Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence received.

Apologies were received from Councillors Carter, Dibbs, Frankum and Harvey.

All Members who believe they have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in any matter to be considered at the meeting must declare that interest and, having regard to the circumstances described in Part 3 Paragraph 1.5 of the County Council's Members' Code of Conduct, leave the meeting while the matter is discussed, save for exercising any right to speak in accordance with Paragraph 1.6 of the Code. Furthermore all Members with a Non-Pecuniary interest in a matter being considered at the meeting should consider whether such interest should be declared, and having regard to Part 5, Paragraph 2 of the Code, consider whether it is appropriate to leave the meeting while the matter is discussed, save for exercising any right to speak in accordance with the Code.

Members were mindful that where they believed they had a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in any matter considered at the meeting they must declare that interest at the time of the relevant debate and, having regard to the circumstances described in Part 3, Paragraph 1.5 of the County Council's Members' Code of Conduct, leave the meeting while the matter was discussed, save for exercising any right to speak in accordance with Paragraph 1.6 of the Code. Furthermore Members were mindful that where they believed they had a Non-Pecuniary interest in a matter being considered at the meeting they considered whether such interest should be declared, and having regard to Part 5, Paragraph 2 of the Code, considered whether it was appropriate to leave the meeting whilst the matter was discussed, save for exercising any right to speak in accordance with the Code.

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting

The minutes of the last meeting were reviewed and agreed

To receive any deputations notified under Standing Order 12.

The deputation process was explained to attendees. It was confirmed that there were six deputations for the meeting.

To receive any announcements the Chairman may wish to make.

The Chairman confirmed that a Home to School Transport Appeal training session would take place following the meeting.

To consider a report of the Director of Economy, Transport and Environment regarding three planning applications, two for variation of condition 3 (hours of operation) of planning permission 11/01427/CMAN and one for extension to site to provide car park (Retrospective) at Bryan Hirst Recycling Ltd, Bullington Cross, Sutton Scotney

The Committee considered a report from the Head of Strategic Planning (Item 6 in the Minute Book) regarding three planning applications relating to condition changes to extend the hours of use of the site and a proposal for an extension to the site to form a car park at Bryan Hirst Recycling in Bullington.

The officer introduced the item and confirmed the applications as well as the changes included in the update paper, which included reference in the report (paragraphs 1.4) to the Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations that should be to the new 2017 Regulations. Aerial and site photographs were shown to give the application further context, following a members’ site visit on Monday 4 December.

The Committee received one deputation on this item. Rupert Wieloch spoke against the applications and claimed that there were properties closer to the site than stipulated in the officer presentation that would be affected by the proposals. The vegetation and trees removed was a habitat for dormice. Mr Wieloch stated that there was evidence of high stockpiles spilling over the fence into the surrounding woodland and noise from the site carrying quite a distance and being over 95 decibels. He also referred to weekend working, contrary to the current conditions, and felt that the site was dangerous, with no clear path marked for vehicles.

During questions of the deputation, it was clarified that the noise experienced from the site was that of metal being lifted and dropped onto stockpiles.

During questions of the officers, the following points were clarified:

• Complaints had been received regarding the site, which had been investigated.
• The Environmental Health officer had been consulted and had no concerns regarding the noise levels on site.
• Ecologist had not commented on the application as the vegetation had already been removed and there was nothing there left to assess, but previous inspections had not found any evidence of dormice.
• A Liaison Panel was not currently in existence.
• The tree removal did not require planning consent as the trees were not protected.
• The original condition regarding a tree planted bund was only regarding the boundary adjoining the A34, which had been complied with.
• There was some potential for planting to take place in the south-east corner of the site, but this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

To consider a report of the Director of Economy, Transport and Environment regarding planning application for continued use for wood waste sorting, storage and transfer; highways salt store; bin storage; storage and transfer of waste fridges freezers; parking of HGVs and construction and operation of a wood processing area, operation of wood shredder and screener, construction of additional wood storage bays and overflow wood storage areas at Down End Quarry, Down End Road, Fareham

The Committee considered a report from the Head of Strategic Planning (Item 7 in the Minute Book) regarding an application for the continued use of the site for a range of waste related activities and the addition of wood processing, with shredding and screening, at Down End Quarry in Fareham.

The officer introduced the item, and it was confirmed that there was an amendment to Condition 11 as follows:

Within three months of the date of the installation of a wood shredder in accordance with this permission, noise monitoring shall be undertaken to compare the effects of the development with the predicted impacts within the Wood Shredder Noise Assessment (dated 9 June 2017) submitted with the application. The scope and duration of the monitoring shall be agreed in writing with the Waste Planning Authority prior to implementation and the results of the monitoring shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority within one month of being carried out. If the results of the monitoring indicate that impacts are at or above Lowest Observable Adverse Effect Level (Noise Policy Statement for England, 2010) then operation of the wood shredding process shall cease until such time as mitigation measures are undertaken to reduce the impact to below this level, in accordance with a mitigation scheme which has first been agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority. The approved measures shall be installed before operation of the wood shredding process recommences and shall be retained for the duration of the use.

Reason: In the interests of public amenity and to ensure the development is in accordance with Policy 10 (Protecting public health, safety and amenity) of the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (2013).

A correction to the reference to the Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations in paragraphs 1.4 and 4.8 was also reported.

A location plan was shown to Committee and the private haul road and SSSI were clearly marked. An aerial photograph showed the nearest properties. It was confirmed that wood shredding was being proposed as an additional activity at the site which would result in an increase of 15,000 tonnes of material being brought to the site, with an additional 20 HCV movements per day. Permanent permission for the site was being sought and the restoration of the site conditions remains as it was with the original application.

The Committee received one deputation on this item. Owen Dimond spoke on behalf of the applicant in support of the application. He told Committee that the applicant (Veolia) had many sites across Hampshire and that this was the primary site for wood waste and processing. Noise levels had never been an issue due to the background noise from the M27 motorway being quite high, but there were 4 metre concrete walls and shutter doors proposed to keep processing noise to a minimum. The revised Condition 11 required further noise monitoring to assess compliance and if additional mitigation was required, then operations would cease until the noise levels were found to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

To consider a report from the Director of Culture, Communities and Business Services regarding an application for a Definitive Map Modification Order to record public footpaths at Ashe Hill Park Estate, Oakley, Basingstoke.

 The Committee considered a report from the Director of Culture, Communities and Business Services (Item 8 in the Minute Book) regarding an application for a Definitive Map Modification Order to record public footpaths at Ashe Hill Park Estate in Basingstoke.

The officer introduced the item and explained that despite there being many issues and concerns from local residents regarding the application, only matters of evidence could be considered in determining the application. A location plan was shown and the background and closures of the paths was explained to Committee. The plan showed the footpaths that had been closed in 2009, but the majority were free of permanent obstruction and had been since the 1960’s. Over 120 people had been written to as part of the consultation process and responses had been received from those who wanted the paths to remain open along with those who wished them to remain closed.

Conflicting evidence had been received regarding the path marked U-V. On the one hand ,the adjacent landowners had indicated that the paths had been blocked on a regular basis, but on the other hand the  user evidence did not bear this out. Therefore, the recommendation in respect of this path was that an Order should be made to record it so that the conflicting evidence could be tested further at public inquiry.

The Committee received four deputations on this item. Chris Burrowes, a local resident told Members how the route U-V was not as wide as had been stated in the report, and had been blocked to prevent ant-social behaviour. Only one person had claimed to use the route regularly yet no one had ever been witnessed using the path. Mr Burrowes felt there were other more suitable paths that could be used as alternatives.
            Dorothy Collard thanked the officer for the detailed report but also spoke in favour of path U-V remaining closed. She told Committee that blocking the path should be enough to deter people from using it, but had they known that a sign was required then they would have put one up. Many of the roads surrounding the paths were quiet culs-de-sac, and therefore it was not too much of an issue that there were no pavements. Ms Collard felt that the only route required was B1-Y-X-T-S, which had been upgraded.
            Beverley Fenn addressed Committee on behalf of her Mother, Ethel Wilcox, who had lived in her property since the 1960’s and sought to legally get path U-V blocked after an incident with dogs that had managed to get from the path into her garden. She and her husband had been advised to block the route for a day a year and had done so for 50 years. Those who tried to use the route soon after closure were told why the route had been blocked and Mrs Wilcox had not expected to have to provide further evidence regarding the closure. Anti social behaviour in the area had drastically decreased since the path had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.