Contact: Katherine Snell, ext 5938 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The application is for a concrete recycling site, to recycle concrete waste into a secondary aggregate at C A Stevens Transport, Old Stockbridge Road, Grateley, near Andover.

1.2 On 17 October 2007 the Committee, after some Members visited the application site on 1 October 2007, considered the application, and concluded that the issues of appropriate land use, visual impact, noise impact, lorry routing, traffic conditions, out of date and inaccurate plans were unresolved. The item was deferred in order to investigate and resolve the queries.

1.3 Since that time there has been some discussion with the applicant about the withdrawal of the application so it has been deferred to this meeting. The officer's report presented on 17 October 2007 is attached as Appendix 2 to provide background information.

1.4 Most of the above issues that arose from the application have now been dealt with to the satisfaction of the Waste Planning Authority. However, following an independent noise assessment and the lack of information to mitigate the predicted significant adverse impact, it is recommended that planning permission be refused.

Recommendation

That planning consent for a concrete recycling site, to recycle concrete waste into a secondary aggregate at C A Stevens Transport, Old Stockbridge Road, Grateley, near Andover (Application No. 07/02133/CMAN) be refused for the following reason:

Reason for Refusal

It is considered that the proposal would be contrary to Policy DC8 of the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy (summary attached as Appendix 1) in that there would be an adverse impact for local residents in terms of noise.

2. Site and Proposal

2.1 The site and proposal are described in the officer's report (Appendix 2).

2.2 As mentioned above, several issues were raised by Members which needed resolving to determine the application. The action undertaken to resolve the queries were as follows:

(i) a visual impact assessment undertaken (Appendix 3);

(ii) noise impact assessment commissioned;

(iii) location plan drawn (Appendix 4); and

(iv) lorry routing and conditions investigated.

3. Development Plan

3.1 The Hampshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy Policy DC8 (Pollution, health, quality of life and amenity) and Test Valley Borough Local Plan (Adopted June 2006) AME 04 (Noise and vibration) apply.

4. Consultations

4.1 The only additional consultation has been received from the Environmental Health Officer (Test Valley Borough Council) who accepts the findings of the noise assessment.

4.2 No further representations have been received.

5. Commentary

5.1 The location plan that has now been submitted offers a technical solution to the Members' query.

5.2 The visual impact assessment demonstrates that the impact of the proposal would be minimal. Views were recorded from seven receptor positions; five of these were local houses, which show the lack of need for screening.

5.3 The application site is within a transport depot, which is not in the ownership of the applicant, and currently generates large numbers of lorries. Therefore, the enforcement of lorry routing would not be able to be monitored and subsequently enforced.

5.4 The lorry routing and proposed conditions are not enforceable as the proposal involves third party vehicles and it is uncertain if the situation can be monitored effectively. Any vehicles entering or leaving the site cannot be conditioned as they may be involved in businesses unconnected with the proposal.

5.5 Details of the ability of HGVs to turn on-site and parking provision have been received and deemed satisfactory. The Highways Authority has raised no objection to a predicted maximum increase of three HGVs a day on the local highway network. This is based on the estimated throughput of material being 14,400 tonnes per annum. On the basis of a 50 week year, over 5.5 days a week and using 20 ton vehicles, some 2.6 HGVs per day would be needed to bring this amount on material into the site. Presumably some of these vehicles would also leave the site empty. On this basis it is acknowledged that the expected traffic generation at the site is likely to be greater than set out in the application.

5.6 Nevertheless the wider site is already used as a transport yard and if the throughput is limited to 14,400 tonnes per year the application should not give rise to a significant increase in HGV traffic.

5.7 On the other hand, the results of the noise impact assessment undertaken by an independent expert has shown that the proposal is likely to generate complaints. The findings have been verified by the Environmental Health Officer as an unacceptable loss of amenity to local residents. It is noted that even though there are times when the background noise of vehicles is higher at the properties than those predicted by the concrete crusher, noise intrusion is still a significant adverse impact.

5.8 A management scheme, to include details of arrangements and graphical representation of where the crusher and stockpiles would sit, has been requested and not supplied. This has implications for any potential noise attenuation and the uncertainty of the extent to which dust could have an impact.

5.9 In consideration of the noise assessment and the lack of information to mitigate the significant adverse impact, it is recommended that planning permission be refused.

1741/KS

APPENDIX 1

Annexe to Reason for Refusal

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

(General Procedure) Order 1995 - as amended)

__________________________________________________________________

The Hampshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy

Policy DC8 (Pollution, health, quality of life and amenity)

Minerals and waste development will only be permitted if due regard is given to the pollution and amenity impacts on the residents and users of the locality and there is unlikely to be an unacceptable impact on health and/or the quality of life of occupants of nearby dwellings and other sensitive properties. Where necessary minerals and waste developments should include mitigation measures, such as buffer zones between the site and such properties.

Test Valley Borough Local Plan (Adopted June 2006)

AME 04 (Noise and vibration)

Noise-generating development will be permitted provided that the levels of noise or vibration would not cause an unacceptable level of disturbance to the occupants of nearby properties having taken account of any proposed attenuation or other measures.

Noise-sensitive developments will be permitted provided that the intended users would not be subject to unacceptable noise or vibration levels from existing noise-generating uses having taken account of any proposed attenuation or other measures.

APPENDIX 2

Contact: Katie Snell, ext 5938 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 Planning permission is sought for the recycling of concrete waste into a secondary aggregate at C A Stevens Transport, Old Stockbridge Road, Grateley, near Andover. There is considerable local objection to the proposal. However, the proposal accords with policy and it has been demonstrated that the site could be operated without significant environmental impact. Therefore the recommendation is that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

2. Recommendation

That planning permission in respect of a concrete recycling site, to recycle concrete waste into a secondary aggregate at C A Stevens Transport, Old Stockbridge Road, Grateley, Near Andover (07/62133/CMAN) be granted for the following reason, subject to conditions set out in Appendix 1.

Reason for Approval

It is considered 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.

3. Site and Proposal

3.1 The site comprises approximately 0.1 hectare at the transport and storage depot of C A Stevens Transport, Old Stockbridge Road, Grateley. The nearest dwellings are "Full View", approximately 230 metres to the south of the site and "Dibden Cottages", which are approximately 230 metres to the north. The remainder of houses in the vicinity are at least 300 metres from the site boundary.

3.2 The site lies within an existing, active transport and storage depot with a variety of ongoing activities and comprises a collection of large buildings and structures and existing hardstanding. A shared access exists onto the main road.

3.3 The site was historically a piggery and abattoir with associated storage and distribution uses. Planning permission for pig houses was granted in 1967. In 1975 permission was given to erect a new building to serve as a collection depot, store and offices for the animal waste trade. Permission for further ancillary office accommodation was given in 1976.

3.4 In 1981 planning permission was granted for a ready mixed concrete plant (a B2 use under the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987) as well as an outline permission for an oil storage and distribution depot (B8). In 1983, there was a change of use permission which enabled the Site become a transport and storage depot (B8). Permission was given for another storage building in 1989 (B8).

3.5 The proposal is for a facility to recycle concrete waste to produce secondary aggregate. It is proposed to recycle up to 14,400 tonnes of waste a year. Concrete waste will be imported and stockpiled prior to screening and crushing. It is anticipated that a mobile crusher will be brought to the site 12 times a year and operated for approximately two days on each occasion. The crusher has a built-in screener which will also be operational for approximately two days a week. Once crushed, the material will be removed to a storage area prior to distribution.

3.6 Access to the site is from the Old Stockbridge Road. Vehicles will access the site and deposit the concrete and leave using effectively a one-way system. There is currently an average of 23 heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) movements a day and 30 non-HGV movements a day generated by the depot. The proposal would increase traffic numbers by 5% for HGVs and by 10% for non-HGVs.

3.7 Customers are not expected to require parking, but there are approximately 40 parking spaces within the depot which would be available for use.

3.8 The proposed hours of operation are between 0730 and 1800 hours Monday to Friday, between 0730 and 1400 hours on Saturday and not at all on Sunday or recognised public holidays.

4. Development Plan

4.1 Hampshire, Portsmouth, Southampton and New Forest National Park Minerals and Waste Core Strategy Development Plan Document (Adopted July 2007); DC3 - Impact on Landscape and Townscape; DC6 - Highways; DC8 - Pollution, health, quality of life and amenity; and DC13 - Waste Management and Recycling apply.

5. Consultations

5.1 Grateley Parish Council objects to the proposal as it is unsuitable for the countryside location near the village of Grateley. The Parish Council has concerns over potential traffic, dust, vibration and noise generation.

5.2 Test Valley Borough Council raises objection due to the lack of information, in particular noise and traffic.

5.3 The Environmental Health Officer (Test Valley Borough Council) raises no objection to the proposal in principle. It is considered that the noise level generated by the crusher will be audible, but insufficiently high enough above background level to cause disturbance.

5.4 The Environment Agency raises no objection subject to surface drainage condition.

5.5 The Highway Authority raises no objection to the proposal.

5.6 The local Member, Councillor Mrs West, objects to the proposal on the following grounds:

(i) adverse impact on the rural/historic character of the area;

(ii) the proposal does not contain sufficient environmental information;

(iii) adverse impact of lorry movements in terms of noise, dust and safety; and

(iv) adverse noise impact. The proposal will create a different noise from the transport depot and other activities on-site.

6. Representations

6.1 There have been 21 letters of objection from residents of Grateley, including a letter from Test Valley Borough Councillor Tim Southern. The main reasons for objection are:

(i) increased traffic through the village of Grateley;

(ii) increased noise, dust and odour;

(iii) inappropriate development in the countryside and near residential area;

(iv) industrialisation of a rural, agricultural site; and

(v) inappropriate proximity to historic settings.

7. Report of Site Visit

7.1 Five Members of the Committee (Councillors Beagley, Cooper, Hockley and John West, with Councillor McIntosh in the Chair) undertook a site visit on 1 October 2007. Councillor Pat West, as Local Member, was also present. Members also met representatives of Grateley Parish Council and the applicant.

7.2 The Chief Planning Adviser introduced the application and outlined the key features of the proposed.

7.3 Members noted the position of the site, the location of the village of Grateley, the railway line and the nearest houses. They also noted that the current lorry movements were 23 HGV and 30 non-HGV per day and the applicant proposed to increase this number by 5% and 10% respectively.

7.4 Councillor Pat West expressed concerns, on behalf of Test Valley Borough Councillor Tim Southern and local residents, about the number of lorry movements and asked whether there was a pre-determined route for lorries. The Chief Planning Adviser advised that there had been no suggestion from the Highways Authority that there should be lorry routeing.

7.5 Parish Council representatives were concerned about the additional lorry movements on the local roads and the noise from the crusher. The Chief Planning Adviser advised that noise specifications had been received from the company supplying the crushing/screening equipment and on the basis of that information there has been no objection from the Environmental Health Officer. He considered that the noise level generated by the crusher would not cause an unnecessary disturbance to local residents. However, a noise study would be carried out and the results of this would be reported to the Regulatory Committee meeting on 17 October 2007.

7.6 Members asked the Chief Planning Adviser to confirm at the meeting on 17 October the amount of waste to be recycled, whether there is a pre-determined lorry route and the results of the survey referred to in paragraph 7.5 above.

7.7 Members viewed the stockpiles of aggregate, where the aggregate would be crushed, the location of the water treatment plant and the weighbridge. They also noted that, given that the crusher would operate 12 times a year, that there would be a 30 day period for stockpiling prior to crushing. They also noted that a small scaffold tower would be erected so that lorry loads could be inspected.

8. Chief Planning Adviser's Comments

8.1 Policy DC13 of the Hampshire Core Strategy states that planning permission will be granted where the proposal re-uses or redevelops previously developed land.

8.2 The local concern that the development is an industrialisation of a rural, agricultural site must be viewed in this context. The site is within the curtilage of units which have been classified as industrial/storage and has been used for these purposes; therefore the proposal accords with policy DC13.

8.3 Concern has been raised that the proposal is an inappropriate development in the countryside and potentially detrimental to local historic settings. However, the site is well-screened by existing buildings and planting and therefore accords with policy DC3 - Impact on Landscape and Townscape.

8.4 In terms of amenity issues, local residents have raised concerns of noise and dust. In response to this the Environmental Health Officer has made some noise calculations from the data supplied from the manufacturers' specifications of the crushing/screening machine. The noise level next to the crusher would be approximately 85 dB(A). The noise level would be approximately 50-52 dB(A) at the nearest residential properties (assuming free field conditions with no attenuation other than distance). At the type of location in question, the normal day-time noise level is usually around 40-45 dB(A).

8.5 Therefore the difference between the emitted noise and the background noise level will be 12 dB(A) at worst without any attenuation. Whilst the noise would be audible at the residential properties, this would not be sufficient to justify a refusal or permission. The crushing would be restricted in the hours of work and the number of days per month of operation. In addition, the crusher would be positioned between existing buildings, which would further reduce noise levels at the residential properties

8.6 There is also local concern that the proposal will have an unacceptable dust impact. It is proposed that the crusher and screener be sprayed with a mist of water to prevent dust creation, as necessary. The Environmental Health Officer raised no concerns on dust grounds and it is considered that the dust issue can be satisfactorily controlled by planning condition. Therefore, in consideration of the above amenity issues, it is deemed that the proposal does not conflict with Policy DC8 - Pollution, health, quality of life and amenity.

8.7 There are local objections about the impact of the proposal on an already busy road network in the Grateley area. This concern is noted. The proposal is anticipated to utilise the existing HGV and vehicle traffic visiting the depot. The applicant expects those existing customers who buy primary aggregate from the site would also bring in the waste concrete and purchase the crushed concrete, so an increase of 15% in total vehicle movements from the depot is anticipated.

8.8 There is local concern that the access to the site is where vehicles regularly exceed the speed limit and/or drive erratically. This is not a planning consideration and therefore cannot be the basis for a refusal.

8.9 The Highway Authority considers that the route between the site and the Lorry Route Network can satisfactorily accommodate on average an additional six movements.

8.10 The site access is well-established and provides good visibility in both directions. There have been no personal injury accidents recorded at the site in the last three years. The site is located 2.2 miles from the A343 which is part of the Hampshire Lorry Route Network. However, if permission is granted, it is reasonable to restrict the tonnage of material brought onto site to prevent any increase in movements over time and limit any impact on local amenity.

8.11 It is noted that Test Valley Borough Council raises objection on the grounds of insufficient information on noise and traffic impact . However, the further information provided on these issues has been investigated by the Highways Authority and the Environmental Health Officer at Test Valley Borough Council, and both have subsequently stated they have no objection.

8.12 In conclusion, the proposal accords with policy and it has been demonstrated that the site could be operated without significant environmental impact. Furthermore, there is a considerable need for construction and demolition waste recycling facilities in Hampshire. Therefore, the recommendation is that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

1479/KS

APPENDIX 1

Conditions

Commencement

(1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 (as amended) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

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: 0730-1800 Monday to Friday and 0730-1400 Saturday. There shall be no working on Sunday or recognised public holidays.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Protection of Water Environment

(3) No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground is permitted, unless approved by the Waste Planning Authority in writing for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unnacceptable risk to controlled waters.

Reason: To prevent pollution of controlled waters.

Dust

(4) Dust shall be controlled by damping of stock-piled material and during screening/crushing, as submitted in the supporting statement and approved by the Waste Planning Authority, in order to prevent any dust from leaving the C A Stevens Transport depot. These approved measures shall be implemented for the duration of the development.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Noise

(5) The level of noise emitted from the site shall at no time exceed an LA eq of 50 dB(A) as measured at the facade of the nearest house.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Highways

(6) A maximum of 15,000 tonnes per annum shall be recycled. Records of material type and quantity of throughput should be maintained by the applicant for the duration of the development. These records should be readily available for the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the appropriate level of development and associated highway traffic for the site and surrounding area.

APPENDIX 2

Annexe to Reason for Conditions

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

(General Procedure) Order 1995 - as amended)

__________________________________________________________________

Hampshire, Portsmouth, Southampton and New Forest National Park Minerals and Waste Core Strategy Development Plan Document (Adopted July 2007)

Policy DC3 - Impact on Landscape and Townscape

Minerals and waste development will only be permitted if due regard is given to the likely visual impact of the proposed development and its impact on, and the need to maintain and enhance, the distinctive character of the landscape or townscape. If necessary, additional design, landscaping, planting and screening, including planting in advance of the commencement of the development, should be proposed.

Policy DC6 - Highways

Major mineral extractions, landfills and `strategic' recycling, aggregate processing and recovery and treatment facilities, will be permitted provided they have a suitable access to and/or route to the minerals and waste lorry route as illustrated on the Key Diagram. In all cases, minerals and waste development will only be permitted if it pays due regard to the likely volume and nature of traffic that would be generated by the proposal and the suitability of the proposed access to the site and of the road network that would be affected. Consideration should be given to highway capacity, road and pedestrian safety, congestion and environmental impact, and whether any highway improvements are required and whether these could be carried out satisfactorily without causing unacceptable environmental impact.

Policy DC8 - Pollution, Health, Quality of Life and Amenity

Minerals and waste development will only be permitted if due regard is given to the pollution and amenity impacts on the residents and users of the locality and there is unlikely to be an unacceptable impact on health and/or the quality of life of occupants of nearby dwellings and other sensitive properties. Where necessary minerals and waste developments should include mitigation measures, such as buffer zones between the site and such properties.

Policy DC13 - Waste Management and Recycling

Waste management developments (excluding landfill) will be permitted provided that the site:

a. Is identified as a site, or within an area suitable for waste management uses, in the Hampshire Waste Management Plan, or

b. Re-uses/redevelops previously developed land and/or redundant agricultural and forestry buildings (including their curtilages), or

c. Is within a planned area of large-scale development, or

d. Is on employment land, preferably co-located with complementary activities, and

e. Has good access to, the minerals and waste lorry route as shown on the Key Diagram, and where possible, the site enables the use of waterborne and rail freight, and

f. In the case of recovery and treatment sites, incoming waste shall be subject to pre-treatment, either on or off site to maximise the potential for recycling, and where technically possible, energy will be generated and used and the by-products, including heat, will be reused or recycled, and

g. In the case of sites providing public access, the site shall be accessible for use by disabled people.

APPENDIX 3 - VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX 4 - LOCATION PLAN