Appeal Decision

Site visit made on 17 February 2014 by David Richards BSocSci Dip TP MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Decision date: 10 March 2014

Appeal Ref: APP/A2280/A/13/2209020 Highways Depot, North Dane Way, Lordswood, Chatham, ME5 8YE
The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. The appeal is made by Asbestos First Ltd against the decision of Medway Council. The application Ref MC/13/1549, dated 18 June 2013, was refused by notice dated 3 October 2013. The development proposed is change of use from winter maintenance depot for storage of salt and parking of seven gritters, to an asbestos waste transfer station as described in supporting statement.

Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for change of use from winter maintenance depot for storage of salt and parking of seven gritters, to an asbestos waste transfer station as described in supporting statement at Highways Depot, North Dane Way, Lordswood, Chatham, ME5 8YE in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref MC/13/1549, dated 18 June 2013, subject to the following conditions: 1) 2) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Site Location Plan received on 2 June 2013; 0999/1438/01 received on 25 June 2013; and 0999/1438/03A received on 2 September 2013. The use hereby permitted shall only operate between the hours of 0700 to 1800 Mondays to Fridays inclusive and between the hours of 0700 to 1300 on Saturdays and not at any time on Sundays and Public Holidays. No development shall take place until details of arrangements for large vehicle access and egress have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved arrangements shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details, and retained for the life of the development. No development shall take place until a security scheme for the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall include measures for the prevention and mitigation of vandalism and flytipping including the type and location of boundary treatment, CCTV and lighting on the site. The scheme shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to

3)

4)

5)

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate

Appeal Decision APP/A2280/A/13/2209020

commencement of the use and thereafter retained for the life of the development. 6) 7) No more than 2 skips or 8 tonnes of Asbestos Containing Material shall be stored on site at any one time. None of the skips hereby permitted or any other temporary or moveable structures used in association with the use shall be located within 1 metre of the boundaries of the site. There shall be no more than 10 transit van movements per day or 1 skip movement per fortnight in association with the permitted use.

8)

Main Issues 2. The main issues are the effect on the health of residents, the effect on highway safety and the effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area. Reasons 3. The site is a former highways gritting depot, close to the junction of North Dane Way with Albemarle Road. It is set back from a track which continues in an easterly direction from the junction, behind a screen of mature trees. It is enclosed by a substantial fence with barbed wire on top. The site comprises the former depot buildings, now used as offices by the appellant company, areas of hardstanding and an open storage area where grit was stored. The nearest residential properties are on Farley Close some 50 metres to the southwest of the site. 4. The proposal is to use the site as a transfer station for asbestos and asbestos containing material (ACM) removed from buildings and construction sites. The appellant company is an experienced operator working under licence from the Health and Safety Executive, and subject to stringent safety audits. The company has held an HSE licence since 1998. Following removal of asbestos from sites, the double bagged and sealed ACM would be temporarily transferred to a lockable steel container, prior to being taken to a licenced landfill site for disposal. Two skips would be used on site and the plans show the storage of decontamination units, which would be taken off site to be used when the asbestos was being removed from a building. Each of the skips would be capable of storing 4 tonnes and so a maximum of 8 tonnes would be stored on site at any one time. Instead of individual small vehicles going direct to the landfill site, the bulk skips would be exchanged on a fortnightly basis and there would be 10 transit movements a day. The hours of operation are proposed as 0700 to 1800 Monday to Friday and 0700 1300 on Saturdays, with no operations on Sundays or Bank Holidays. 5. While there are existing sites which receive asbestos waste in Kent (two transfer stations and one landfill site) they operate a minimum charge based on weight, the lowest being 255 for up to half a tonne. This makes it uneconomic to dispose of small quantities of asbestos waste. The proposal is intended to provide a facility for the safe storage and transfer of small quantities of asbestos waste prior to onward disposal to landfill. Health 6. Asbestos is well-known to be hazardous to health, and residents of the area, which includes many homes, as well as schools and community facilities, are

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate

Appeal Decision APP/A2280/A/13/2209020

concerned about the potential for ACM from the site to find its way into the surrounding environment for example as windblown dust, or as a result of fire/vandalism, or into groundwater. While these fears are understandable, the operation would be strictly regulated by the HSE and the Environment Agency. An environmental permit (EP) would be required to handle the waste on site, which would be subject to conditions. The conditions would limit the quantity of waste that can be accepted and require that all asbestos wastes must be double bagged and kept within secure lockable containers. There would also be a requirement that asbestos wastes must be stored on an impermeable surface with sealed drainage, to ensure no drainage to controlled waters. 7. The application for an EP is a separate process from the planning application. Government Policy is set out in Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (PPS 10). Paragraph 27 advises that the planning and pollution control regimes are separate but complementary. Pollution control is concerned with preventing pollution through the use of measures to prohibit or limit the release of substances to the lowest practicable level. It also ensures that ambient air and water quality meet standards that guard against impacts to the environment and human health. The planning system controls the development and use of land in the public interest and should focus on whether development is an acceptable use of the land, and the impacts of those uses on the development and use of land. Waste planning authorities should work on the assumption that the relevant pollution control regime will be properly applied and enforced. 8. The Councils Environmental Health Officers and the Environment Agency had no objection to the proposed activity. 9. In summary, the operation of the site subject to an EP would ensure that there would be strict controls to minimise the risk of ACM escaping into the environment where it could cause a health hazard to residents and others. While the location means that the site could be affected by vandalism, the use of CCTV, which can be required by condition, would enable the risk to be managed. In any event, the storage of the material within lockable containers would effectively control the risk of fire as a possible cause of contamination. 10. Objectors also drew attention to the possibility of illegal fly-tipping occurring, in the event of independent contractors bringing material to the site and finding it closed, or being turned away if the material was not properly bagged in accordance with the EP requirements, or simply to escape payment of disposal charges. However there is little conclusive evidence to show that the presence of the site would lead to an increased risk of fly-tipping in the area to the detriment of the locality or the Area of Local landscape Importance. While such illegal activity cannot be absolutely ruled out, the purpose of providing for the transfer of small quantities of materials under controlled conditions at an economic rate would, if anything, help to reduce any cost driven incentive to fly-tipping. The applicant is a licensed operator who would be able to advise on the appropriate treatment for materials brought to the site, and provide bags of a suitable quality for safe storage. 11. I therefore conclude that the requirement for an EP would ensure that there would be no material harm to human health. The proposal would comply with saved Policy BNE2, which requires that all development should protect the amenities of the occupants of nearby and adjacent properties.

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate

Appeal Decision APP/A2280/A/13/2209020

Highway safety 12. The levels of usage proposed, which can be limited by the attachment of appropriate conditions, is predicted to result in a relatively low number of vehicle movements and which is unlikely to exceed that associated with the former depot use. The highways consultee did not object to the proposal or identify any conflict with saved policies T1 and T2 of the Medway Local Plan or Policy W9 of the Kent Waste Local Plan. 13. The current access arrangements mean that drivers leaving the site have to make an awkward manoeuvre if turning right into North Dane Way. However visibility at this point is satisfactory, and my observation was that traffic using North Dane Way and Albemarle Road slowed down to negotiate the junction. There is scope to improve the junction arrangements to eliminate any residual risk of accidents involving large vehicles emerging from the site. This can be achieved by an appropriate condition. Character and appearance 14. The site was formerly used as a highways depot with parking for seven gritters. No external changes would be made to the external appearance of the site. I acknowledge that the existing boundary fence is not attractive, but it has been in place for many years in association with the former use. While the operator may wish to remove branches and foliage that overhanging the site, this would not impact anymore than would have been likely to occur under the former use, and I do not consider that it would result in a material threat to the health of the trees, or to any wildlife that may use them for roosting or foraging. 15. I have considered the issue of illegal fly-tipping above. For the reasons given there I do not consider that there is any material risk of increased fly tipping as a result of the proposed use of the site. Accordingly, as there would be no significant change to the appearance of the site or detrimental effect on the character and appearance of the area, I do not consider that the proposal would conflict with saved Policy BNE1 of the Medway Local Plan, which requires that the design of development should be appropriate in relation to the character, appearance and functioning of the built and natural environment. Conclusion 16. For the reasons given above, I conclude that planning permission should be granted. 17. A condition specifying the relevant plans is necessary to define the scope of the permission. Conditions limiting the hours of operation, the number of skips/quantities of material to be stored, and the number of vehicle and skip movements are necessary to protect the amenity of nearby occupiers and of the surrounding area. A condition requiring a scheme to improve the access is necessary in the interests of highway safety. A condition addressing site security and boundary treatment is necessary to minimise the risk of crime and to secure a satisfactory appearance to the development.

David Richards
INSPECTOR

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate