Agenda item

The application before Members proposed the importation of approximately 650,000 tonnes of material over a 30 month period, and the undertaking of engineering operations to create a new landform connecting Ingrebourne Hill with Hornchurch Country Park. The final landform would be landscaped with trees and other vegetation to provide an area of recreation and nature conservation open to the public.

The proposed development would involve the importation of inert material to create a new landform at the site. The imported material would be composed of construction, demolition, and excavation waste gathered from sites in and around Greater London. The imported material would be deposited in a reception area, located at the southern end of the operational area, and would then be screened into a grade of material that was suitable for use as engineering soils. It was anticipated that up to 30% of the imported material would be unsuitable, and would be transferred back out of the site for use as recycled aggregate in the construction industry.

The site was located within the Green Belt, formed part of the Thames Chase Community Forest, and also formed part of a Borough level Site of Nature Conservation Importance.

Members noted that an extra sixteen letters of representation, objecting to the proposals, had been received.

In accordance with the public speaking arrangements the Committee was addressed by an objector with a response by the applicant’s representative.

The objector commented that the proposal had received many objections due to its proposed impact on the environment. The objector also commented that proposals to control lorry movements to and from the site would be hard to police in reality and would those movements would create dusty conditions throughout the area.

In response the applicant’s representative advised that the company had previously carried out similar schemes in other areas of the borough and were experienced in working with the Council in order to police and enforce any conditions that were included in the proposal. The representative also commented that the idea of the proposal was to improve the relationship between Ingrebourne Hill and the Hornchurch Country Park.

With its agreement Councillors Michael Deon Burton, David Durant and Jeffrey Tucker addressed the Committee.

Councillor Burton commented that the proposal would restore damaged land but that the land would only become damaged in the first place due to the proposed works. Councillor Burton also commented that lorries transporting the waste would be detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding area which also included a primary school.

Councillor Durant commented that the extra lorry movements would have a cumulative effect on the road network and

questioned why the Highways Authority had not raised any objections to the proposal.

Councillor Tucker commented that he agreed with what his colleagues had previously mentioned and felt that there were too many construction works currently taking place in the Rainham area. Councillor Tucker also commented that the proposed route for the lorries to take into the site was not suitable for vehicles of that size.

During the debate members raised concerns regarding the possible disturbance of wildlife on the site and whether the wildlife would return after the works had been completed. They expressed concern in respect of the visual impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the impact of lorry movements on a nearby school. Members further expressed concern that of the inert materials brought to the site following processing on the site a fair proportion would be taken from the site with the resulting increase of lorry movements.

Members also discussed the proposed Special Circumstances that had been put forward by the applicant as the proposal affected the openness of the Green Belt.

A large part of the debate centred on the increased traffic movements and the impact these would have on the local area. Members also questioned whether the inert material should be deposited in Rainham and not in the source area.

The report recommended that planning permission be approved, however following a motion to refuse planning permission which was carried by 7 votes to 0 with 4 abstentions it was RESOLVED that planning permission be refused on the grounds that

1.         Adverse impact on wildlife and adjacent SSSI through adverse noise, dust and other disturbance.

2.         Inappropriate development in the Green Belt, loss of openness during works and as result of works with no Very Special Circumstances outweighing the harm.

3.         Detriment to local residents through adverse visual impact during works, dust nuisance, reduced air quality and noise.

4.         Adverse impact on local road network causing inconvenience to road users and pedestrians, due to volume of lorry movements.

The vote for the resolution was carried by 7 votes to 0 with 4 abstentions

Councillors Misir, Hawthorn, Ower, Ganly, Whitney, Martin and Williamson voted for the resolution to refuse planning permission.

Councillors J. Crowder, P. Crowder, Best and Kelly abstained from voting.

Members noted that the proposal was still subject to a referral to the Mayor of London’s office for consideration.