2.4 hectares and is located next to the junction of Bury Road and Normandy Way on the outskirts of Marchwood. Two high voltage power lines cross the site. The site contains the former Marchwood Incinerator building and adjoins an established household waste recycling centre (HWRC). To the west of the site is Slowhill Copse Waste Water Treatment Works. To the north are Eling and Bury Marshes Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Solent and Maritime Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area (SPA)/RAMSAR. The site is within the Totton/Eling and Marchwood Strategic Gap. The nearest houses, other than those on the site to be demolished, are approximately 200 metres away.

4. History

4.1 The Marchwood Incinerator opened in 1975 and continued operating through to 1996, when it ceased operation due to the introduction of more stringent pollution control requirements. Planning permission for a new Energy Recovery Incinerator at the nearby Marchwood Industrial Park was granted in 2001. This has now been constructed and is fully operational.

4.2 In 1996 planning permission was granted to use the former incinerator building as a waste transfer station. The purpose was to maintain the waste management service until the new Energy Recovery Incinerator came into operation. Consequently this was a temporary consent which, as subsequently amended, expired 31 December 2006. As part of this permission the chimney stack and large items of pollution control equipment were removed. The permission includes a requirement to demolish the incinerator building on cessation of use.

4.3 In 1991 planning permission was granted for the HWRC on land next to the incinerator. The HWRC has a separate public access from Normandy Way. Servicing access is through the Incinerator site.

5. Proposal

5.1 The proposal is to demolish the former Incinerator building and redevelop the site to construct a new waste transfer station and an expanded HWRC. The waste transfer station would handle dry recyclables, civic amenity waste, bulky waste, litter, street sweepings and commercial waste. It would also have the capability of handling household waste in an emergency as a back up for the Energy Recovery Incinerator at times of shut down. The redevelopment would be carried out in five phases taking about 18 months in total to complete. It is proposed to continue waste transfer activity throughout the redevelopment, initially by continuing as existing and then via a temporary facility at the rear of the site.

5.2 Phase 1 would be to construct the temporary waste transfer facility at the rear of the existing HWRC. This would comprise an enclosure with timber sleeper push walls covered by netting. The old Incinerator building would continue to be used for waste transfer until the temporary facility was operational.

5.3 Phase 2 would be the demolition of the old Incinerator building, retaining the concrete-lined bunker, and the demolition of the two houses within the site. These houses were built for the site manager and supervisor and are no longer required, having been unoccupied for several years and in a poor state of repair.

5.4 Phase 3 would be the construction of the new waste transfer building. It would be a steel portal framed structure built above the existing bunker. The walls would be comprised of sheet cladding with a shallow pitched roof. The main elevational cladding would be light green, the roof grey and the service doors dark green. The new building would be about 30 metres by 26 metres (a smaller footprint than the old incinerator building) and would be about 14 metres high - about half the height of the old Incinerator building (27 metres). The bunker would be partitioned to allow separate storage of bulky waste, street sweepings, litter and amenity waste; dry recyclables; and other wastes. Delivery vehicles would access from the south side, as they do at present, and tip into the appropriate bunker. Inside the building a long reach 360° excavator with grab would operate along a platform behind the bunker, transferring waste directly to articulated bulk haulage vehicles which enter the building from the east at a lower level. The existing administration building would be retained and the weighbridge would remain in its current position.

5.5 Phase 4 would be the construction of the green waste bay and area for clinical waste transfer. The clinical waste transfer would be into a wheeled container. The temporary waste transfer facility would then cease and the structures would be removed.

5.6 In Phase 5 the HWRC would be redeveloped and expanded into the area previously used for the temporary waste transfer facility. The expanded HWRC would provide improvements in handling the material and in general operation and provide 35 parking spaces (about 45% more than existing) as well as for queuing of up to 30 vehicles in the access road. This will address the issue of cars backing up onto Normandy Way, which is a problem currently at busy periods. The number of bins would remain at twelve as present but there would be better circulation and storage and the flexibility to provide additional bins if required in the future. Servicing would be directly to the adjoining waste transfer station.

5.7 Access would remain as existing, with public access to the HWRC from Normandy Way and access for lorry traffic from the Bury Road access. It is estimated that the waste transfer station would handle about 59,000 tonnes of waste per year, generating about 78 lorry loads (157 lorry movements) per day. The existing waste transfer facility in the old Incinerator building handles about 49,000 tonnes of waste a year, generating about 63 lorry loads (126 lorry movements) per day. In 2005/6 the HWRC handled 14,232 tonnes of waste of which 52% was recycled. The lorry traffic would continue to be routed via Bury Road and Jacobs Gutter Lane to and from the A35, and would not be routed through Marchwood village.

5.8 None of the existing landscaping or vegetation around the site would be removed. Additional planting would be carried out around the Bury Road entrance and to supplement the existing planting around the site. Additional planting would also be carried out along the outer boundary of the extended HWRC.

5.9 The applicant (Veolia) comments that with the increased growth of waste (an average of 3% per year for the last 10 years) and the increased drive for recycling there is not sufficient capacity to accommodate this waste transfer activity within the new Energy Recovery Incinerator building as originally envisaged; and that the use of the existing bunker has advantages both in terms of sustainable development and enabling the waste transfer building to have a smaller footprint. Veolia concludes that an additional facility is required for this part of Hampshire and consider the site is well located to serve this need, as well as being well located to handle household waste in an emergency as a back up to the Energy Recovery Incinerator, and meet its commercial requirements.

6. Development Plan

6.1 Hampshire County Structure Plan Policy G2 concerns the Strategic Gap, Policy MW concerns waste transfer and recycling facilities.

6.2 Hampshire Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan Policy 46 concerns proposals for waste transfer and recycling.

6.3 New Forest District Local Plan First Alteration Policy DW-E1, DW-E32 and CO-E1 concerns development in Strategic Gap.

7. Consultations

7.1 New Forest District Council objects to the application because the proposed development would be visually intrusive and unjustified within this countryside location, thereby harming the openness of the designated Strategic Gap, and the rural character and appearance of the area, contrary to policies DW-E1, DW-E32 and CO-E1 of the New Forest District local Plan First Alteration.

7.2 However should the Hampshire County Council be minded to grant permission for the development, they request that suitable conditions are imposed in respect of materials, additional landscaping and restricting hours of operation to appropriate times.

7.3 Environment Agency raises no objection subject to conditions.

7.4 Natural England comment the proposal is unlikely to have a significant effect on the SAC/SPA/RAMSAR nor adversely affect the SSSI. No objection raised.

7.5 Highway Advisor raises no objection subject to conditions.

7.6 Marchwood Parish Council raises objection on the following grounds:

(i) site location within the strategic Gap;

(ii) previous notification of plans for demolition of old incinerator building and only temporary use as a transfer loading station;

(iii) unacceptable increase in traffic movements;

(iv) potential for unacceptable disruption if construction takes place at same time as power station;

(v) proximity to SSSI; and

(vi) potentially more appropriate site at Eling Wharf.

7.7 In addition objection on the grounds of serious adverse visual impact, lending an industrial setting to an historic established village settlement and therefore out of keeping with the area. Consideration that, given the length of time that has been available for the assessment of increases of waste for disposal and for the identification of alternative and suitable sites, that the original advice and established policy that this site be returned to its previous status of undeveloped land within a strategic gap between settlements, be complied with. That the application also does not comply with further established policies contained within the District Plan.

7.8 SSE Power Distribution raise no objection.

7.9 Southern Water raise no objection subject to protection for the public sewer which runs alongside Bury Road.

7.10 Southampton Airport raise no safeguarding objection.

7.11 Local Member Councillor Harrison has been informed.

7.12 Waste Disposal Authority - HCC

7.13 The County Council is committed to eliminating landfill disposal of household waste and ensuring that waste disposal and collection operations in the County are as efficient and as effective as possible. The development of a modern transfer station at Bury Road is crucial to allowing service objectives to be met.

7.14 Increasingly, it is residual waste from the Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC) network that is the main source of the County Council's landfill activities. As recycling of the household waste becomes more successful, processing capability at three Energy Recovery Facilities (ERF's) will be freed up for HWRC residual waste but it will only be possible for the ERF's to take this material if it has been pre-treated i.e. shredded. This is common practice on the Continent.

7.15 The proposed new transfer station at Marchwood will be able to accommodate a shredder within the building. It will also provide a strategic site that is capable of handling and storing HWRC waste generated in and around the New Forest. Operational flexibility will be significantly improved. The new facility will reduce lorry movements through Marchwood village and it will also be of real operational benefit to New Forest District Council's collection operations. Indeed, the need is supported by the New Forest District Council Environment Portfolio Holder, who spoke in support of the application at the New Forest District Council Planning Development Control Committee on 14 February 2007 when it considered the consultation on the planning application.

8. Representations

8.1 11 letters of objection have been received from local residents on the following grounds:

(i) impact of lorry traffic;

(ii) impact on Eling marshes;

(iii) reneging on commitment to demolish ugly old incinerator and intent to build another industrial monstrosity;

(iv) Strategic Gap should be enforced;

(v) improvements to HWRC can be done independently of waste transfer station;

(vi) commitment given to demolish old incinerator and not use site for waste when applying for the new incinerator;

8.2 1 letter from a resident concerned that the HWRC should be kept open throughout redevelopment as it extremely valuable for residents.

8.3 A petition of 320 signatures has been received stating `SAY RUBBISH TO WASTE TRANSFER STATION. We the undersigned object to the plan to build a new waste transfer station on the site of the old incinerator and wish to see the old incinerator building demolished as soon as possible.'

9. Chief Planning Adviser's Comments

9.1 Whilst the need for an additional facility was not considered necessary when the planning permission for the new Energy Recovery Incinerator was granted in 2001 circumstances have changed. The local authorities (the County Council, City Council and District Councils) have now to meet new and challenging targets for waste management and the commercial requirements of the applicant have, as a result, changed. The application needs to be considered in relation to these current demands and requirements. It is considered that there is a strong waste management need for a waste transfer station for recyclable waste and non-burnable waste in this part of Hampshire in addition to the facilities provided by the Energy Recovery Incinerator on Marchwood Industrial Park.

9.2 The old Incinerator has been used for waste transfer since 1996 without giving rise to noise or smell complaints from local residents. There has been concern in the past about lorry traffic to and from the site, but little of this traffic travels through the village itself. Bury Road/Jacobs Gutter Lane has been substantially improved in recent years, this has overcome the deficiencies in width and alignment which caused the problems.

9.3 The main local concern has been the visual impact of the old incinerator building which is clearly intrusive and an eyesore at the entrance to the village; the concern being the delay in its demolition. This is compounded by the location of the site within the Strategic Gap, although the Incinerator and the neighbouring waste water treatment works were both in operation before the Strategic Gap was designated. The redevelopment proposes the demolition of the old building and its replacement by a much smaller building. However, although the site is a brownfield site as it has clearly been developed and has waste uses, the removal of the old building is already a requirement of the existing planning permission. Therefore whilst the proposal is in accordance with policy, being a redevelopment on an existing site, the visual impact has to be considered in relation to the proposed building itself, and how this impacts on the Strategic Gap, not a comparison with the old building remaining.

9.4 The landscape assessment with the application shows the roof of the waster transfer building will be visible as will be the vehicular accesses which are to be retained. However, the building has been well designed to minimise its impact and this impact will be further reduced by the additional landscaping. As such it is not considered that the proposal would diminish or undermine the purpose of the Strategic Gap.

9.5 As well as being well located to serve the waste need of the locality, the site offers significant advantages in sustainability by reducing the carbon footprint of the building through use of the existing bunker. There are also significant synergies with the co-location with the HWRC, which would improve its efficiency and operation. It is a well-used facility and the redevelopment and expansion would provide a significantly improved and efficient service to the local community.

Conclusion

It is considered there is a significant need for this facility to meet the County Council, City and District Councils' waste management needs and requirements as well as the commercial requirement of the applicant. The operation of the site is not likely to give rise to noise or smell problems for local residents and Bury Road/Jacobs Gutter Lane are suitable for taking the lorry traffic and there is not the need for lorries to travel through Marchwood. Whilst within the Strategic Gap the proposals are within the existing developed area, the proposed building is well designed and together with the existing and proposed landscaping would not undermine the purpose of the Strategic Gap. Consequently it is considered the proposals are in accordance with policy and it is recommended to grant planning permission.

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	LOCATION
Redevelopment of existing site to provide a replacement waste transfer station and household waste recycling centre, demolition of former incinerator building and two redundant buildings and temporary extension of time for retention of existing waste transfer station (until redevelopment commences) at Bury Road/Normandy Way, Marchwood. (Application No: 07/89251)(County Council Ref: NF018)	Environment Department Room 130

1238/PC

APPENDIX 3

Annexe to Reasons for Conditions

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

(General Procedure) Order 1995 - as amended)

__________________________________________________________________

Planning Policy Statement 10 (PPS10) `Planning for Sustainable Waste Management' July 2005

Key Planning Objectives

- protect green belts but recognise the particular locational needs of some types of waste management facilities when defining green belt boundaries and, in determining planning applications, that these locational needs, together with the wider environmental and economic benefits of sustainable waste management, are material considerations that should be given significant weight in determining whether proposals should be given planning permission;

Regional Planning Guidance for the South East (RPG9) - Minerals and Waste June 2006

Policy W17: Location of Waste Management Facilities

Waste Development Documents should, in identifying locations for waste management facilities, give priority to safeguarding and expanding suitable sites with an existing waste management use and good transport connections.

The suitability of existing sites and potential new sites should be assessed on the basis of the following characteristics:

· Good accessibility from existing urban areas or major new or planned development;

· Good transport connections including, where possible, rail or water;

· Compatible land uses; namely:

· active mineral working sites,

· previous or existing industrial land use,

· contaminated or derelict land,

· land on or adjoining sewage treatment works, or

· redundant farm buildings and their curtilages; and

· be capable of meeting a range of locally-based environmental and amenity criteria.

Waste management facilities should not be precluded from the Green Belt. Small-scale waste management facilities for local needs should not be precluded from Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and National Parks where the development would not compromise the objectives of the designation.

Hampshire County Structure Plan (Review) 2000

Policy G2

To maintain the principal breaks of open and undeveloped land between built-up areas, strategic gaps will be maintained between the following:

Southampton and Totton

Southampton - Hedge End/Bursledon/Netley

North Baddesley/Valley Park

Stubbington/Lee-on-the-Solent and Fareham/Gosport

Waterlooville and Havant

Havant and Rowlands Castle

Emsworth and Havant

Totton/Eling and Marchwood

Marchwood and Hythe

Hythe and Fawley

The precise boundaries of the strategic gaps will be defined in local plans:

(i) after provision has been made for the development requirements

established in other policies in the Plan; and

(ii) including no more land than is required to effect the physical and/or visual

separation of the settlements adjoining the gap.

Within defined strategic gaps, permission would not normally be granted for development which would diminish the gap physically or visually.

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 no re-used, recycled or processed; and

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

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 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.

New Forest District Local Plan First Alteration (August 2005)

Policy DW-E1

General development criteria

Development shall be appropriate and sympathetic in scale, appearance, materials,

form, siting and layout, and shall not cause unacceptable effects by reason of visual

intrusion, overlooking, shading or other adverse impact on local amenities.

Developers shall have regard to:

(a) the scale and siting of the proposal in relation to adjoining development, spaces, the character of the area and the wider landscape. This will involve consideration of height, massing and density, relationship to adjoining buildings and land uses and landscape features on and off site, and other potential impacts of the proposal on local amenities e.g. noise, light or other forms of pollution, including those arising from traffic generated by the development (see also Policy DW-E43, Section C6); and

(b) materials and built form in relation to the character of adjoining development, local vernacular and any historic features (see also Policies DW-E18 to DW-E29, Section C2).

Policy DW-E32

Strategic Gaps

The area of the Test Valley between Totton and the District boundary, and the areas between Totton and Marchwood, Marchwood and Hythe, and Hythe and Fawley, as identified on the proposals map, are designated as Strategic Gaps. Development will not normally be permitted within these gaps other than in accordance with policies in Parts D and E of this plan, and should not diminish Strategic Gaps either physically or visually.

Policy CO-E1

The Countryside Outside the New Forest

All areas outside the New Forest which are not included within a defined built-up area, as shown on the proposals maps, are defined as countryside, within which development will be strictly controlled in order to safeguard the character and appearance of the countryside.