Planning Committee Agenda Item No. 4 (a)

30 November 2010

Minerals Application (County Development)

Erection of replacement asphalt plant and demolition of existing plant and erection of works offices and weighbridge at Depot, College Road, Ardingly, nr , West

Application No: WSCC/070/10/AR

Report by Divisional Manager (County Development)

Local Member: Bill Acraman District: Mid Sussex

Executive Summary

Hanson QPE Ltd propose the erection of replacement asphalt plant, demolition of existing plant, and erection of works offices and weighbridge at Ardingly Depot, Ardingly, near Haywards Heath.

This report provides a generalised description of the site and the proposal and sets out the planning history, and policy context within which it should be considered.

Ardingly Parish Council has objected on the grounds of surface water drainage, lighting, noise, hours of work, impact on , air quality, visual impacts, increase in HGVs, highway capacity, and pedestrian safety. A total of 83 representations (one in support and one neutral) and one petition in objection (containing 334 names) were received.

Consideration of Key Issues

The main material planning considerations are whether the proposal: • meets an identified need; • is acceptable in terms of visual amenity; • is satisfactory in terms of highway capacity and road safety; • has an acceptable impact on neighbouring amenity; • has an acceptable environmental impact; and • would not prejudice the possible reinstatement of the Horsted Keynes-Haywards Heath railway line.

Identified Need

The proposal is for replacement infrastructure within an existing safeguarded railhead site. This accords with the policies in the Minerals Local Plan and will ensure the continued viability of a rail depot that makes an important contribution to the importation of crushed rock into the county and serves and neighbouring counties. The proposal would also enable the recycling of asphalt which would help to reduce the need for raw materials.

Visual Amenity

The existing industrial activity is an established presence in the area. Although the proposed development will have a greater impact on the AONB (due to the increased height of the plant increasing its prominence in distant views), the impacts can be mitigated to some extent through the siting of the plant further to the west, painting the structure in a colour to minimise visual intrusion and locally through new planting on the southern boundary of the site and the highway hedgerow on the approach to the site from the south.

Highway Capacity and Road Safety

The Highway Authority has confirmed that the highway network has adequate capacity for the traffic presently generated by the Ardingly Depot. Council is satisfied that the development would accord with Policy AR1 (No increase in HGV traffic), and does not object, subject to imposition of a condition requiring HGV movements not to exceed present numbers. A condition requiring that records of HGVs visiting the site be maintained and submitted to the County Planning Authority, would ensure that present HGV numbers are not exceeded. The proposal is considered satisfactory with regard to highway capacity and road safety.

Neighbouring Amenity

Residential properties in the area experience a degree of adverse impacts as a result of the operations at the Depot site. The proposed changes at the Depot present the opportunity to reduce noise and air quality impacts through the use of modern plant and imposition of appropriate planning conditions.

Environmental Impact

The proposal would result in new planting to screen the development. Conditions can be imposed to control any adverse impacts on the environment. The proposed plant would enable the recycling of asphalt which introduces sustainability benefits to the current operations.

Reinstatement of the Horsted Keynes-Hayward Heath Railway Line

The proposal complies with Policy AR2 of the Local Plan as the development, by virtue of its siting and ability to be relocated, does not prejudice the possible future reinstatement of the railway link to the north of the site.

Conclusion

The proposal complies with the relevant development plan policies. The proposed development relates to an existing asphalt and crushed stone Depot, which is safeguarded by the Minerals Local Plan, and which fulfils a local need for the provision of asphalt. The development would replace plant that has existed on the site since 1962, and which has become an established feature within the High AONB. The current visual impact is limited beyond the existing boundaries of the site and although the new plant will be taller and more prominent in distant views, the relocation of the plant within the site, painting the structure in a colour to minimise visual intrusion and provision of additional screening would mitigate adverse impacts on the wider area and locally. The proposal would not generate increased HGV movements and the Highway Authority has raised no objection to the

proposal in terms of highway capacity and road safety. The development provides an opportunity to reduce residential amenity impacts in the area through the use of modern plant and the imposition of appropriate planning conditions. It would not prejudice the possible future reinstatement of the Horsted Keynes-Hayward Heath railway link.

Recommendation

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out in Appendix 1 of this report.

1. Introduction

1.1 This report concerns a proposal by Hanson QPE Ltd for the erection of replacement asphalt plant and demolition of existing plant and erection of works offices and weighbridge at Ardingly Depot, Ardingly, near Haywards Heath.

2. Site Description

2.1 The 0.75ha application site is located within Ardingly Rail Depot approximately 1.6km south of Ardingly Village and 1.6km north of Lindfield (Appendix 2 - Location Plan and Appendix 3 – Application Site and Aerial View).

2.2 The minerals railhead is safeguarded under Policy 37 of the West Sussex Minerals Local Plan 2003, and is used for the importation of crushed stone which is mixed with bitumen for the production of asphalt. It is served from College Road and a rail extension off the main north-south railway link, which passes through Mid Sussex.

2.3 The wider site area, occupied by the Depot and controlled by the applicant, extends north to include a disused railway line and east, under College Road, to include a further area of disused railway line. The areas of the Deot outside the red line defined application site are used for the movement and storage of materials primarily associated with the production of asphalt. The disused railway route, within the control of the applicant, is safeguarded by Policy AR2 of the Mid Sussex Local Plan 2001 for potential reinstatement as a railway link between Horsted Keynes and Haywards Heath.

2.4 The railhead is located in the south-eastern area of High Weald AONB within West Sussex. The immediate surroundings are characterised by attractive rural countryside, agricultural activities, and a small pocket of residential dwellings and farm houses.

2.5 The site is located outside the flood risk area of the River Ouse which is approximately 70m from the site and flows from north to south.

3. Relevant Planning History

3.1 F/61/800: Outline planning permission for tarmacadam plant granted permission in 1961.

3.2 F/61/800/1: Installation of a tarmacadam and asphalt coating plant detailed permission granted in 1962.

3.3 F/66/436: Installation of weighbridge and office permitted in 1966.

4. The Proposal

Existing Plant

4.1 The site has been used as an asphalt batching plant since the original permissions in 1961 and 1962. The existing plant, painted yellow, is 18m at its highest point and is industrial in appearance (Appendix 4 – Elevations of Existing Plant). Mature deciduous trees provide screening on its boundaries which soften the visual impact of the proposal for most of the year.

Replacement Plant

4.2 The new asphalt treatment plant would be erected approximately 35m to the south east of the existing asphalt plant (Appendix 5 – Proposed Site Layout). The existing plant would be dismantled and removed from the site.

4.3 The proposed plant, to be painted in a colour scheme to be approved by the County Planning Authority, would be larger than the current structure (Appendix 6 – Elevations of Proposed Plant). It would be arranged in a linear fashion to run parallel with the southern boundary of the site and would comprise: • an exhaust stack, with a 28.0m* high flue; • mixer house, a 23m x 9.4m solid mass; and • mixed material storage system, a large enclosed mass which is 17m at its tallest point. * The applicant has advised that a height reduction of 1.5m would be possible, subject to agreement by MSDC’s EH officer.

4.4 The more modern specification of the replacement plant would enable the introduction of the recycling of the asphalt from the highway surface planings currently imported into the Depot. The recovered asphalt can then be used for recycled asphalt pavement (RAP). At present, all the material (including the asphalt) is recycled and used as the sub-base for construction proposals.

4.5 Overall, the proposal would: • enable an increase in capacity for the storage of batched asphalt with six storage hoppers making up the ‘mixed storage’ system; • provide parking for 8 Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV); • involve rearranging the circulation area to enable more efficient site operations; and • reflect the existing operating hours at the site, Monday – Friday 0600 to 1600, Saturday 0600 to 1300, and not at all on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays, unless as ‘Occasional Out of Hours Operations’. The latter to be restricted to the preparation and despatch of asphalt in compliance with specified criteria. (Condition 21).

Works Offices and Weighbridge

4.6 The new works office, mess room, and associated office space would comprise a two-storey modular structure with associated access and circulation. The existing weighbridge would be removed and replaced by two weighbridges to weigh HGVs as they enter and leave the site.

Highway Movements

4.7 To establish the existing traffic generated by the site, information was submitted by the applicant accounting for the past two and a half years of HGV movements. (Appendix 8 – HGV Records) In 2008 - 9,326 vehicles entered and left the site; 2009 – 9,960 vehicles entered and left the site and during the first 6 months of 2010 – 4,848 HGVs entered and left the site.

5. Policy

5.1 Planning applications must be determined in accordance with the statutory ‘development plan’ unless material considerations (including national policy) indicate otherwise. For the purposes of the application, the following adopted planning policy documents form the statutory ‘development plan’: the South East Plan (2009); the West Sussex Minerals Local Plan (2003); and the Mid Sussex Local Plan 2004.

5.2 The key policies in the ‘development plan’ are summarised below. In addition, reference is made to relevant national planning guidance that guides the decision-making process, all of which are material to the determination of the application.

South East Plan

5.3 Although the Government revoked Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) on 6 July 2010, following a recent legal challenge, this decision has been reversed and the South East Plan (SEP) still forms part of the development plan. However, the Government has restated its intention to abolish RSS through the Localism Bill and this fact is a material consideration.

5.4 Notwithstanding the above uncertainty, the relevant policies in the SEP are:

• M5 - Waste and Minerals - Safeguarding Rail Depots • C3 - Countryside and landscape management - AONBs

West Sussex Minerals Local Plan 2003 (saved policies)

5.5 The following policies are relevant: • Policy 4 - Promotes the use of secondary aggregates in appropriate locations. • Policy 7 - Seeks to impose appropriate conditions for recycling operations. • Policy 12 - Mineral working within the AONB. • Policy 37 - Safeguarding mineral railheads. • Policy 47 – Account will be taken of number type and routing of vehicles likely to be generated.

• Policy 48 Consideration of access, manoeuvring and wheel cleaning facilities on site. • Policy 49 - Seeks to take into account the cumulative effect of mineral workings on the locality. • Policy 52 – Details will be required of the siting and appearance of buildings, machinery, and plant. • Policy 53 – Mineral operations will be required to protect and maintain existing trees, hedgerows and shrubs. • Policy 60 - Seeks to impose appropriate noise conditions. • Policy 61 – Seeks to impose appropriate conditions to control dust. • Policy 62- Seeks to impose conditions to control artificial light. • Policy 63 – Seeks to impose conditions to control hours of work.

Mid Sussex District Local Plan 2004 (saved policies)

5.6 The key policies are: • Policy B1: A high standard of design is expected • Policy B3: Development will not be permitted if significant harm to the amenity of nearby residents is likely to be created due to noise, loss of privacy, overlooking, reduction in sunlight, and reduction in outlook • Policy B4: natural resources are to be efficiently used • Policy B23: new development is to minimise noise impacts on surrounding neighbouring properties and the environment • Policy B24: Lighting proposals should be kept to the minimum necessary in terms of intensity and the number of fittings proposed. • Policy T4: Sustainability requirements and traffic generation of new Development • Policy C5: Development in Areas of Outstanding Beauty • Policy CS13: Land Drainage • Policy CS14: Safeguarding Flood Defences • Policy CS15: Water Quality • Policy AR1: Oppose development at Ardingly Rail Depot involving an increase in HGVs. • Policy AR2: Safeguard possible reinstatement of railway link between Horsted Keynes and Haywards Heath.

Planning Policy Statement 7 – (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas)

5.7 PPS7 contains guidance to compliment other policy regarding development in rural areas and the protection of the rural area from the impacts of development. Paragraph 21 deals with planning in nationally designated areas, such as the High Weald AONB. It states that: “Nationally designated areas comprising … AONBs … have been confirmed by the Government as having the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. The conservation of the natural beauty of the landscape and countryside should therefore be given great weight in

planning policies and development control decisions in these areas. The conservation of wildlife and the cultural heritage are important considerations in all these areas ….”

Planning Policy Guidance 24 (Planning and Noise)

5.8 PPS24 sets out objectives to shape development to minimise impacts of noise on sensitive development. Where it is not possible to achieve the desired degree of separation, Local Planning Authorities should consider whether it is practicable to control or reduce noise levels, or to mitigate the impact of noise.

Minerals Policy Statement 1 (MPS1)

5.9 MPS1 provides advice and guidance to planning authorities and the minerals industry and it will ensure that the need by society and the economy for minerals is managed in an integrated way against its impact on the environment and communities.

Minerals Policy Statement 2 (MPS2):

5.10 MPS2 states the principles to be followed in considering the environmental effects of mineral working and expands, in appendices, on the need for community consultation and involvement and Environmental Management Systems (EMSs).

6. Consultations

6.1 Mid Sussex District Council (Planning): Objection on the grounds that the proposed layout does not appear to safeguard the possible reinstatement of the Bluebell railway link as required by Policy AR2 of the Mid Sussex District Local Plan. No objection is raised on highways grounds subject to a suitable enforceable condition ensuring that there is no increase in heavy vehicular traffic using the site (Policy AR2). Further comments are made regarding odour, visual impact and construction.

6.2 Mid Sussex District Council (Environmental Health): Comments made with regard to noise, odour, emissions, and hours of use.

6.3 Ardingly Parish Council: Objects most strongly to the application on the grounds of surface water drainage, lighting, noise, hours of work, impact on Bluebell Railway, air quality, visual impacts, increase in HGVs, highway capacity, and pedestrian safety.

6.4 Haywards Heath Town Council: (not a formal consultee) Raised concerns as to increased numbers of potentially larger HGVs travelling south and impacting upon busy school routes.

6.5 Environment Agency: No objection subject to conditions and informatives relating to surface water drainage, contamination, demolition, and pollution prevention.

6.5 High Weald AONB Unit: Raised concerns: “The proposed development does not directly affect the components of natural beauty identified in the High Weald AONB Management Plan 2004; however a development of this type may have significant impacts on the character of the

landscape. The test for all development in the AONB is whether it conserves or enhances the landscape, and in general a development of this type would not be compatible with allocation in an AONB.

“It is not the case though that some areas of the AONB may be regarded as being degraded as intimated by the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) accompanying the application which states at paragraph 4.4.2: “However there are various pockets of landscape within the AONB which could be regarded as being of significantly less landscape value than others, including the existing site itself.” All of the AONB is designated and the test applies to all areas. Where landscape is not in keeping with AONB character the test and duty on local authorities is to conserve and enhance, not accept damage or degradation and allow the landscape to degrade further.

“However it is accepted that the site is in a current industrial use and that a replacement use will not significantly increase the adverse impacts of the development on the wider AONB.”

6.7 WSCC Highway Authority: No objection, subject to no intensification of use of the site leading to an increase in HGVs on the highway network and imposition of conditions which require details of wheel washing and construction methodology. The Highway Authority supports conditions restricting hours of operation.

7. Representations

7.1 The application has been advertised in accordance with article 8 of The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995. In response to 2 site notices, an advertisement in the local press, and the previous committee report (sent to those who had made comments) but subsequently withdrawn, a total of 83 representations (one in support and one neutral) and petitions in objection (containing a total of 334 signatures and addresses) have been received. The objections may be summarised as relating to: • local impacts of HGV movements (in respect of highway safety/capacity, routing, highway condition, and air quality); • dust affecting residential amenity; • noise affecting residential amenity; • odour affecting residential amenity; • light affecting residential amenity; • visual impact in the AONB; • impact on future plans to reinstate the Bluebell Railway and establish a museum; and • questionable need.

7.2 Issues raised in the representations are considered and dealt with in Section 8 of this report.

8. Consideration of Key Issues

8.1 The main material planning considerations are whether the proposal: • meets an identified need;

• is acceptable in terms of visual amenity; • is satisfactory in terms of highway capacity and road safety; • has an acceptable impact on neighbouring amenity; • has an acceptable environmental impact; and • would prejudice the possible reinstatement of the Horsted Keynes-Haywards Heath railway line.

Identified Need

8.2 One of the National Planning Objectives, as set out in Mineral Planning Statement 1 ‘Planning and Minerals’ (MPS1) is to promote the sustainable transport of minerals by rail, sea or inland waterways. MPS1 also seeks to safeguard existing railheads and associated storage, handling and processing facilities for the bulk transport by rail of minerals, including secondary and recycled materials.

8.3 Ardingly Depot is safeguarded under Policy 37 of the Minerals Local Plan (MLP). Policy 39 of the MLP states that favourable consideration will be given to the improvement of existing railheads provided that such operations would not have an unacceptable impact on the environment and would not cause a significant increase in disturbance due to factors including increases in noise, dust and traffic. Policy 42 has a preference for new secondary mineral processing plants to be within established industrial areas rather than within existing mineral extraction sites.

8.4 The County Council’s Background Paper 4: Transportation of Minerals and Waste, Version 2 (December 2009) prepared as part of the Core Strategy, despite work on which having been suspended in light of abolition of the SE Plan and other contextual policy changes, provides the most up to date information. It states that the majority of hard rock imports into West Sussex are into railheads in the north eastern part of the county (at Ardingly and Crawley). It is estimated that they imported on average 705,000 tonnes annually between 2002 and 2006 and that they have the potential for greater capacity. They are strategically well-located to serve West Sussex as well as areas beyond the county boundary. The Background Paper presents options for safeguarding railheads, all of which propose to continue the safeguarding of the Ardingly Depot, recognising the important role it plays in importing aggregates to the area.

8.5 The proposal would enable asphalt from highway surface planings, brought to the site by road, to be processed and recovered to make recycled asphalt pavement, thereby further developing the recycling element to the operations on the site. The applicant advises that the lorry movements created by this recycling are a fraction of the total and will fall within the total numbers limit required by Condition 18.

8.6 In conclusion, the proposal is for replacement infrastructure within an existing safeguarded railhead site. This accords with the policies in the Minerals Local Plan and will ensure the continued viability of a rail depot that makes an important contribution to the importation of crushed rock into the county and serves West Sussex and neighbouring counties. The proposal would also enable the recycling of asphalt which would help to reduce the need for raw materials.

Visual Amenity

8.7 The submitted plans show the new asphalt batching plant to be 28m* at its highest point (10m higher than the existing plant). The plant would be mostly enclosed by corrugated cladding resulting in a large structure not dissimilar to agricultural buildings. *[The applicants have been asked to explore the possibility of reducing the height of the plant and are in discussion with the Mid Sussex Environmental Health (EH) officer regarding regulations governing emissions from the flue. If the applicant advises that from an operational point of view the height of the flue could be reduced by 1.5m such that the height of the new plant at 26.5m would be 8.5m higher than the existing plant. A condition limiting the flue to that height would be imposed if the EH officer agrees.]

8.8 As the development site is in the High Weald AONB, a visually sensitive area, the applicant commissioned a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) which considers the national, regional and local character assessments of the area. The LVIA concludes that “the High Weald AONB is generally accepted to be well wooded and deeply-incised in many places to give complex patterns of ridges and steep, deep stream valleys (ghylls)”.

8.9 The report, when considering landscape value, suggests that there are various pockets of landscape within the AONB, including the subject site, which could be regarded as being of significantly less landscape value than others. The High Weald AONB Unit advises that the test for all development in the AONB is whether it conserves or enhances the landscape, and in general a development of this type would not be compatible with allocation in an AONB. If the proposed development was not on a site which has operated for 49 years and was not a replacement for plant existing on the site, there can be little doubt that it would be unacceptable. However, the development now proposed must be judged in its current context and assessed on the basis of the degree of negative impact it may make to the landscape.

8.10 Policy C4 of the Mid Sussex Local Plan 2001 requires the conservation and enhancement of the natural beauty to be regarded as the overall priority in the High Weald AONB. Policy C4 also allows that development within the AONB may be permitted if, amongst other things, it is essential for local social and/or economic needs.

8.11 Given the heavy wooded and undulated local landscape, the site is not a major visual feature in the wider landscape. Locally to the site, concerns relate to visual impacts on the views of motorists and pedestrians heading north on College Road towards Ardingly.

8.12 The proposed development, due to the increase in height relative to the existing plant, would be more visible. However, given the longstanding existence of the asphalt plant and its established presence, the new structures would not be uncharacteristic or greatly alter the landscape local to this part of the AONB.

8.13 Siting the new plant 35m to the west of the existing plant, would make better use of the established tree screening. The applicant has proposed new planting in a current gap in the screen which would also help to screen the plant (Appendix 7 – Screen Planting). It is proposed that the new structure would be painted in a colour to be agreed by the County Planning Authority which

would be an improvement on the yellow currently used. A condition requiring submission and approval of a colour scheme, intended to camouflage/minimise visual impact, would be imposed on any permission granted.

8.14 The highway hedgerow on the eastern boundary of the adjoining agricultural field to the south is under the control of the applicant (Appendix 7 – Screen Planting). The subject hedgerow (to the west of College Road) has failed in certain areas opening up views of the existing plant. A condition could be imposed requiring additional planting and the maintenance of the hedgerow at a sufficient height to screen the proposal From College Road.

8.15 The High Weald AONB unit did not object to the application as the proposal did not significantly increase the adverse impacts of the existing industrial use on the wider AONB.

8.16 In conclusion, the existing industrial activity is an established presence in the area. Although the proposed development will have a greater impact on the AONB (due to the increased height of the plant increasing its prominence in distant views ), the impacts can be mitigated to some extent through the siting of the plant further to the west, painting the structure in a colour to minimise visual intrusion, andlocally through new planting on the southern boundary of the site and the highway hedgerow on the approach to the site from the south.

Highway Capacity and Road Safety

8.17 Policy AR1 of the Mid Sussex Local Plan states that “the Council will raise objections to any application for development proposals at Ardingly Rail Depot which would result in an increase in heavy vehicular traffic using the site”. Mid Sussex District Council does not object, conditional upon imposition of an enforceable condition controlling the number of vehicle movements.

8.18 A statement in the supporting documentation indicates that the proposed development would not generate any additional vehicle movements. Further information submitted with the application provides two and a half years of data demonstrating vehicle movements to and from the site. (Appendix 8 - HGV Records). The annual numbers of HGVs picking up or delivering loads in 2008 were 9,326 and in 2009 were 9,960. The numbers vary over the year due to the seasonal nature of construction and range between 508 and 1,024 HGVs per month. (For clarification, the vehicle movements, arriving and departing, would be twice the above figures.) A condition could be imposed to ensure that the development would not give rise to a material increase in HGV movements beyond those that currently occur, limiting the annual number of HGVs and allowing for seasonal variation on a monthly and daily basis as set out in Condition 18.

8.19 The significant majority of the materials used at the Depot (i.e. the crushed rock) are imported by rail, reducing reliance on HGVs. The replacement plant would enable the recycling of the asphalt from the road planings and pavement. Although the waste asphalt would be transported to the site by the HGVs, this would not increase vehicle movements as the site currently imports waste asphalt to produce recycled road-base. The generation of road planings normally forms part of a single surfacing contract including both removal and replacement of the road surface, so that lorries delivering road planings to Ardingly depart with new asphalt, returning to their point of origin. The proposed condition controlling vehicle movements would ensure that there

would not be a material increase in vehicle movements resulting from the recycled asphalt planings element of the proposal.

8.20 The proposed plant would be constructed whilst the existing plant is in operation. This would result in a short term (approximately 6 months) increase in vehicle movements due to the combination of the existing operations and the construction of the proposed plant. Conditions can be imposed requiring approval of a construction method statement to include controls on delivery times and routing of construction vehicles associated with the proposal.

8.21 In conclusion, the Highway Authority has confirmed that the highway network has adequate capacity for the traffic presently generated by the Ardingly Depot. Mid Sussex District Council is satisfied that the development would accord with Policy AR1, and does not object, subject to imposition of a condition requiring HGV movements not to exceed present numbers. A condition requiring that records of HGVs visiting the site be maintained and submitted to the County Planning Authority, would ensure that present HGV numbers are not exceeded. The proposal is considered satisfactory with regard to highway capacity and road safety.

Neighbouring Amenity

8.22 The operations at the Depot site have an adverse impact on the residential amenity of properties in the area. Asphalt batching involves multiple heavy vehicle movements moving substantial tonnages of crushed stone and asphalt resulting in noise and dust. Heating bitumen results in odours not typically compatible with rural and residential areas.

8.23 As the current site operates under planning permission from the early 1960s, there are no measures in place to ensure residential amenity is safeguarded. The current proposal would provide an opportunity for the existing amenity impacts to be reduced through the use of modern plant and imposition of planning conditions. Highway movements associated with the proposal would be controlled by condition to ensure the replacement plant does not result in a material intensification in HGV traffic. The particular amenity impacts of the proposal are considered below.

8.24 Noise Pollution: A noise impact assessment was submitted in support of the application which determines background noise levels at three of the closest residential properties. The report establishes that the existing background noise levels vary from 51-59dB LAeq while the existing plant is in operation.

8.25 The noise levels at the residential locations are modelled on the predicted noise output of the proposed plant. The report maintains that the noise levels envisaged by the proposed plant would range from 42-52dB LAeq, resulting in an overall reduction in the existing background noise levels at the closest residential properties. Accordingly, the report concludes that the proposed plant would result in a reduction in noise levels from the Depot, thereby reducing amenity impacts on adjoining residential properties in relation to noise pollution.

8.26 Air Quality: An air quality assessment has been submitted with the application which considers the construction and operational effects of the proposed plant. The report considers dust, air quality and stack emissions and the potential impacts of the proposal on residential amenity.

8.27 The report highlights that the construction phase associated with the proposed plant would have a high risk of causing dust impacts unless appropriate mitigation measures and controls are implemented.

8.28 The assessment considers the operational effects of the proposed plant in terms of dust, odour, and emissions. The report concludes that several design and control measures form part of the proposal which would result in an improvement to the current situation.

8.29 Mitigation methods proposed to reduce impacts on residential properties of dust and odour involve: the siting of the bitumen tanks as far away from the residential properties as possible; methods of efficiently dealing with spillages; the use of water sprinklers; enclosing containers; and methods of handling dust waste. A condition could accompany an approved scheme requiring details of dust suppression measures.

8.30 The Mid Sussex Environmental Health Officer considered the impacts of the proposal in terms of odour and emissions and advised that the emission limits and monitoring are satisfactorily addressed under an existing Local Authority Pollution Prevention and Control Permit (PPC/LAPPC/009/1).

8.31 Heavy Goods Vehicles: Many residents of Ardingly and Lindfield have raised objection to the proposal on the basis that there will be an increase in HGVs in the area, despite the application details indicating otherwise. It is widely felt by local residents that the roads north through Ardingly and south through Haywards Heath cannot accommodate the existing levels of HGVs generated by the site and that the HGVs present an unacceptable safety hazard to pedestrians and other road users.

8.32 The Highway Authority raises no objection on grounds of either safety or capacity of the local road network. The Depot is lawfully established and, given that there will be no increase in the use of HGVs, apart from the 6 months whilst the development is proceeding, there will be no significant change in amenity impacts resulting from HGVs using College Road.

8.33 In conclusion, residential properties in the area experience a degree of adverse impacts as a result of the present operations at the Depot site. The proposed changes at the Depot provide the opportunity to reduce noise and air quality impacts through the use of modern plant and through the imposition of appropriate planning conditions.

Environmental Impact

8.34 The site’s environmental features are limited to a variety of trees on the periphery of the site which provide substantial screening. The proposal involves some low level planting to enhance the existing screening. No trees would be removed.

8.35 The site is located in close proximity to the River Ouse. A planning condition can be imposed which requires details of surface water drainage to be submitted for approval.

8.36 The proposed plant would enable the recycling of asphalt in a way that the current plant cannot. This has sustainability benefits in that it reduces the

amount of energy consumed and recycles waste mineral for the production of asphalt.

8.37 In conclusion, the proposal would result in new planting to screen the development. Conditions can be imposed to control any adverse impacts on the environment. The proposed plant would enable the recycling of asphalt which introduces sustainability benefits to the current operations.

Possible Reinstatement of the Horsted Keynes-Hayward Heath railway line

8.38 Policy AR2 of the Mid Sussex Local Plan requires that “The route of the disused railway branch line between Horsted Keynes and Haywards Heath is safeguarded for possible reinstatement of the railway link.”

8.39 The northern part of the application site, defined by the red line boundary, encroaches onto the line of the disused railway between Horsted Keynes and Haywards Heath. The proposal involves retaining the existing concrete paving where the site intersects with the former railway line. The major works would be in the south of the application site where the replacement plant would stand clear of the former track bed. The proposed development involves no significant changes that would preclude the possibility of reinstating the railway at some time in the future. However, the present and proposed operation of the Ardingly Depot rely upon the import of stone brought into the site by rail. The imported stone is transferred by conveyor belt to bunkers occupying the former track bed. This land, which is in applicant’s control, lies to the north of the plant area outside the current application site (see area marked as ‘STOCK BAYS’ on Appendix 5 – Proposed Site Layout).

8.40 Mid Sussex District Council has objected to the application on the grounds that, in the absence of clarity, the proposed layout does not appear to safeguard the possible reinstatement of the railway link and, therefore, the proposal conflicts with Policy AR2.

8.41 It is acknowledged that the proposed development has the potential to delay the possible reinstatement of the railway line. However, the Depot site is an existing lawful operation safeguarded as a railhead under Policy 37 of the Minerals Local Plan and the applicant is entitled to beneficial occupation the land he leases. Accordingly, the current activity, in planning terms, can continue on the site. If in the future the current use ceases and there is no longer a strategic need for a railhead, then, subject to negotiation with the then landowners and the nature of any intended future use of the land, the opportunity to reinstate the railway line will arise.

8.42 Discussions between the applicant and the Bluebell Railway have identified more precisely the extent of the land required to reinstate the railway. (Appendix 9 – Bluebell Railway Feasibility Drawing) It is clear that the Depot at the safeguarded railhead, as currently configured, could not continue to operate alongside the railway. Reinstatement of the railway line may however prove possible before the current use ceases if the applicant’s operation of the Depot alters such that the land currently used for storage of stone (and which lies outside the current application site) is no longer essential for operational purposes. In support of the feasibility drawing it is understood agreement has been reached on ‘Heads of Terms’ between Hanson and the

Bluebell Railway which provide stronger recognition of the scope for reinstating the Bluebell Line.

8.43 On a practical note, the proposal involves replacement plant that would be transported from another site operated by the applicant. As this plant is capable of being transported, it is likely that it could be removed at the end of its life or transferred to another site and therefore its siting would not prejudice the possible reinstatement of the railway line.

8.44 In conclusion, the proposal complies with Policy AR2 of the Local Plan as the development, by virtue of its siting and ability to be relocated, does not prejudice the possible future reinstatement of the railway link to the north of the site.

9. Overall Conclusion and Recommendation

9.1 The proposal complies with the relevant development plan policies. The proposed development relates to an existing asphalt and crushed stone Depot, which is safeguarded by the Minerals Local Plan, and which fulfils a local need for the provision of asphalt.

9.2 The development would replace plant that has existed on the site since 1962, and which has become an established feature with the High Weald AONB. The current visual impact is limited beyond the existing boundaries of the site and although the new plant will be taller and more prominent in distant views, the relocation of the plant within the site, painting the structure in a colour to minimise visual intrusion and provision of additional screening would mitigate adverse impacts on the wider area and locally.

9.3 The proposal would not generate increased HGV movements and the Highway Authority has raised no objection to the proposal in terms of highway capacity and road safety. The development provides an opportunity to reduce residential amenity impacts in the area through the use of modern equipment and the imposition of appropriate planning conditions. It would not prejudice the possible future reinstatement of the Horsted Keynes-Hayward Heath railway link.

9.4 It is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions and informatives set out in Appendix 1 of this report.

10. Crime and Disorder Act Implications

10.1 There are no implications with relation to this planning application.

11. Human Rights Act Implications

11.1 The Human Rights Act requires the County Council to take into account the rights of the public under the European Convention on Human Rights and prevents the Council from acting in a manner which is incompatible with those rights. Article 8 of the Convention provides that there shall be respect for an individual’s private life and home save for that interference which is in accordance with the law and necessary in a democratic society in the interests of (inter alia) public safety and the economic well being of the country. Article 1 of protocol 1 provides that an individual’s peaceful enjoyment of their property shall not be interfered with save as is necessary in the public interest.

11.2 For an interference with these rights to be justifiable the interference (and the means employed) needs to be proportionate to the aims sought to be realised. The main body of this report identifies the extent to which there is any identifiable interference with these rights. The Planning Considerations identified are also relevant in deciding whether any interference is proportionate. Case law has been decided which indicates that certain development does interfere with an individual’s rights under Human Rights legislation. This application has been considered in the light of statute and case law and the interference is not considered to be disproportionate.

11.3 The Committee should also be aware of Article 6, the focus of which (for the purpose of this committee) is the determination of an individual’s civil rights and obligations. Article 6 provides that in the determination of these rights, an individual is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal. Article 6 has been subject to a great deal of case law. It has been decided that for planning matters the decision making process as a whole, which includes the right of review by the High Court, complied with Article 6.

Michael Elkington Divisional Manager (County Development)

List of Appendices Appendix 1 – Conditions and Informatives Appendix 2 – Location Plan Appendix 3 – Application Boundary and Aerial View Appendix 4 – Elevations of Existing Plant Appendix 5 – Proposed Site Layout Appendix 6 – Elevations of Proposed Plant Appendix 7 – Screen Planting Appendix 8 – HGV Records [2008, 2009, and 2010 (6 months)] Appendix 9 – Bluebell Railway Feasibility Drawing

Background Papers • Planning Policy Guidance 24 (Planning and Noise) • Minerals Policy Statement 1 (MPS1) • Minerals Policy Statement 2 (MPS2) • Mid Sussex Local Plan (Saved Policies) 2004 • West Sussex Minerals Local Plan (2003)

Contact: Derek Kingaby ext. 77674.

Appendix 1 - Conditions and Informatives

GENERAL

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

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

Approved Plans 2. The proposed development shall not take place other than in accordance with the approved drawing numbers: D115102.021.02, D115102.021.005, D115102.021.006, D115102.021.007, D115102.021.008, D115102.021.009, D115102.021.010, D115102.021.012, and D115102.021.013 and the supporting information submitted with the application, save as varied by the conditions hereafter or any variation thereto that may be agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority.

Reason: To secure a satisfactory development.

Decision Notice on Site 3. A copy of this decision notice together with the approved plans and any schemes and/or details subsequently approved pursuant to this permission shall be kept at the site office at all times and the terms and contents thereof shall be made known to supervising staff on the site.

Reason: To ensure the site operatives are conversant with the terms of the planning permission.

PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT

Construction Management Plan 4. Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved a construction management plan, including arrangements for dismantling/demolition and removal of redundant material and its recycling, is to be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the County Planning Authority to include details of: a. parking for vehicles of site personnel, operatives and visitors; b. loading and unloading of plant and materials; c. storage of plant and materials; d. programme of works (including measures for traffic management); and e. routing on the highway network of construction vehicles within 10 km of the development site.

Once approved, the details shall be implemented in full for the duration of the construction period. Dismantling/demolition shall be completed and the redundant materials removed from the site within 3 months of the new development becoming operational.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety, residential and visual amenity.

Surface Water Drainage Scheme

5. Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, a surface water drainage scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydro geological context of the development, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development becomes operational.

The scheme shall also include details of how it is to be maintained and managed after completion.

Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding, to improve and protect water quality, improve habitat and amenity, and ensure future maintenance of these in accordance with the requirements of PPS25.

Dust Suppression 6. Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, the applicant shall submit and secure approval in writing by the County Planning Authority, for a detailed scheme of dust suppression. This shall include the following: i) a plan showing the location and specification of dust suppression water sprinklers; and ii) all other measures to be undertaken for the suppression of dust arising from construction activities.

Thereafter the approved scheme shall be carried out in full and operated throughout the period of construction and subsequently in connection with the development hereby approved.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of adjoining residential properties.

Wheel Washing Facility 7. Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved the applicant shall submit and secure approval in writing from the County Planning Authority, for a scheme detailing the measures to ensure that no vehicle shall leave the site in such a condition that earth and mud adhere to the wheels in a quantity which may introduce hazard or nuisance on the highway and actions to be taken in the event of mud or debris arising from the development being present on the highway. Thereafter the approved scheme shall be implemented in full and operated throughout the period of construction and subsequently in connection with the development hereby approved.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

Screen Planting 8. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, details of the tree planting on the southern boundary and hedgerow improvement/ management scheme relating to the most southern part of the land (to the west of College Road) in control off the applicant are to be submitted in writing for approval by the County Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full and maintained thereafter, with failures being replaced as necessary.

Reason: to screen the development in the interest of visual amenity.

Colour Scheme 9. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a scheme shall be submitted for approval by the County Planning Authority indicating the colours to be used to paint the approved structures in order to camouflage/minimise their visual impact. Thereafter the approved scheme shall be implemented in full and maintained in the colours as approved.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity within the AONB.

CONTROLLING CONSTRUCTION

Construction Deliveries 10. No deliveries of construction materials/plant shall be received by or despatched from the site outside the hours of: 0800 to 1800 on Monday to Friday; 0800 to 1300 on Saturday; and not at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in advance and in writing by the County Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of neighbouring residents.

Operation of Machinery 11. No plant, machinery or vehicles associated with the construction of the development hereby approved shall be operated on the site except between the hours of: 0800 to 1800 Mondays to Fridays inclusive; 0800 to 1300 on Saturdays; and not at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in advance and in writing by the County Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

Contamination 12. Any visibly contaminated or odorous material encountered on the site during the development work must be investigated. The County Planning Authority must be informed immediately of the nature and degree of contamination present and the remediation method proposed. No further development shall be carried out until the developer has obtained written approval to proceed from the County Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of public health and safety.

Tree Protection 13. Existing boundary trees and shrubs shall be retained unless identified for removal on a plan to be submitted and approved in advance by the County Planning Authority. Retained trees are to be protected for the duration of the construction works in accordance with BS5837:2005 ‘Trees in relation to construction’.

Reason: In the interest of environmental amenity.

Silencing of Mobile Plant 14. No mobile plant or machinery shall be used on the site during construction of the plant hereby approved, or the continued production of the Asphalt, unless fitted with silencing or noise reduction equipment to a standard not less than the manufacturer's standard UK specification for the equipment.

Reason: In the interests of amenity.

CONTINUING OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

Maximum Noise Level 15. The corrected noise level* for operational noise, measured from the closest sensitive receptors (Avins Bridge House, Viewlands, and Avins Farm) shall not exceed 55dB(A) (free field as a L(A) eq over a time period of 60 minutes) between the hours of use approved by this planning permission.

*A 5 dB correction has been added to reflect one or more of the following features occurring:

• the noise contains a distinguishable, discrete, continuous note (whine, hiss, screech, hum, etc.); • the noise contains distinct impulses (bangs, clicks, clatters, or thumps); • the noise is irregular enough to attract attention.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

Noise Monitoring 16. Within 2 months of commencement of operation of the proposed plant a noise survey shall be carried out to demonstrate compliance with condition 15 (55dB(A) over 60 minutes) of this permission. The survey results are to be advised in writing to the County Planning Authority. Should the site fail to comply with the limits set in condition 15, the applicant shall provide details of further noise attenuation/mitigation measures to ensure compliance with the maximum noise levels. Those measures shall be put in place and a further noise survey carried out with results advised to the County Planning Authority. If necessary, further attenuation/mitigation measures should be effected until compliance can be demonstrated to have been achieved.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

Lighting 17. All lighting shall be installed in the locations and in accordance with the notes indicated on the approved lighting plan DRG D11502.021.012 so as to be directed in a way which precludes any direct view of the lighting elements and spillage beyond the site boundary. The lights shall be kept to the minimum luminance level required to achieve safe working operations and only operated during the hours of use hereby approved.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

HGV Numbers 18. Unless otherwise agreed by the County Planning Authority as a non-material minor amendment, no more than 10,000 Heavy Goods Vehicles shall enter the

site and no more than 10,000 shall leave the site during permitted operating hours in any calendar year. Construction traffic associated with the development hereby approved is to be regarded as over and above the limitations on numbers of vehicles associated with normal working of the site. The monthly average of 834 HGVs entering the site and 834 HGVs leaving the site during permitted operating hours shall not be exceeded by more than 40% in any calendar month. The daily average of 35 HGVs entering the site and 35 HGVs leaving the site during permitted operating hours shall not be exceeded by more than 50%.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

HGV Records 19. A continuous record of daily vehicle numbers, including arrival and departure times, shall be maintained from the time that the development hereby approved is brought into use and kept at the site office at all times. Such record shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority quarterly for the first 12 months, commencing 3 months after the approved development is brought into use, and thereafter half yearly. They should also be available to the County Planning Authority on request, given 24 hours notice.

Reason: To enable monitoring of HGV movements in the interest of residential amenity

Hours of Use 20. The asphalt batching plant, weighbridge and associated circulation area shall not be used outside the hours of: 0600 to 1700 Monday to Friday; 0600 to 1300 on Saturdays; and not at all on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays unless to accord with controls set out in condition 21 - Occasional Out of Hours Operation.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of adjoining residential properties.

Occasional out of hours operation 21. Out of hours operations shall be restricted to the preparation and despatch of asphalt and will only be permitted subject to satisfying the following criteria: a. Residents within 300m of the site, Ardingly Parish Council and the County Planning Authority are to be notified in writing no less than 7 days in advance b. This is not to occur on more than 12 days in any calendar year. c. The out of hours operations are documented and kept on site for inspection by the County Planning Authority. d. There are no more than 10 vehicles entering and no more than 10 vehicles leaving the site in any one instance of out of hours operation, the numbers of which are to fall within the imposed limits on the number of HGVs as per condition 18 and the recording of movements as per condition 19.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of adjoining residential properties.

INFORMATIVES

A. The reasons for granting planning permission are that the development: • meets an identified need; • is acceptable in terms of visual amenity; • is satisfactory in terms of highway capacity and road safety; • has an acceptable impact on neighbouring amenity; • has an acceptable environmental impact; • and would not prejudice the possible reinstatement of the Horsted Keynes - Haywards Heath railway line.

B. In determining the application the following planning policies were considered: • South East Plan - Policies M5 and C3 • Planning Policy Guidance 24 (Planning and Noise) • Minerals Policy Statement 1 (MPS1) • Minerals Policy Statement 2 (MPS2) • Mid Sussex Local Plan 2004 • West Sussex Minerals Local Plan 2003

West Sussex Minerals Local Plan 2003 (saved policies): The following policies are relevant: • Policy 4 - Promotes the use of secondary aggregates in appropriate locations. • Policy 7 - Seeks to impose appropriate conditions for recycling operations. • Policy 12 - Mineral working within the AONB. • Policy 37 - Safeguarding mineral railheads. • Policy 47 – Account will be taken of number type and routing of vehicles likely to be generated. • Policy 48 Consideration of access, manoeuvring and wheel cleaning facilities on site. • Policy 49 - Seeks to take into account the cumulative effect of mineral workings on the locality. • Policy 52 – Details will be required of the siting and appearance of buildings, machinery, and plant. • Policy 53 – Mineral operations will be required to protect and maintain existing trees, hedgerows and shrubs. • Policy 60 - Seeks to impose appropriate noise conditions. • Policy 61 – Seeks to impose appropriate conditions to control dust. • Policy 62- Seek to impose conditions to control artificial light. • Policy 63 – Seeks to impose conditions to control hours of work.

Mid Sussex Local Plan 2004 (saved policies): The key policies are: • Policy B1: A high standard of design is expected

• Policy B3: Development will not be permitted if significant harm to the amenity of nearby residents is likely to be created due to noise, privacy, overlooking, reduction in sunlight, and reduction in outlook • Policy B4: natural resources are to be efficiently used • Policy B23: new development is to minimise noise impacts on surrounding neighbouring properties and the environment • Policy B24: Lighting proposals should be kept to the minimum necessary in terms of intensity and the number of fittings proposed. • Policy T4: New Development • Policy CS13: Land Drainage • Policy CS14: Safeguarding Flood Defences • Policy CS15: Water Quality • Policy AR 1: Oppose development at Ardingly Rail Depot involving an increase in HGVs. • Policy AR2: Safeguard possible reinstatement of railway link between Horsted Keynes and Haywards Heath

C. This permission is granted under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and does not purport to grant any other consent, approval or agreement by the County Council.

D. The applicant’s attention is drawn to pages 2 & 3 of the Environment Agency letter 8th July 2010. (Copy herewith)