Agenda and minutes

Northern Area Planning Committee - Thursday 5 December 2019 5.30 pm

Venue: Upper Guildhall, High Street, Andover, Hampshire

Contact: Sally Prior - 01264 368024  Email: sprior@testvalley.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

233.

Public Participation

Minutes:

In accordance with the Council’s scheme of Public Participation, the following spoke on the applications indicated:

 

Agenda Item No.

Page No.

Application

Speaker

7

10 - 89

18/00936/FULLN

Mr Williams

  (Hurstbourne Tarrant Parish Council)

Mr Foxley (Objector)

Mr Buckley (Supporter)

Mr Martin (Applicant)

8

90 – 129

Waste to Energy Harewood Incinerator

Mr Cooper (Barton Stacey Parish Council)

Mrs Dryden (Longparish Parish Council) and Mr Yelf (Keep Test Valley Beautiful) (Objectors)

 

Councillor North made representation on application 18/00936/FULLN.

 

Councillor Drew made representation on the Waste to Energy Harewood Incinerator item.

234.

Minutes

Minutes:

Resolved:

 

That the minutes of the meeting held on 3 October 2019 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

235.

18/00936/FULLN pdf icon PDF 647 KB

(OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE)

SITE: Bourne Park Airfield, Bourne Park Estate, Hurstbourne Tarrant, SP11 0DG,  HURSTBOURNE TARRANT

CASE OFFICER:  Miss Emma Jones

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

APPLICATION NO.

18/00936/FULLN

 

APPLICATION TYPE

FULL APPLICATION - NORTH

 

REGISTERED

06.04.2018

 

APPLICANT

Mr. J Martin and Mr. R Wood

 

SITE

Bourne Park Airfield, Bourne Park Estate, Hurstbourne Tarrant, SP11 0DG,  HURSTBOURNE TARRANT

 

PROPOSAL

Demolition of buildings associated with Bourne Park Airfield, and removal of existing airstrip and outdoor storage areas;

Erection of detached dwelling and outbuildings; with associated parking, turning, landscaping, access, private amenity space and ecological enhancements

 

AMENDMENTS

Additional information received:

  • 22.08.2019
  • 23.08.2019
  • 21.10.2019
  • 29.10.2019

 

CASE OFFICER

Miss Emma Jones

 

 

 

Members of the NAPC considered that the current activity taking place on the site is causing significant harm to the amenities of residents and as such the proposed development would comply with the requirements of policy LE10 of the Test Valley Borough Council Revised Local Plan 2016.  As such it was resolved to delegate to the Head of Planning and Building to grant PERMISSION subject to the submission of (i) An acceptable nitrate mitigation scheme; (ii) The undertaking of an Appropriate Assessment; (iii) The satisfactory conclusion of consultation with Natural England; (iv) The completion of a legal agreement to secure the nitrate mitigation measures;  and subject to conditions and notes as considered appropriate by the Head of Planning and Building following consultation with the applicant.

 

236.

Waste to Energy Harewood Incinerator pdf icon PDF 418 KB

(OFFICER RECOMMENDATION:  OBJECTION)

SITE: Land to the west of the Raymond Brown Waste Solutions, A303 Enviropark, Drayton Road, Barton Stacey, Andover, SO21 3QS

CASE OFFICER: Mrs Samantha Owen

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

SITE

Land to the west of the Raymond Brown Waste Solutions, A303 Enviropark, Drayton Road, Barton Stacey, Andover, SO21 3QS  BARTON STACEY

 

PROPOSAL

A Waste to Energy Facility comprising a twin line facility (i.e. two boiler and flue gas treatment lines) capable of processing a total of up to 500,000

tonnes of waste per annum (tpa), with a gross electrical generating capacity of up to 65 MW. The facility would generate hot gases that in turn are used to produce steam for use in a steam turbine to generate electricity.

 

CASE OFFICER

Mrs Samantha Owen

 

 

 

 

That the Northern Area Planning Committee (NAPC) OBJECTS to this submission on the basis of inadequate information which has been submitted for Public Consultation including that contained within the PEIR.  It is strongly recommended that further consultation with the public should occur.  The NAPC endorses this report together with the full responses of consultees as Test Valley Borough Council’s response to the Public Consultation process.

The following consultee comments should be noted in particular:

  • Air Quality - the PEIR is premature in presenting its work so far as it transpires that insufficient work has been undertaken to make any assessment in relation to the impact of the proposed development.
  • It is considered that with regard to Noise and Vibration the information supplied within the PEIR is deficient. 
  • Ground Contamination - the PEIR is premature in presenting its work so far as it transpires that insufficient work has been undertaken to make any assessment in relation to the impact of the proposed development.
  • In relation to Socio-Economic issues the PEIR does not address adequately the impacts of the incinerator on tourism which is influenced by a number of factors and whilst this is acknowledged it is considered that more work is needed on the impact of tourism in the local area.
  • With regard to Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment the PEIR is currently inadequate and significantly more work is required in order to fully assess the impact of the proposal on the surrounding landscape.

 

 

  • Alternatives to the proposed location should have been shared at this stage through the PEIR and in accordance with the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017.
  • The proposed development would reduce energy production at the solar farm by 0.55% and it is not clear if the proposed mitigation would address this shortfall.
  • It is advised within the PEIR that connection to the grid will be applied for separately by the Distribution Network Operator (DNO).

    Due to its location connection to the grid could have significant environmental impacts and this should be considered in conjunction with the scheme.  It would appear to not accord with Government guidance on generating stations and grid connection contained within the relevant National Policy Statement

·  Water Demand - the PEIR’s contention that the impact on water resources and flood risk during construction, operation and decommissioning would not be significant does not appear to be justified by supporting evidence.  It would appear that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 236.