APPLICATION NO: 10/0039/STMAJW DISTRICT REF: S.10/1816/CM VALIDATION DATE: 22 July 2010 AGENT: MWS Environment Ltd., 5 Meissen Avenue,

Desborough, Kettering NN14 2YB. APPLICANT: A1 Green Recycling Ltd. SITE: A1 Green Recycling Ltd., Sharpness Docks, Bridge

Road, Sharpness GL13 9UX. PROPOSAL: Retrospective change of use of general industrial site

to waste recycling facility and proposed use as a waste transfer station and single storey building.

PARISH OF: Hinton SITE AREA: 0.2 hectares

GRID REF: Grid Ref: E367099 N202135

RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission is GRANTED for the reasons set out within this report and summarised at paragraphs 7.21 to 7.22 and subject to the conditions detailed at section 8.0 of this report.

1.0 LOCATION 1.1 The application site is located within the industrial area of Sharpness Docks,

approximately 3 kilometres north of Berkeley and 9 kilometres north west of Dursley. Sharpness is located on the Severn Estuary and the docks are at the head of the Gloucester and Sharpness Canal. The site is accessed from the B4066 which runs in a north westerly direction from the A38 Gloucester to Bristol Road. The site is located in the southern part of the docks, opposite the dock entrance gates at the roundabout between the dock access road and eastern perimeter road, called Bridge Road.

1.2 The application site is mainly level, roughly rectangular in shape, measuring approximately 1627 square metres. The land is used mainly for open storage of soil and aggregate heaps and other mainly inert waste materials. There is a small single storey brick building with a corrugated sheet roof that was formerly an electricity sub-station in the north eastern corner of the application site. On hardstanding in the south western corner of the application site is a metal storage container, small wooden storage building and caravan. The application site is enclosed by a mixture of 2 metre and 1 metre high weld mesh and herras fencing with entrance gates on western boundary. There is established vegetation along parts of the northern, southern and eastern boundaries, including some trees.

1.3 Beyond the dock access road running along the southern and western application site boundaries is open land. There is a large fertiliser warehouse located to the north of the application site, just beyond a linear section of open land which was formerly the route of a branch railway line that connected the southern docks area to the main rail network. A group of three residential properties are located 30 metres to the east fronting onto Bridge Street and separated from the application site by an area of green space.

1.4 The application site is located approximately 300 metres from the Severn

Estuary which is an important nature conservation habitat for wildfowl, being designated a Special Protection Area, Special Area of Conservation, a notified Site of Special Scientific Interest and Ramsar site.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The applicant is seeking to regularise the unauthorised change of use of a general industrial site on Sharpness Docks to a waste recycling facility. The applicant wishes to recycle up to 10,000 tonnes of non-hazardous commercial, industrial and household waste. This would be made up of 7,500 tonnes of construction, demolition, excavation waste and 2,500 tonnes of commercial, industrial and household waste. The applicant is also seeking permission to use the application site as a waste transfer station. The development proposals include the erection of a single storey building to be used for waste recycling and a portakabin, located close to the site entrance, to be used as a site office/ mess facilities for operatives in place of the caravan that had been stationed on the application.

2.2 The information supplied in the Planning Support Statement states that: “The majority (about 90 to 95%) of the waste processed by the existing operation is generated within a 5 mile radius of the application site and comprises mainly construction, demolition and excavation waste; it is expected that the proposed development will continue to serve this local need. The majority (about 75%) of the waste to be accepted by the proposed development will continue to be construction, demolition and excavation wastes arising from the local area, which will be processed to produce soil and recycled aggregates; about 75 -80% of these products are expected to be provided to local businesses (such as construction companies and garden centres) and households within a 5 mile radius of the site. At present surplus soil and aggregate are taken to Bristol and Avon Waste Management Ltd in Avonmouth.

2.3 It is expected that about 25% of the waste to be accepted by the proposed development will be general household commercial and industrial waste arising from the local area and the majority from within a 5 mile radius of the site; these wastes will not include biodegradable municipal waste such as food waste. Owing to the type of general waste that will be accepted by the development it is expected that initially about 70 - 80% of the incoming waste will comprise recoverable materials such as metals, plastic, glass, doors and windows. The destination of the recovered elements will, to a certain extent,

depend upon the price that can be obtained for these materials; however, appropriate buyers for recovered materials have been identified in Sharpness, Tetbury and Bristol.

2.4 There are two existing waste management facilities located within Sharpness Docks, the in-vessel recycling centre operated by New Earth Solutions Group Ltd and the metal recycling facility operated by European Metals Recycling Ltd (EMR) which is located about 200 metres to the north-east of the application site. The presence of these existing facilities demonstrates the suitability of the Sharpness Docks for this type of development. These existing sites provide complimentary facilities to the proposed development and ones which the applicant has taken appropriate residual/recovered material to in the past and would intend to continue to do so in the future. Residual waste materials that cannot be accepted by the local recycling facility are expected to be taken to the Viridor facility in Filton, Bristol.”

2.5 The recycling building, following the receipt of revised plans, would measure

8.0 metres by 11 metres with mono-pitched roof up to a maximum height of 4.7 metres. The building would be finished in blue coloured profiled steel cladding which has been chosen to mirror the industrial buildings to the north of the application site. The entrance door would be on the western elevation, facing into the yard. The building would be used for the manual sorting of incoming waste. The processing and storage of inert construction and demolition waste to produce recycled aggregates would be undertaken along the northern application site boundary. This layout has been revised to take account of comments received during the publicity for this application regarding the original location of storage mounds adjacent to the road. Skips would be stored along the southern application site boundary closest to the road. All the equipment and plant that will be used for the waste processing operations is mobile and includes the following: barrel screen, crusher, loading shovel and 2 x 360 degree excavators.

2.6 The proposal is to employ 3 full time and 3 part time workers. Six car parking spaces for operatives and turning space are to be provided for skip lorries. HGV will not be parked overnight on the site as these are operated from a depot elsewhere. Waste would be delivered to the site by road in skip lorries. “It is expected that on average the operation will generate about 10 vehicle movements per day; although on some days there will be no vehicle movements as work dictates. The daily movements are likely to be spread fairly evenly throughout the working day. Vehicles entering the site would do so using the formal entrance located off the southern dock access road, immediately opposite the B4066.”

2.7 A chemical toilet will provide welfare facilities for staff on the application site. Surface water will continue to drain through the application site as at present and the concrete pad will drain to a sealed drainage sump emptied by pump or vacuum tanker.

Environmental Impact Assessment

2.8 The application was screened in accordance with Regulation 7 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 on 25 August 2010 because the application site whilst small in size, lies close to sensitive areas. The sensitive areas are the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar/SSSI site and Sharpness Docks Key Wildlife Site. It was the opinion of the Waste Planning Authority, following consultation with the appropriate consultees that an Environmental Statement was not required, as the proposal would not be likely to have a significant effect on the environment.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The County Council has no other relevant planning history for the application

site.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY

Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management

4.1 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.

4.2 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.

4.3 In considering applications for waste management facilities the statement indicates that authorities should consider the likely impact on the local environment and amenity.

4.4 It is also stated in paragraph 22 of PPS10 that development plans form the

framework within which decisions on proposals for development are taken, and that when proposals are consistent with an up-to-date development plan, Waste Planning Authorities should not require applicants for new or enhanced waste management facilities to demonstrate a quantitative or market need for their proposal.

Planning Policy Statement 23 – Planning and Pollution control

4.5 Paragraph 10 of PPS23 states, “planning and pollution control systems are separate but complementary”. The planning system should focus on the use of land and the impacts of that use rather than the control of processes or emissions themselves. In doing so paragraph 15 indicates that the Local Planning Authority should take into consideration the full environmental impacts of development and ensure that, “the relevant pollution control authority is satisfied that the potential releases can be adequately regulated under the pollution control framework.”

Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation

4.6 PPS9 states that the aim of planning decisions should be to prevent harm to biodiversity and geological conservation interests. Where granting planning permission would result in significant harm to those interests, local planning authorities will need to be satisfied that the development cannot reasonably be located on any alternatives sites that would result in less or no harm. In the absence of any such alternatives, local planning authorities should ensure that, before planning permission is granted, adequate mitigation measures are put in place. Where a planning decision would result in significant harm to biodiversity and geological interests, which cannot be prevented or adequately mitigated against, appropriate compensation measures should be sought. If significant harm cannot be prevented, adequately mitigated against, or compensated for, then planning permission should be refused. Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review (Adopted 1999)

4.7 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 indicates that the Adopted Structure Plan’s Development Plan status must be considered. The following ‘saved’ policies are relevant to the proposed development:

Policy P1 - pollution Policy WM2 – integrated waste management facilities

Policy WM3 – regional self sufficiency Policy WM4 - recycling and composting Policy WM6 – disposal

Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan 2002 – 2012 (Adopted October 2004) 4.8 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 indicates

that the Adopted Waste Local Plan’s Development Plan status must be considered. Following the Secretary of State’s Direction on 19th January 2009, the following policies have been ‘saved’ until the formal adoption of the forthcoming Development Plan Documents contained in the Waste Development Framework:

Policy 12 - inert recovery and recycling

Policy 33 - water resources – pollution control Policy 37 - proximity to other land uses Policy 38 - hours of operation Policy 40 - traffic The following ‘unsaved’ policies of the Waste Local Plan still have a degree of materiality and are relevant to the consideration: Policy 6 – waste management facilities for other sites Policy 13 - materials recovery and waste transfer facilities

Stroud District Local Plan (Adopted November 2005) (Saved Policies) 4.9 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 indicates

that Stroud District Local Plan’s Development Plan status must be considered. Stroud District Council adopted the Local Plan on 10 November 2005 to guide development within the district until 2010. Policies within the plan have been ‘saved’ by direction under the provision of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 until the adoption of the forthcoming LDF documents and shall remain a material consideration. TR11- Sharpness Docks EM3 – key employment land NE3 – key wildlife sites GE1 – effect on nearby occupants

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 The proposal was advertised by site notices that were posted on 1st

September 2010 and a Public Notice was placed in the Dursley Gazette on 2nd September 2010. Thirteen letters were sent to residents and businesses near the application site to notify them of the application being made.

5.2 In response to this publicity, two letters of objection have been received. One

of the letters, from an adjacent business, did not object to the inert construction and demolition waste processing provided dust and airborne particles are kept regulated but raised concerns about the implications of a household waste transfer facility on odour, airborne particles and vermin issues on their food grade warehouse. Other issues raised are as follows:

• The site is too close to 3 private houses and the building under construction is only 30 yards from the nearest house;

• Risk of vermin in the building;

• They are already established on site and their working practices are poor and untidy;

• Plastics are burned leading to breathing problems for the objector;

• Aggregate recycling machine is close to the road used by the public and is noisy and dusty;

• The operation has no connection with the docks, waterways and railways and has no rights to any exception to planning law.

6.0 CONSULTATIONS Stroud District Council 6.1 Stroud District Council raised no objections to this application. The Case

Officer’s Report noted “The submitted noise assessment shows that the noise from the application site was almost undetectable due to noise from the adjacent scrap yard and fertilizer plant. Our Environmental Health team consider that with operating hours, the standard Environmental Permit conditions would be sufficient to ensure that any detriment to amenity from issues such as noise and dust would not be excessive nor give rise to complaints.”

Hinton Parish Council 6.2 Hinton Parish Council comments as follows:

‘Hinton PC would like to OBJECT to the above planning application because:- 1. We already have two recycling plants on the dock, one of which is giving us tremendous problems with smell & flies. 2. There will be an increase of 60 vehicles a week and the roads just cannot take this amount. 3. The council feel there will be an increase of dust and noise. 4. Parishioners are already complaining about this A1 recycling plant 5. They are burning, plastic & Carpets, where is all the non recycling items going to go? Are they allowed to do this? 6. It does not look like a very well establish place, the PC thinks that it is a terrible eye sore and if it does get passed they need to erect a wall around the site so it is screened from the road and public view. 7. We think it is unacceptable to have yet another recycling plant as the problems with the ones we got are not being sorted out.’

6.3 Upon reconsultation with revised plans, the Parish Council commented that their “ views still stand as before.”

Environment Agency

6.4 The Environment Agency has no objections to the proposed development and

commented as follows:

“Pollution Prevention We generally concur with Section 4.3 of the Supporting Statement. Being located on a Secondary Aquifer it is important to protect groundwater resources. The need therefore to appropriately manage surface water runoff, and the presence of the concrete pad/hardstanding, is important. We note the inclusion of these necessary measures, and there will be a requirement for the operator to maintain such under the terms of their Environmental Permit which is due to be issued shortly. We would expect the following two requirements to be part of the operator’s environmental management.

1. All oil and fuel tanks should be bunded. This bunding should be constructed so that it has a capacity of 110% that of the largest tank. 2. The site should be constructed with a sealed drainage system where waste is to be initially tipped. Any drainage for areas that may have mixed loads deposited should be drained to the foul water system or a sealed tank. You might wish to secure the above by planning condition if you see fit, however any planning conditions should not duplicate the Environmental Permitting regime.

Environmental Permit We note from your email dated 27 September that Hinton Parish Council is concerned about the proposed development and has objected to it. The operators of the sites in the area are obliged to maintain their premises in accordance with their Environmental Permits. The purpose of Environmental Permits is to manage and control the environmental risk posed by the sites that operate under them. Such sites are subject to regular inspection and monitoring in order to assess and maintain compliance with the Regulations. Whilst we appreciate local people’s concerns, we do not consider it appropriate to raise an objection on these grounds as we are satisfied with the information submitted in support of this application. In relation to the A1 Recycling site, it is currently authorised to operate an inert waste processing (screening) facility under a Waste Exemption (an Exemption from Environmental Permitting). We do not appear to have records of the Environment Agency having received complaints in relation to this site. In terms of the potential environmental and amenity risks posed by the site, detailed risk assessment has been produced by the operator in support of the permit application. The risk assessment has identified the potential risks posed by the activities at the site and has detailed the methods that will be employed to mitigate these risks. The operator of the site has already applied for an Environmental Permit to authorise the receipt and processing of mixed household, commercial and industrial waste. This permit application is still being determined at present. The Environmental Permit, once issued, is there to control the pollution risk posed by the proposed operations at the site, which includes the generation of dust, odour and noise, through a combination of permit conditions and the operator’s own environmental management system.

It is expected that the environmental permit, coupled with the operator’s environmental management system and accident management plan, will be sufficient to control the impact of the site on the surrounding environment. Once the permit has been issued, the site will be regulated by the Environment Agency and will be subject to periodic compliance assessment work in order to ensure permit compliance is maintained.

British Waterways 6.5 British Waterways comments as follows:

‘British Waterways (BW) is a public body set up to maintain and develop the network of canals and other inland waterways in a sustainable manner so that they fulfill their full economic, social and environmental potential. In addition to statutory navigation and safety functions, British Waterways has to:

• Conserve our waterway heritage and environment

• Promote and enable rural and urban regeneration

• Maintain and enhance leisure, recreation, tourism and education opportunities for the general public and

• Facilitate waterway transport After due consideration of the application details, British Waterways has no objections to the proposed development. You mention that an objector has stated that activities at a Dockyard must be dock related. This is true if the use is to comply with our Permitted Development rights under Class 17 of the GPDO. However as this is an application to change the use of land, i.e. planning permission is needed because the use does not comply with those uses permitted at a dock, it is for you to decide if this is a suitable use. However if permission is granted we would hope that the appearance of the site will be improved and unrelated vehicles, such as a horse box etc will be removed from the site. If the Council is minded to grant planning permission, it is requested that the following informative is attached to the decision notice:’ “The applicant/developer is advised to contact third party works Phil J White (01452 318000) in order to ensure that any necessary consents are obtained and the works are compliant with the current British Waterways’ “Code of Practice for Works affecting British Waterways”.

Highways Development Co-ordination 6.6 The County Highways Representative commented as follows:

‘The site is located at Sharpness Docks on a private industrial estate. The site is accessed via the A38, along the B4066 directly to the site. The roads to the site are adequate for the proposed waste transfer station, and no Highway objection is raised.’

Natural England 6.7 Natural England commented on the screening stage that they “agree with the

County Ecologist that an EIA will not be needed for this application” but did not provide any further observations on the planning proposals.

7.0 PLANNING OBSERVATIONS Archaeology 7.1 The County Archaeologist advises that in his view there are no archaeological

issues in connection with this proposal, and recommends that no archaeological investigation or recording should be required in connection with this scheme.

Ecology 7.2 The County’s Principal Ecologist advises that the development site is outside

the indicative floodplain and there are no watercourses in the immediate vicinity (save for the Gloucester/Sharpness Canal). Control of surface water on the site through an Environment Agency permit should be obtainable and so there is no reasonable prospect of the Severn Estuary being polluted. The ‘Vegetation & Protected Species Assessment’ submitted shows that the only identifiable issue is the presence of nesting birds in vegetation on the boundaries of the site plus birds and bats in a building on the site and likelihood of nesting birds and bats being present and impacted adversely however is not very high. A planning condition is recommended to protect birds during this period. Sharpness Docks Key Wildlife Site is present close to the site (to the north and east) and has been designated for its plant interest. However as it falls outside the red line, the County Ecologist does not think the proposed development is likely to affect the plant interest that may exist within the Key Wildlife Site.

Planning considerations 7.3 This application is concerned with the change of use of a site on an industrial

area for a small scale waste recycling operation and waste transfer facility. Proposals include the erection of a new building on the application site and a modular building used as and office/mess facilities. The main considerations in determining this application are appropriateness of the land use in this location, potential traffic generation, impact on the amenity of the surrounding area, impact on wildlife and the environment.

Land use

7.4 Sharpness Docks is identified in the Stroud District Local Plan as a key employment area under Policy EM3. This policy states that in these areas employment needs will take precedent over redevelopment for alternative uses and change of uses away from employment will not be permitted. Waste uses are generally considered ‘sui generis’ and do not fall into any use class but are employment uses. Proposals to change from an industrial use to a waste operation requires planning permission. Stroud District Local Plan Policy TR11 aims to protect the viability of the docks area for handling freight and shipping repairs. Many of the activities which are dock related benefit from Permitted Development Rights under Class 17. Whilst the activities on this application site are not specifically dock related, I consider that the use is

an employment and industrial activity that is complementary to the other waste recycling operations on the docks, sourcing material from the local area and would have no additional impact on the overall viability of the docks. British Waterways which own the application site and the docks area, do not object to the operation. The District Planning Officer considers “this to be an employment generator which meets the policy requirement, is in keeping with the uses of the surrounding industrial area” and the District Council raises no objection.

7.5 The application site is not included within the site specific allocations for

materials recovery facilities/waste transfer facilities of Schedule 1 or 2 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan. However policies WM1 and WM3 of the Gloucestershire Structure Plan encourage the provision of facilities on sites in appropriate locations to ensure the self sufficiency in dealing with the county’s own waste arising. I therefore consider the location on an existing industrial estate, easily accessible, close to where the wastes arise to be acceptable and in accordance with ‘unsaved’ Policies 6, and 13 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

7.6 The Parish Council has expressed concerns about the acceptability of

permitting a further waste recycling facility when there have been problems with other waste recycling operations on the docks. Paragraph 10 of PPS 23 states that Local Planning Authorities should work on the assumption that the relevant pollution control regime will be properly applied and enforced. The Environment Agency is currently determining an Environmental Permit application from the applicant. I am satisfied that the problems of smell and flies associated with the green waste composting site earlier this year have been resolved and would not be a material consideration in the processing of dry, mainly inert waste which would be carried out on this application site. Traffic

7.7 Access to the site is close to the dock entrance which provides good access to the highway network beyond. Whilst the Parish Council has expressed concern on traffic grounds, the County’s Highway Advisor is satisfied that an average of 10 HGV movements per day would not increase traffic to an unacceptable level onto the highway network in the vicinity of the application site. The application site can accommodate the turning of HGVs within the site boundary and the layout would provide space for staff car parking. There would be no need for HGVs to travel past the residential properties closest to the application site on Bridge Road and the public would not visit the site. The imposition of planning conditions to require the applicant to sheet loads and to clean vehicle wheels to prevent any transference of mud or other debris to the highway should mitigate any problems associated with vehicles visiting the application site. I therefore consider that the impact of the proposals on traffic generation is acceptable and in accordance with policy 40 of the Waste Local Plan and Policy GE5 of the Stroud District Local Plan.

Impact on surrounding amenity

7.8 Public consultation on the proposal has raised concerns by the Parish Council, a neighbouring resident and a local business regarding noise, dust, odours, vermin, fumes from burning, the site’s untidy appearance and its potential impact on business.

Noise 7.9 The applicant has submitted an Environmental Noise Assessment in support

of his application. The report notes the existence of several significant sources of noise in the vicinity of the application site and the nearest noise sensitive residential properties closest to the application site. Background noise levels were measured whilst recycling operations at the site were inoperative. It was noted that the most significant noise sources during this period were vehicular movements at the fertiliser warehouse to the north of application site and the residential properties (mainly forklifts and some articulated vehicles) and general activity at the scrap metal facility, located north east of the application site and the residential properties.

7.10 Noise generating machinery at the recycling plant includes a stone crusher.

Noise monitoring was carried out whilst the stone crusher was operating along with a digger in order to obtain a comparative noise level. Noise levels recorded from the recycling site were 4.3dBA less than the background level recorded earlier as a result of reduced activities at the fertilizer warehouse and the scrap metal facility. The report has concluded that “noise from the A1 Recycling plant including the stone crusher is not the most significant source in the locality and is difficult to detect either subjectively or quantitatively adjacent to the residential properties when all other local operations are active. If the hours of operation at A1 Recycling are restricted it is unlikely that noise from their yard would be present outside the operational hours of either the fertilizer warehouse or the scrap metal yard at times when background noise levels would be considerably lower.” The District Council’s Environmental Health Officer considers that standard Environmental Permit conditions would be sufficient to ensure that any detriment to amenity from issues such as noise and dust would not be excessive nor give rise to complaints.

7.11 The proposals include the erection of a new recycling building which would

both screen the sorting of materials from view and muffle sounds from these activities. The nearest residential property is located 35 metres from the wall of the proposed recycling building, closest to the boundary. There would not be windows or door openings on the nearest elevation to the residential properties which would help mitigate noise. Hedging around the perimeter of the site and the garden to the dwelling would also assist in screening noise from activities on the site.

7.12 In the light of comments received during the publicity of the planning

application, the applicant has revised the layout of the site to move the processing and storage of the soils and aggregates to the northern boundary of the site, away from the road and the residential properties. Skip storage,

car parking and vehicle turning have now been located adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. Provided that it is made a condition on any permission that processing of waste and the operation of machinery only takes place within restricted hours of 0700 to 1700 on Monday to Friday, similar to the other industrial activities in the vicinity, I do not consider that the waste operations on the application would adversely affect residential amenity and would be in conformity with Policies 37 and 38 of the Waste Local Plan and Policy GE1 of the Stroud District Local Plan.

Dust, odours, fumes and vermin 7.13 The applicant has applied to recycle only dry, mainly inert industrial,

commercial and household waste materials consisting of demolition and building waste, metals, glass and plastics. There would be no putrescible element to the waste that would be malodorous, attractive to flies or vermin which could be nuisance to adjacent occupiers. A planning condition restricting the burning of residual waste materials should prevent the reoccurrence of this practice and allow the Waste Planning Authority and Environment Agency to take enforcement action should this be necessary to prevent nuisance.

7.14 Some of the sorting and processing of the waste materials brought to the site

will take place within the confines of the proposed recycling building. This will limit the transmission of any airborne particles. The applicant has been recycling commercial and industrial waste into secondary aggregates on the site and wishes to continue with this aspect. The applicant is obliged to adopt operational procedures to minimise dust emissions in order to comply with the conditions of an Environmental Permit. These would include dust monitoring and recording, active dust suppression such as damping down and the cessation of activities during windy periods. The Environment Agency is responsible for regulating atmospheric emissions and ensuring the satisfactory management of the site. Revised proposals to relocate the crushing machine and secondary aggregate stockpiles towards the rear site boundary should also assist in preventing the transmission of airborne particles onto the nearby highway. I consider that appropriate preventative measures can be applied which would prevent there being any adverse impact on the surrounding land users so that the proposal complies with Policy 37 of the Waste Local Plan.

Visual appearance 7.15 The site being opposite the entrance to the docks is visually prominent.

Objectors have commented on the untidy appearance of the site. As the proposals include the erection of a new recycling building this will bring the opportunity to screen the sorting of waste materials from public view. The proposed design on the recycling building would have an industrial appearance, which scale, height and massing would not be out of character with the other industrial buildings in the area. The 35 metre gap between the building and the nearest residential property would not lead to any loss daylight or have an overbearing effect on the dwelling. The removal from site of a caravan and dilapidated wooden structure and their replacement by a

more acceptable design of portakabin to be used as the office/mess facilities will also improve the appearance of the site. Relocating the stockpiles of secondary aggregates to the rear boundary of the site and limiting the height of the stockpile to 3 metres by condition will also benefit the overall appearance of the site. A planning condition requiring details of new boundary fencing to be submitted and approved should improve the appearance of this site from public viewpoints. I consider that the application has been revised so that its impact on the surrounding area is now acceptable so that it complies with Policy 37 of the Waste Local Plan. Water environment

7.16 Whilst the application site lies within 300 metres of the River Severn it is not within the floodplain shown on the Environment Agency’s flood maps. Being located on a Secondary Aquifer it is important to protect the quality of the groundwater. The applicant is proposing to use a chemical toilet to deal with foul drainage and a sealed system for drainage to control surface water from the areas of hard standing on the site. Conditions to require the bunding of any tanks and a sealed system of drainage from the site along with the regular monitoring of the operations on the site by the Environment Agency should prevent the Severn Estuary from being polluted from runoff from the site. I consider that the proposal is in accordance with Policy 33 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan. Impact on wildlife

7.17 The site lies close to the Severn Estuary which has international and national designations for its wildlife interest. The Stroud District Local Plan shows a locally designated Key Wildlife Site is close to the site (to the north and east) which has been designated for its plant interest. Policy NE3 of the Stroud District Local Plan aims to protect the ecological interest on these sites from damage. The applicant has submitted a ‘Vegetation & Protected Species Assessment’ in support of his application. This assessment shows that the only identifiable issue is the presence of nesting birds in vegetation on the boundaries of the site plus the potential for birds and bats in a building on the site. The report concludes that the likelihood of nesting birds and bats being present and impacted adversely however is not very high. A planning condition is recommended to protect nesting birds during this period. I consider that impact of the proposals on wildlife to be negligible and those impacts can be controlled though a condition to prevent works to trees and hedges during the nesting period and an advisory note setting out the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. I therefore consider that the impact of the proposals on wildlife is acceptable and in accordance with Policy NE3 of the Stroud District Local Plan. Other considerations Human Rights

7.18 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.

7.19 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 in the interests of national security, public safety, or the economic well-being 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.

7.20 Objections from the Parish Council and two neighbouring occupiers have

been received relating to the application. For the reasons set out in the Planning Observations, it is not thought there would be any breach of the convention rights. Even if there was to be an interference with convention rights then, in this case, it is thought that the interference would be justified in the interests of public amenity. 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

7.21 The application is for the retrospective change of use of a general industrial site to a waste recycling site and the proposed use as a waste transfer station with the erection of a new recycling building and office/ mess portacabin. Whilst there have been objections which mainly relate to the untidy appearance and poor working practices which have been used on the site, this planning permission gives the applicant the opportunity to improve the appearance and operations on the site. The imposition of planning conditions set out below allows the County Council as Waste Planning Authority to enforce the scope of this permission and the Environment Agency to monitor the activities on the site, as part of the permitting process.

7.22 The 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:

Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review (Saved Policies) –WM.2, WM3, WM4, WM6 and P1.

Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan (adopted October 2004) (Saved Policies) – 12, 33, 37, 38 and 40. Stroud District Local Plan to 2011 (Adopted March 2006) (Saved Policies) – EM3, NE3, TR11.

8.0 RECOMMENDATION 8.1 That planning permission be granted for the reasons set out in this report and

summarised in paragraphs 7.21 to 7.22 and subject to the conditions detailed at section 8 of this report

Commencement 1. The development herby approved shall begin not later than three years from

the date of this permission. The date of commencement of development shall be notified to the Waste Planning Authority within one week of such commencement.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Approved Plans

2. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Waste Planning Authority, or varied by other conditions of this consent, the development hereby authorised shall only be carried out in accordance with the submitted application, supporting information and approved drawings: Figure 1 Location Plan received 6 May 2010; Figure 2 Existing Site Plan received 23 June 2010; Additional Site Plan dated October 2010; Drawing 01 D Site plan and location plan dated October 2010; Drawing 02 D Plan and elevations a proposed dated October 2010. No development shall be carried out other than in accordance with the aforementioned plans unless otherwise agreed in advance and in writing with the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to define the scope of this consent in the interests of the amenity of the area and in accordance with Policy P1 of the Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review adopted 1999.

Scope of the development 3. The development hereby approved shall be restricted to the receipt, recycling

and transfer of up to 10,000 tonnes of inert, industrial, commercial and household waste. No additional processes for the treatment of waste other

than those specified in the application shall be carried out at any time on the application site. Reason: To define the scope of the application in accordance with policies 37, 39 and 40 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan 2002 -2012.

4. The application site shall not accept wastes from individual members of the public and no direct public sales shall be carried out from the site in association with the development hereby approved.

Reason: To define the scope of the application in accordance with policies 37, 39 and 40 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan 2002 -2012.

5. The heights of any stockpiled or deposited waste and/or other materials whether in a processed or unprocessed state shall not exceed 3 metres in height from ground level. Reason: In the interests of amenity of the area in accordance with Policy 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

Additional Information 6. Within 3 months from the date of this permission, details of the modular office

building and the boundary fence shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority. The proposals shall be implemented and maintained as approved as such thereafter for the duration of the use. Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area in accordance with Policy 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

Hours of operation 7. No machinery shall be operated, no process shall be carried out, no materials

shall be accepted or despatched from the application site except between the following hours: 0700 hours to 1700 hours on Monday to Friday; 0700 hours to 1300 on Saturday and at no time on Sunday and Bank or Public Holidays.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity in accordance with Policies 37, 38 and 40 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan.

Access and traffic

8. All HGV traffic carrying waste materials to and from the site shall be covered so as to prevent spillage or loss of such material on the public highway. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy 37 of the Waste Local Plan.

9. No commercial vehicle shall leave the site unless their wheels and chassis are clean, to prevent materials being deposited on the highway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy 37 of the Waste Local Plan.

Pollution control 10. Details of the sealed drainage system where waste shall initially be tipped for

processing shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority. The proposals shall be implemented and maintained as approved as such thereafter for the duration of the use. Reason: To prevent the pollution of the water environment and in order to safeguard the surrounding environment in accordance with Policy 33 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan 2002 – 2012 and Policy P1 of the Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review adopted 1999

11. Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund wall and comply with Oil Storage Regulations 2001. The volume of the bunded compound shall be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. All filling points, associated Pipework, vents, gauges and sight glasses must be located within the bund or have secondary containment. The drainage system of the bund shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework shall be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank/ vessel overflow pipe outlets must discharge downwards into the bund.

Reason; To prevent the pollution of the water environment and in order to safeguard the surrounding environment in accordance with Policy 33 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan 2002 – 2012 and Policy P1 of the Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review adopted 1999.

Environmental Protection

12. No materials shall be burned on the site.

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

13. A copy the Environmental Permit obtained from the Environment Agency

shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority within one month of issue to confirm that the operator and the application site are in compliance with the current pollution legislation. Thereafter any renewal or extension of any environmental permit shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for the duration of the consented development’s operational life. Reason: To ensure that the planning consent granted through this permission is running in parallel with the current pollution legislation and to ensure that no adverse impacts are arising on the surrounding environment in accordance

with Policies 33 and 37 of the Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan and Policy P1 of the Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review.

Restriction of permitted development rights

14. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning

(Development Management Procedures) (England) Order 2010 or any other order amending, replacing or re-enacting that Order: a) No fixed plant or machinery, building structures and erections shall be erected extended installed or replaced within the application site without the prior written approval of the Waste Planning Authority. b) No additional lights, or fences shall be installed or erected at the application site unless details of them have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason: To enable the Waste Planning Authority to maintain adequate control over the development and protect the amenity of the area.

Protection for wildlife 15. No hedgerow, tree or shrub or building removal works shall take place

between 1st March and 31st August inclusive each year unless a survey to assess the nesting bird activity on the application site during this period has been undertaken and a method of working to protect any nesting bird interest found is established and then implemented. Reason: To ensure that wild birds building or using their nests are protected in accordance with Policy 25 of the Waste Local Plan.

Advice Notes to Applicant 1. The applicant/developer is advised to contact British Waterways’ Third Party

Works Officer: Phil J White (01452 318000) in order to ensure that any necessary consents are obtained and the works are compliant with the current British Waterways’ “Code of Practice for Works affecting British Waterways”.

2. Bats are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended)

and also the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 2010. To avoid possible prosecution under this legislation if a bat or evidence of bats using a building or other feature on site is discovered during operations all work which might affect the species should cease and a licensed bat consultant or Natural England contacted and the situation assessed before work can proceed. This advice note should be passed on to any persons/contractors carrying out or operating the development.

BACKGROUND PAPERS: Application 10/0039/STMAJW and accompanying plans and supporting information, consultation responses and letters of representations. CONTACT OFFICER: Linda Townsend, Principal Planning Officer. Gloucester 426063 Gillian Parkinson, Legal and Democratic Services Gloucester 425212

Consultee Time taken (weeks)

Stroud District Council 8 weeks 6 days

Environment Agency 9 weeks 4 days

Development co-ordination 2 weeks 5 days`

Ecology 3 weeks

Archaeology 2 days

Hinton Parish Council 4 weeks

Natural England No response received

Minerals & Waste Policy 3 weeks 1 day

Time taken 16 weeks