Waste Issues and Options

The point should be added that as a result of the concentration of population access open space adjacent to the larger conurbation plays an important role in the health and wellbeing of local people and waste disposal in those areas should be avoided wherever possible.

Paras 109, 118 and 123 of the NPPF should be highlighted under Objective 3:
Para 109
“The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:
● protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils;
● recognising the wider benefits of ecosystem services;
● minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government’s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures;
● preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability; and
● remediating and mitigating despoiled, degraded, derelict, contaminated and unstable land, where appropriate.”
Para 118
“When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by applying the following principles:
● if significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused;
● proposed development on land within or outside a Site of Special Scientific Interest likely to have an adverse effect on a Site of Special Scientific Interest (either individually or in combination with other developments) should not normally be permitted. Where an adverse effect on the site’s notified special interest features is likely, an exception should only be made where the benefits of the development, at this site, clearly outweigh both the impacts that it is likely to have on the features of the site that make it of special scientific interest and any broader impacts on the national network of Sites of Special Scientific Interest;
● development proposals where the primary objective is to conserve or enhance biodiversity should be permitted;
● opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments should be encouraged;
● planning permission should be refused for development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats, including ancient woodland and the loss of aged or veteran trees found outside ancient woodland, unless the need for, and benefits of, the development in that location clearly outweigh the loss; and
● the following wildlife sites should be given the same protection as European sites: – potential Special Protection Areas and possible Special Areas of Conservation; – listed or proposed Ramsar sites;26 and – sites identified, or required, as compensatory measures for adverse effects on European sites, potential Special Protection Areas, possible Special Areas of Conservation, and listed or proposed Ramsar sites.”
Para 123
“Planning policies and decisions should aim to:
● avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts
● mitigate and reduce to a minimum other adverse impacts on health and quality of life arising from noise from new development, including through the use of conditions;
● recognise that development will often create some noise and existing businesses wanting to develop in continuance of their business should not have unreasonable restrictions put on them because of changes in nearby land uses since they were established; and
● identify and protect areas of tranquillity which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value for this reason.”

When considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. ‘Very special circumstances’ will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm is clearly outweighed by other considerations

The following factors should be taken in to account and sites judged on their merits NOT just on the basis of the environmental impact of road transport:
- Landscape and visual impact including impact on the Green Belt
- Impact on the historical environment
- Noise and air quality impact on vulnerable communities, particularly in areas which impact the most people e.g. near to large settlements
- Loss of agricultural land
- Flood risk and hydrology impact
- Ecological impact
- The recreation ad amenity value of the area given the proximity of centres of population.

With respect to sites in the Green Belt NPPF para 88 states that “When considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt” and that “very special circumstances” need to be demonstrated if the harm is to be outweighed by other considerations. The distance which aggregates have to travel by road cannot by itself be considered to outweigh the harm caused by quarry sites in the Green Belt.

Development Management policies should include the following:
• • dust;
• lighting;
• visual impact on the local and wider landscape;
• landscape character;
• archaeological and heritage features (
• traffic;
• risk of contamination to land;
• soil resources;
• impact on best and most versatile agricultural land;
• flood risk;
• internationally, nationally or locally designated wildlife sites, protected habitats and species, and ecological networks;
• impacts on nationally protected landscapes (nationally protected geological and geo-morphological sites and features;)
• site restoration and aftercare;

The requirement to summarise submissions above 100 words is unnecessary