ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT APPLICATION
WASTE RECOVERY PLAN
BLOCKADE SERVICES LTD
SOUTH GODSTONE QUARRY (PHASE 4) LAMBS BUSINESS PARK SOUTH GODSTONE SURREY RH9 8LJ
JULY 2019
envee ...making business green
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 SITE HISTORY
3.0 REQUIREMENT TO IMPROVE
4.0 WASTE PROPOSALS
5.0 PROPOSED WASTE TYPES
6.0 POTENTIAL FOR CONTAMINATION
7.0 AMOUNTS OF WASTE
8.0 LIMITS OF WASTE ACTIVITY
9.0 RECOVERY AND INTENDED USE
10.0 CONCLUSIONS
APPENDIX A – HISTORIC LANDFILL DATA 1 EA historic landfill data
APPENDIX B – PLANNING DOCUMENTS 1 Letter from Surrey County Council dated 12 February 2016 2 Planning consent TA/99/155 dated 30 August 2002 3 Soil handling Discharge of condition 12 TA/99/155/D1 dated 20 June 2003 4 Pre-settlement contours discharge of condition 15 TA/99/155D 04 July 2003 5 Drainage scheme discharge of condition 18 TA/99/155/D2 dated 15 October 2003 6 Aftercare and Landscape discharge of condition 22 & 25 TA/99/155/D4 dated 28 September 2005 7 Working Method Statement Planning Consent TA/99/155 8 Surrey County Council Planning and Regulatory Committee report dated 21 February 2001 Item 16 and Annex A 9 Extracts from email from SCC dated 17 June 2015 10 Section 106 Agreement dated 08 August 2002
APPENDIX C – CROSS SECTIONS
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 2
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This waste recovery plan is to support the application for an environmental permit for Blockade Services Ltd at South Godstone Quarry, Lambs Business Park, South Godstone, Surrey, RH9 8LJ. The permit is required to achieve the restoration of the Phase 4 void area of the quarry, shown in Figure 1 below, which is a clay pit that has been formed by the removal of minerals associated with former brickworks operations on site. The quarry is subdivided into Phases for planning purposes, which coincides with previous extraction and ancillary operational activity, and are referred to throughout this document.
Fig 1: Phasing plan for the entire site.
The Phase 4 void is formed in virgin clay where extraction has taken place in the past. There is also an historical landfill covering part of the proposed permitted area. Also, Environmental Permit EPR/EB3107CQ has areas in the same Phase. This permit is for aggregate production and dewatering of the lagoon. These permits are in place to aid with the restoration of the quarry. The Waste Framework Directive provides that imported inert material required to create the approved restoration landform, and construct the lakes required by the restoration scheme, involves waste replacing other materials which would otherwise have been used and is therefore in accordance with the definition of recovery under Article 3(15) of the Directive. The central NGR for the site is TQ 34759 48458.
The proposed environmental permit is a Tier 3 bespoke based on the Standard Rules SR2015No39. This is to take into account the amount of waste material required.
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 3
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
Although referred to as Phase 4, this is the second area to be permitted. Phase 2 is permitted under EPR/EB3400MB, a recovery permit issued in November 2016. The activities were deemed to be recovery and now the Phase is almost completed to the approved levels. The activities proposed for Phase 4 are identical as Phase 2, to recover waste to restore the quarry to the approved levels. Much of the previous WRP will be relevant to this one.
This plan has been written using the guidance of the Environment Agency’s guidance. The types and amounts of waste are specified in this Waste Recovery Plan. Cross- sections and profiles have been produced to demonstrate both current and the proposed landform levels. Reference has also been made to the Methley case, (R (Tarmac Aggregates Ltd) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2016] Env. L R 15), as the restoration requirements in that case have parallels with the restoration obligations at Godstone as advised by the EA.
The main aspect of the engineering operation is to import inert materials for use in restoration of Phase 4 of the site. This inert material is required for restoration of the former quarry works needed to return the site to the approved productive use for nature conservation.
2.0 SITE HISTORY
Lambs Business Park and former brickworks lies within open countryside and arable farmland to the west of South Godstone village. The former brickworks extend to 8.2 hectares and is made up of a disused quarry and associated ancillary land and buildings. There is a railway siding to the north of the site which branches from the mainline.
The land has been cleared of the majority of weed and scrub growth vegetation, self- set since the site was last operational, to prepare for the restoration works. Much of the lagoon in Phase 4 has now been dewatered.
The quarry and associated workings have been in existence since 1898. Previously waste was used as an infill material in parts of Phase 4 from 31 August 1981 until 31 December 1996. This was conducted under an environmental permit registered to W T Lamb & Sons Ltd, the landowner. Only inert waste materials were imported into Phase 4 and used in the previous infilling works and the restoration of this area far from complete. As alluded to in the WRP for Phase 2, a separate WRP (this document) would be forthcoming for Phase 4. The historic landfill is referred to in Appendix A.
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 4
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
Fig 2: Environment Agency data showing historic landfill.
The approved final restoration scheme profile for the site, including phases 2, 3 and 4, is a gentle downwards slope from north to south, to marry in with the existing levels in the woodland to the south of the site close to Phase 1, with the creation of meadow areas, planting of broadleaf trees and shrubs as well as coniferous planting and scrub vegetation to support nature conservation and including the creation of water bodies for enhanced biodiversity. The approved restoration scheme was devised with the directional engagement of Surrey County Council and using independent landscape specialists. All of the relevant planning documents are included as Appendix B of this document. The scheme was devised, geared towards woodland and amenity lakes, to minimise the amount of inert material required and reduce it from what would be needed if the site were to be returned to agriculture. The Planning and Regulatory Committee (PRC) report contained in Appendix B(8) summarises the development proposal and consultation responses including specific considerations in Appendix B also included in Appendix B(8). The report notes that the scheme ensures the minimum amount of material is required to achieve the scheme which enhances the conservation value of the site and the County Landscape Architect concludes it would “lead to a substantial enhancement locally of landscape and ecological aspects” (PRC para 31). The nature conservation qualities of this restoration scheme will enhance the surrounding environment to the west and south. This scheme remains relevant and current to date and Surrey County Council has reaffirmed its requirement for the site to be restored strictly in accordance with the approved scheme as indicted in the letter in Appendix B(1) dated 12th February 2016.
Planning consent was approved by Surrey County Council for the continuation of winning and working of brick clay from an area of 5.64 hectares, incorporating Phases 1, 2 and 3 as indicated on Figure 3 below, with provision for restoration through
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 5
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
importation of inert material only. At the time of determination SCC recognised the “balance which needs to be struck between the beneficial use of inert material for site restoration and their potential use in place of primary aggregates” (PRC para 34) and the planning consent, and Section 106 agreement, does not distinguish between the use of waste and non-waste in achieving the restoration of this site. The expectation is for the site to be restored and that this should not be delayed. SCC’s expectation is unchanged as referred to in section 3 below. A copy of the Decision Notice, TA/99/155 dated 30 August 2002, is included within this document as Appendix B(2). Plans were put into place to restore the quarry works. Consent TA/99/155 required discharge of conditions relating to soil placement, pre settlement contours, drainage scheme, landscaping scheme and aftercare scheme. These schemes encompass all the details of how the restoration will be achieved including planting and layout of the compartment areas of the site. All conditions were discharged and are referred to in more detail in section 3 below and the approved documents are appended to this WRP in B(3), B(4), B(5) and B(6). Restoration of the consented area, Phases 1 to 3, and an additional adjacent operational area, outside of this governed by a separate planning consent, Phase 4, were made subject of a Section 106 legal agreement, included in Appendix B(10). Planning permission allows development to proceed and the section 106 agreement in this case makes that permission a legally binding obligation. This strengthens the County Council’s ability to enforce against non-completion of restoration. This cannot be achieved without the necessary recovery permit.
Blockade Services Ltd has been appointed to complete the works. The company will be the sole contractor for the project. The company operates the inert waste recycling and aggregate production facility at South Godstone Quarry and also the recovery permit for Phase 2. To ensure that that the company remains in control of the project, they are also the applicant for this environmental permit.
Figure 2 above shows the EA records of historic landfill and further historical landfill data is included within Appendix A(1) of this document. The historic records show the land delineated by an inner and outer historic landfill site boundary. The reason for this delineation has not been corroborated by the EA local office and the applicant contends that the outer boundary relates to the planning consent area and the previous waste activity was limited to the inner area.
3.0 REQUIREMENT TO IMPROVE
The planning documents in Appendix B provide details of the means of the restoration project which are referred to in more detail below. The land is no longer in productive use (except for the aggregate production permit, linked to the restoration) since the closure of the active quarry and brickworks and in its current profile, without any soil coverage, the land is not capable of any beneficial use. It has been left as a barren clay lined void with peripheral site haul roads. The original soils from the site were removed and lost many years ago before the Town and Country Planning framework imposed conditions requiring the retention of onsite derived materials. All materials needed to restore the landform and create a profile capable of supporting nature conservation will have to be imported. Waste will replace other materials which would otherwise have to be used and is therefore in
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 6
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
accordance with the definition of recovery under Article 3(15) of the Waste Framework Directive. The indicative phased working and restoration anticipated that Phase 4 would be restored by 2007 and the Section 106 agreement imposes a legal obligation for the area to be restored in accordance with the planning consent. Restoration of the area is not possible without the importation of inert material whether that is waste or non-waste.
If the land is restored and improved it can be put back into a restoration profile to support nature conservation and the beneficial use creating mixed habitats and linkages, including “wildlife corridors to adjacent countryside” commended by Surrey Wildlife Trust, with adjacent woodland and fields. The ongoing proposals include increased potential of improved biodiversity. Development of the scheme proposals was an iterative process with SCC involving pre-application site meetings and discussions. The scale and period of working and restoration was reduced from the initial proposals as a result of this process resulting in a smaller extraction area and a change in the restoration contours. The total void for Phases 2, 3, and 4 was calculated at 475,000m³ and the discussions with SCC reduced the scheme and volumes by 132,000m³ to 343,000m³. SCC acknowledged that the revised scheme “which now involves the creation of a lake, have reduced the amount of fill required by 132,000m².” (para 12 PRC). At the time 142,000m³ was indicated for Phase 4. The volume in this WRP for Phase 4 at 114,743m³ based on the survey is less as it reflects the slope angle to be left between phases 2 and 4 as described in more detail in section 7 below.
Surrey County Council identified a number of aspects relating to implementation of restoration using inert material in consent TA/99/155 which controls the placement of material and treatment of the soil profile and planting for the final nature conservation end use. Conditions 6 and 7 limits importation to Class A inert waste only, the category of clean inert material at that time, in recognition that use of inert waste was a beneficial substitute in place of primary aggregates (see also section 2 above). The working scheme in Appendix B(7) identified that inert material would be placed in layers not exceeding 750mm and compacted by dozer until satisfactory consolidation is achieved.
The soil handling scheme required by condition 12, submitted and approved on 20 June 2003, see Appendix B(3) described the measures for protection and handling of soils in the restoration of the clay pit. The scheme identifies the separation of materials on site into primary and secondary types, equivalent to subsoil and topsoil, to ensure that the inert material is suitable for the restoration profile. Material unsuitable for topsoil and subsoil will be rejected and tipped into the base of the void. The scheme also details ripping and stone picking procedures.
A plan, based on the approved restoration profile, was submitted in accordance with condition 15, detailing pre settlement contours, and was approved on 04 July 2003. This is appended in B(4). The surcharge was deemed necessary due to the compaction anticipated to be achieved.
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 7
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
Details of a drainage scheme were submitted to and approved by Surrey County Council TA/155/D2 dated 15 October 2003 appended in B(5). The scheme made provision for drainage during infilling operations and after the restoration was completed involving a series of sumps, drains and ponds.
Landscaping and aftercare scheme details were submitted and approved in 2005. The schemes are appended in B(6). Although the planning application incorporated only phases 1 to 3 these schemes went into significant details about the restoration of Phases 1 to 4 as required by the section 106 agreement. The landscaping and restoration proposals statement for each phase detailed the method of restoration and the aftercare scheme described the tree planting and meadow seed mixes to enable the site to be returned to nature conservation use. The reasoning behind the aftercare scheme is incorporated in the written statement of the scheme appended in B(6).
The planning consent clearly stipulates the method of restoration and imposes strict controls on the means of achieving this and details of planting and the end use. As referred to in section 2 above Surrey County Council still regards this scheme as current and requires restoration strictly in accordance with the approved details. A site meeting with the SCC Planners and their Enforcement Team was held in May 2015 and in a subsequent email SCC stressed the requirement for restoration in accordance with the approved scheme and emphasised the timescales for completion of phase 2 by 2007, see email extract in Appendix B(9). A subsequent meeting was held in October 2015 to follow up on progress of the restoration and discussions included the recovery permit required which is outside of planning control. Alternatives to the approved scheme for the site were already tested through the planning process as SCC identified that if that land were reinstated at a lower level than approved it would form a large water body and this would not support the nature conservation benefits of the proposed scheme. “It is undesirable to leave a deep water void at the site, such a form of restoration has no recreational or nature conservation application” (PRC para 40). The land is privately owned and there is no need or intention of public access to be created in this area. The beneficial after use of nature conservation does not rely on any infrastructure needs for its implementation and management other than retention of a site access for agricultural vehicles after completion of restoration to undertake aftercare and for future onward management. Two gates are established one on the eastern boundary and the other in the north east corner. Both accesses are in existing use.
The revised EPR: Waste recovery on land guidance final dated 18 October 2016, refers to in determination of RvD cases. The guidance refers to a financial test and stipulates that “You will need to demonstrate that the proposed operation would be financially viable, and therefore would go ahead, if you had to use non-waste material”. However, the guidance also states that “Where a legal obligation to do the works can be demonstrated you do not need to provide evidence that the proposal is financially viable.” This is further defined that if “evidence that you have a legal obligation to carry out the works and would go ahead regardless of the cost to you, the Environment Agency is likely to consider your activity to be recovery”. The legal requirement to restore at this site is compelling. There is an extant planning permission and section 106 agreement and engagement with SCC has Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 8
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
shown their involvement before determination of the consent and urgency for restoration to be put into effect now through liaison over the last year. Information to demonstrate financial viability is not being offered in this WRP as the legal obligation to restore means this need not be demonstrated.
Originally, an environmental permit application was submitted that covered the entire site covering Phases 1 to 4 as one. However, due to the complexities of the previously permitted area, it was decided to tackle the restoration of the quarry by permitting in more than one phase at a time. The second area proposed to be restored, Phase 4, is the subject of this application. The figure below shows the proposed area that is subject to this second permit application edged green. The Phase 2 void has been created by the extraction of clay for the former brickworks operation. Limited infill has been added under the historic landfill authorisation. This is referred to in more detail in section 2 above.
Fig 3: Proposed permitted area for second recovery application.
4.0 WASTE PROPOSALS
The proposal of the engineering operation is to import inert materials only. The option is to use a single contractor, the applicant, to import inert waste such as hardcore, soils and stones.
If waste materials were not to be used in the proposals for infilling the quarry, a suitable alternative would have to be sought. The Section 106 agreement obligation means
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 9
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
that if waste is not available or permitted as a recovery operation then non-waste will have to be relied on. The most likely source of an alternative would be to purchase topsoil and aggregate that had not been previously classed as waste. This soil and aggregate could well be virgin materials at higher environmental cost. The planning permission does not specify the material to be imported and inert waste including clays and soils has specification similarities to virgin aggregates which would otherwise have to be used to meet this obligation. As the source of the proposed imported materials will be from one contractor, the transportation is limited to single journeys from local sites. This eases the carbon footprint as there is a guaranteed source of materials. This is opposed to sourcing from various sites further away which would no doubt incur further transportation and vehicle usage. The recovery of discarded material is justifiable as it potentially diverts waste that would normally be going to landfill for disposal. The applicant has already demonstrated a high level of compliance with the recovery permit for Phase 2.
5.0 PROPOSED WASTE TYPES
The proposed waste materials would be limited to inert material. The proposals would only use the waste streams referred to in EA guidance. As described in section 3 above the operator will segregate inert materials on site to ensure that the inert material suitable as subsoil and top soil are separated out from the material unsuitable for the final restored profile which will be placed in the bottom of the void. This will ensure that the soil profile for tree planting and meadow seeds mixes matches the material used in the landform. This is explained in the working scheme in Appendix B(7). The EWC codes that are available for the proposed engineering work are as follows:
Table 2.5 Waste types Exclusions Wastes having any of the following characteristics shall not be accepted: • Consisting solely or mainly of dusts, powders or loose fibres • Wastes that are in a form which is either sludge or liquid
Permitted waste types
Source Sub-source Waste Description Additional restrictions code
01 Waste 01 01 01 01 02 Wastes from Restricted to waste resulting from wastes from mineral non- overburden and exploration, mineral metalliferous interburden only. mining, excavation excavation quarrying and physical and 01 04 wastes 01 04 08 Waste gravel chemical from physical and crushed treatment of and chemical rocks other than minerals processing of those mentioned non- in 01 04 06 metalliferous minerals 01 04 09 Waste sand and clays
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 10
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
10 Wastes 10 12 wastes 10 12 08 Waste ceramics, from thermal from bricks, tiles and processes manufacture of construction ceramic goods, products (after bricks, tiles and thermal construction processing) products
10 13 waste 10 13 14 Waste concrete from manufacture of cement, lime and plaster and articles and products made from them 17 17 01 concrete, 17 01 01 Concrete Construction bricks, tiles and and demolition ceramics 17 01 02 Bricks wastes 17 01 03 Tiles and ceramics 17 01 07 Mixtures of Metal from reinforced concrete, bricks, concrete must have tiles and been removed. ceramics other than those mentioned in 17 01 06 17 05 soil 17 05 04 Soil and stones Restricted to topsoil, stones and other than those peat, subsoil and dredging spoil mentioned in 17 stones only. 05 03
19 Wastes 19 12 wastes 19 12 09 Minerals (for Restricted to wastes from waste from the example sand, from treatment of waste management mechanical stones) only aggregates that are facilities treatment of otherwise naturally waste (for occurring minerals. example Does not include fines sorting, from treatment of any non- crushing, hazardous waste or compacting, gypsum from recovered pelletising) not plasterboard. otherwise specified 19 12 12 Other wastes Restricted to crushed (including bricks, tiles, concrete mixtures of and ceramics only. materials) from Metal from reinforced mechanical concrete must be treatment of removed. wastes other Does not include fines than those from treatment of any mentioned in 19 non-hazardous waste or 12 11 gypsum from recovered plasterboard. 20 Municipal 20 02 garden and 20 02 02 Soil and stones Restricted to topsoil, wastes park wastes peat, subsoil and (household stones only. waste and similar
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 11
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
commercial, industrial and institutional wastes) including separately collected fractions
For EWC codes 10 12 08, 17 05 04, and 19 12 09 the EA guidance will be followed. The parameters stating what should be tested for, to confirm that only inert materials will be utilised.
6.0 POTENTIAL FOR CONTAMINATION
To ensure that environmental risk is kept to a minimum, all of the imported material will meet strict criteria. The material would consist of screened material accompanied by a clean material report via chemical analysis. Excellent quality materials are required for the restoration of the quarry and brickworks. The testing to ensure inert materials are only used will follow the EA guidance.
7.0 AMOUNTS OF WASTE
The proposal is to restore the former quarry and brickworks. The entire site is approximately 8.2 hectares in size. The initial application area, Phase 4 is approximately 1.9 hectares in size.
No more than the permitted amount of waste specified by the environmental permit will be exceeded and the volume required for the scheme has been minimised through creation of lakes and woodland rather than returning the land to agriculture. The SCC Planning and Regulatory Committee report notes that, “Originally it was envisaged that once extraction ceased the site would be returned to agriculture” The report warned of diminished future inert waste streams and lack of viability of land in agricultural use. (para 37) SCC noted that an effect of gearing the restoration to woodland and amenity lakes is that it would “have the effect of reducing the amount of filling required to return the site to agriculture” (PRC para 38). The proposals are only going to incorporate the suggested design aspects, so no imported materials would be used without reason. The depths of inert material to be placed in the Phase 4 void area varies across the phase and are illustrated in the cross sections and depth profiles in Appendix C. The final landform levels were determined to ensure that the surface could support the amenity planting proposed, as a lower level surface would result in extensive ponding, and to create a gentle slope to “blend in with the surrounding landscape” (PRC para 30). The cross sections show the existing ground levels and the final landform level in mAOD.
The volume is 114,743 cubic metres equivalent to 149,166 tonnes at a conversion rate of 1.3t per m³. This is in line with the methodology used for Phase 2.
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 12
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
Total amounts are calculated using an average of 1.3 tonnes per cubic metre as per industry guidance. An average of 1.3 tonnes is used as the density of materials can differ. This assumes the compaction described in section 3 above and referred to in more detail in the working method statement in B(7). All of the imported materials will be weighed before being recovered at the site.
The proposed engineering works are planned to commence as soon as possible and could last for a period of up to 2 years to complete. The restoration project needs to be stable and long lasting.
8.0 LIMITS OF WASTE ACTIVITY
The amount of inert materials to be imported to the application site is limited by the approved restoration profile derived from the nature conservation scheme design which is the intended use of the land. The submitted profiles and surveys demonstrate the limits required.
The permitted limits will be closely monitored by the completion of accurate duty of care waste transfer notes. These amounts will be reported to the Environment Agency every quarter as per the proposed permit conditions.
The cross sections and profiles in Appendix C explain the amounts and limits further.
9.0 RECOVERY AND INTENDED USE
The engineering operation has the single aim of restoring the Phase 4 quarry area to the approved restoration contours in line with the current planning consent to support a nature conservation end use. The benefit to the local area is in the restoration of Phase 4 to nature conservation. SCC concluded in the PRC report that “A significant benefit of the proposal is that it provides an opportunity for a comprehensive restoration scheme for the former claypit and the current and future extraction areas which would benefit the visual amenities of the land, enhance the conservation value of the site by providing lakes, woodland and meadowland planting, and provide for the reinstatement of the land to a forestry use in the long term.” (PRC para 32). The land contiguous with the site will benefit from the enhanced biodiversity restoration of the wider site. Visually from the surrounding area and users of the Godstone Business Park the area will be returned from an unproductive barren void to a verdant vital area for fauna and flora.
The planning documents in Appendix B indicate that only inert materials can be imported to restore the quarry to a more productive use and it does not restrict this to waste or non-waste.
The restoration will be overseen by Southern Testing Ltd – Dr Lawrence Mockett - to ensure that it is carried out to the greatest standard. WT Lamb Holdings Ltd have employed Southern Testing Ltd to specify and oversee the restoration methodology so that the site will be restored to an appropriate standard. The specification that will
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 13
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
be adhered to will ensure that the waste recovery process is completed to a standard that allows the intended future of the site to be achieved.
The need to execute the proposals adequately leads to the improved quality of the land. Re-profiling will be done with the use of specialist machinery to ensure that the appropriate amount of compaction as described in section 3 and Appendix B(7) will occur. This will minimise the need for any extra topping up of the levels. The minimum amount of material will be used to ensure that the levels outlined within the planning consent are met.
The engineering proposals will be competently managed by a fully technically qualified person. Evidence of this in the form of a current, relevant WAMITAB certificate is being forwarded as part of the permit application.
10.0 CONCLUSIONS
Like previously in Phase 2, now nearing full completion, the proposal of the engineering operation is the need to import specific inert waste material from an outside source to meet the design requirements. If the use of inert waste material that has undergone appropriate control measures is available, then this is a viable option. The source of the materials will be from the local area using an experienced company, Blockade Services Ltd, so transport is kept to a minimum. The use of waste materials will also remove the need for using virgin materials and divert it from other disposal routes such as landfill. The Waste Framework Directive provides that inert imported material to create the approved restoration landform required by the restoration scheme, replacing other materials which would otherwise have been used, is in accordance with the definition of recovery under Article 3(15) of the Directive. The amount of material required is governed by the levels set out in the submitted profiles approved by planning condition and reinforced by a section 106 legal agreement. The scheme is still current, and restoration of the site is required strictly in accordance with to continue with approved plans. This ensures that only the minimum amount of material will be used to achieve the specified finished levels. Following the EA guidance, the proposals appear to adopt a positive answer to all of the criteria. All of the potential impacts to the environment, human health and public amenity have been suitably risk assessed. This is to minimise any adverse effect and provide a long-term benefit to the local area and in accordance with the latest guidance notes this site meets the defined criteria for recovery.
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 14
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
APPENDIX A – HISTORIC LANDFILL DATA
1 EA historic landfill data
Waste Recovery Plan - June 2019
5/14/2015 Environment Agency - What's in your backyard?
Enter a postcode or place name: Other topics for this area... Waste Landfill
; Other maps Data search Text only version Map legend X: 534,725 Y: 148,428 at scale 1:10,000
Click on a feature for details of that site
Authorised Landfill
Site boundary
Historic landfill
Site boundary
Other national environmental organisations
Natural Resources Wales Area of responsibility Scottish Environment Protection Agency Area of responsibility
Customers in Wales - From 1 April 2013 Natural Resources Wales (NRW) has taken over the responsibilities of the Environment Agency in Wales. © Environment Agency copyright and database rights 2015. © Ordnance Survey Crown copyright. All rights reserved. Environment Agency, 100026380. Contains Royal Mail data © Royal Mail copyright and database right 2015. This service is designed to inform members of the public, in line with our terms and conditions. For business or commercial use, please contact us.
Tell me more about waste and landfill:
Waste regulation We regulate waste management through a system of licences. Find out how to get the correct licence here, get data on waste and find out if there are any rules applying to household waste.
Waste facts and figures The UK produces about 220 million tonnes of controlled wastes per year. Find out about waste incineration, hazardous waste, recycling and landfill.
Follow us: YouTube Twitter Flickr Facebook Author: The Environment Agency | [email protected] Last updated: 30th April 2015
Privacy policy | Terms and conditions | Contact us | Cymraeg © Environment Agency 2015
http://maps.environment-agency.gov.uk/wiyby/wiybyController?topic=waste&layerGroups=default&lang=_e&ep=map&scale=11&x=534563.8749999995&… 1/1 5/14/2015 Environment Agency - What's in your backyard?
Interactive Maps
Historic landfill
Site details
Site name Lambs Brickworks
Site address Lambs Brickworks (Godstone Brickworks)
Site operator null
Licence no. 0
Types of waste buried:
A 'Yes' is shown in the right hand box where there is evidence that the type of waste may have been buried. If there is no evidence or no data currently available, then the box is left blank.
Inert: Waste which remains largely unaltered once buried such as glass, concrete, bricks, tiles, Yes soil and stones.
View map of this location
Follow us: YouTube Twitter Flickr Facebook Author: The Environment Agency | [email protected] Last updated: 30th April 2015
Privacy policy | Terms and conditions | Contact us | Cymraeg © Environment Agency 2015
http://maps.environment-agency.gov.uk/wiyby/queryController?topic=waste&ep=2ndtierquery&lang=_e&layerGroups=2&x=534719.3885&y=148439.14899… 1/1 5/14/2015 Environment Agency - What's in your backyard?
Interactive Maps
Historic landfill
Site details
Site name Lambs Brickworks
Site address Telburston Hill, Godstone, Surrey
Site operator W T Lamb and Sons Limited
Licence no. 0
View map of this location
Follow us: YouTube Twitter Flickr Facebook Author: The Environment Agency | [email protected] Last updated: 30th April 2015
Privacy policy | Terms and conditions | Contact us | Cymraeg © Environment Agency 2015
http://maps.environment-agency.gov.uk/wiyby/queryController?topic=waste&ep=2ndtierquery&lang=_e&layerGroups=2&x=534764.905&y=148436.22&ext… 1/1 5/14/2015 Environment Agency - What's in your backyard?
Interactive Maps
Historic landfill (Grid reference: X: 534,714.69; Y: 148,472.06)
Page 1 of 1 (2 results for selected location)
First waste Last waste Site name Site address received received
Lambs Brickworks (Godstone Lambs Brickworks 31 AUG 1981 31 DEC 1996 Brickworks)
Lambs Brickworks Telburston Hill, Godstone, Surrey - -
Tell me more about waste and landfill:
Waste regulation We regulate waste management through a system of licences. Find out how to get the correct licence here, get data on waste and find out if there are any rules applying to household waste.
Waste facts and figures The UK produces about 220 million tonnes of controlled wastes per year. Find out about waste incineration, hazardous waste, recycling and landfill.
Active and Historic Landfill Layer
Our active landfill layer holds details of sites that are regulated by us. Our historic landfill layer holds details of sites that have surrendered their environmental permits or were identified as being closed before the formation of the Environment Agency.
Definitions
Sites designated with codes A1-A7 were originally regulated under the Waste Management Licensing Regulations and the majority of which are closed as they are not compliant with the Landfill Directive.
A1: Co-disposal landfill site A landfill site that disposed of both non hazardous and hazardous waste in the same cells.
A2: Other landfill sites taking special waste A landfill site that disposed of hazardous wastes only.
A4: Household, commercial and industrial waste landfill A landfill site that disposed of both non hazardous biodegradable and non-biodegradable wastes only.
A5: Landfill taking non-biodegradable wastes A landfill site that disposed of non-biodegradable non hazardous wastes.
A6: Landfill taking other wastes A landfill site that disposed of other wastes not listed in categories A1, A2, A4 and A5. An example could be dredgings from waterways.
A7: Industrial waste landfill (factory cartilage) A landfill site that disposed of wastes from the operator only or a specific organisation or source. Wastes could be both non hazardous or hazardous wastes.
L05: Inert Landfill Landfill sites originally permitted as installations. Legislative amendments changed these to waste operations. These http://maps.environment-agency.gov.uk/wiyby/wiybyController?latest=true&topic=waste&ep=query&lang=_e&x=534714.6875000017&y=148472.06249999… 1/2 5/14/2015 Environment Agency - What's in your backyard? are landfill sites that are Landfill Directive compliant and can operate now.
5.2 A(1) a) Landfill sites permitted as installations accepting non hazardous and/or hazardous wastes that are Landfill Directive compliant and can operate now.
Follow us: YouTube Twitter Flickr Facebook Author: The Environment Agency | [email protected] Last updated: 30th April 2015
Privacy policy | Terms and conditions | Contact us | Cymraeg © Environment Agency 2015
http://maps.environment-agency.gov.uk/wiyby/wiybyController?latest=true&topic=waste&ep=query&lang=_e&x=534714.6875000017&y=148472.06249999… 2/2 Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
APPENDIX B – PLANNING DOCUMENTS
1 Letter from Surrey County Council dated 12 February 2016 2 Planning consent TA/99/155 dated 30 August 2002 3 Soil handling Discharge of condition 12 TA/99/155/D1 dated 20 June 2003 4 Pre-settlement contours discharge of condition 15 TA/99/155D 04 July 2003 5 Drainage scheme discharge of condition 18 TA/99/155/D2 dated 15 October 2003 6 Aftercare and Landscape discharge of condition 22 & 25 TA/99/155/D4 dated 28 September 2005 7 Working Method Statement Planning Consent TA/99/155 8 Surrey County Council Planning and Regulatory Committee report dated 21 February 2001 Item 16 and Annex A 9 Extracts from email from SCC dated 17 June 2015 10 Section 106 Agreement dated 08 August 2002
Waste Recovery Plan - June 2019
Tel: 020-8541-7673 Fax: 020-8541-9399 Our ref: Min/Ta/17 Your ref: s [email protected]
Ms. Sian Holmes Matthews and Son LLP Planning & Development 91 Gower Street Group County Hall London Kingston upon Thames WC1E 6AB Surrey KT1 2DY
12 February 2016
Dear Ms. Holmes,
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Land South Godstone Brickworks, Tilburstow Hill Road, South Godstone, Surrey
I write in respect of the above named site.
Please accept this letter as confirmation that condition 3 of planning permission Ref. TA99/155 dated 30 August 2002 requires that extraction of minerals shall cease by 31 December 2040 and restoration of the site shall be completed by 31 May 2047 by which date the whole of the site shall have been restored strictly in accordance with the permitted restoration scheme and Plan Nos. RP1 and LP1 dated 10/2000 and all buildings, fixed plant or machinery, internal access roads and hardstandings, together with their foundations and bases, shall have been removed from the land.
A copy of this planning permission is enclosed for your information as appropriate.
I trust this is helpful.
Yours sincerely,
Dustin Lees Senior Planning Officer
Encl. Copy of planning permission Ref. TA99/155 dated 30 August 2002
Page 1 of 1
ANNEXE A
TO: PLANNING & REGULATORY COMMITTEE DATE: 21 FEBRUARY 2000
BY: HEAD OF PLANNING
DISTRICT(S): TANDRIDGE ELECTORAL DIVISION (S): GODSTONE
PURPOSE: FOR DECISION S/A REF: 111E2
TITLE: MINERAL AND WASTE APPLICATION: TA99/155
SUMMARY
South Godstone Brickworks, Tilburstow Hill Road, South Godstone.
Continuation of winning and working of brick clay from an area of 5.64 ha, retention of certain brickmaking facilities and associated junction improvements to private access road.
This planning application has arisen as a result of the Interim Development Order (IDO) granted in 1947 covering an area of 13.6 ha at South Godstone Brickworks, ceasing to have effect. Consequently, the current application has been submitted to regularise the on-going extraction of brick clay. The brickwork kilns are not included in this application as they are the subject of a separate extant planning permission.
South Godstone Brickworks is identified in the Surrey Minerals Local Plan 1993 as an existing brickworks. The site is located in the Green Belt where policies of restraint apply. Key issues are the maintenance of production and whether the site can be well restored. The slow rate of clay extraction would result in the majority of the site remaining unrestored for a lengthy period, however, it is intended to restore the area of former working as soon as possible. Accordingly, other issues considered in the report are the impact that working and restoration of the site would have on the environment and on local amenity. In particular, the highways and traffic impacts of the proposal, which have especially concerned local residents.
It is concluded in the report that the application accords with policy, including the provisions of the Development Plan and that the impacts of working including traffic generation, are acceptable. Additionally, whilst the full restoration of the site will be a lengthy process, even partial restoration would be a benefit and enhance the local landscape in this area of Local Landscape Significance. The wider restoration scheme provides a comprehensive control not available at present and is therefore a significant benefit.
That, subject to the completion of a legal agreement to secure the restoration of the site and adjoining area of former mineral working and a S278 Highway Works Agreement to secure access improvements, planning permission be granted subject to conditions.
The application was originally advertised alongside the recycling depot and rail aggregate depot planning applications as a departure from the development plan. The application has now been amended and would no longer be considered to be a departure.
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 2
Amending letters or Plans: Letters dated 16/01/01, 20/11/00 plus Accompanying Documentation including Supporting Memorandum dated 20/11/00 and Plan Nos. EMS/10619/2/BC dated 10/2000,1061/2/RJ dated 10/2000, 10619/2/LO dated 10/2000, EMS/10619/BCF dated 10/2000, Proposed Working Arrangements EMS/10619/2/BC/WA dated 10/2000, Mineral Working Sections Drawing SG20-2B dated 05/06/00, Restoration Plan RP1 dated 10/2000; Landscape Plan LP1, Location Plan 100 dated 13/11/97, Drawing No. 97/1590/2/A dated January 2000
THE PROPOSAL
Extraction
1 It is proposed to continue extracting clay and restore the site to woodland and waterbodies by partially filling with inert waste. Extraction would not take place over the entire 5.64 ha of the site. The site area includes the retention of the brick cutting shed; the metal workshop and store; the pan building and store; and brick-stacking areas, formerly permitted by the IDO. In addition, the western section of the site would be used for the stockpiling of clay and access to the working area.
2 South Godstone Brickworks currently produces between 60-80,000 machine and hand-made bricks per week. The site has clay reserves of 125,000 m3 . To continue production it is proposed to extract clay at an estimated annual output of 3,000 m3 giving an annual average production of bricks of 3.4 million.
3 At the present rates of production a clay lift lasting approximately 14 days would take place at two or three year intervals. To maintain production it would be necessary for a clay lift to take place during spring 2001. This would involve the clay pit being dewatered and then clay excavated by box scraper and stockpiled to the west of the brickworks buildings. Approximately 10,000 m3 of clay is placed in a single stockpile up to 4 metres high. This allows the material to weather in advance of its use in the brickmaking process. When required, the clay is transported from the stockpile to the brickwork building by loading shovel where it is mixed with water, sand and pulverised fuel ash (PFA). PFA is stockpiled to the south east of the clay working area.
4 Clay has been extracted from the northern portion of the site and this area is currently a steep sided water filled pit. The clay lift proposed for spring 2001 would remove the remaining 10,000 m3 of clay to complete working in this area and enable this section of the claypit to be divided off from the current and future extraction area, by a clay bund. Once a barrier is in place, the northern section of the site can be filled and restored.
5 Extraction would continue in the remaining 1.4 ha over a 40 year period. Working would proceed in a southerly direction with the excavations going to a depth of 28 metres. No topsoil remains at the site and therefore no soil stripping is required.
Restoration
6 Past and future extraction of clay would create a total void of 343,000 m3. It would be 48 years before the site is fully restored. However the restoration would take place in distinct stages. The filling of the northern section of the site would commence in 2002 and would continue until 2005. It would involve the deposit of around 201,000 m3 of inert waste at an approximate rate of 65,000 m3 per year. The planting in this area (shown on Plan 2 as Phase 2) would be completed by autumn/winter 2005/6. Restoration would not take place again until 2040 when the filling and creation of lakes would commence on the southern section of the site. This phase, shown as Phase 4 on Plan No.2, would involve the importation of approximately 138,000 m3 of inert waste over the
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 3 period 2042 to 2046. The full restoration of the site would take until 2047 to complete. The clearance of brickmaking and ancillary facilities would take place over a two year period concurrent with the final filling, ie 2042 to 2044.
7 Phase 2, the northern section of the site, would be planted mainly with Corsican pine trees. However there would be a band of broad-leaved trees including ash, oak, willow, silver birch, field maple and hazel on the western boundary of the area. In phase 4, the southern section of the site, the pit on the western side of the phase would be graded to create a fishing lake. Some 16,000 m3 of clay would be retained to line the sides and bottom of the lake. An area of meadowland planting containing wildflowers and grass would surround the lake. The middle section of the site would be planted with broad-leaved trees and shrubs to link up with the restoration of phase 1A (see variation of conditions proposal) and the existing woodland to the south of the site. The far eastern part of the phase would be planted with Corsican pine.
8 The proposed restoration for the clay extraction area forms part of a comprehensive scheme covering the entire site the subject of all four applications and previous mineral working activity.
Access and Traffic
9 Access to the site is gained from Tilburstow Hill Road via Terracotta Road and through the commercial area of Lambs Business Park. The brickmaking activity would generate approximately 10 heavy goods vehicle movements per day (5 in 5 out). During the two periods of filling, 15 loads per day would be imported onto the site, generating 30 vehicle movements. The proposal also involves improvements to the access with Tilburstow Hill Road. These would involve the realignment of the roadway across the site frontage to allow better sightlines and would require the existing brook to be culverted and the footpath realigned. Details of the works would be agreed with the Highway Authority under a Highway Works Agreement.
Hours of Working
10 The hours of operation would be 0730 hours to 1800 hours Monday to Friday and 0730 hours to 1300 hours on Saturdays.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
11 Since the application was originally submitted, further supporting information covering the traffic and noise impact, landscape, geology, hydrology, archaeology and ecology has been supplied, along with site restoration proposals. It is considered that sufficient supporting information has been now been supplied to enable the proposal to be fully assessed in accordance with SSP Policy EN2. There has been an amendment to the application boundary to include the existing water filled claypit to the north of the site area which originally formed part of the variation of conditions proposal found elsewhere in this report. The recent amendments to the application have resulted from a need to ensure that a viable restoration of the whole site could take place as early as possible in a workable phased manner. The boundary changes to the applications do not result in a greater landtake, they are merely amendments to the sites’ configurations.
12 The proposed scale and period of working has also been reduced. It had been proposed to extract clay over a period of 145 years and fill the resulting void of 475,000 m3 with inert waste. A smaller extraction area and a change in the restoration which now involves the creation of a lake, have reduced the amount of fill required by 132,000 m3. This reduction in fill, along with a significant reduction in timescale, should provide for less overall impact than the initial proposal.
13 Given the changes, for the sake of clarity, the applicant has provided a single document containing information relevant to this application. This document includes plans and all the supporting
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 4 documentation and supersedes any previous amendments. All the revised documents have been placed on deposit at the Borough and County Council offices and consultees have been informed and asked it they wish to make further comments. An advertisement was placed in the local newspaper to inform that revised information had been submitted and all persons who made representations on the application previously, have been informed by letter and invited to comment.
DISTRICT COUNCIL
14 At its meeting on 30 January 2001, the Planning and Environmental Protection Committee considered this application and resolved to object unless the County Council is satisfied that there will be no increased environmental impact on the area or the amenities of local residents along Terracotta Road, in particular, and, unless lorry movements can be rigorously controlled and monitored by the County Council.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Introduction
15 The existing claypit at South Godstone Brickworks has been partially worked and contains proven reserves of clay. Nevertheless, there is no longer an extant planning permission for clay extraction and as such the applicant is applying for a new permission to regularise an on-going activity. The site is subject to the constraints of Metropolitan Green Belt policy, where the acceptability of mineral working is subject to the achievement of a high quality of restoration and the maintenance of high environmental standards. At the same time, it will be necessary to consider the effect of the development on the environment and amenity and whether the proposed measures for the mitigation of are satisfactory.
Policy Framework
The following Development Plan policies are relevant in assessing this proposal.
Surrey Structure Plan 1994 Policy EN1 - Sustaining Surrey’s Environment Policy EN2 - Environmental Assessment Policy PE2 - Development within the Green Belt Policy MT2 - The Movement Implications of Development Policy DP24 - Demand for Mineral Working Policy DP29 - Restoration Policy DP32 - Environmental Control of Waste Disposal
Surrey Structure Plan Deposit Draft 2001 Policy L06 - The Metropolitan Green Belt Policy SE1 - Natural Resources and Pollution Control Policy SE2 - Water Resources and land Drainage Policy DN18 - Mineral Workings and Restoration
Surrey Minerals Local Plan 1993 Policy 1 - Environmental & Amenity Protection Policy 4 - Restoration Policy 5 - Framework for Restoration Policy 6 - Commitment to Restoration Policy 19 - Extensions to Clay Workings
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 5 South of the Downs Local Plan 1994 Policy 3 - Development in the Green Belt Policy 41 - Area of Local Landscape Significance
Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft 1998 Policy RE2 - Development in the Green Belt Policy RE19 - Area of Local Landscape Significance Policy MO9 - Importance of Heavy Goods Vehicles
Green Belt Policy
16 The site is located within the Metropolitan Green Belt. ‘Policy Planning Guidance Note 2’ (PPG2) (Revised January 1995 sets out the latest Government advice on Green Belts. The guidance states that minerals can only be worked where they are found and “that mineral extraction need not be inappropriate development: it need not conflict with the purposes of including land in Green Belts, provided that high environmental standards are maintained and that the site is well restored”.
17 Policy PE2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994 (SSP) whilst pre-dating the revision of PPG2, sets out the Authority’s approach to the control of development within the Metropolitan Green Belt. In paragraph 3.8 it is recognised that some uses may need to be located in the Green Belt, including mineral working and waste disposal, and that these uses may be permitted though not as of right. Policy LO6 of the Deposit Draft Surrey Structure Plan 2001 (DDSSP) supports the maintenance of the Green Belt. In this case, the Authority would wish to be satisfied that the proposal involves high environmental standards to mitigate against any potential environmental impact and that the proposed restoration and afteruse of the site can be achieved to an acceptable standard.
Minerals Policy
18 To ensure that mineral working takes place in the least damaging way, the Authority would need to be satisfied that the need of the mineral and the nature and yield of the deposit, outweigh material landscape, highway, environmental or amenity considerations as set out in SSP Policy DP24. DDSSP Policy DN18, recognises that there is need to ensure a steady supply of materials and that mineral working should be restored to the highest practicable standards at the earliest practicable date.
19 Minerals Planning Guidance 7 (MPG7) offers guidance on the reclamation of mineral workings and advises that restoration and aftercare are an integral part of the working of a site. Both the Government’s ‘Sustainable Development: The UK Strategy’ and MPG7 suggest that mineral workings are to be reinstated to an appropriate afteruse at the earliest opportunity. In accordance with this view, Policy DP29 of the SSP seeks to ensure that mineral working does not result in permanent damage to the environment by emphasising the need to secure the restoration of mineral workings to a condition capable of sustaining an acceptable afteruse at the earliest practicable date.
20 It is recognised in the Surrey Minerals Local Plan 1993 (SMLP) that careful restoration is necessary to ensure that mineral working does not have a permanent adverse effect on a locality. Policy 4 seeks to ensure that land used for mineral working is reclaimed to a use compatible with the area. There is a presumption in favour of forestry or agricultural afteruses although conservation and amenity uses would be given favourable consideration where appropriate. Policy 5 requires that a broad framework of restoration is established. Policy 6 seeks to ensure that applicants are capable of carrying out the proposed restoration.
21 South Godstone Brickworks is identified in the SMLP as one of the active brickworks in the County (A9). Policy 19 of the SMLP supports the extension of clay extraction areas at existing brickworks
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 6 for the maintenance of production and provided that the environmental impacts of the operation are acceptable. The Plan goes on to recognise that brickworks entail the construction of substantial buildings and other structures.
Environmental & Amenity Policy
22 Mineral extraction can be source of public concern and has the potential to harm environmental and amenity interests. The consultation draft of Mineral Planning Guidance Note 11 (MPG11) ‘Controlling and Mitigating the Environmental Effects of Minerals Extraction’ recognises that as minerals can only be worked where they are found and as a result sites may be located in environmentally sensitive areas or close to communities. Consequently, the need to control and minimise the impacts of working is a priority.
23 Traffic is identified as one of the main impacts connected with mineral working and this is reflected by the public concern related to traffic within the locality of mineral sites and along the route to processing and final delivery. The Government’s advice on transport, Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 (PPG13) March 1994, is currently being revised and is out to public consultation. The revised PPG states that local authorities should “encourage development which is, or can realistically be, served by rail or water and development with good (though where possible indirect) access to trunk roads...”.
24 The SSP recognises that emphasis needs to be given to the broader environmental implications of development. Proposals are expected to demonstrate compliance with the wide range of criteria set out in Policy EN1 ‘Sustaining Surrey’s Environment’. The SSP also puts emphasis on the environmental implications of movement. Policy MT2 seeks to ensure that the movement implications of a development is compatible with the local transport infrastructure. Policy MT7 recognises the impact that lorry traffic can have on sensitive areas, town and village centres, residential streets and rural lanes.
25 The ‘Surrey Minerals Local Plan’ (SMLP), 1993, recognises that traffic associated with mineral workings gives rise to a high level of concern and that careful consideration is necessary to assess the impact on the locality and the highway network. It is also accepted that all mineral workings give rise to some degree of disturbance and therefore the Authority will normally favour an extension to an existing site rather than a new working. Policy 1 seeks to secure adequate safeguard for the protection of the environment and amenities of local residents by requiring applicants to satisfy the County Council that adequate steps have been taken to minimise the impact of any proposal and that the relevant issues set out in the policy have been taken into account. In this case, such issues include archaeology, ecology, and traffic.
Summary Policy Issues
26 The need to balance environmental impacts against the importance of mineral resources to society and the economy is recognised. Mineral working can be acceptable in the Green Belt in certain circumstances. The site is identified as an existing brickworks in the SMLP and there is policy support for extensions to clay extraction areas. The need for further clay extraction will be examined along with the environmental impact of working.
Green Belt Considerations
27 Objectors to the proposal have stated that the development would damage the Green Belt and would therefore be better located elsewhere. However, minerals can only be worked where they occur and in this case, the brickmaking facilities are present at this site. Mineral working is also a temporary activity, albeit in the case of clay extraction, that activity takes place over a long period of
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 7 time. Consequently, in terms of Green Belt policy as mentioned in paras 16 & 17 above, mineral working need not be inappropriate development.
28 PPG2 also advises that development proposals should not injure the visual amenities of the Green Belt and that when any large-scale development or redevelopment, including mineral extraction is to take place in the Green Belt, it should as far as possible contribute to the achievement of the objectives for the use of Green Belt land. The objectives set out in PPG2 include the enhancement and retention of attractive landscapes, retention of land in agricultural, forestry or related uses and to secure nature conservation interest.
29 The Authority needs to be satisfied that the applicant’s proposals for working the site, reinstatement and aftercare will achieve satisfactory standards of operation and restoration. Whilst clay extraction at South Godstone Brickworks has been taking place over a long period of time, no restoration has taken place. To accord with Policy 5 of the SMLP, the applicant needs to demonstrate the practicality of the proposed restoration and an ability to achieve such a restoration. Whilst there is no restored land at the site which could give a practical indication of the success of the restoration, the planning application includes plans and statements setting out the progressive working and reclamation of the site to a waterbody and forestry. The application has been the subject of wide consultation and there is no reason to believe that, with the imposition of conditions relating to restoration and aftercare, the proposals could not be achieved. Issues relating to the environmental impact of the development are discussed in detail under subject headings in the environment and amenity section of the report (paragraphs 44 to 85).
30 Restoration of the site would result in a landform that would blend with the surrounding landscape and slope down from the highest point in the north western corner of the site (82 m AOD) to 76 m AOD in the south of the site. Land to the south of this application area, but included in the overall restoration, goes down to 74.6 m AOD just south of the existing lake. The largest lake, to be created in the centre of the site close to the western boundary at the time of final restoration, is to be used for fishing purposes. The County’s Landscape Architect has commented that the site is well concealed by virtue of topography and vegetation cover. The site is of a modest scale compared with other clay workings, the material being worked to a greater depth than normal. Nevertheless, the proposal would give rise to some visual disruption over a long period of time, particularly in the south of the site. However, a benefit to be gained from the current proposal is that the northern section of the site would be filled, and planted by 2006.
31 Restoration would involve new woodland planting. The broad-leaved planting would link with the lake and as the Surrey Wildlife Trust commented, form wildlife corridors to adjacent countryside. The County’s Landscape Architect’s opinion is that the proposals generally will lead to substantial enhancement locally of landscape and ecological aspects. He also comments that the use of fast growing species to provide quick screening in the initial stages are supported, as are the proposal to provide wildlife conservation measures involving mixed habitat.
32 A significant benefit of the proposal is that it provides an opportunity for a comprehensive restoration scheme for the former claypit and the current and future extraction areas which would benefit the visual amenities of the land, enhance the conservation value of the site by providing lakes, woodland and meadowland planting, and provide for the reinstatement of the land to a forestry use in the long term.
Restoration
33 Clay extraction has taken place at the brickworks for more than a century, yet no progress has been made in respect of restoring the land to a beneficial afteruse. Policy DP29 of the SSP seeks to ensure that mineral working does not result in permanent damage to the environment. Delay in restoration has environmental costs and the priority is to secure the restoration of this site to a
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 8 condition capable of sustaining an acceptable afteruse at the earliest practicable date. This view accords with the suggestion in the Government’s ‘Sustainable Development: The UK Strategy’ and ‘MPG7’ that mineral workings are to be reinstated to an appropriate afteruse at the earliest opportunity. The Government set out its commitment to reducing the reliance on landfill in the ‘Waste Strategy 2000’ and although in principle, landfill is the least desirable option, it is accepted in the Strategy that there will continue to be a need for landfill and that it will be the BPEO for certain wastes and in certain situations.
34 The Government’s desire to reduce the reliance on landfill derives from targets set by the European Landfill Directive. To encourage alternative ways of dealing with waste the Landfill Tax was introduced in 1996. However, this policy stance needs to be balanced against the necessity infilling with inert waste to facilitate the restoration of former mineral workings. The recently issued PPG10 ‘Planning and Waste Management’ September 1999, recognises this dilemma in para. A9 of Annex A. It advises that a balance needs to be struck between the beneficial use of inert materials for site restoration and their potential use in place of primary aggregates. Further recognition of the difficulties of ‘recycling’ land arising from the diversion of waste from landfill was given when two exemptions from Landfill Tax were introduced in October 1999. These exemptions were introduced specifically to address the fact that Landfill Tax had contributed to a shortfall in the availability of suitable inert material for the filling of working and old quarries and the restoration of landfill sites. Implicit in these exemptions, is the recognition that restoration of mineral workings should not be significantly delayed and that in such instances, inert waste is being put to a beneficial use.
35 The extended period over which the development would take place, would result in an environmental impact. Extraction would continue over a 40 year period and whilst filling would take place in the northern section of the site, the larger southern part of the site would remain unrestored and the brickmaking facilities in place until after 2040. Until such time that the site could be fully restored, it would not make a positive contribution to the visual quality of this part of the Green Belt.
36 The applicant is required to demonstrate that the site can be well restored. Minerals Planning Guidance (MPG7) offers guidance on the reclamation of mineral workings and advises that restoration and aftercare are an integral part of the working of a site. As such, it is important to have regard to these matters and the proposed afteruse at the time the planning applications for extraction is considered. For a proposed long term working such as this, the applicant need to demonstrate that the objectives of the scheme are practicable.
37 The land at South Godstone Brickworks has been disturbed for many years. Originally it was envisaged that once extraction ceased the site would be returned to agriculture. Historically there has been a preference for sites to be restored to agriculture. However a number of factors are challenging this approach. In future there is likely to be a diminishing level of landfilling due to the desire to reduce waste and seek higher levels of waste recycling and recovery. At the same time, agriculture is becoming less viable in some areas and farms are diversifying. Increasingly, sites are not being returned to agriculture but are being restored for wildlife or recreational activities such as sailing or angling. Whilst looking afresh at the clay extraction and restoration at this site, an alternative restoration scheme was considered appropriate.
38 The submitted restoration proposals are geared towards woodland and amenity lakes. This would have the effect of reducing the amount of filling required to return the site to agriculture. Within the overall restoration there would be two lakes, the larger of the two being surrounded by meadowland planting. The remainder of the site would be planted with three blocks of Corsican Pine (two falling within this application site and one within the site area of the variation of conditions application). These would be surrounded by linked blocks of broad-leaved planting, which would merge with the existing woodland to the south of the site. These blocks of woodland lend themselves to the fact that the site would need to be restored in stages, and would provide some enhancement to the landscape and an element of screening, whilst clay extraction in the south of the site continues. The restoration
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 9 proposal covers all the land which has been subject to mineral working. The comprehensive restoration scheme constitutes a significant benefit in respect of land which is not subject to adequate control at present.
39 The restoration would provide for the land to slope gently southwards and marry in the existing land levels in the woodland to the south of the site. Giving a final landform that would be compatible with the natural landform of the locality and suitable for the intended afteruse. In terms of MPG7’s requirements, it is considered that the applicant has demonstrated that the objectives of the scheme are practicable and that the proposal accords with SSP Policy 29.
40 The Residents’ Association has suggested that the land should not be filled but landscaped and planted water features created. It is their view that restoration of the land is impractical on the grounds of timescale and availability of suitable material. The final restoration would not be completed for many years to come (2047). Nevertheless, the restoration would take place in two stages and the first stage would be completed by 2006. The nearest inert waste landfills, Reigate Road Sandpit and Broombank Quarry, are likely to be operational during the first phase of filling but would have closed when the second phase is due for filling. The filling of the claypit would involve the importation of 205,000 m3 over the initial period 2001 to 2005 and 138,000 m3 over the final filling period 2042 to 2046. Taking into account the restoration proposed and the volumes of waste involved over the relatively short timescales for filling, it is considered that the restoration is both achievable and practicable. It is undesirable to leave a deep water void at the site, such a form of restoration has no recreational or nature conservation application.
Need
41 The site is located within the outcrop area of the Weald Clay which is estimated to be approximately 160 metres thick underlying the brickworks. The former excavations have taken place to a maximum depth of 28 metres and it is intended that this would be the case in any future workings. Clay extraction has taken place at the site since the early 1900s. Over the years, output has fluctuated and today is well below historic levels of production. In the late 1980s, approximately 240,000 bricks per week were produced. The fact that the level of output from the site is so low raises some question with regard to demand and the need for further clay extraction at this site. Additionally, other commercial activities have grown up around the brickworks which are not ancillary to the brickmaking activities and the brickworks is no longer the predominant activity at the site. Nevertheless it is recognised that the clay is a resource and that were the brickworks to close the resource would be effectively sterilised.
42 South Godstone Brickworks is the easternmost of five active brickworks in the County. Another brickworks has been dormant for some time and may close permanently. The difficulty in assessing need, is that production of bricks is tied to the amount of activity in the construction industry and therefore there is always uncertainty regarding the levels of future demand. However, there is only sufficient clay left in the current stockpile to meet production requirements until the summer of 2001. To maintain production, a further clay lift will need to take place in spring 2001. The applicant is not wishing to change the nature of scale of the current operation, nor are any additional facilities being requested. The proposal is merely to maintain production. Clearly there is commercial need for production at the site as brickmaking is on-going and has taken place, albeit in varied volumes, for more than 50 years.
Summary Green Belt and Need
43 Whilst in the short term the site would remain disturbed, in the longer term the proposal would enhance the local landscape and should not prejudice the visual amenities of the Green Belt. Moreover, the restoration would as far as possible contribute to the achievement of the objectives for use of land in the Green Belt by providing an opportunity for a comprehensive restoration scheme
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 10 which would benefit the visual amenities of the land, enhance the conservation value of the site by providing mixed habitats. If the proposal were to be permitted, it is considered that the site could be well restored. It can therefore be concluded that provided high environmental standards can be maintained, the development would not be inappropriate in the Green Belt and meet the requirements of SSP Policy PE2. With regard to need, the proposal would maintain production at an existing site in accordance with SMLP Policy 19.
Environmental and Amenity Considerations
44 Tandridge District Council has proposed modifications to the Local Plan that reflects the Inspector’s view that Lambs Business Park, which adjoins the site, be identified as a Major Developed Site in the Green Belt. Within the commercial estate, there are a variety of other uses. The presence of other uses is not relevant to the suitability of this development, but there is a great deal of concern locally regarding the cumulative impact of the existing uses and the four minerals and waste proposals currently being determined.
45 Local residents’ concerns relate mainly to environmental matters, particularly the impact of HGV traffic using the site access and the local road network. Whilst this focuses on safety, it also includes the general disturbance caused by the vehicles in terms of noise, dust, vibration and spillages. The Residents’ Association and their consultants are of the opinion that the cumulative impact of the four proposals and the existing operations at the Business Park need to be considered. They also point out that the site rates poorly in terms of sustainability. The brickworks are not accessible to a train station or connected to the bus network and there are few facilities within walking distance of the site. Whilst this may be correct, with regard to the proposal, minerals can only be worked where they are found. It also has to be borne in mind, that although residents questioning the applicant’s claim to have a ‘long established mineral activity’, clay extraction is, and has been, taking place at the site over a very long period of time.
Emissions and Odour
46 There have been complaints from local residents and 17 of the representations to these planning applications refer to the smoke and odour from the brickworks. The brickworks produce speciality bricks in the traditional manner. Clay and coal dust bricks are set into clamps and heated resulting in the bricks catching alight. Over the week that they burn, there are two days when fumes are produced. There are approximately 30 firings per year and fumes should disperse. Nevertheless, in certain weather conditions the fumes tend to be held low to the ground and cause odour problems. This is not a matter over which this Authority has any control, however the issue has been discussed with the Environmental Health Officer (EHO) at Tandridge. The EHO has explained that owing to the brickworks operating a traditional clamp system, it is exempt from any requirements for its emissions to be authorised under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
47 However, odour can be proved to be a statutory nuisance under S80 of the Environmental Protection Act. For this to happen, it must be frequent, intrusive and significantly effecting residents in their homes. Residents have been requested to complete log sheets detailing such incidences, however, only two have been returned so far. It is understood that the Environmental Health Officer has approached the company about the possibility of raising the flue height but this may not be practical or feasible.
48 Whilst this is clearly a problem for local residents which they feel constitutes a reason for refusal, the County Council has had contrary legal advice. The brickwork building has an extant planning permission unconnected with this application. Government advice is that the planning system should not be used to duplicate controls available elsewhere.
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 11 49 The proposal involves the use of inert waste only which is most likely to be sourced from construction and demolition sites and comprise, soils, bricks and concrete. However, residents are worried that other wastes could be introduced onto the site and give rise to potential pollution problems Infilling with waste is controlled by the waste management licence and the site would be visited by Environment Agency officers on a regular basis. When transporting waste, the Duty of Care requirements also apply. Information regarding the quantity, nature and origin of waste needs to be kept on transfer notes which must be made available to the Environment Agency. The Duty of Care applies to the producer of waste, the haulier and end user, and it is a criminal offence not to comply.
Highways, Traffic and Access
50 Local road network The impact of the traffic associated with the proposed developments at South Godstone Brickworks has given rise to a great deal of concern locally and has been the major objection to the proposals. The suitability of the access to the whole site and the rural nature of the local roads have been questioned in the past. The site was considered in the Surrey Waste Local Plan 1995 Consultation Draft having potential for limited scale waste recycling and transfer facilities. However, at that time the nature of the access was seen as a constraint to development of the site and it was felt that any appreciable increase in HGV traffic could result in an increased environmental impact.
51 Vehicles would use Tilburstow Hill Road (D395) which has junctions with the A22 at either end, south of Godstone to the north and at Anglefield Corner to the south. Tilburstow Hill Road is joined by Harts Lane north of the railway bridge. Harts Lane and the northern section of Tilburstow Hill Road, are part of the designated Surrey Cycle Way. In addition, there is a substantial rights-of-way network in the area with a number of footpaths/bridleways crossing Tilburstow Hill Road. Some do not cross Tilburstow Hill Road directly, instead, users have to travel along the road which itself forms a link in this network.
52 Residents have voiced concern about the County Council’s ability to monitor vehicle movements on a day to day basis s and the effect that the HGVs would have on the condition of local roads. In fact vehicles can be monitored and a log of the arrival time, number plate and origin of load kept and be made available to the Authority, when required. With regard to the wear and tear caused by vehicles on the public highway, this is not a material consideration. Damage to the highway is an issue for the Highway Authority.
53 Traffic generation The applicant estimates that brickmaking as a result of clay extraction, would generate approximately 5 loads per day (10 vehicle movements) and during the two periods of filling 30 vehicle movements would be generated by the importation of waste. Only during the first phase of filling ie between 2001 and 2005 would filling and extraction overlap. This could be controlled by the imposition of a planning condition if permission were to be granted. Nevertheless, residents are of the view that Lambs Business Park already generates too much traffic and are opposed to this development, as it will involve an increase in HGVs using the local roads.
54 In order that the traffic implications of the four applications could be understood, the County Council requested a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) looking at both the technical aspects of safety and capacity and the environmental impact of the proposals, individually and cumulatively. TIAs should be impartial assessments of the transportation impact and when consideration TIA’s the Highway Authority needs to ensure that they are objective. There has been some criticism by the Residents’ Association and their advisors, Buchanan’s, that the TIA had inaccuracies and shortcomings. (see para 31 of the general section of the report under the heading Publicity). However, the Highway Authority has looked in detail at both traffic reports, has undertaken its own traffic surveys, and
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 12 looked at the surrounding road network together with on-site measurements of the access sight-lines and conclude that the TIA satisfactorily fulfils its proper function.
55 Several traffic surveys have now been carried out. Two traffic surveys were carried out for the TIA in 1999, local residents have undertaken their own survey and the County Council commissioned a traffic survey in May 2000. The County Council’s survey showed that the 14 hour total two way traffic flow on Terracotta Road was 1171 vehicles, (566 out and 605). There were 115 HGV’s (9.5%) and 121 buses and coaches (10.5%). Of the 566 vehicles leaving the site, 316 turned left onto Tilburstow Hill Road towards Godstone and the remaining 250 turned right towards Anglefield Corner. Vehicles entering the Lambs complex, predominantly came from the north (360 from the north and 245 from the south). The maximum two way 14 hour traffic flow on Tilburstow Hill Road in the vicinity of the access was counted as 3796 vehicles. The Highway Agency’s Technical Advice Note, ‘Traffic Flow Ranges for Use in the Assessment of New Rural Roads’ gives an acceptable flow range for a single two carriageway road as anything up to 13,000 vehicles per day. Even lowering this significantly to account for the varying carriageway width on Tilburstow Hill Road, a flow of 3796 vehicles would not be described as a heavily trafficked road. The proportion of HGV’s on Tilburstow Road in the vicinity of the site which are related to current activities on the site, is approximately 66%.
56 The Highway Authority’s view regarding the various surveys is that they will inevitably differ to some degree firstly because they were taken on different occasions, and secondly that some activities (e.g. bus activity) have apparently changed since the earlier and later traffic surveys. However the Highway Authority consider that the differences do not influence the overall conclusions that can be drawn.
57 The applicant asserts that the site has generated high levels of traffic over many years. Historically, the brickworks operated at a much higher level than they have over recent years. The applicant claims that in the late 1980’s when the brickworks were producing some 90,000 bricks per week, the brickworks alone generated approximately 130 lorry movement per week. Therefore it could be argued that a proportion of the vehicle movements proposed would replace traffic that was previously generated by the brickworks. Nevertheless, quantification of the total level of movements from the brickworks and commercial estate in the late 1980’s is difficult, as the vehicle generation and the other business on site is likely to have changed.
58 Environmental impact of traffic The TIA includes two surveys carrie d out on 12 October 1999 and 16 October 1999 at the junction of Tilburstow Hill Road with Harts Lane and at the point where the Greensand Way meets Tilburstow Hill Road. These surveys included counts for pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians. The surveys unsurprisingly showed that the level of ‘affected group’ activity was far greater on Saturday than during weekdays. It is likely that if these counts had been taken during the summer, or during a school holiday period, the level of activity would have been greater. Concerns remain regarding the visibility for users of the Greensand Way and Tilburstow Hill Road where it is restricted by the alignment of the road and the banked verges. However, there is little in the way of mitigation that could be provided, other than the provision of advance warning signs for traffic on Tilburstow Hill Road.
59 The impact in respect of the residents of Terracotta Road must also be considered. All traffic accessing the commercial estate passes the residential properties in Terracotta Road, which are between 5 to 15 metres from the roadway. The gardens of some residents in Rushton Close also back onto Terracotta Road. The movement of vehicles on this roadway is a source of noise for these residents.
60 Having carefully considered the TIA and the vehicle counts, the Highway Authority is of the view that the small increase in vehicle movements on Tilburstow Hill Road per day generated by the clay
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 13 extraction and infilling, would not increase the overall daily traffic flow by a significant amount. Consequently, the Highway Authority has raised no objection in terms of the roads operational capacity. Nevertheless the accident record at the bridge and the nominal radius at the site entrance for left turns towards the north, gave rise to concern and therefore the Highway Authority seek improvements to the access.
61 Access The Highways Authority accepts that the junction has a sub-standard visibility splay and that it will remain sub-standard if and when improvements are made. Significant volumes of traffic have used the junction for many years and there is not a poor accident record. A 9 metre ‘x’ distance by 160 metre ‘y’ distance for a junction of this type of junction with the volume of traffic being carried by a minor road ie Terracotta Road would be desirable and would be required if this were a new junction being constructed. However, the junction needs to function within the limits of its surroundings and the Highway Authority would seek an ‘x’ distance of 4.5 metres. DETR guidance allows a relaxation of the “y” distance to 160 metres if the 85th percentile surveyed speed of through traffic is less than the speed limit applying to the major road. A speed survey of Tilburstow Hill Road carried out by the applicant’s consultant in the vicinity of the site has resulted in 85 th percentile speeds of 54 mph northbound and 52 mph southbound. More recently a Highway Authority speed survey in connection with the proposed introduction of a 50 mph speed limit produced similar results. The appropriate sight-lines would therefore be 160 metres not 215 metres as quoted in Buchanan’s report.
62 Buchanan’s discounted the benefits to be derived from the proposed junction improvements but the Highway Authority are of the view that improving the sight-lines would provide greater visibility for traffic looking left whilst exiting the access road, and southbound through-traffic on Tilburstow Hill Road would be able to see traffic waiting on Terracotta Road. Whilst the improvements would not provide a junction to full technical standards, an improvement would take it nearer to those standards.
63 Aware that the Highway Authority would require any planning permission to be conditional on such works being carried out, the applicant has included proposals for access improvements in the latest submissions. The access proposals have given rise to concern locally, and residents of the cul-de- sac known as Brookside, which is located just to the north of the junction of Terracotta Road and Tilburstow Hill Road, are particularly anxious. Local residents general concerns centre on what affect the access improvements would have on the footpath and brook which run alongside the roadway at this point. They are worried that the improvements would impact on the brook causing flooding and result in the loss of the footpath. The applicant has indicated that the brook would be culverted and the footpath reinstated. Residents of Brookside have also voiced concerns with regard to the footpath and brook; but they are particularly worried about the affect of enlarging the access to the Lambs complex, fearing it would merge with the access to the cul-de-sac. They are anxious that this would result in safety and amenity impacts for the residents of Brookside.
64 A detailed survey plan showing the access improvements has been requested from the applicant, but as yet, has not been received. If this planning application were to be permitted, it would therefore need to be subject to the prior completion of a Highway Works Agreement which secured the necessary improvements.
65 To improve road safety at the bridge, the Highway Authority propose that traffic lights would be installed which show red both sides of the bridge and be triggered by the approach of vehicles. This scheme is progressing through The Tandridge Partnership Area Transportation Sub-Committee. This would also have a knock-on effect of reducing through vehicle speeds on Tilburstow Hill Road. The Highway Authority is of the opinion that benefits in terms of safety would be derived for all users of Tilburstow Hill Road, from both the installation of traffic lights and access improvements. Whilst Godstone Parish Council welcome the signalization of the bridge, the Parish Council and local
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 14 residents, remain concerned about the safety of the junction with the A22 at Anglefield Corner where Tilburstow Hill Road joins the A22 at an difficult angle, particularly for large vehicles.
Highways, Traffic and Access conclusions
66 Local residents, the Residents’ Association and their advisors Buchanan’s, are of the opinion that the local highway network and Tilburstow Hill Road have a poor width and are generally sub-standard, and these concerns have not been fully taken into account. Whilst acknowledging that the local roads are rural in character and have restricted width in places, the Highway Authority does not accept that the highway concerns are sufficient to warrant refusal of the proposals. The Highway Authority has therefore raised no objection subject to the completion of a Highways Agreement to facilitate the improvement to the access. It is pertinent that subject to access improvements, the Inspector at the Tandridge District Local Plan Inquiry felt that he had no persuasive evidence that the local highway network could not adequately cope with additional traffic movements to and from the site, and as a result there were no significant highway and traffic related objection to MDS status. It is therefore concluded that the development complies with SSP Policy MT2.
Noise
67 This is quiet rural area where the background noise levels are low. All traffic accessing the commercial estate passes a row of houses in Terracotta Road, which are between 5 to 15 metres. from the road. There are many activities on the commercial estate providing a considerable flow of vehicles throughout the working day. In their representations, residents have voiced concern that the introduction of additional HGV movements would compound the noise generated by the activities and vehicle movements already generated by the site as a whole. The residents of Rushton Close, whose gardens back onto Terracotta Road, particularly complain about buses and other vehicles using the site very early in the morning. Clearly, the access road is an unwelcome source of noise for the residents of Terracotta Road and Rushton Close.
68 Brickmaking as a result of clay extraction, currently generates approximately 20 vehicle movements). and during the first period of filling between 2001 and 2005, 30 additional vehicle movements would also be generated by the importation of waste. As a result of the increased vehicle movements, noise levels for the residential properties on Terracotta Road would increase, however an accurate prediction is difficult because the activities generate a relatively low flow. It is predicted that if all four of the current applications were to be permitted, noise levels at these properties would increase by approximately 2 to 4 LAeq. Taking into account the existing double glazing, the internal noise level would be acceptable. Nevertheless, the increase in traffic noise would be noticed if windows were left open.
69 The applicant’s consultants identified that the speed humps in Terracotta Road were contributing to the noise created by vehicle movements. To mitigate this impact the applicant has removed the speed humps towards the road’s eastern end near the houses which front the road leaving one on the straight section of roadway adjoining the railway line. The removal of the speed humps would contribute to a reduction of noise if the speed of the traffic were kept low. Another form of traffic calming is currently under construction for the section of road nearest to the housing, in the form of two projecting islands that restrict the width of the road.
70 The change in noise levels due to additional traffic movements on Tilburstow Hill Road are small and would probably not be noticed. However, any increase in HGVs would be noticed visually and could induce a sense of increased noise.
71 Concern remains with regard to the noise impact of any additional HGV movements on the properties in Terracotta Road and Rushton Avenue. The problem arises as a result of the access and roadway being located in close proximity to residential properties. Despite these concerns, it is
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 15 the Environmental Noise Officer’s view that the noise generated by this proposal would not breach the noise guidelines. The 20 vehicle movements per day associated with the clayworking are not new traffic and as was stated in para 57 it does appear that this activity once generated far higher lorry movements when the brickworks operated nearer capacity.
Dust
72 The prevailing wind direction is from the south west and residents living to the north of the site have voiced concerns regarding the impact of noise and dust emanating from the site. The Residents’ Association’ consultants, have in their submissions, stated that there appears to have been no regard for BATNEEC (Best Available Techniques Not Entailing Excessive Costs) and recommend that an Environmental Management Systems is drawn up in accordance with BS7750 ‘Specification of Environmental Management Systems’, second edition, (January 1994). However, this is not a matter that could be imposed by a planning authority and is essentially fir the company themselves to instigate. The planning authority could however, if minded to permit the application, impose a condition relating to the control of dust.
73 The potential for dust generation is limited in terms of the clay extraction. The clay is excavated damp and the applicant contends that when material is recovered from the stockpiles it is also damp and not prone to dust generation.
74 The main dust generators would be the waste vehicle movements on internal haul routes particularly during dry weather. Generally dust is controlled by environmental health controls but where it has the potential to affect the use of land, it is capable of being a material planning consideration and the control of dust on this site would be sought by planning condition. At the same time, dust control would be imposed by condition on any waste management licence granted by the Environment Agency.
Visual Impact
75 The land associated with minerals and waste activities is situated to the west of the Business Park and is well concealed from any of the residential properties or roads in the area. However, a resident of Rushton Avenue states that it is possible to see aggregate stockpiles and machinery from his property. The Brickworks complex has farmland to the south and west and a railway to the north. The southern boundary has sparse hawthorn scrub and a narrow belt of woodland at its western end. The hedgerow along the western boundary is somewhat overgrown. Public Bridleway 293 runs to the west of the site. The bridleway is well screened by hedgerows in the vicinity of the site, but it is possible to have some distant views into the site from the bridleway when it traverses higher ground to the south. The brick kilns are more open to view from the south and south east. The applicant has offered to augment existing planting in this area and this has been welcomed by the County’s Landscape Architect. Such planting could be the subject of a planning condition should permission be granted.
76 Clay extraction would take place on land that has already been stripped of soils. The applicant has identified an area along the southern part of the eastern boundary beside the brick stacking area, where there is limited scope for landscaping. This would of course, take some time to mature but could be the subject of a condition if planning permission were granted. A benefit to be gained from this proposal is that it would secure a comprehensive restoration scheme for the whole of the site, resulting in the land being restored to woodland and lakes. This would in the long term, enhance the visual appearance of this site which falls within an area of Local Landscape Significance. In the short term, restoration would be achieved in the northern part of the site, which has been excavated in the past but left unrestored. The County’s Landscape Architect has commented that the proposal would lead to a substantial enhancement locally of landscape aspects.
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 16 Ecology
77 Surrey Wildlife Trust and English Nature both requested a detailed ecological survey of the whole site, and this has been carried out. A separate great crested newt survey was also submitted to cover the areas of standing water as the site is close to a known great crested newt breeding pond. The survey found that whilst there are several known breeding ponds in the vicinity of the site, with the closest population only 500 metres away, the areas of open water at the site were an inhospitable environment for great crested newts.
78 An existing lake in the southern corner of site adjacent to woodland, would be retained in the final restoration and a second much larger lake created. A small group of oaks towards the centre of the site just south of the clay stockpile, would be retained and augmented with other broad-leaved planting when the site was restored. Surrey Wildlife Trust has commented that it supports the planting of broad-leaved species that would form a wildlife corridor to adjacent countryside.
79 The Residents’ Association’s consultants stated in their report that the proposal would result in the loss of an SNCI. A potential SNCI was identified in the Tandridge District Council Local Plan Consultation Draft, as being located to the east of the extraction area. This was found to be incorrect and removed from later versions of the Plan. There is an SNCI known as Maple Wood to the north west of the site, however, it is the view of the consultees that this would be unaffected by the clay extraction and refilling.
Archaeology
80 At some time in the past, the soils have been stripped from the site. As a result, it is unlikely that there would be any residual archaeological interest within the site area. Nevertheless, the County’s Archaeologist recommends that as the site is within an area of good general archaeological potential and some features may have survived, a site assessment should be carried out prior to extraction. This could be the subject of a condition if planning permission were to be granted.
81 There are two areas of Archaeological interest to the south of the site. It was shown in the geotechnical report accompanying this application, that there is no potential for damage to be caused to these sites by drawdown as a result of dewatering the workings.
Geology and Hydrogeology
82 The site is located within the outcrop of the Weald Clay at a point where the clay is estimated to be around 160m deep. It is proposed to excavate the clay to a maximum depth of 28 metres with a maximum slope angle of 35 degrees, as in the existing pit. As these slopes would be exposed for many years prior to infilling, it has been necessary to have a stability analysis carried out. This showed that minor, localised and shallow slope instability may occur involving the surface zone of weathered clay but this is unlikely to compromise the overall slope stability.
83 The clay has low permeability and there are little or no groundwater flows into the previously excavated areas which instead, collect water from surface runoff and direct precipitation. This water is removed by pumping, to enable clay excavation to take place. Water from the pit is pumped into a holding pond which provides water for use in the brickmaking process. Surplus water flows from the holding pond into the on-site surface water drainage system established across the business park. Ultimately, it is discharged off-site at the south eastern corner of the site into a stream which flows along the south eastern boundary of the site. As clay lifts take place infrequently, and for a limited time, dewatering can be planned to allow the discharge rates to not exceed the capacity of stream.
84 The low permeability of the clay reduces the possibility of any effects of ‘drawdown’ across the site or in the surrounding area. This is of particular significance with regard to the Sites of Nature
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 17 Conservation Importance (SNCI) at Furze Wood and Maple Wood, the potential SNCI at Birchen Coppice and the nearby Sites of Archaeological Importance. The submitted geotechnical report addresses the potential impact of dewatering and concludes that it is not considered that dewatering would result in groundwater drawdown effects on the designated areas, local streams, licensed water abstractions within the vicinity of the site or nearby buildings. The County’s Consultant Geologist has considered all the submitted information and has no geological/geotechnical objections to the proposal.
Summary, Environment and Amenity
85 Extensive consultation has been carried out in relation to the issues raised by the proposal and consultees have raised no objection. There are however, local concerns with regard to the traffic impact of the development. The traffic flows involved in the brickmaking activity are already existing and lighter than they have been in the past and the Highway Authority has no road safety or capacity objections provided access improvements are carried out. In terms of any other impacts of the proposal, these can be adequately controlled by the imposition of conditions. The benefit to be gained from the proposal is the restoration of the site that would enhance the visual appearance of the locality. The proposal would not materially adversely impact on the environment and would accord with SSP Policies EN1, DP29 and SMLP Policy 1.
CONCLUSIONS
86 Green Belt policy accepts that minerals can only be worked were they are found. The principle of clay extraction has been well established at this site and is an on-going activity. The SMLP supports the extension of clay extraction areas for the maintenance of production. Whilst the level of production has fallen in recent years the site remains a manufacturer of both factory and handmade bricks. It is therefore considered that there is a need for the continued extraction of clay at this site albeit on a relatively small scale. The acceptability of this development centres on the standard of restoration likely to be achieved and the adequacy of proposals for the minimisation of environmental impact. The applicant has submitted a practical scheme detailing phases and timescales of restoration and proposals, which are particularly suited to the fact that the site would need to be restored in stages. Proposals for minimising the environmental impact of the development have been accepted by consultees. Whilst concerns have been raised by local residents, the District and Parish Council with regard to traffic, the level of traffic and the impacts of such flows is acceptable to the Highway Authority. It is therefore considered that the proposal meets the policy requirements of Policy PE2 and DP 29 of the SSP.
87 The achievement of some form of restoration at the site has long been a priority. This proposal provides a means by which this aim can be achieved. Currently, only the land subject to planning permission Ref. TA80/675 (shown on Plan No. 1 as an orange dotted line) has any restoration requirement, however this is not subject to a time constraint. The land has been disturbed over a long period of time and with no soils remaining at the site, an acceptable restoration through the natural regeneration process would be slow, if ever achievable. The existing claypit is extremely deep and steep-sided and therefore some element of filling is required to bring the land back into beneficial use. It is considered that the submitted restoration scheme would secure an acceptable and early restoration of part of the site in a manner which cannot be required currently and additionally gives control over the remainder of the site which has been used for minerals and waste activities. Therefore such a scheme would provide the significant benefit of a comprehensive restoration programme for the entire site which could be secured by a legal agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
That, subject to the completion of a legal agreement to secure the restoration of the site and adjoining area of former mineral working and a S278 Highway Works Agreement to secure access improvements, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 18
CONDITIONS Approved Documents 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out and completed in all respects strictly in accordance with the submitted documents and plans contained in the application and the amending letters of 20/11/00 and 16/01/01, plus Accompanying Documentation including Supporting Memorandum dated 20/11/00 and Plan Nos. EMS/10619/2/BC, 1061/2/RJ, 10619/2/LO, EMS/10619/BCF dated 10/2000, Proposed Working Arrangements EMS/10619/2/BC/WA dated 10/2000, Mineral Working Sections Drawing SG20-2B dated 05/06/00, Restoration Plan RP1 all dated 10/2000 and Landscape Plan LP1, Location Plan 100 dated 13/11/97, Drawing No 97/1590/2/A dated January 2000, and no variations or omissions shall take place without the prior approval in writing of the County Planning Authority.
Time Limits
2 The development hereby permitted shall be begun no later than the expiration of one year beginning with the date of this permission. The operator shall notify the County Planning Authority in writing seven working days of the commencement of the following:
i) implementation of this planning permission;
ii) work within each phase.
3 The extraction of minerals shall cease by 31 December 2040 and restoration of the site shall be completed by 31 May 2047 by which date the whole of the site shall have been restored strictly in accordance with the permitted restoration scheme and Plan Nos. RP1 and LP1 dated 10/2000 and all buildings, fixed plant or machinery, internal access roads and hardstandings, together with their foundations and bases, shall have been removed from the land.
Hours of Operation
4 Except in emergencies to maintain safe site operations which shall be notified to the County Planning Authority as soon as practicable, or unless the County Planning Authority has agreed otherwise in writing, no lights shall be illuminated nor shall any operations or activities authorised or required by this permission be carried out except between the following times:
0730 to 1800 hours Monday to Friday 0730 to 1300 hours Saturdays
there shall be no operations undertaken on Sundays, Bank Holidays or National Holidays.
Limitations
5 Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary under Part 4,19 and 21 of Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any order revoking and re- enacting that Order), no plant, buildings or machinery where fixed or moveable, shall be erected on the site without the prior written approval of the County Planning Authority in respect of the siting, detailed design, specifications and appearance of the plant, buildings or machinery.
6 Fill material shall be limited to Class A inert waste only. Any non-conforming material should be separated and removed for disposal at a licensed landfill site.
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 19
7 Notwithstanding Condition 6 above, no soils or inert materials shall be removed from the site.
Working Programme Phasing
8 Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority, the working and restoration of the site shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the working programme and phasing plans, Plan No EMS/10619/2/BC/WA dated 10/2000, SG20 - 2B dated 05/06/00 and LP1.
Noise
9 The noise from the permitted activity should not exceed 43 LAeq for any 30 minute period when measured at, or recalculated as at, a height of 1.2 metres above the ground and at least 3.5 metres from the facade of any noise sensitive location.
Dust
10 Before the development hereby permitted commences, the operator shall submit to the Head of Planning for approval, a dust management scheme. The scheme as approved shall be carried out in full, any variations are to be agreed in writing by the Head of Planning.
Archaeology
11 No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant for approval in writing, by the County Planning Authority.
Soil Movement, Storage and Final Placement
12 Within six months of the date of this permission a scheme to for the provision and placement of soils shall be submitted to the Head of Planning. Such a scheme shall include details of :
a) the depths of subsoils and topsoils required for each phase of the site restoration; and
b) details of, and a plan showing the location of, soil stockpiles;
c) details of any plant, and its location, if required.
The scheme as approved shall be carrie d out in full, and any variations are to be agreed in writing by the Head of Planning.
13 Soils shall not at any time be stockpiled, handled or used for purposes of restoration unless they are in such a dry and friable condition as to prevent compaction.
14 No soils or any other materials shall be stockpiled on site to a height greater than 5 metres above the surrounding ground levels.
15 Within six months of the date of this permission a plan showing pre-settlement contours shall be submitted to the Head of Planning. With the exception of materials stockpiled under condition 14 above, no waste or restoration soil shall be placed to levels in excess of levels of those shown on the plan approved by the Head of Planning, or as subsequently amended.
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 20 16 For each phase, when infilling is within 3 metres of the approved pre-settlement levels referred to in condition 15 above, profile boards shall be placed at 40 metre centres indicating the top of that level below the sub and top soil layer.
17 Prior to the placement of top and sub soils in each phase, a levels survey shall be carried out for the relevant phase and submitted to the Head of Planning.
Drainage
18 Within nine months of the date of this permission a drainage scheme shall be submitted to the Head of Planning for approval. Such a scheme shall make provision for the natural or artificial drainage of the site both during and on completion of the restoration. The scheme as approved shall be carried out in full, any variations are to be agreed in writing by the Head of Planning.
Vehicle Movements and Cleaning
19 The number of movements of heavy goods vehicles generated in connection with brickmaking, shall not exceed 20 vehicle movements in any one day. During the period from 2001 to 2005, no more than 30 heavy goods vehicle movements shall take place in any one day in connection with the filling of the site hereby permitted.
20 All HGV’s generated by the development hereby permitted accessing and egressing the site shall be recorded and a record maintained on site and made available for inspection by representatives of the County Planning Authority during normal working hours. Records shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority every three months for the duration of the development hereby permitted.
21 No part of the development hereby permitted shall commence until wheel cleaning facilities to be agreed by the Head of Planning have been provided and thereafter those facilities shall be maintained and used for the duration of the development.
Landscape and Restoration
22 Within 6 months of the date of this permission a detailed scheme of landscaping shall be submitted to the Head of Planning for approval. The scheme shall include provision for additional planting on the southern boundary of brickworks in the vicinity of the brick cutting shed and brick kilns.
23 All landscape planting shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the restoration scheme included in this application and as detailed on Plan LP1.
24 All tree and shrub planting and other landscape works pursuant to this permission shall be maintained for five years from the completion of restoration in any part of the site. During that period any trees or shrubs which die, or are severely damaged or diseased shall be replaced by trees of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted, within 12 months of their death, damage or disease.
Aftercare
25 Within 6 months of the date of this permission, an aftercare scheme shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval. Such a scheme shall specify the steps to be taken and the period during which they are to be taken to bring each phase of the land restored to the required standards for woodland and/or amenity. The scheme as approved shall be carried out in full, any variations are to be agreed in writing by the Head of Planning.
REASONS
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 21
1 To comply with the terms of the application and to enable the County Planning Authority to exercise control over the operation so as to ensure an orderly method of working, to minimise the impact on local amenity and that the site is restored to a satisfactory condition in accordance with the terms of Surrey Structure Plan Policy EN1, ‘Sustaining Surrey’s Environment’, Policy DP29 ‘Restoration’ and Minerals Local Plan Policy 1, 5 and 6.
2 To enable the County Planning Authority to exercise control over the site for the development hereby permitted and comply with Section 91 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.
3 To enable the County Planning Authority to exercise control over the site for the development hereby permitted and to comply with Schedule 5 paragraph 1 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.
4 To enable the County Planning Authority to adequately control the development and to minimise its impact on the amenities of the local area in accordance with Surrey Structure Plan Policy EN1 ‘Sustaining Surrey’s Environment’ and Minerals Local Plan Policy 1.
5 To enable the County Planning Authority to adequately control the development and to minimise its impact on the amenities of the local area in accordance with Surrey Structure Plan Policy PE2 ‘Development within the Green Belt’, South of the Downs Local Plan Policy 3, and Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft Policy RE2 ‘Development in the Green Belt’.
6 To safeguard the environment in accordance with Surrey Structure Plan Policy EN1 ‘Sustaining Surrey’s Environment’ and Minerals Local Plan Policy 1.
7,12, To secure a woodland and amenity restoration to the required standard and assist in absorbing the 13, site back into the local landscape in accordance with Surrey Structure Plan Policies PE2 ‘Development within the Green Belt’ DP29 ‘Restoration’ and Minerals Local Plan Policies 3 and 5, South of the Downs Local Plan Policy 3 and Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft Policy RE2 ‘Development in the Green Belt’.
8 To enable the County Planning Authority to adequately control the development and to minimise its impact on the amenities of the local area and to comply with Surrey Structure Plan Policy EN1 ‘Sustaining Surrey’s Environment’, Policy PE2 ‘Development within the Green Belt’, South of the Downs Local Plan Policy 3, Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft Policy RE2 ‘Development in the Green Belt’.
9 To ensure minimum disturbance and to avoid nuisance to the locality to comply with Surrey Structure Plan Policy EN1 ‘Sustaining Surrey’s Environment’ and Minerals Local Plan Policy 1 and Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft Policy EV10 ‘Noise’.
10 In the interests of local amenity and to comply with Surrey Structure Plan Policy EN1 ‘Sustaining Surrey’s Environment’ and Minerals Local Plan Policy 1 and Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft Policy EV14 ‘Environmental Pollution & New Development’.
11 To afford the County Planning Authority a reasonable opportunity to examine any remains of archaeological interest which are unearthed and to ensure that adequate steps are taken for the preservation or recording of such remains and to comply with Surrey Structure Plan Policy PE13 ‘Heritage Records & Archaeological Investigation’, Minerals Local plan Policy 1, South of the Downs Local Plan Policy 49 and Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft Policy H8 ‘Archaeological Monitoring of Development Sites’.
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 22 14 To reduce the impact on the local landscape to comply with Surrey Structure Plan Policy PE2 ‘Development within the Green Belt’ and Minerals Local Plan Policy 1.
15,16 To comply with the terms of the application and to enable the County Planning Authority to 17 exercise planning control over the operation so as to secure restoration to the required standard and assist in absorbing the site back into the local landscape in accordance with the terms of Surrey Structure Plan Policies PE2 ‘Development within the Green Belt’, DP29 ‘Restoration’, South of the Downs Local Plan Policy 3 and Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft Policy RE2 ‘Development in the Green Belt’
18 To secure restoration to the required standard in accordance with Surrey Structure Pla n Policy DP29 ‘Restoration’ and Minerals Local Plan Policies 1and 5.
19 To reduce to the minimum the impact of the vehicle traffic resulting from the proposed development in accordance with Surrey Structure Plan Policy EN1 ‘Sustaining Surrey’s Environment’, Policy M2 ‘The Movement Implications of Development’ and Minerals Local Plan Policy 1, South of the Downs Local Plan Policy 75 and Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft Policy MO9’Impact of Heavy Goods Vehicles’.
20 To enable the County Planning Authority to monitor vehicle movements to ensure compliance with Condition 19 to comply with Surrey Structure Plan EN1 ‘Sustaining Surrey’s Environment’, Policy M2 ‘The Movement Implications of Development’ and Minerals Local Plan Policy 1, South of the Downs Local Plan Policy 75 and Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft Policy MO9’Impact of Heavy Goods Vehicles’.
21 In order that the development should not prejudice the condition of safety on the highway, nor cause inconvenience to other highway users to comply with Minerals Local Plan Policy 1 and South of the Downs Local Plan Policy 75.
22 To improve the appearance of the site in the interests of visual amenity and to comply with Section 197 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.
23 To improve the appearance of the site in the interests of visual amenity, and to assist in absorbing the site back into the local landscape, to comply with Section 197 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 Structure Plan Policies PE2 ‘Development within the Green Belt’ DP29 ‘Restoration’.
24 To comply with the terms of the application and to enable the County Planning Authority to exercise planning control over the operation so as to secure restoration to the required standard and assist in absorbing the site back into the local landscape in accordance with the terms of Surrey Structure Plan Policies PE2 ‘Development within the Green Belt’, Policy PE9 ‘Trees, Hedgerows and Woodlands’ and DP29 ‘Restoration’, South of the Downs Local Plan Policy 3 and Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft Policy RE2 ‘Development in the Green Belt’ and NE11 ‘Woodlands and Hedgerow Management’.
25 To secure restoration to the required standard and assist in absorbing the site back into the local landscape and to comply with Schedule 5 paragraph 2 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990. Surrey Structure Plan Policy DP29 and Policy 5 of the Minerals Local Plan.
Informatives
1 The permission hereby granted shall not be construed as authority to carry out works on the highway. The applicant is advised that a licence must be obtained from the Highway Authority before any works are carried out on any footway, footpath, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the highway.
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA ANNEXE A 23
2 The developer is reminded that it is an offence to allow materials to be carried from the site and deposited on or damage the highway from uncleaned wheels or badly loaded vehicles. The Highway Authority will seek, wherever possible, to recover any expenses incurred in clearing, cleaning or repairing highway surfaces and prosecutes persistent offenders. (Highways Act 1980 Sections 131, 148, 149).
CONTACT: P SPARROW
TEL NO: 020 8541 9439
BACKGROUND The deposited planning application documents and plans, documents PAPERS: and plans subsequently received amending the proposals, responses to consultations, notifications and representations received as referred to in the report and included in the planning application files.
Government Guidance Planning Policy Guidance PPG2 - Green Belts Planning Policy Guidance PPG7 – The Countryside – Environmental Quality and Economic and Social Development Draft Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 - Transport Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 - Planning & Noise Minerals Planning Guidance MPG1 - General Considerations and the Development Plan System Minerals Planning Guidance MPG7 - The Reclamation of Mineral Workings Consultation Paper Controlling and Mitigating the Environmental Effects of Minerals Extraction MPG11
Development Plan Surrey Structure Plan 1994 Surrey Structure Plan Deposit Draft 2001 Surrey Minerals Local Plan 1993 South of the Downs Local Plan 1994 Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Draft 1998
Other Documents ‘Guidelines for Noise Control Minerals and Waste Disposal ‘ Surrey County Council September 1994 ‘Sustainable Development - UK Strategy’ HMSO 1994 ‘Our Countryside the Future’ HMSO 2000
Pl&Reg/ch/073annA q ITEM NO. 16
TO: PLANNING AND REGULATORY COMMITTEE DATE: 21 FEBRUARY 2001
BY: HEAD OF PLANNING
DISTRICT(S): TANDRIDGE ELECTORAL DIVISION (S): GODSTONE
PURPOSE: FOR DECISION S/A REF: 111 E2
TITLE: MINERALS AND WASTE APPLICATIONS : TA99/155 TA99/156 TA99/157 TA80/675/C/A SOUTH GODSTONE BRICKWORKS, TILBURSTOW HILL ROAD, SOUTH GODSTONE
SUMMARY
TA99/155 - Continuation of winning and working of brick clay from an area of 5.64 ha, retention of certain brickmaking facilities and associated junction improvements to private access road.
TA99/156 - Change of use of 1.2 ha part of landfill site/railway depot to use as a rail-borne aggregates depot and consequential junction improvements to private access road.
TA99/157 - Temporary change of use of 1.4 ha of existing landfill site to recycling depot for a period of 10 years and consequential junction improvements to private access road.
TA80/675/C/A - Variation of Conditions 2 (approved documents), 5 (hours of working), and 9 (vehicle numbers) of planning permission Ref. TA80/675 dated 7 January 1981, to permit importation of inert materials by road and revise the hours of working and restoration within the area delineated on plan EMS/10619/2/VC and consequential junction improvements to private access road.
The recommendation is to:
(a) PERMIT TA99/155 subject to conditions, a S106 Legal Agreement and S278 Highway Works Agreement.
(b) REFUSE TA99/156
(c) REFUSE TA99/157
(d) PERMIT TA80/675/C/A subject to conditions, a S106 Legal Agreement and S278 Highway Works Agreement.
A Members’ site visit took place on 14 June 1999.
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps 2
APPLICANT: W T Lamb (Holdings) Ltd
Date Registered: TA99/155, TA99156 & TA99157 registered on 19/11/98 TA81/675/C/A registered on 14/10/98
INTRODUCTION
1 This report is concerned with the merits of four separate planning applications relating to South Godstone Brickworks (TA99/155, TA99/156, TA99/157 & TA80/675/C/A). The combined application sites of the four proposals essentially covers the land with a history of minerals and waste activities to the west of Lambs Business Park. There is some overlap in site areas, particularly in relation to the temporary proposal for a recycling depot and the variation of conditions application. The application to vary conditions provides for the restoration of land including that land the subject of the recycling depot application. Plan 1 shows the extent of the site areas and their location in relation to the Business Park.
2 The planning applications all involve development within the site of South Godstone Brickworks and therefore there are elements of the reports that are common to all four applications. To reduce repetition and try to ensure clarity, areas common to all four applications are presented in this initial part of the report. The common sections cover the site description, planning history, development plan consultations and publicity. Any individual comments relating to a specific application will be highlighted. The individual proposals, planning considerations and recommendations are set out in ANNEXES A-D to this report. Attached to this general section of the report is Plan 1 which illustrates the proposed site areas and Plan 2 which shows the overall restoration scheme for the site. Site plans are found at the back of the individual proposals.
SITE DESCRIPTION
3 South Godstone Brickworks lies within the Green Belt and in an Area of Local Landscape Character to the south of the Redhill to Tonbridge railway line. There is an existing rail siding, which has been constructed along the northern end of the site. Land to the north of the railway line falls within an Area of Great Landscape Value. An SNCI which comprises ancient and semi natural woodland lies to the north and north west of the brickworks and adjoins part of the western boundary of the application site. Approximately 100m south of the site, there is a Site of Archaeological Importance and an Area of High Archaeological Importance.
4 The Brickworks are situated approximately midway between Godstone and Blindley Heath with farmland to the south and west. To the east of the existing and former claypit is an area of commercial units known as Lambs Business Park, which was formerly part of the brickworks.
5 Access to the site is through the Business Park and access to the whole complex is via a private road known as Terracotta Road, which joins Tilburstow Hill Road (D395) at a point just south of a railway bridge. The arched railway bridge has a height restriction of 3.9 metres and the carriageway at this point is only 4.5 metres wide. Tilburstow Hill Road is an unrestricted narrow rural road, with an average carriageway width of 5.5 to 6.0 metres. The majority of the road has no pavement, nor does it have street lights. To the north, Tilburstow Hill Road joins the B2236 just south of Godstone village, which later joins the A25 within Godstone. Tilburstow Hill Road joins the A22 at a junction known as Anglefield Corner, approximately 1.5 km south of the site.
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps 3
6 The nearest residential property known as ‘Duala Cottage’ is situated at the entrance to the industrial/commercial complex, some 130 metres away from the former claypit. There are ten residential properties on the northern side of Terracotta Road. In addition, there is a small cul-de- sac just north of the site access known as Brookside. Some properties situated in the cul-de-sac have boundaries adjoining the northern side of Terracotta Road. The gardens of properties on the northern side of the cul-de-sac, Rushton Avenue, lie to the south of Terracotta Road. There is a 50 bed nursing home known as Oakhurst Court located off Tilburstow Hill Road, to the south of the junction with Terracotta Road. Godstone Farm is situated towards the northern end of Tilburstow Hill Road.
PLANNING HISTORY
7 Clay extraction and brickmaking are long-standing uses at South Godstone Brickworks having taken place prior to the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act. The first planning permission was an Interim Development Order (IDO) granted on 9 May 1947 which covered an area of 13.6 ha. Since that time, the brickworks have continued to be active, although production is now much lower than in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The brickworks themselves are the subject of an extant planning permission.
8 The Planning and Compensation Act 1991 introduced the review of old mining permissions granted under IDOs. An application was made to register the IDO relating to the brickworks in 1992, Ref. TA92/0254. In such cases, unless otherwise agreed by the Mineral Planning Authority, a scheme of conditions to secure improved operating and environmental standards must be submitted within twelve months or the permission ceases to have effect. Whilst discussions were held and draft conditions were produced, no final submission of conditions was made and therefore the IDO is no longer valid.
9 Some brickmaking facilities were tied to the IDO, but several buildings and some concrete stacking areas have express planning permissions. A single storey building of 1,353 m2 was permitted in July 1981 under Ref. TA81/300/504. In February 1983, consent was granted for a single storey building of 66.1 m2 Ref. TA82/900/1614. Two concrete hardstandings, one of 1,675 m2 and another of 1,075 m2 for the storage of bricks and coke respectively, were permitted in July 1985 Ref. TA85/0248. Consent was granted for an existing kiln building to be replaced and enlarged by a building of 1,383 m2 in September 1987 Ref. TA87/644. These planning permissions are conditioned to limit their use to the life of the clay reserves or the cessation of clayworking.
10 The rail link into South Godstone Brickworks was originally constructed for the import of railway ballast and material arising from British Railway’s maintenance operations, particularly track laying. This material was to be used as fill for the void created by clay extraction. Planning consent Ref. TA80/675 granted in January 1981, permitted the construction of a railway siding of approximately 440 metres. The primary aim of this consent was to secure the restoration of the site and therefore although the permission was not time limted, it was conditioned to ensure that the siding, weighbridge and site office were used solely in connection with the landfilling and were removed within six months of the cessation of landfilling.
11 The rail siding consent also granted permission for 30%, ie some 20,000 tonnes per annum, of the better quality spent rail ballast to be exported from the site by road for re-use elsewhere. Condition 3 of that consent stated that the depot should be “used solely for the handling of resaleable spent railway ballast and earth brought to the site by rail only, as described in the application particulars and shall not be used for the import or distribution of crushed limestone, gravel or any other material”. The depot was operated by South Godstone Aggregates until June 1993. The railway siding to the site was disconnected, then reinstated during the early part of 1998. The siding has since been used for the importation of Welsh slag and crushed limestone.
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps 4
12 In September 1997, a proposal to change the use of 0.96ha of the site to a recycling depot for construction and demolition wastes was refused primarily on Green Belt grounds, Ref. TA97/0432.
13 The commercial area known as Lambs Business Park was formerly part of the brickworks. During the war years the site was requisitioned for the Canadian Army and many of the buildings were used for storage. Following the war, some buildings did not revert to their former brickworks use and this part of the complex has a long planning history which includes enforcement action against unauthorised commercial uses and certain storage activities. The Business Park now comprises of approximately 26 commercial units. Many of the older buildings have now been demolished and a further 1,200 m2 of replacement space is shortly to be built. At the Tandridge District Local Plan Public Inquiry the Applicants made representations to have Lambs Business Park identified as a Major Developed Site (MDS) in the Green Belt. The Local Plan Inspector supported the proposal and has recommended that the Local Plan be modified to include such a designation, in line with the advice contained in annex C to Planning Policy Guidance Note 2 ‘Green Belts’.
14 In November 2000 Tandridge District Council’s Planning and Environmental Protection Committee considered the Inspector’s report and agreed with the recommendation that the Business Park be identified as a MDS. A site specific policy has been drafted, setting out criteria for limited infilling and/or redevelopment at Lambs Business Park and brickworks. Tandridge District Council’s proposed modifications to the Local Plan are currently out to consultation. The extent of the proposed MDS is shown on Plan 1 and, whilst there is some small overlap in terms of the clay extraction site area and the brickmaking facilities, the MDS does not include the area the subject of the current proposals.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
15 South of the Downs Local Plan : Metropolitan Green Belt, Area of Local First Review Landscape Significance.
16 Tandridge District Local Plan Deposit Version 1998 : Metropolitan Green Belt, Area of Local Significance.
CONSULTATIONS
17 Following amendments to the applications and the submission of further supporting information, consultees were sent the amending/amplifying information and asked for their views. In most cases, consultees original responses and their further responses have both been in the form of one comment for all four proposals. Any specific comments regarding a particular application are marked with an asterisk. The paragraph numbers in italics relate to where these issues are discussed in the reports.
18 Environment Agency * No objection to the rail aggregate depot subject to a condition * No objection to the recycling depot
19 Southern Water : No objection.
20 Sutton & East Surrey Water Company : The site is within a water resource ‘area of interest’ for Bough Beech, River Eden. Object subject to the Environment Agency giving reassurance that there would be no detrimental affect on quality.
21 Thames Water Utilities : No objection.
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps 5
22 English Nature : Requested a great crested newts survey. This has been carried out. English Nature has no further observations.
23 Forestry Commission : Do not object. Support the proposal of a buffer zone between the site and Maple Wood (see para. 82 of the rail aggregate depot section of the report) and suggest that no conifers are planted in the part of the site adjoining the existing woodland. (see Plan 2)
24 Surrey Wildlife Trust : The Trust’s original comment was that it would like to see the restoration directed towards nature conservation. Following the submission of the latest information, the Trust has stated that it supports the recommendations for screening the works with native broad-leaved species that also form wildlife corridors to adjacent countryside.
*The Trust has made comments that are specific to the rail aggregate depot proposal. It does not object to the proposal provided that a 10 m buffer zone is maintained between the depot and the adjacent Maple Wood. The depot should not extend into previously undisturbed land. Any stockpiling of material immediately adjacent to the woodland is likely to have a detrimental impact on the trees. (See paras. 82 of the rail aggregate depot section of the report).
25 Railtrack : No objection.
26 County Highway Authority -Transportation Development Control : No objection in terms of safety and capacity subject to the completion of a Highways Agreement to facilitate improvements to the access and other highway works.
27 Head of Engineering - Environmental Noise : Has concerns relating to the increase in noise on Terracotta Road as a result of the traffic.
* In relation to the rail aggregate depot there is particular concern about the method of unloading. The acceptability of the noise level is reliant entirely on the skill of the operator of the grab unloading the train wagons. (This is discussed in the noise section of the rail aggregate depot section of the report paras.68 to 74)
28 Head of Environmental & Economic Policy - Conservation, Heritage and Landscape : No objection. - Rights of Way : No objection.
29 Consultant Geologist : No objection.
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps 6
PUBLICITY
30 The proposals were advertised by a site notice and an advertisement in the local newspaper. 45 neighbouring owner/occupiers were notified. Members of the public have made representations on the developments at South Godstone Brickworks rather than make comments relating specifically to the individual proposals. In June 1999, all those who had sent in representations were notified of the submission of additional documentation. Further amendments and supporting information were received at the end of November 2000 and all residents who had made representations prior to that date were notified of the changes and invited to make comments. 87 letters of representation have been received objecting to the proposals. Accompanying the representation of one resident are photographs showing damage to bollards at the Anglefield Corner junction and vehicle accidents on Tilburstow Hill Road. The main points of objection are summarised below. However, the greatest objections have been received on the fact that the site lies within the Green Belt and that any increase in traffic would be unacceptable. Residents feel that it is now dangerous to use Tilburstow Hill Road and that the road is too narrow for the use of such large vehicles. Following on from these objections, dust, odour and fumes have also featured in many of the representations.
Any points relating to specific applications are identified by asterisks. * refer to TA99/156 proposed rail aggregate depot ** refer to both TA99/156 proposed rail aggregate depot and TA99/157 proposed recycling depot
Location (a) the site lies within the Green Belt; (b) the site is unsuitable for this type of activity as it is in close proximity to a residential area; (c) would be better located in urban areas; (d) there are better sites elsewhere in Surrey; (e) the site is in the AGLV; (f) the proposals are out of keeping with the surroundings; * (g) a rail aggregate terminal is not needed in the Green Belt. The Purley depot is only 10 miles away. Purley has expanded in recent years, is as close to the M25 and could service the area.
Cumulative Impact (a) what was once a small country brickworks has become a very busy industrial area; (b) there is already too much activity and traffic associated with the site - motorcycles, buses, cars and lorries; ** (c) if all these proposals were permitted, it would create the largest aggregate distribution centre and recycling plant in Surrey on a site intended as a small business park. There would be severe consequences for the safety and quality of life of hundreds of residents.
Noise (a) the proposal would involve an increase in noise; (b) the site already generates far too much noise; (c) radios played in the workshops on the commercial estate are so loud they can be heard in local properties; (d) there is now almost continual traffic noise from Terracotta Road, 6 days per week and intermittently on Sundays; (e) the proposal would increase noise from unloading trains; (f) there would be noise from reversing alarms; (g) empty lorries generate noise.
Health and Safety
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps 7
(a) the development would result in pollution of the atmosphere, the ground, groundwater and noise pollution; (b) the site already gives rise to noxious smells; (c) the development would increase the risk of accidents; (d) there have been a number of accidents around the entrance to the business park and the railway bridge requiring the road to be closed, to the inconvenience of local residents; (e) it is now dangerous for pedestrians to use Tilburstow Hill Road. Narrow country lanes do not have footpaths, if two heavy goods vehicles are crossing head-on they take up the whole road with no space left for pedestrians, horses or cyclists; (f) the business park already creates high levels of noise, fumes and dust which carries over onto properties where children play; (g) vibration from the heavy goods vehicles is causing damage to houses along Tilburstow Hill Road; (h) the proposal would result in an impact on residents’ quality of life.
Dust (a) the proposal would generate dust; (b) the dust control measures are insufficient; ** (c) the proposal for dealing with dust is totally inadequate. There is concern that respiratory illnesses will be caused by the dust. Local cars and property are periodically covered in dust arising from the site; * (d) the application seriously misrepresents the impact on dust air pollution, there is an aggregate terminal at Purley which creates considerable dust, despite water sprays to minimise it.
Traffic (a) the increase in traffic would be unacceptable; (b) account should be taken of the ability of local roads and their configuration to cope with the increase in traffic. The narrow country lanes are not suitable for the large lorries proposed; (c) existing lorries use Anglefield Corner which is a notoriously dangerous junction. Lorries using this junction remove the ‘keep left’ signs in the road at the junction with A22, lorries turning left out the site damage the railway bridge; (d) Tilburstow Hill Road is too narrow for 8 wheelers. In some places the width between centre/and verge white lines is almost the same as the lorry; (e) traffic usage; (f) there are already spillages from lorries using the road, this is dangerous and would increase; * (g) taking 50 lorries off national trunk roads by using trains and then onto lorries for onward transportation is no benefit to the overburdened Godstone area; (h) walls are damaged by suction from lorries; (i) the Surrey Cycleway crosses Harts Lane; (j) the Greensand Way crosses Tilburstow Hill Road; (k) traffic lights at the bridge would not assist.
Access (a) there are insufficient details of the access improvements; (b) the access improvements could impact on the Brook causing flooding and affect the footpath; (c) the access improvements would incorporate the entrance to the Business Park with the entrance to the cul de sac Brookside. Loss of trees and hedges which currently screen the cul-de sac from the sight and sound of the traffic. The widened junction would bring the heavy vehicles closer to the houses and would put the children of Brookside at risk. It would also result in the vision of drivers exiting from Brookside being obscured.
Miscellaneous
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps 8
(a) the proposals will cause a further reduction in the value of property in the area; (b) the site already operates at unsociable hours; ** (c) there is a visual impact of machines and aggregate stock piles from local properties; (d) the proposals are the ‘thin end of the wedge’: (e) Metro buses already operate from the site 7 days a week with dozens of buses parked at the site overnight, the size of the vehicles and hours of operation have an impact on the local roads and local residents; (f) Godstone Farm attracts many visitors including school children; (g) the proposal would impact on the wildlife of the area.
31 The Tilburstow Hill Residents’ Association
Strongly object. The Residents’ Association has submitted several representations regarding the four proposals including a report and photographs. In addition, the Association instructed Colin Buchanan and Partners to provide professional planning and traffic advice. It should be noted that both Buchanan’s and the residents’ reports were submitted in March 2000 prior to the latest amendments and the submission of further supporting documentation. The Residents’ Association were informed of the amendments and subsequently made further representations.
Specific comments or items discussed within the planning considerations section of individual reports are shown in italics.
Tilburstow Hill Residents’ Representations
A summary of the Residents’ Association main points of objection is given below. The Association included with its representations a traffic survey and photographs showing the access road entrance from Tilburstow Hill, damage to road signs, and an accident at the Tilburstow Hill Road/A22 junction.
The Association strongly object to the proposals on the grounds that:
(a) the careful build up of a number of activities has totally changed the nature and purpose of the site, the latest being to create a major road distribution centre for aggregates; (b) it is inappropriate in the Green Belt; (c) the residents carried out their traffic movement survey which showed consistently that the site is already subject to 1200 vehicles per 12 hour period; (d) the site operates at unsocial hours with approximately 200 vehicles operating outside the times of 0730 and 1800 hours; (e) the proposals would cause an unacceptable increase in the number, size and weight of heavy goods lorries using the local roads giving access to the site; (f) the proposals would give rise to major road accident potential at the railway bridge, site access and junction with the A22; (g) the proposals would cause unacceptable further deterioration to the adjacent highway infrastructure; (h) the proposals would prejudice the safety of pedestrians (including school children), ramblers, cyclists, local horseriders and other visitors attracted to the area; (i) the proposals would give rise to an unacceptable increase in dust, noise and traffic fumes, environmental pollution; (j) the proposals would impact on the amenity and quality of life and cause increased house maintenance costs from dust and pollution and result in a major reduction in property value.
The Residents’ Association Report covers:
Tilburstow Hill opinion poll results. The poll (over 150 people) records that local residents were concerned about the volume of traffic, its speed and the amount of HGVs. Over 75% of those
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps 9
approached opposed the four minerals and waste planning applications, MDS status for Lambs Business Park and a planning application being dealt with by Tandridge District Council.
Road Survey. The survey concludes that the roads are only capable of carrying cars and light commercial vehicles with the occasional large delivery vehicle, not the current level of buses and HGVs. There is a lack of traffic calming and speed limits.
Traffic impact. This section sets out a critique of the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) submitted by the Applicants, and concludes that the TIA has a number of errors and omissions.
Environmental control. The Association consider that the environmental impact of the recycling depot in terms of vehicle movements, type of waste and dust generation.
Environmental damage as a result of brickmaking. The residents set out their concerns about the brickmaking process on health and environmental grounds.
Photographs of the Tilburstow Hill area. Showing Tilburstow Hill Road and its junctions with Terracotta Road; the A22 at Godstone and Anglefield Corner and the entrance to Godstone Farm; Harts Lane; Rabies Heath Road; Godstone one way system.
Following the submission of the amended applications, the Residents’ Association maintains its strong objection to the planning applications. The residents feel that the restoration of the land is impractical on the grounds of timescale and availability of suitable material and propose that the area be landscaped and water features created. It questions:
(a) the intention of the applications which they consider will change the nature of the site from a light commercial activity with low level brickmaking, to a major heavy industrial activity engaged in the processing and distribution of minerals by road; (b) the Applicants claim that the rail aggregate depot would save one million road miles; (c) the Applicants claim to have a ‘long term established mineral activity’; (d) why the brickmaking kilns do not comply with EEC Directive 84/360/EEC 28/04/84 and the Environmental Protection Act 1990; (e) the Applicants willingness to accept a monthly vehicle movement restriction, which residents believe would give carte blanche to justify any number of vehicles; (f) the accuracy of the TIA; (g) that the proposals would bring any employment to the area; (h) that refusal of the applications would impact on the existing tenants at the Business Park.
Reports by Colin Buchanan & Partners on behalf of the Tilburstow Hill Residents’ Association The findings of the Buchanan report are as follows:
Green Belt. The recycling and aggregates depots are inappropriate development and no exceptional circumstances have been demonstrated. The Applicants claim there is a need for the development, but need does not necessarily provide a very special circumstance and there are no clear reasons why the developments should be located at this site. The point is made that the site has ‘poor sustainability credentials’ in terms of accessibility. (paras. 36 of the variation of conditions and 45 of the clay extraction proposal).
In terms of the clay extraction application, Buchanan’s refer to extraction over a period of up to 100 years and that site restoration could only occur after the working was exhausted. As such, they consider the proposal to be contrary to the objectives of the Green Belt. The area of clay extraction within the site area was revised in 1999 limiting the operation to a single southwards extraction area with a life of some 40 years. See paras 1 - 5 of the clay
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps 10
extraction report for more details of the extraction area and timescale. There is reference made to MPG1 advice that clay for making bricks is common and from this they conclude that there is no demonstrable need for this type of development to occur at this location. They also refer to the loss of an SNCI, stating that this is contrary to Policy DP24 of the Structure Plan. Maple Wood an SNCI is adjacent to the site to the north west. - see para. 82 of the rail aggregate depot section of the report. A pSNCI was mistakenly identified in Tandridge District Council’s Consultation Draft Local Plan, see para 79 of the clay extraction proposal.
Environmental Management. No regard to BATNEEC or other relevant British Standards and that no Environmental Management System (EMS) is proposed. They recommend that an EMS be drawn up in accordance with BS 7750. (see paras. 72 clay extraction, 76 rail aggregate, 90 recycling and 61 variation of conditions).
Dust Impact. The dust suppression measures appear to be inadequate. The reasons for this statement are given as: the scale of the operation; hosing down is not reasonable or appropriate; there are no dust suppression measures for the unloading, the transfer of materials; the stockpiles; there are no arrangements for sheeting lorries, wheelcleaning or road cleaning. (see paras. 72-74 clay extraction, 75-76 rail aggregate, 88-90 recycling and 61 and 62 variation of conditions).
Hours of Operation. Freight trains mostly operate during the evening; controls on the times of unloading needed. (See para. 71 of the rail aggregate depot section of the report).
Noise. Concerned about the Applicants claim that noise would be mitigated by virtue of the land sloping downwards. Details of the noise impact of creating the bund have not been provided. (the bund is already in place and the intention is to increase its height by 1 m - see para. 84 of the recycling depot report). No mitigation is proposed for the noise impact on the residents living in Terracotta Road. (see para. 86).
Pollution. No detail of the pollutants or measures to control pollution from the brickworks. (see paras. 46 to 49 of the clay extraction section of the report).
Clay Extraction. Recommend that the proposed soil stripping and storage is carried out in accordance with DoE guidance. (see para. 5 of the clay extraction section of the report). Are concerned that the subsequent infilling may not require a Waste Management Licence.
Findings. The Applicants have not proved a case for need and there are no discernible benefits gained by all the proposed developments occurring in the same locality, nor any reduction in impact. It is noted that each application should be considered on its merits but it is felt that consideration must also be given to the cumulative impact of the proposals and the current operations at the Business Park. The report concludes that there are fundamental planning objections to the proposals and it is strongly recommended that they be refused.
Traffic and Highways Appraisal Report - Buchanan
The report is critical of the TIA submitted by the Applicants, believing it to have a number of inaccuracies and shortcomings. The findings relating to traffic matters are discussed in the section of the reports entitled Highways, Traffic and Access. The current traffic flows, highway network and access are common to all four proposals, therefore the paragraphs numbers given below are from the first report TA99/155 clay extraction.
Traffic Generation. Buchanan’s consider the traffic surveys undertaken for the TIA and the residents’ own surveys and note that there is a 75% disparity between the HGV flows recorded. They note that the current level of Business Park traffic generation accounts for more than one third of the total two-way flow along Tilburstow Hill Road and that the HGV element of this flow is
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps 11
almost entirely associated with the Business Park. The report is critical of the ‘best guess’ estimates of traffic generation made by the Applicants. (see paras 53-5).
Access. The junction is significantly sub-standard in visibility and layout terms and would remain sub-standard despite the proposed improvements, the provision of traffic signals at the bridge may interfere with the junction. (see paras 61-65).
Highway Network. Tilburstow Hill Road, Rabies Heath Road and Hart’s Lane are all sub- standard in width and alignment, and have limited footpaths and streetlighting. They are used by walkers and equestrians. The accident rate of Tilburstow Hill Road is above what might be expected on this type of road. (see paras 20-52).
Sustainability. Development would be contrary to aims of PPG13. (see paras. 53, 54 and 58 of recycling report). The report concludes that further development should not be permitted on traffic and highways grounds as an increase in traffic flows would be unacceptable. (see paras 58 to 60 & 66).
32 Godstone Parish Council
TA99/155 - Clay Extraction proposal. No objection provided there is no increase in brickmaking activities at the site or no additional adverse impact to the environment.
TA99/156 - Proposed rail aggregate depot and TA99/157 - Proposed recycling depot. Object on the grounds that the applications are for inappropriate development in the Green Belt, that Tilburstow Hill Road, which is the only road access route to the site, is totally unsuitable for HGVs. If these proposals are granted, access to and from the site must only be by rail. In relation to the rail aggregate depot, the Parish Council also objects on the grounds of health and safety, the adverse effect on local residents health from the increased dust which would be generated. The Parish Council also makes the following comments : the Council is pleased to hear that the Applicants have offered access improvements and a contribution towards traffic lights at the railway bridge, but feels this alone would not eradicate the current traffic problems along this road; there appears to be no overall plan of development for the Business Park and that developments are being allowed to take place piecemeal without due consideration to the impact on the local environment and residents.
TA80/675/C/A - Variation of conditions to allow inert fill to be brought to the site by road. Strongly objects on the grounds of dust pollution, that the access road is a D classified road and is totally unsuitable for the 40 tonne lorries now visiting the site. Such lorries cause traffic problems through Godstone, and are breaking up the edges and surface of Tilburstow Hill Road. In the interest of the local residents, consideration must be made of the total number of vehicles using the access on a daily basis, including buses, very large refuse vehicles as well as other commercial vehicles.
33 Bletchingley Parish Council
TA99/155 - Clay extraction proposal. No Objection.
TA99/156 - Proposed rail aggregate depot and TA99/157 - Proposed recycling depot. Objects to both these applications on the grounds that they are inappropriate development in the Green Belt and that the impact of the HGV movements would create a traffic hazard on local roads and the operation itself would create noise and dust nuisance to residents that would have a serious detrimental effect on the local environment.
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps 12
TA80/675/C/A - Variation of conditions to allow inert fill to be brought to the site by road. Objects on the ground that the site is totally unsuitable for the importation of waste materials by road. Access from any direction is along narrow country lanes and through residential areas and any further increase in HGVs would adversely affect the whole area.
CONTACT: PAULINE SPARROW, PRINCIPAL PLANNING OFFICER
TEL NO: 020 8541 9439
BACKGROUND The deposited planning application documents and plans, documents PAPERS: and plans subsequently received amending the proposals, responses to consultations, notifications and representations received as referred to in the report and included in the planning application files.
Pl&Reg/ch/073ps
@ Please ask for Ms N EI-Shatoury Tel: 02085419095 Fax: 02085419392 SU RREY email: [email protected] COUNTY COUNCIL DX 31509 KINGSTON UPON THAMES Legal Services MrEM Sheard County Hall Matthews & Son Kingston upon Thames Chartered Surveyors Surrey KT I 2DN 91 Gower Street London WCIE 6AB
Your ref: EMS/1 0619 Our ref: LPEINS/25029/cl
9 August 2002 Dear Mr Sheard
LAND AT SOUTH GODSTONE BRICKWORKS, TILBURSTOW IDLL ROAD, SOUTH GODSTONE - PROPOSED SECTION 106 AGREEMENT
Thank you for your letter of 5 August and your client's cheque in payment ofmy fees.
I have now leted the Section 106 A ment dating it as of 8 August and I return one part for your client's retention.
Yours sincerely
~ru~.~ for Head ofLegal Services "
Head of Legal Services Ann Charlton www.surreycc.gov.uk DATEDTHE [?-H.. DAYOF~ 2002
SURREY COUNTY COUNCIL
- and-
W T LAMB HOLDINGS LIMITED
PLANNING OBLIGA nON
Under Section 106 ofthe Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as substituted by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991 relating to South Godstone Brickworks Tilburstow Hill Road South Godstone
ANN CHARLTON HEAD OF LEGAL SERVICES (# COUNTY HALL KINGSTON UPON THAMES SURREY KT12DN COUNTY COUNCIL
REF: LPEINS/25029 T HIS P LAN N IN GOB L I GAT ION is made the day of
~ Two thousand and two BET WEE N SURREY COUNTY
COUNCIL of County Hall Kingston upon Thames Surrey KTI 2DN (hereinafter referred to as "the Council") of the first part and W T LAMB HOLDINGS LIMITED whose registered office is at Nyewood Court Brookers Road Billingshurst West
Sussex RH 14 9RZ (hereinafter referred to as ''the Applicant") of the second part
WHEREAS
(1) Surrey County Council is the Planning Authority for the County of Surrey for
the purposes of this Planning Obligation and for the purposes of enforcing the
obligations hereunder
(2) The Applicant is seized in fee simple absolute in possession of land at South
Godstone Brickworks Tilburstow Hill Road South Godstone which is shown
for the purposes of identification only edged red and hatched red on the
attached plan number EMSII 0619/s 106 (hereinafter referred to as "the
Property")
(3) The Applicant has made an application to the Council under reference
TA99/155 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Application") for continuation of
winning and working of brick clay from part of the property being an area of
5.64 ha retention of certain brickmaking facilities and associated junction
improvements to a private access road and the Council has resolved to approve
this application subject to the Applicant entering into this Agreement
(4) In connection with the Application the Council require and the Applicant has
agreed by virtue of the Said Provisions to observe and perform the planning
obligations contained herein ..
T HIS INS T RUM E N T WIT N E SSE T H as follows:
1 THIS OBLIGATION is a planning obligation for the purposes of the said
provisions and is enforceable by the Council
2 THE Applicant pursuant to the said provisions and to all other enabling
powers and so as to bind itself and its successors in title the owners and occupiers of
the Property and so as to bind the Property and each and every part thereof into
whosesoever hands the same may come HEREBY COVENANTS and agrees with the
Council that the Applicant and those deriving title under it will perform and observe
the planning obligations contained in the Schedule hereto
3 NOTHING contained or implied in this Planning Obligation shall prejudice
affect or restrict the rights powers duties and obligations of the Council in the exercise
of its functions as County Planning Authority and its rights powers duties and
obligations under all or any public and private statutes bylaws and regulations may be
as fully and effectually exercised as if the Council were not a party to this Planning
Obligation
4 THE Applicant shall not be liable for breach of the covenants restrictions or
obligations contained in this Deed occurring after it has parted with its interest in the
Property but without prejudice to liability/or any subsisting breach of covenant prior
to parting with such interest PROVIDED THAT in the event of the Applicant
disposing whether by sale or lease of the whole or any part of the Property they shall
include a clause in the contract for sale and purchase or in the agreement for lease that
the sale or lease shall be subject to the terms and provisions of this Planning
Obligation
2 .,. N t
"--.~... " •••• - ____.W _. __._. ".~
...... -~ , -... _-' .. I II !~ I
Ij I I ; I ~ I ! ~ ; t ; I I J
iJ I i ! 1
00 1m
Application TA99/155 Site Area '!:....~'='== Area ofMajor Developed Site Area subject to 5.106 Agreement 11111
Scale Approx 1/1250 Plan No. EMS/10619!sJ06 Date ......
CROWN COPYRIGHT ALLRIGHTSRESERVED UCENCENo ESl0000.1057 5 THE Applicant shall upon completion of this deed pay to the Council the
reasonable expenses ofthe Council in connection with the negotiation preparation and
completion of this Planning Obligation as certified by the Head of Legal Services and
of any transaction arising therefrom
6 THE PARTIES HERETO HEREBY DECLARE that this Agreement is
executed or signed by them as a Deed in accordance with Section 1 of the Law of
Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 provided always that the provisions
hereof (other than those contained in this clause) shaH not have any effect until this
Planning Obligation has been dated
7 IF planning permission granted pursuant to the Application shall expire before
it is implemented (by the carrying out of a "material operation" as defined by Section
56(4)(a) ofthe Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended» or shall be at any 1 time revoked this Deed shall forthwith determine and cease to have effect save for the
provisions of clause 5
8 THIS Agreement is a 10ca11and charge and shall be registered as such
9 IN THIS INSTRUMENT
9.1 \Vords importing the masculine gender shall include the feminine and words
importing the singular number shall include the plural
9.2 The expressions "the Council" and "the Applicant" shall include the
successors in title assignees and trustees of each party separately
9.3 "The Said Provisions" means Section 106 Town and Country Planning Act
1990 as substituted by The Planning and Compensation Act 1991
9.4 "The Planning Permission" means the permission reference TA99/155 granted I pursuant to the Application J 3 ..
SCHEDULE Obligations to be perfonned by the Applicant
The Applicant shall restore that part ofthe Property shown hatched red on the attached
plan in accordance with the restoration scheme approved under reference TA99/155 in
particular Restoration Plan RPI and Landscape Plan LPI or as subsequently approved
by the Council acting reasonably
IN WIT N E SSW HER E 0 F the Council and the Applicant have caused their
respective Common Seals to be hereunto affixed in the presence of the persons
mentioned below the day and year first before written
r:.>ld (THE COMMON SEAL ofSURREY fV::) (COUNTY COUNCIL was hereunto (affixed in execution ofthis Deed in the (presence of: "--~c....., O. ,,~O~
Head ofLogal Servioes {AuthOrised Si~~atory1
( THE COMMON SEAL OF W T ( LAMB HOLDINGS LIMITED was ( hereunto affixed in execution ofthis (Deed in the pres ce of:
Secretary
25029agl
4 SURREY COUNTY COUNCIL
. ~~GII~iEE:LlN~..~Z.~~$3~
ORDERED TO f'~~... I!iy~~~ BE SEALED c.~ 2.1. 2..01 J...J..e...A.... lb.
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
APPENDIX C – CROSS SECTIONS
Waste Recovery Plan - June 2019
LEGEND
Top
BANKING SLOPING MASONRY
Bottom
BUSHES & HEDGES STILE
0.23w MARSH WALL Width drawn to scale
OPEN SIDED BUILDING BUILDING
GATES GLASS ROOFED Single Double
RETAINING WALL Fill Summary RTW CONTOURS 25.50 Name Fill Factor 2d Area Fill
ABBREVIATIONS (WHERE APPLICABLE) Total Fill 1.300 19175.66sq.m 114743.19 Cu. M. FURNITURE FENCES
AIR VALVE AV BARBED WIRE FENCE BWF Totals 19175.66sq.m 114743.19 Cu. M. BELISHA BEACON BB CORRUGATED IRON FENCE CIF BOLLARD B CLOSE BOARD FENCE CBF BRITISH TELECOM BOX BTB CHAIN LINK FENCE CLF BRITISH TELECOM MANHOLE BTMH CHESTNUT PALING FENCE CPF BUS STOP BS INTERWOVEN FENCE IWF CABLE MARKER CM IRON RAILING FENCE IRF DOWN PIPE DP LARCH LAP FENCE LLF EARTH ROD ER MISCELLANEOUS FENCING Misc.F ELECTRICITY CABLE PIT ELCP POST AND CHAIN FENCE PCF ELECTRICITY CONTROL BOX ECB POST AND RAIL FENCE PRF ELECTRICITY POLE EP POST AND WIRE PWF FIRE HYDRANT FH TUBULAR STEEL RAIL TSRF FLOWER BED FB FOOTPATH FP GAS VALVE GV HEIGHTS GULLY G BED LEVEL BL GULLY OUTLET GO COVER LEVEL CL INSPECTION COVER IC EAVE HEIGHT EL LIGHT L FLAT ROOF LEVEL FRL LAMP POST LP FLOOR LEVEL FFL LETTER BOX LB INVERT LEVEL IL MANHOLE MH PARAPET WALL HEIGHT PWL NOTICE BOARD NB RIDGE HEIGHT RL NAME PLATE NP STRUCTURAL SLAB LEVEL SSL OVERHEAD WIRES OHW TOP OF WALL TOW PARKING METER PM TOP OF FENCE TOF ROAD SIGN RS RODDING EYE RE BUILDING RETAINING WALL RTW SLUICE VALVE SV ACCESS HATCH AH STOP COCK SC ARCH HEAD LEVEL AHL TELEGRAPH POLE TP ARCH SPRINGER LEVEL ASL TELEPHONE CALL BOX TCB BEAM SOFFIT LEVEL BSL TOP OF KERB TK CILL HEIGHT CH TRAFFIC LIGHT TS CEILING LEVEL CL UNDERGROUND UG FALSE CEILING FC UNABLE TO LIFT UTL FINISHED FLOOR LEVEL FFL VENT PIPE V LAVATORY BASIN LB WATER METER WM ROOF LEVEL RL WATER LEVEL WL RADIATOR Rad WATER VALVE WV RAIN WATER PIPE RWP SKYLIGHT SL SOIL AND VENT PIPE SVP SURFACES WASH BASIN WB WATER TANK WT CONCRETE CONC WINDOW CILL LEVEL WCL CONCRETE PAVING CP TACTILE PAVING TP WINDOW HEAD LEVEL WHL TARMAC TMc UNDERSIDE LEVEL USL UNMADE UN
GRID: All infomation relates to Ordnance Survey Grid computed using Leica Smartnet RTK Network.
DATUM: All level information relates to OSGM15 GPS Datum, derived using Leica Smartnet RTK Network.
NOTES: · Surveyed boundaries may not be legal boundaries. · Dimensions should not be scaled. All information contained in the drawing should be checked and verified on site prior to any fabrication/construction. · All utilities have been identified to the best of the surveyors knowledge but cannot be guaranteed. Due to non entry of inspection chambers all pipe sizes should be checked and verified before any works commence. · Services such as Inspection Chambers and Water Meters etc may be obscured by parked cars or debris. · Tree spreads shown indicatively only.
SKILLTRAN Ltd The Old Bakehouse, 44a Western Road Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex, BN6 9TA
tel: 01273 835235 fax: 01273 832526 e-mail: [email protected] Land & Civil Engineering Surveyors web: www.skilltran.co.uk
SURVEYED --
DRAWN -- CHECKED -- SCALE Sheet 1 of 2 A0@1:200 WTL Lamb Holdings
Godstone Quarry Terracotta Road Godstone 3D Topographical Survey Job No Rev Drawing Number 18051 - 18051_03
Date : 09.04.19 LEGEND
Top
BANKING SLOPING MASONRY
Bottom
BUSHES & HEDGES STILE
0.23w MARSH WALL Width drawn to scale
OPEN SIDED BUILDING BUILDING
GATES GLASS ROOFED Single Double
RETAINING WALL Fill Summary RTW CONTOURS 25.50 Name Fill Factor 2d Area Fill Total Fill 1.300 19175.66sq.m 114743.19 Cu. M. Totals 19175.66sq.m 114743.19 Cu. M.
GRID: All infomation relates to Ordnance Survey Grid computed using Leica Smartnet RTK Network.
DATUM: All level information relates to OSGM15 GPS Datum, derived using Leica Smartnet RTK Network.
NOTES: · Surveyed boundaries may not be legal boundaries. · Dimensions should not be scaled. All information contained in the drawing should be checked and verified on site prior to any fabrication/construction. · All utilities have been identified to the best of the surveyors knowledge but cannot be guaranteed. Due to non entry of inspection chambers all pipe sizes should be checked and verified before any works commence. · Services such as Inspection Chambers and Water Meters etc may be obscured by parked cars or debris. · Tree spreads shown indicatively only.
SKILLTRAN Ltd The Old Bakehouse, 44a Western Road Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex, BN6 9TA
tel: 01273 835235 fax: 01273 832526 e-mail: [email protected] Land & Civil Engineering Surveyors web: www.skilltran.co.uk
SURVEYED --
DRAWN -- CHECKED -- SCALE Sheet 2 of 2 A0@1:200 WTL Lamb Holdings
Godstone Quarry Terracotta Road Godstone 3D Topographical Survey Job No Rev Drawing Number 18051 - 18051_03
Date : 08.04.19
Blockade Services Ltd Permit Application
Prepared by:
Envee Ltd 16 Oakland House 463 Lichfield Road Four Oaks Sutton Coldfield West Midlands B74 4DJ
T: 0121 308 3120 M: 07867 983 534 E: [email protected]
envee ...making business green
Waste Recovery Plan - July 2019 15