APPLICATION NO: 08/0056/GLMAJW VALIDATION …glostext.gloucestershire.gov.uk/Data/Planning...

APPLICATION NO: 08/0056/GLMAJW VALIDATION DATE: 02.10.2008 APPLICANT: Keyway (Gloucester) Ltd AGENT: PE Duncliffe Ltd, Stonecroft, Park Road, Nailsworth,

GL6 0HW SITE: Brick House, Sudmeadow Road, Gloucester, GL2 5HS PROPOSAL: Variation of condition 8 of planning permission

07/01274/COU (dated 25.01.08 for change of use of site from a permitted skip storage use and repair/servicing and maintenance of motor vehicles to a waste transfer station) to allow a maximum of 100 heavy goods vehicle movements a day to the site (50 entering and 50 leaving)

Grid ref: 382031, 218234

SITE AREA: 0.17ha

RECOMMENDED:

That planning permission be granted for the reasons set out in this report and summarised at paragraphs 7.14 to 7.18 of this report and subject to the conditions set out in section 8 of this report.

1. LOCATION 1.1 Brick House is located off Sudmeadow Road within the Hempsted area of

Gloucester city. Sudmeadow Road is a cul de sac and the application site lies towards the bottom (northwest) of this road. Nearby, and on the opposite side of Sudmeadow Road, is the access to Gloucester City Football Club. The site is currently being used for the storage of empty skips and for the repair and servicing of motor vehicles. Planning permission was granted for the change of use of the site to a waste transfer station in January 2008, subject to a number of conditions, one of which limited the number of heavy goods vehicle movements to a maximum of 40 movements per day. This change of use permission has not yet been implemented.

1.2 Towards the top (southeast) of Sudmeadow Road near to the junction with

Llanthony Road are 13 no. residential properties. The closest of these properties is located approximately 190 metres from the boundary of the application site. Further along Sudmeadow Road, between the residential properties and the application site, is the Severnside Trading Estate. Sudmeadow Road joins with Llanthony Road at a T-junction. Llanthony Road becomes Hempsted Lane a few metres to the west of this junction and this entire stretch of road forms part of the South West bypass leading from the west of the city centre through to Quedgeley.

1.3 The River Severn lies approximately 100 metres to the east and northeast of

the site. The site lies within the defined Flood Zone 3 of the River Severn (the

Page 1 of 20 DC JAN09 1 GJ/ag/ ComReps

high risk zone) as shown on the Environment Agency’s Flood Zone Map. Llanthony Priory, a scheduled ancient monument, lies on the south-east side of the Sudmeadow Road/Llanthony Road junction.

2. THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application is for a variation of the condition relating to the number of

heavy goods vehicle movements permitted per day to allow up to 100 movements, instead of 40 movements, ie up to 50 movements in and 50 movements out, instead of 20 movements in and 20 movements out per day.

2.2 The applicant has provided the following information in support of the

application:

“ INTRODUCTION Keyway is a Gloucester based Company that was formed in the mid-1980’s. The Company employs in excess of 150 people and specialises in plant hire, demolition, skip hire and waste management, transport and construction.

2.3 The Company has invested substantially in its modern fleet of vehicles which consists of a variety of tipper lorries, low-loaders, flat bed trailers, crane mounted and road sweeper lorries. The Company also has a variety of machines including JCB’s, 360 machines (various sizes), dozer blades, loading shovels, dumper trucks and crushing and screening machines. The Company operates a sizeable skip hire/waste management arm, which serves the needs of both domestic and commercial customers.

2.4 Keyway provides services to a variety of customers throughout

Gloucestershire and beyond and they have substantial experience in the fields of both construction and major engineering projects.

2.5 In terms of their waste management activities, Keyway have invested

substantially in a variety of re-cycling initiatives as part of their on-going commitment to reducing landfill.

2.6 Given the specific requirements that Keyway have in relation to their waste

management activities (of which Gloucestershire County Council are fully aware) it has proved difficult to locate a suitable site, not only in land use planning terms, but importantly, from a locational point of view. The Company has operated from Gloucester since its formation and the vast majority of their employees are also Gloucester based. For that reason, securing a site within the Gloucester urban area has been a primary consideration, given the need to ensure that their employees do not have to travel long distances to work.

2.7 Additionally, as the great majority of Keyway’s work is concentrated within the

Gloucester area the need to secure a site within the urban area fully accords with National and Local Waste Planning Policies which indicate that such facilities are best located close to where waste is generated.


2.8 Keyway have, over the 2/3 years, liaised closely with Gloucestershire County Council in relation to identifying sites that maybe suitable for either inert crushing, screening/recycling or Waste Transfer Station facilities. The former Hayes Metals site provided Keyway with a short-term site for inert materials but due to the Quays Regeneration Scheme, the lease arrangements were terminated. The Brickhouse Site at Sudmeadow Road does however provide an excellent opportunity for Keyway to have a modest sized Waste Transfer Station.

THE PROPOSED CHANGE OF CONDITION

2.9 In 2007, Keyway submitted a planning application to GCC for the change of use of Brickhouse, Sudmeadow Road, Gloucester from its permitted skip storage and repair/servicing and maintenance of motor vehicles to a waste transfer station. The application was validated on 10 September 2007 under planning application reference 07/01274/COU. Following statutory consultations, consideration by officers of GCC and a members site visit, the application was presented before GCC’s Planning Committee on 25 January 2008. Consistent with the planning officer’s professional recommendation, Members of the Planning Committee proceeded to grant planning permission and the formal planning permission was issued, dated 25 January 2008.

2.10 Having considered the various conditions that have been imposed on the

planing permission decision notice, Keyway seek to vary condition 8 of planing permission reference no 07/0217/COU. This condition states

‘For the development hereby authorised, no more than 40 heavy goods vehicle movements to and from the site per day (a maximum of 20 heavy goods vehicles entering the site and 20 leaving the site) shall take place, unless otherwise agreed in advance and in writing with the Waste Planning Authority’.

2.11 Keyway have progressed pre-application discussions with Gloucestershire

County Council and the reasons that underpin Keyway’s proposal to vary condition 8 were set out in correspondence to the Highway Authority (HA) dated 20 February 2008 (see Appendix 1 below). In response, The HA advised that it would be necessary for an independent traffic assessment to be undertaken, the purpose of which was to establish the traffic movements associated with the existing lawful use of the application site. Keyway appointed a Highway Consultancy who, in turn, liaised with the HA in order to agree the necessary ‘scope’ of work that was required. A traffic count was undertaken, the results of which have been supplied to the HA. Following review of the traffic data, the HA have advised that they would not object to an application to vary condition 8 to permit a maximum of 50 skip lorries a day to visit the site.

2.12 The planning application relates to a variation of condition 8 and does not

seek to alter or amend any other aspect of the development that was approved under planning permission 07/01274/COU. On the basis that the HA have reviewed the traffic data associated with the existing lawful use of the


application site which includes the storage and movement of skips), Keyway submit that the proposal to vary condition 8 is reasonable and that planning permission should be granted.”

Appendix 1 Correspondence dated 20 February 2008. “We note that Condition 8 of the pp decision notice restricts the number of vehicle movements to 40 heavy goods vehicle movements to and from the site per day. The Supporting Statement submitted with the application provided the existing traffic generation figures (paragraph 3) ie: Keyway's existing skip storage business generates 40 trips in to the site and 40 out of the site for the purposes of collecting and dropping off empty skips and bins. The Motor Vehicle Repair business generates 18 movements (in/out). In total the existing traffic generation figures are in excess of 50 movements entering the site and 50 leaving the site. As confirmed by you during the Planning Committee debate there are no traffic movement restrictions relating to the existing site. The difficulty that the Company are faced with (in relation to condition 8) is that whilst the pp authorises a maximum of 25,000 tonnes of skip waste per year (about 85 tonnes per day) the Company relies heavily on the domestic / householder skip market where skip sizes are in the 1-4 tonne "bracket". In order to achieve 85 tonnes per day a 7.5 tonne (gross vehicle weight rigid vehicle) carrying approximately 1 tonne of waste) would need to make 84 trips to the site per day. In the same way an 18 tonne vehicle (gross vehicle weight) would need to make 33 trips to the site per day. A 26 tonne vehicle (gross vehicle weight) carrying 4 tonnes of waste would need to make 21 trips to the site per day. Whilst it is the case that the number of trips to the site per day would be reduced as a consequence of larger weight skips, Keyway's market is focused on those domestic customers requiring rapid turn around of skips in the 1 - 4 tonne range. With the above in mind, our clients would welcome your views as to whether you would have any highway objection to an increase in the number of vehicle movements, consistent with the existing traffic generation figures already prevailing.” Results of survey of traffic generated from the site (summary) Start time 0700 end time 1900 Type of vehicle In Out Total movements Car/taxi 5 6 11 LGV 4 3 7 HGV 18 19 37 Skip Lorry 27 28 55 Total lorries (HGV+Skip) 45 47 92 Total vehicles 54 56 110


3 PLANNING HISTORY Application number

Description of development

Decision /date

99/00703/COU Storage of skips Refused by Gloucester City Council in April 2000 but won on appeal in October 2000.

04/01268/COU Continued use of site for repair, servicing and maintenance of motor vehicles

Approved by Gloucester City Council in February 2005.

07/01274/COU Change of use of the site from permitted skip storage and maintenance of motor vehicles to a waste transfer station

Approved by Gloucestershire County Council on 25 January 2008.

Copies of these decisions are attached as Appendix 1 to this report.

4. PLANNING POLICY 4.1 Under Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act (1990) the Planning

Authority must have regard to the development plan in considering planning applications unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The introduction of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 introduces a new system of development plans defined as Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents. The new system is being brought into effect through a series of commencement orders and transitional arrangements apply until the full introduction of the Act. The effect of the transitional arrangements means that the Planning Authority continues to consider those development plans that existed on 28 September 2004 when determining planning applications. The Secretary of State has issued Directions for the Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review and the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan which confirm that the Development Plans will continue to apply until new policies expressly replace old policies by being published, adopted or approved. Where policies have not been saved, the County Council may still have regard to those policies and attach such weight as appropriate to those unsaved policies. The following sections of this report will set out the relevant policies to be considered in determining the planning application.

4.2 The following development plans and guidance must be considered in

determining this planning application: 4.3 Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS)

The Authority must consider the Regional Spatial Strategy once it is published, adopted or approved. From 28 September 2004, the adopted Regional Planning Guidance for the South West (RPG10) constitutes the RSS for the Region and is a material consideration in determining planning applications until it is replaced by the emerging RSS.


The emerging Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West 2006-2026 is now in an advanced stage of preparation. It was subject to Examination in Public in 2007, and the Secretary of State published her proposed changes to the Panel’s Report in July 2008.

4.4 Planning Policy Statement 10 (PPS10): Planning for Sustainable Waste

Management (including the Companion Guide to PPS10) PPS10 encourages communities to take responsibility for their own waste and to enable waste to be disposed of in one of the nearest appropriate installations. The statement promotes sustainable waste management whereby waste is moved up the waste hierarchy of reduction, reuse, recycling and composting and waste to energy, with waste disposal to landfill as a last resort. When determining planning applications the PPS is a material consideration which may supersede policies in development plans and Waste Planning Authorities should therefore not place requirements on applicants which are inconsistent with the PPS. In considering application for waste management facilities the statement indicates that authorities should consider the likely impact on the local environment and amenity. The requirement for applicants to demonstrate that their proposal represents the Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO), that was a former requirement of previous guidance (PPG10) has been removed.

4.5 Planning Policy Statement 23 (PPS 23): Planning and Pollution Control PPS23 sets out the material considerations that should be taken into account determining planning applications for developments that may give rise to pollution. PPS23 notes that the planning and pollution control systems are separate but complementary.

PPS23 states that any air or water consideration is capable of being a material consideration in so far as it affects land use.

The planning system should focus on the whether the development itself is an acceptable use of the land, and the impacts of those uses, rather than the control of the processes or emissions themselves. Planning Authorities should work on the assumption that the relevant pollution control regime will be properly applied and enforced. They should act to complement but not seek to duplicate it.

PPS23 recommends close liaison with pollution control authorities and that Planning Authorities should ensure that the pollution control authority is satisfied the proposal can be regulated under the pollution control regime. Planning Authorities should also ensure that the cumulative effects of the pollution from a proposal, taking into account the existing sources of pollution, do not make a proposal unacceptable.


4.6 Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review: Adopted Plan (November 1999) The following policies have been ‘saved’ and are relevant to the proposed development: Policy WM.1 indicates that waste management facilities should operate on the basis that waste will be treated and/or disposed of by employing the best practicable environmental option for that waste stream. Policy WM.2 – states that provision for primary waste management facilities should be located near to major concentrations of waste arisings, ands secondary facilities should be located to serve the primary facilities. The following considerations will apply: a) how proposals contribute towards an integrated waste management system and the provisions of the development plan; c) the amenity of local communities ands access to the countryside is safeguarded and where possible enhanced; f) there is no adverse impact on important natural resources including agricultural land and the water-based environment Policy WM.3 indicates that development intended to primarily cater for Gloucestershire’s waste will be encouraged in the appropriate locations. Policy WM.4 indicates that provision will be made for facilities associated with the recovery of materials through recycling and composting. The following locational criteria apply: contribution towards an integrated waste management system, should be in close proximity to major concentrations of waste arisings, industrial, redundant or ‘brownfield’ land should be used in preference to virgin land. Policy P.1 – Provision will only be made for development where it does not have an unacceptable effect in terms of:

a) the environment and local community in terms of air, noise or light pollution; b) the quality of surface or ground water; or c) contamination of the land or soil. 4.7 Gloucestershire Structure Plan Third Alteration Deposit Draft (November

2002) & Proposed Modifications (July 2004 and January 2005) The Third Alteration had an Examination in Public in November/December 2003. Two sets of Proposed Modifications have been produced. In April 2005 a Secretary of State Direction was issued on the Plan. Due to this Direction, the Plan remains held in abeyance and will not be forwarded to adoption. The following policies are relevant to the proposed development, although the weight attached to them is limited as they have not been ‘saved’. Policy SD.21 – need for waste management facilities

Policy MR.4 – biodiversity Policy MR.9 – pollution impact


4.8 Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan (GWLP) adopted 2004 The Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan was adopted in October 2004. Under the terms of the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government’s Direction (dated 5 October 2007) the following WLP policies are ‘saved’ until replaced by Development Plan Documents contained in the Minerals and Waste Development Frameworks.

Policy 37 – Proximity to other land uses Proposals for waste development will be determined taking into account such matters as the effect on the environment, occupants’ and users’ amenity and health, the countryside, the traditional landscape character of Gloucestershire, the local highway network, any hazardous installation and substance, and any adverse cumulative effect in combination with other development in the area. Where appropriate, suitable ameliorative measures shall be incorporated in the proposals to mitigate, attenuate and control noise, dust, litter, odour, landfill gas, vermin, leachate and flue emissions.

Policy 38 - Hours of Operation The Waste Planning Authority will where appropriate impose a condition restricting hours of operation on waste management facilities to protect amenity. Policy 40 - Traffic Proposals for waste development will only be permitted where the site access and the adjacent highway network can safely accommodate the traffic associated with the development, or where the required highway improvements would not cause unacceptable harm to the local environment. A transport assessment will be required to address the traffic generation of the proposed development and its impact on the local road network. The following policies of the Waste Local Plan were not saved by the Secretary of State, but are still material considerations: Policy 2 (regional self-sufficiency), Policy 3 (proximity principle), Policy 6 (waste management facilities for other sites).

4.9 Gloucester City Local Plan adopted 1983

Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 indicates that the Local Plan’s status must be considered. The statutory adopted Local Plan for Gloucester is the 1983 Gloucester Local Plan. Although the plan was published some time ago, it has been formally saved until September 2007.

With effect from 27th September 2007 some of the policies of the 1983 adopted local plan have been deleted and therefore whilst they are material considerations they have less weight in planning terms. Of the total 190 policies in the 1983 Local Plan, 137 have been deleted and 53 policies have been saved. The deleted policies are those that may have been implemented or relate to a historic matter and are therefore no longer relevant, policies that repeat national policy and policies that are statements of intent that add little


value to the development control process e.g. ‘The Council will investigate the possibility of….’ The saved policies will in due course be replaced by adopted Local Development Framework documents.

The following policies are relevant to the proposed development:-

Core Policy A.4 (not saved) which seeks environmental improvement and enhancement through control of development and other measures.

Gloucester City Local Plan (Second Stage Deposit) 2002 The Second Stage Deposit has not officially been adopted but the policies are considered a material consideration. This Revised Deposit version of the Plan has been adopted by the City Council for development control purposes and will be a material consideration in planning decisions. However, following the Secretary of State’s Direction, its weight will be limited. Relevant Policies are: Policy FRP 10 recommends that planning permission should not be granted for developments that would give rise to unacceptable noise levels; Policy FRP 11 seeks to protect sensitive development from the effects of pollution through noise, dust, vibration, light, heat or radiation. Draft Local Development Framework A Preferred Options consultation paper on development control policies was published in January 2006. The policies in the Local Development Framework will gain weight as it proceeds towards adoption. The following draft policy is relevant: Policy D5- Safeguarding Amenity states: “Any new development that would cause an unacceptable loss of amenity to adjoining occupiers either directly or indirectly will be refused.”

5. PUBLICITY AND REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 The application was advertised by site notice and a newspaper advertisement

was placed in a locally circulating newspaper. A number of local properties were also sent ‘near neighbour’ consultation letters.

5.2 A the time of writing this report 6 representations have been received from

residents of the houses in Sudmeadow Road, plus 3 representations from local businesses. These representations object to the proposal for the following reasons:

• Sudmeadow Road is not wide enough or strong enough to take existing

traffic levels, let alone additional HGV traffic. An alternative route through Spinnaker Park, or the tip or Hempsted Lane near Pressweld should be used instead.


• The survey did not show skip traffic before 0900, whereas skip lorries have been noted any time from 0615.

• Sudmeadow Road suffers from parking problems exacerbated recently by student parking for the nearby Gloscat building reducing the width to single lane and making it difficult for large lorries and other traffic to pass along the road;

• This proposal will exacerbate existing levels of vibration, noise, dust and mud on the road that effect the residential properties on Sudmeadow Road;

• The site itself is in the flood plain and therefore should not be disturbed • Use of the site as a Waste Transfer station will cause dust and smells to

nearest neighbours.

5.3 The local City Councillor , Cllr Gordon Heath, has objected on the following grounds:

“ This proposal would represent an increase of 250% above that already granted (case officer’s note – this is actually a 150% increase), in traffic movements past the row of terraced homes in Sudmeadow Road…houses which are close to the pavement and below pavement level and so bringing their ground floor windows very close to wheels of large vehicles. This worrying increase would have an enormous negative impact as indeed the amount which has already been granted will have….”

5.4 County Councillor Jeremy Hilton has objected on the grounds that the proposal will increase the number of vehicles arriving at the site from 20 to 50 equalling a 250% increase in traffic (case officer’s note – this is actually a 150% increase). This is unreasonable especially as the skip lorries will pass by a row of terrace homes in Sudmeadow road 100 times a day. The homes in Sudmeadow Road have small front yards and the noise from passing skip lorries will have a negative impact on the quality of life of the dozen households living in the road. I recommend that the application is rejected.

5.5 Hempsted Residents Association has strongly objected on the following grounds:

• Sudmeadow Road is poorly maintained, with private houses at the eastern

end. The passage of HGVs is shaking these hoses and most likely causing structural damage to them.

• The application to increase the number of vehicle movements so soon after the previous application suggests that the applicant most probably felt that the initial application would fail with such a high number of movements. The same reasoning applies now.

• Sudmeadow Road joins with Llanthony Road, now part of the Gloucester South–Western Bypass. The combined vehicle movements will cause serious disruption to traffic flow, and is another reason why this application should be refused.


6. CONSULTATIONS 6.1 Gloucester City Council

Gloucester City Council makes the following comments: “I refer you to the City Council’s representation in respect of the original application, which set out our concerns with the proposed development. Notwithstanding that your Authority subsequently granted planning permission I reiterate the City Council’s original objection and advise that the proposed increase in the use of the site is likely to further exacerbate the adverse impacts in terms of vehicular noise upon the residential amenities of the occupiers of properties at Sudmeadow Road. The proposal would also set a dangerous precedent for the incremental increase in the use of the site”. The city council’s objections to the original proposal were on grounds of • Traffic impact on inadequate road • Impact on residents of housing on Sudmeadow Road • Development would cause increase in flood risk • Impact from dust, smoke, noise.

6.2 Environment Agency. No response received. Assume no objection. The EA

did not object to the original change of use application, subject to conditions, which have been imposed.

6.3 County Highways Representative

“To support the application to vary the condition, the Applicant was requested to undertake a traffic survey on Sudmeadow Road to ascertain the trip rate associated with the current use. A manual traffic count was undertaken in the summer of 2008 and this indicated that the existing use generates around 92 HGV/Skip Lorry movements a day (45 heavy goods vehicles were recorded entering the site and 47 leaving the site between 7am and 7pm). It should be accepted that the survey is just a snapshot of the current situation and from evidence from other sites, flows are likely to vary by up to 10% a day. It would be reasonable to assume, therefore, that the current use could generate HGV traffic of between 45 and 50 vehicles (between 90 and 100 trips). In the opinion of the Highway Authority, it would not be possible (to) prove a material impact on Sudmeadow Road if the condition were varied to permit a maximum of 50 HGV's a day in respect of the proposed use. … I refer to the above planning application received on 13 October 2008 with Plan No: KGL/001/2008 to which no Highway objection is raised.”


7. OBSERVATIONS OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Planning

7.1 This application is for a variation of a condition on the grant of planning permission for the change of use from skip storage and vehicle repair to a waste transfer station, it is not for the change of use itself.

7.2 The approved condition limited heavy goods vehicle movements to and from the site to 40 per day (a maximum of 20 heavy goods vehicles entering the site and 20 leaving the site). The application seeks to change the condition to allow 50 heavy goods vehicles a day to access the site, meaning a total of 100 movements, 50 in and 50 out.

7.3 It is important to note that there are no conditions regulating the operating

hours or the vehicle movements associated with the current uses of the site for empty skip storage and the repair and servicing of motor vehicles.

7.4 The original condition on the number of HGV movements for the change of

use to a waste transfer station application was imposed in order to achieve some limit on the proposed use, and was guided by the information on anticipated traffic levels provided by the applicant at the time of the application.

7.5 The applicant’s information about current levels of traffic only related to the

part of the site used for skip storage, and was advised as being 40 movements in each direction, a total of some 80 trips. Therefore, the level of 40 vehicles per day, 20 in each direction, was perceived as being an improvement on the current situation. However no account was made of traffic generated by the motor repair part of the site.

7.6 Had a higher level of traffic been anticipated in the original application, then

the applicant would have been requested to justify this by undertaking a survey of current traffic levels from both parts of the site. This has now been done, and the survey has demonstrated that current combined levels from both parts of the site are very close to the level now being sought.

7.7 Therefore, despite the objections that have been submitted, it is difficult to

conclude that the change in the permitted maximum number of vehicle movements will lead to a deterioration in the amenity of the local residents in terms of noise and dust, because the new limit of traffic movements reflects current levels. The alternative routes suggested are not available without compulsory purchase and would not be viable to implement.

7.8 The calculations of anticipated traffic levels are based on a maximum annual

throughput for the Transfer Station of 25,000 tonnes, and assumes that most of the vehicle movements are smaller skip lorries, ie 7.5 or 18 tonne vehicles. The existing permission already imposes a limit of 25,000 tonnes on the annual throughput, and this provides a safeguard on further incremental intensification of the operation.


Highways considerations 7.9 The application has been considered by the Highways Development Co-

ordination area manager who, on the basis that the proposed level of traffic movements reflects current levels, recommends that no objections be raised subject to the imposition of suitable conditions. The proposed change of condition is considered acceptable in highways terms and accords with Policies 37, 38 and 40 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

Noise

7.10 In situations where background levels are already high, as is the case with Sudmeadow Road, increases in traffic levels need to be quite dramatic before there is any noticeable change in noise levels. Generally, a doubling of traffic levels only results in an increase of 3 dB which is the threshold of noticeable difference in noise levels. The key determinant is vehicle types, with larger vehicles being generally noisier than smaller ones, therefore an increase in the size and weight of vehicles is more likely to result in higher noise levels than a change in traffic numbers. Human Rights

7.11 From 2nd October 2000 the Human Rights Act 1998 has the effect of enshrining much of the European Convention on Human Rights in UK law. Under 6(1) of the Act, it is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a convention right. A person who claims that a public authority has acted (or proposes to act) in a way which is made unlawful by Section 6(1) and that he is (or would be) a victim of the unlawful act, may bring proceedings against the authority under the Act in the appropriate court or tribunal, or may rely on the convention right or rights concerned in any legal proceedings.

7.12 The main Convention rights relevant when considering planning proposals are

Article 1 of the First Protocol (the peaceful enjoyment of property) and Article 8 (the right to a private and family life). Article 1 of the First Protocol guarantees the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions and Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 guarantees a right to respect for private and family life. Article 8 also provides that there shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except as in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety, or the economic wellbeing of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the freedom of others.

7.13 Objections have been received from local residents relating to the impact on residential amenity. For the reasons set out in the observations of the Head of Planning and Development, in particular under headings highways and amenity issues, I am of the opinion that the proposal does not represent undue interference with such rights and in any case since these rights are qualified, and have to be set against other considerations, any interference that there may be, is considered to be justified. Accordingly, it would not be unlawful to grant planning permission for this development.


Conclusions and summary reasons for grant of planning permission and relevant development plan policies and proposals

7.14 This application is for the alteration of a condition on a planning permission for the change of use from skip storage and vehicle repair to a waste transfer station. The change of condition would impose a maximum of 100 HGV movements per day to and from the site. There have been objections to this proposal from Gloucester City Council, the local Residents Association, one of the County Councillors, the District Councillor and a number of local residents and businesses. The main reasons for objecting are impacts on residential amenity, unsuitability of the road and traffic congestion.

7.15 The applicant has demonstrated that current traffic levels generated from the

combined operations on the site are close to those now being sought. On this basis it is considered difficult to sustain any objection on either amenity grounds or highway grounds.

7.16 The existing overall limit on the annual throughput provides a safeguard on

further incremental intensification of the operation. A limit on permitted working hours will also help reduce traffic levels outside normal business times. These safeguards do not exist for the currently consented operations at the site for empty skip storage and vehicle servicing and repairs.

7.17 Subject to the retention of the control on annual throughput and limiting of hours of operation I consider that this application is acceptable and accords with the relevant development plan policies, particularly Policies 16, 37 and 40 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan, and WM.1, WM.3, WM.4, F.1 and P.1 of the Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review. This application has been determined in accordance with the Town and Country Planning Acts, and in the context of the Government’s current planning policy guidance and the relevant circulars, together with the relevant Development Plan policies, including the following:

Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review – ‘Saved’ Policies WM.1, WM.3, WM.4, P.1, F.1 and NHE.2

Gloucestershire Structure Plan Third Alteration Deposit Draft and Proposed Modifications - Policies SD.21, MR.4, MR.8 and MR.9.

Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan (adopted October 2004) – ‘Saved’ Policies 16, 33, 37, 38 and 40. ‘Unsaved’ Policies 2, 3, 6.

Gloucester City Council Local Plan adopted 1983 – Core Policy A.4.

7.18 The Council is of the opinion that the proposed development gives rise to no material harm, is in accordance with the development plan and that there are no material considerations that indicate that the decision should be refused. The existing conditions will be reiterated on the decision notice, with changes to the operating hours condition no 6. The opportunity has been taken to review the wording of all conditions and small changes have been made to clarify the intention and assist enforcement.


8. RECOMMENDATION

That planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions:

Commencement 1. The development to which this permission relates shall be begun not later

than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date of this permission. Written notification of the date of commencement shall be sent to the Waste Planning Authority within 7 days of such commencement

Reason: To accord with the provisions of section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Definition of Permission 2. This permission relates to the land outlined in red on drawing number

KGL/002/2007 Rev A2.

Reason: To define the planning permission so that the development is carried out in accordance with the planning submission.

Working Programme, Phasing and Direction of Working 3. Unless otherwise agreed in advance and in writing by the Waste Planning

Authority, or varied by other conditions of this consent, the construction of the building and operation of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted application forms, supporting information for this application and drawing reference KGL/001/2008 dated September 2008, and for planning permission 07/01274/COU and drawings reference KGL/002/2007 Rev A2 dated June 2007 and KGL/001/2007 Rev A2 dated June 2007. Reason: To adequately control the development and minimise its impact on the amenity of the local area in accordance with Policies 37, 40 and 42 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

Buildings and Plant

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of part 8 of schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any order amending, replacing or re-enacting that order), no fixed plant or machinery, buildings or structures shall be erected, extended, installed or replaced on any part of the site without the prior written approval of the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the local environment, and in accordance with Policies 37 and 42 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.


5. Prior to the commencement of development, samples of the external finishes for the Site Office building and a sample of the proposed concrete block wall shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Waste Planning Authority. Thereafter only the approved materials shall be used.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

Hours of Working

6. Except in emergencies where operations are required to protect life, limb or property, or unless otherwise agreed in advance and in writing with the Waste Planning Authority, no waste transfer operations or other operations (including the manoeuvring, loading or unloading of vehicles) shall take place on the site except between the hours of:

07:30 - 18:00 hours Monday to Friday 07:30 - 14:00 hours Saturdays There shall be no operations carried out at the site on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the local environment in accordance with Policy 38 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

Importation of Waste Material

7. No more than 25,000 tonnes of material shall be imported to the site in any calendar year (1 January to 31 December inclusive).

Reason: To define the scope of this consent and to protect the amenity of the local environment, and in accordance with Policies 33 and 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan and Core Policy A.4 of the Gloucester City Local Plan, 1983.

8. For the development hereby authorised, no more than 100 heavy goods

vehicle movements to and from the site per day (a maximum of 50 heavy goods vehicles entering the site and 50 leaving the site) shall take place.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety and the amenities of the occupiers of the dwellings on Sudmeadow Road in accordance with Policies 37 and 40 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

9. From the date of commencement of this permission the operators shall

maintain daily records of the number of vehicles bringing materials to the site, and the quantity in weight and type of material accepted onto the site, and shall make them available to the Waste Planning Authority at any time upon request. All records shall be kept for at least 24 months.

Reason: In order that the Waste Planning Authority can monitor the operations at the site.


Access, Traffic and Protection of the Highway

10. No vehicles leaving the site shall enter the public highway unless their wheels and chassis are clean, to prevent materials being deposited on the highway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to help prevent mud and dust from being carried out onto the highway in accordance with Policy 40 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

11. The proposed vehicular access shall not be brought into use until car parking has been provided in accordance with the submitted plan KGL/002/2007 Rev A dated June 2007, and that area shall not be thereafter be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles.

Reason: To ensure that adequate off-road parking is available.

12. The transfer station hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the

manoeuvring facilities are completed in all respects in accordance with the submitted details and shall be similarly maintained thereafter for that purpose.

Reason: To enable vehicles to enter and leave the highway in forward gear in

the interests of highway safety. 13. No part of the development shall be brought into use until covered and secure

space has been laid out within the site in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority for a minimum of 4 bicycles to be parked.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and sustainable travel objectives in

accordance with Policies T.3 and T.8 of the Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review.

Environmental Protection

14. No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a flood risk management and mitigation scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority. Any works shall be completed in accordance with the details agreed and shall be implemented and maintained accordingly thereafter.

Reason: To help protect the development, third parties and users of the site from flooding in accordance with PPS 25 and Policy 34 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

15. No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a scheme for the provision of surface water drainage works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The drainage works shall be completed in accordance with the details and timetable agreed and shall be implemented and maintained accordingly thereafter.

Reason: To prevent pollution and the increased risk of flooding by ensuring the provision of a satisfactory means of surface water disposal in accordance with PPS 23, PPS 25 and Policy 34 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan and Policies F.1 and P.1 of the Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review.


16. There shall be no building or raising of ground levels that cover a ground area more than 260 square metres.

Reason: To prevent the loss of floodplain storage capacity in this location in accordance with PPS 25 and Policy F.1 of the Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review.

17. All reasonable steps shall be taken to minimise noise from vehicles and

machinery, and in particular (but without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing) efficient silencers shall be fitted to and used by all vehicles and machinery on the site.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the local environment in accordance with Policy 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan and Core Policy A.4 of the Gloucester City Local Plan 1983.

18. There shall be no floodlighting erected on the site at any time, unless agreed

in advance and in writing with the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the local environment in accordance with Policy 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan and Core Policy A.4 of the Gloucester City Local Plan 1983.

19. All mobile plant, machinery and HGVs (excluding delivery drivers which are

not owned or under the direct control of the operator) operating within the site requiring reversing warning devices under health and safety legislation shall incorporate broadband reversing devices.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the local environment in accordance with Policy 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

20. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme depicting all external

lighting shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Waste Planning Authority. Thereafter the approved scheme shall be implemented and maintained for the duration of operations at the site.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the local environment in accordance with Policy 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan, and Core Policy A.4 of the Gloucester City Local Plan 1983.

21. Any above ground storage tanks should be sited on an impervious base and

surrounded by a suitable liquid tight bunded compound. No drainage outlet should be provided. The bunded area should be capable of containing 110% of the volume of the largest tank and all pipes, draw pipes and sight gauges should be enclosed within its curtilage. The vent pipe should be directed downwards into the bund.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment in accordance with PPS23 and Policies 33 and 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.


Crushing operations

22. Unless otherwise agreed in advance and in writing with the Waste Planning Authority, there shall be no crushing operations carried out on the site.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area in accordance with Policy 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

Litter 23. Effective measures shall be taken at all times to ensure that no litter or other

wastes are dispersed beyond the boundaries of the site.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area in accordance with Policy 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan. Dust

24. No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a scheme for the control of dust at the site has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Waste Planning Authority. Thereafter the approved scheme shall be implemented and maintained for the duration of operations at the site.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the area in accordance with Policy 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan. Notes to applicant The proposed development is will require a waste management licence and the applicant is advised to contact the Environment Agency.

Bats are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and also the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended). If a bat or evidence of bats using a feature on site is discovered during operations all work should cease and a licensed bat consultant or Natural England contacted and the situation assessed before work can proceed.

BACKGROUND PAPERS:

Application form, plans and supporting information. Consultation responses. Letters of representation.

CONTACT OFFICER:

Anthea Hoey, Atkins Ltd. 01392 352900

Gillian Parkinson, Team Manager Environmental Services, Legal Services 01452 425212


Application History Consultee Time taken (weeks) Gloucester City Council 6 weeks Environment Agency No reply County Highways 2 weeks 2 days Time taken 16 weeks

The above timings relate to the initial responses on the original application submission. The overall time taken reflects the availability of committee dates for consideration of the application.


Date post:	11-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ledung
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times