Strategy Technical Document - New Forest National Park Authority

Transcription

Hampshire
Minerals & Waste
Development Framework
Strategy
Technical Document
Version 1.3
(5th May 2006)
May 2006
HMWDF Technical Document v1.3
3 of 226
Table of Contents
1. Background / Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 9
Background ................................................................................................................................................ 9
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 9
Minerals.......................................................................................................................................................... 9
Waste ........................................................................................................................................................... 10
Data and Data Quality ........................................................................................................................... 11
Information Sources ................................................................................................................................. 11
2. Characterisation of the Framework Area............................................................................................... 13
Geographical Description ...................................................................................................................... 13
3. Issues.......................................................................................................................................................... 14
Environment and Landscape ................................................................................................................. 14
Land use and Economic Growth ........................................................................................................... 16
Urban Economy ......................................................................................................................................... 16
Population Growth and Housing Demand............................................................................................ 17
Rural Economy and the Countryside ..................................................................................................... 18
Transport ................................................................................................................................................... 20
Climate Change & Energy...................................................................................................................... 22
Natural resources ..................................................................................................................................... 24
Health and Quality of Life ....................................................................................................................... 26
Culture and Recreation .......................................................................................................................... 29
4. Policy Context ........................................................................................................................................... 31
Relationship to other Plans and Programmes and Saved Policies ..................................................... 31
European Context ..................................................................................................................................... 31
National Context........................................................................................................................................ 34
Regional Context ....................................................................................................................................... 38
Local Context ............................................................................................................................................. 42
5. Minerals ..................................................................................................................................................... 47
Background .............................................................................................................................................. 47
Mineral Uses ................................................................................................................................................ 47
Hampshire’s Minerals – an overview ...................................................................................................... 47
Regional Context ....................................................................................................................................... 48
Aggregates............................................................................................................................................... 49
Land-won Aggregate Reserves .............................................................................................................. 49
Aggregate Supply ..................................................................................................................................... 51
Importation of Aggregates ...................................................................................................................... 55
Wharf Importation of Crushed Rock and Dredged Sand & Gravel ................................................. 55
Rail Importation of Crushed Rock ........................................................................................................... 60
Recycled and Secondary Aggregates ................................................................................................. 61
Cross border movements ......................................................................................................................... 62
Other Minerals .......................................................................................................................................... 63
Chalk ............................................................................................................................................................ 63
Clay .............................................................................................................................................................. 64
Oil & Gas...................................................................................................................................................... 65
May 2006
4 of 226
6. Waste ......................................................................................................................................................... 66
Background .............................................................................................................................................. 66
Composition of the Waste Stream ......................................................................................................... 67
Resource Streams....................................................................................................................................... 68
Waste Arisings........................................................................................................................................... 70
Municipal Waste Arisings .......................................................................................................................... 73
Commercial and Industrial Waste Arisings ............................................................................................ 79
Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste Arisings.................................................................. 85
Hazardous Waste Arisings ......................................................................................................................... 90
Fly-Tipping - Waste Arisings ....................................................................................................................... 93
Existing Waste Recycling & Disposal ...................................................................................................... 96
Municipal Waste Recycling...................................................................................................................... 96
Municipal Waste Disposal.......................................................................................................................100
Municipal Waste Transfer, Recycling and Treatment Site Locations..............................................102
Green Waste Composting Site Locations............................................................................................104
Commercial & Industrial Waste Recycling ..........................................................................................106
Commercial & Industrial Waste Treatment & Disposal......................................................................108
Commercial, Industrial & Municipal Waste (Non-Inert) Transfer & Recycling Site Locations .....112
Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste Recycling ...........................................................114
Construction, Demolition & Excavation Waste Treatment and Disposal.......................................116
Construction, Demolition and Excavation (Inert) Waste Transfer & Treatment Sites ...................118
Hazardous Waste Recycling & Treatment...........................................................................................119
Hazardous Waste Transfer and Treatment Site Locations.................................................................120
Existing Waste Disposal to Landfilll........................................................................................................ 121
Energy from Landfill .................................................................................................................................122
Non-hazardous and Inert Landfill Site Locations ................................................................................123
Waste Imports and Exports.................................................................................................................... 124
Waste Destination ....................................................................................................................................125
London’s Waste........................................................................................................................................126
Balance of Movements ..........................................................................................................................127
Municipal Waste Cross Boundary Movements ...................................................................................128
Commercial & Industrial Waste Cross Boundary Movements .........................................................129
Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste Cross Boundary Movements ..........................129
Hazardous Waste Cross Boundary Movements..................................................................................130
Waste Growth ........................................................................................................................................ 131
Municipal Waste Growth ........................................................................................................................131
Existing Waste Capacity........................................................................................................................ 134
Permitted Waste Capacity ....................................................................................................................135
Licensed Waste Capacity ......................................................................................................................136
Site Inputs...................................................................................................................................................137
Types of Waste Handling sites............................................................................................................... 138
Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRC’s) .................................................................................138
Material Recovery Facility (MRF)...........................................................................................................138
Waste Transfer Station (WTS) ..................................................................................................................138
Physical Treatment (Recycling) .............................................................................................................139
Metal Recycling (End-of-Life Vehicle (ELV) dismantler)....................................................................139
Metal Recycling (all metals) ..................................................................................................................139
Biological Treatment................................................................................................................................139
Incineration ...............................................................................................................................................140
Landfill and Landraising ..........................................................................................................................140
May 2006
5 of 226
Appendix 1.................................................................................................................................................. 143
Detailed Policy Context ........................................................................................................................ 145
Relevant Background National and European Plans and Programmes .......................................145
Regional Spatial Strategies.....................................................................................................................155
Community Strategies.............................................................................................................................169
Material Resources Strategy (MRS) Stakeholder Involvement.........................................................177
Hampshire Joint Municipal Waste Strategy ........................................................................................178
Hampshire, Portsmouth & Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan.....................................179
Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996-2011 ......................................................................................197
Appendix 2.................................................................................................................................................. 201
Glossary................................................................................................................................................... 203
Appendix 3.................................................................................................................................................. 209
References.............................................................................................................................................. 211
Appendix 4.................................................................................................................................................. 213
Consideration of Likely Significant Effect............................................................................................. 215
Appendix 5.................................................................................................................................................. 217
Initial Race and Equality Screening Assessment................................................................................. 219
May 2006
6 of 226
Table of Figures
Figure 1 - Geographic Areas.............................................................................................................................. 13
Figure 2 - Environmental and Landscape Constraints .................................................................................. 15
Figure 3 - Land use Issues .................................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 4 - Transport Issues.................................................................................................................................... 21
Figure 5 - Climate Change and Hydrogeological Issues.............................................................................. 23
Figure 6 - Health and Quality of Life Issues ...................................................................................................... 27
Figure 7 - Culture and Heritage Issues.............................................................................................................. 30
Figure 8 - Waste Hierarchy.................................................................................................................................. 34
Figure 9 - Map of Aggregate reserves in Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton ............................ 50
Figure 10 - Sand and Gravel Extraction sites................................................................................................... 52
Figure 11 - Aggregate Supply Profile (1994-2003) .......................................................................................... 53
Figure 12 - Wharves located in or near Southampton .................................................................................. 56
Figure 13 - Wharves located in or near Portsmouth....................................................................................... 56
Figure 14 - Licensed Dredging Areas offshore Hampshire............................................................................ 57
Figure 15 - Historic Pattern of Marine Aggregate Extraction (1993-2004).................................................. 58
Figure 16 - Destination of Marine Dredged Aggregate extracted from the South Coast (2004) ......... 58
Figure 17 - Rail Depots in Hampshire ................................................................................................................ 60
Figure 18 - Aggregates Recycling Sites............................................................................................................ 61
Figure 19 - Chalk extraction sites....................................................................................................................... 63
Figure 20 - Clay extraction sites ......................................................................................................................... 64
Figure 21 - Oil and Gas extraction sites............................................................................................................ 65
Figure 22 - Composition of Household Waste ................................................................................................. 67
Figure 23 - Municipal Waste Arisings by District Council and City Council (in 2004-05) .......................... 74
Figure 24 - District Waste Arisings (1997-2005) ................................................................................................. 75
Figure 25 - Household Waste Recycling Centre Waste Deposits (1997-2005)........................................... 76
Figure 26 - Fly-tipping Incidents by Borough and District (2004-05)............................................................. 93
Figure 27 - Fly-tipping incidents by Waste Type - Districts and Boroughs (2004-05) ................................. 94
Figure 28 - Fly-tipping Incidents by Waste Type - Cities (2004-05) ............................................................... 94
Figure 29 - Fly-tipping Incidents by method - Districts and Boroughs (2004-05)........................................ 95
Figure 30 - Waste Treatment method by Project Integra (April 2003-Oct 2005)....................................... 99
Figure 31 - Municipal Waste Collected and Disposed (1997-2005) ..........................................................100
Figure 32 - Municipal Waste Transfer, Recycling and Incineration Sites ..................................................102
Figure 33 - Composting Sites ............................................................................................................................104
Figure 34 - Composting Capacity with Planning Permission (2006-2025) ................................................105
Figure 35 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Management in England and Wales (1998/99) ..........106
Figure 36 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Management in England and Wales (2002/03) ..........106
Figure 37 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Management in Hampshire (2002/03) ..........................107
Figure 38 - Waste Transfer and Recycling Sites (Non-inert) ........................................................................112
Figure 39 - Projected CD&E Recycling Capacity versus time limited consents (2005-2020)................115
Figure 40 - Waste Transfer and Recycling Sites (Inert) .................................................................................118
Figure 41 - Hazardous Waste Treatment and Transfer Sites ........................................................................120
Figure 42 - Non-hazardous landfill void depletion .......................................................................................122
Figure 43 - Non-hazardous and Inert Landfill Sites........................................................................................123
Figure 44 - Muncipal Waste Arisings (1997 to 2005) .....................................................................................131
Figure 45 - Municipal Waste Growth (2001-2004).........................................................................................132
Figure 46 - Municipal Waste Growth in tonnes (2005-2010) .......................................................................132
Figure 47 - Projected waste growth until 2020 ..............................................................................................133
Unless otherwise stated, all figures representing Hampshire county are reproduced from the
Ordnance Survey map with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s Stationary Office.
© Crown Copyright 2006HCC 100019180
For indication of mineral reserves.
C06/055-CSL British Geological Survey. ©NERC. All rights reserved.
May 2006
7 of 226
Index of Tables
Table 1 - Employment and Unemployment Rates (2003-04) ....................................................................... 16
Table 2 - High-tech manufacturing employment (2004) .............................................................................. 16
Table 3 - Knowledge-based services employment (2004) ........................................................................... 16
Table 4 - Persons per square kilometre............................................................................................................. 17
Table 5 - Indices of Deprivation (2005)............................................................................................................. 26
Table 6 - Rank of Quality of Life (2005)............................................................................................................. 28
Table 7 - Listed Buildings (2003) ......................................................................................................................... 29
Table 8 - Land-won Aggregate Reserves (2004) ............................................................................................ 49
Table 9 - Aggregate Supply by district (2003)................................................................................................. 51
Table 10 - Aggregate Supply by Geographic area (2003) .......................................................................... 51
Table 11 - Aggregate Supply (1995-2004) ....................................................................................................... 53
Table 12 - Hampshire's average contribution towards regional totals....................................................... 54
Table 13 - Wharf Summary.................................................................................................................................. 55
Table 14 - Aggregate Throughput History from Wharves (2001-03) ............................................................ 59
Table 15 - Crushed Rock Throughput History (2001-03) ................................................................................. 59
Table 16 - Maximum Estimated Dredged Aggregate Landing Capacity (in 2004)................................. 59
Table 17 - UK Waste Composition Table (2002-03)......................................................................................... 67
Table 18 - Resource Stream Arisings 2004 and 2010 ...................................................................................... 69
Table 19 - Waste Deposits in Hampshire (2002-2003)..................................................................................... 70
Table 20 - Waste Arisings (and EA Waste Returns) in Hampshire (2002-03) ............................................... 71
Table 21 - Waste Arisings In Hampshire's Geographic areas........................................................................ 72
Table 22 - Municipal Waste Arisings History in the South East Region (1997-2005) ................................... 73
Table 23 - Municipal Waste Growth (1997-2005)............................................................................................ 74
Table 24 - Municipal Waste Arisings in Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton (2001-02) ............... 78
Table 25 - Biodegradable Municipal Waste Allowances (2010-2013-2020) .............................................. 78
Table 26 - Industrial Waste Returns (1998/99).................................................................................................. 80
Table 27 - Commercial Waste Returns (1998/99) ........................................................................................... 80
Table 28 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Returns (1998/99).................................................................. 80
Table 29 - Commercial and Industrial Waste produced in Hampshire (2000) .......................................... 81
Table 30 - Industrial Waste Type (2002-03)....................................................................................................... 82
Table 31 - Commercial Waste Type (2002-03) ................................................................................................ 82
Table 32 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Type (2002-03)....................................................................... 82
Table 33 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Returns (in 2002-03) .............................................................. 83
Table 34 - Waste Managed by Facility Type in 2002-03 (in tonnes) ............................................................ 83
Table 35 - C&I Waste Handling Capacity versus population (in 2002-03) ................................................. 84
Table 36 - Regional estimates for use and disposal of CD&E Waste in England (in 2003)...................... 85
Table 37 - Estimations of CD&E Waste Arisings and Waste Returns in Hampshire .................................... 86
Table 38 - Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste Returns (in 2002-03).................................... 87
Table 39 - CD&E Waste Handling Capacity versus population (in 2002-03) ............................................. 88
Table 40 - Composition of Construction, Demolition & Excavation Waste ............................................... 89
Table 41 - Hazardous Waste Returns in Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton (2002-03) .............. 90
Table 42 - Hazardous Waste Movements (2003) ............................................................................................ 90
Table 43 - Origin of Hazardous Waste Arisings ................................................................................................ 91
Table 44 - District and City Council Waste Returns of Hazardous Waste (in 2002-03) ............................. 91
Table 45 - Municipal Waste Recycling Tonnages (2003-05) ......................................................................... 96
Table 46 - Household Waste Materials Collected and Recycling Rate ..................................................... 97
Table 47 - Waste Recycled at Household Waste Recycling Centres (2004-05) ....................................... 97
Table 48 - Total Household Waste handled and recycled by WCA (1997-2005) ..................................... 98
Table 49 - Total Household Waste handled and recycled by HWRC’s (2000-2005) ................................ 98
Table 50 - Total Household Waste handled and recycled by Project Integra (2000-2005).................... 98
Table 51 - Incinerator Waste Capacity ..........................................................................................................101
Table 52 - Municipal Residual Waste Disposal Method (2002-04) .............................................................101
Table 53 - Household Waste Treatment (2004-05)........................................................................................101
Table 54 - Industrial Waste Treatment and Disposal (1998-99)...................................................................108
Table 55 - Commercial Waste Treatment and Disposal (1998-99) ............................................................108
Table 56 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Treatment and Disposal (1998-99)...................................108
Table 57 - Industrial Waste Fate (2002-03) .....................................................................................................109
Table 58 - Commercial Waste Fate (2002-03)...............................................................................................109
Table 59 - Commercial & Industrial Waste Fate (2002-03)..........................................................................109
Table 60 - C&I Waste disposed to landfill by receiving District and City (2002-03) ................................110
May 2006
8 of 226
Table 61 - C&I Waste Treatment and Disposal by Facility and District (2002-03)....................................111
Table 62 - Inert waste disposed to landfill (2002-03) ....................................................................................116
Table 63 - CD&E Waste Treatment and Disposal by Facility and District (2002-03)................................117
Table 64 - Recycling & Treatment of Hazardous Waste (2003)..................................................................119
Table 65 - Destination of Landfill Waste in Hampshire (2002-03) ...............................................................121
Table 66 - Landfill Gas & Energy Generation Sites ......................................................................................122
Table 67 - Origin of Waste Imports into Hampshire (2003-04).....................................................................124
Table 68 – Source Facility of Uncodeable Waste Imports to Hampshire (2003-04)................................124
Table 69 - Source Facility of Waste Imports to Hampshire (2003-2004) ....................................................125
Table 70 - Destination of Waste Exports from Hampshire (2003-04) ..........................................................125
Table 71 - Destination Facility of Waste Exports from Hampshire (2003-04).............................................126
Table 72 - Cross border movement summary – by County or Region (2003-04) ....................................127
Table 73 - Cross border movement summary – by Facility (2003-04) .......................................................127
Table 74 - Municipal Waste Exported (2003-04) ...........................................................................................128
Table 75 - Cross border movements of recyclables (2003-04)...................................................................128
Table 76 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Cross Boundary Movement (2003-04) ............................129
Table 77 - Construction, Demolition & Excavation Waste Cross Boundary Movement (2003-04).......129
Table 78 - Historic Waste Returns of Hazardous Waste in Hampshire (1999-2003).................................130
Table 79 - Hazardous Waste Imports and Exports (2003) ............................................................................130
Table 80 - Household and HWRC Waste Arising Growth (1998-2005).......................................................131
Table 81 - Municipal Growth Rate (1998-2005).............................................................................................131
Table 82 - Projected Waste Arisings in 2010, 2015 and 2020 ......................................................................133
Table 83 – Projected Waste Growth (from Regional Waste Strategy) .....................................................134
Table 84 - Summary of Permitted Waste Capacity .....................................................................................135
Table 85 - Summary of Licensed Waste Capacity .......................................................................................136
Table 86 - Summary of Waste Inputs (2003-04) .............................................................................................137
May 2006
9 of 226
1. Background / Executive Summary
Background
This Technical Document has been prepared to provide an evidence base in support of
the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework (HMWDF). The Framework
will cover all technical aspects of minerals and waste planning in Hampshire, Portsmouth
and Southampton and will replace the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals
and Waste Local Plan adopted in 1998. The HMWDF’s ‘core’ planning strategy will be
adopted in July 2007 and covers the period to 2020. References to Hampshire within this
document mean the areas covered by Hampshire County Council, Portsmouth City
Council and Southampton City Council and the New Forest National Park Authority.
The Framework encompasses a number of development plan documents including:
• The Strategy
• Hampshire Minerals Plan
• Hampshire Waste Management Plan
This document provides background for the Framework on relevant plans, policies and
programmes on mineral and waste production and usage.
Executive Summary
This document highlights a number of issues that need to be addressed within the
Framework. Theses include;
Minerals
•
Land-won sand and gravel - There is a shortage of permitted sites and a landbank
of less than 5 years.
•
Hampshire’s supply of secondary and recycled aggregate is approximately 50% of
the emerging Regional target.
•
Marine Dredged sand and gravel – There is potential for expansion of throughput
particularly at Southampton’s wharves.
•
Safeguarding – There is a need to review and optimise the protection of current
wharf and mineral & waste capacity to protect it from inappropriate
development.
•
Marine imported crushed rock – there is only one site suitable for importing large
amounts of crushed rock and contingency arrangements may be required should
this stop.
May 2006
10 of 226
Waste
•
Waste Transfer and recycling – There is a lack of waste management facilities in
Southampton, particularly for handling commercial and industrial wastes.
•
There is a need to increase waste handling capacities in the districts of
Southampton, Eastleigh, Havant, Rushmoor, Winchester, Fareham, Gosport and
East Hampshire.
•
There is a disparity in the provision of facilities handling commercial and industrial
waste.
•
Waste Treatment – There is a need for treatment or disposal facilities for the
residues from incineration.
•
Landfill – Only 3 years worth of non-hazardous landfill capacity exists (at current
rates of tipping).
•
Waste Exports – Hampshire is currently a net exporter of waste, in particular
hazardous wastes and commercial and industrial wastes indicating a lack of
competitive commercial & industrial treatment and disposal capacity in
Hampshire.
•
Hampshire is a net importer of waste from Dorset.
•
Hampshire has insufficient short-term hazardous waste transfer and hazardous
landfill capacity. There are opportunities to recover energy from existing
hazardous/clinical incineration.
•
Recycling and composting at HWRC’s has plateaued between 2001-04 – is there a
‘theoretical’ limit of efficiency?
•
There are insufficient ‘bring’ sites for the recycling of municipal waste in
Southampton and Portsmouth.
•
Recycling performance of district/city councils varies from 16% (Southampton) to
32% (East Hampshire)
•
CD&E recycling in the South East is less than the national average because a
greater proportion is landfilled or used in landfill engineering.
•
Targets in the National Waste Strategy and Regional Planning Guidance 9 (also
referred to as the South East Plan) to be met or exceeded.
•
Site selection methodology must be compatible with Planning Policy Statement 10.
•
Need to support regional transport and economic hubs at Basingstoke,
Southampton and Portsmouth.
•
Need to encourage short-sea freight movements.
•
Fly-tipping is a concern of the Hampshire community.
May 2006
11 of 226
Data and Data Quality
The production of this document has uncovered areas where data is either limited,
restricted or unavailable which has resulted in gaps in the data. Some of these data gaps
are identified below:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Latest Annual Monitoring Survey of sales from sand and gravel quarries.
Up to date figures on all waste sites – most complete data is that for the year 200203
Waste inputs to licensed waste sites e.g. only have 50% of Transfer sites, 20% of
metal recycling sites
Waste inputs to sites exempt from waste management license
Up-to-date Landfill void capacity
Total permitted and theoretical operating capacity at all waste sites
Construction, Demolition & Excavation waste re-use and recycling on unregulated
sites.
Planning Permission End dates for all sites
Information Sources
The data within this document is drawn from a number of national, regional and local
sources. The most prevalent data sources include:
•
The Environment Agency (EA) issues waste management licenses and also records
waste returns on an annual basis. It also produces a Strategic Waste
Management Assessment, the last assessment was published in the year 20001. The
latest Strategic Waste Management Information for 2002-2003 or calendar year
2003, collating data from a number of sources was published in 20062. Waste
Returns are not the same as waste arisings as they record the waste deposited at
sites that hold a waste management license. Hence some waste streams contain
significant amounts of waste that are managed on sites that are exempt from
waste management licenses. The Environment Agency although a national body
is also split into regional areas. Hampshire is covered by three regions: South, South
West and Thames.
•
The South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) has been responsible for
regional planning and transport since 2001 for the counties of Berkshire,
Buckinghamshire, East Sussex, West Sussex, Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Kent, Medway,
Milton Keynes, Oxfordshire and Surrey. It publishes information about the region
and influences government policies such as those issued by the Office of the
Deputy Prime Minister.
•
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) is made up of a number of groups
and amongst other roles issues Planning Policy Statements (PPS) that set out the
Government’s national policies on different aspects of land-use planning in
England. One such document is PPS10: Planning for sustainable Waste
Management.
Environment Agency - Strategic Waste Management Assessment 2000: South East
Environment Agency – Strategic Waste Management Information 2002-2003 http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/subjects/waste/1031954/315439/923299/?version=1&lang=_e - accessed April 2006
1
2
May 2006
12 of 226
•
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) provides national
guidance and statistical information based upon local authority data, an example
being the 2004 Municipal Waste Management Survey.
•
The Government Office of the South East (GOSE) advises and act for Government
Ministers on important planning issues affecting the region on behalf of the Deputy
Prime Minister and First Secretary of State on land use and planning matters in the
South East.
•
Project Integra is a partnership of all the district and city councils in Hampshire that
are responsible for planning the collection and disposal of household waste. It
supplies municipal waste data from the network of waste transfer and recovery
facilities located across the county to the Waste Management section at
Hampshire County Council.
May 2006
13 of 226
2. Characterisation of the Framework Area
Geographical Description
The Spatial elements of the Strategy will be presented using the following four geographic
areas (see Figure 1).
•
•
•
•
Hampshire’s part of the Western Corridor (as per Hampshire’s part of the subregion proposed in the South East Plan) and referred to as North East Hampshire;
Forest (mainly rural with several small market towns);
Downland (mainly rural with several small market towns);
South Hampshire (as per Hampshire’s part of the sub-region proposed in the South
East Plan).
There are four areas within this spatial template that may have special requirements by
virtue of their designation or density of population and status as Waste Disposal
Authorities. These areas are:
•
•
•
•
the New Forest National Park
the proposed South Downs National Park
Portsmouth City
Southampton City
Figure 1 - Geographic Areas
May 2006
14 of 226
3. Issues
Environment and Landscape
The geographical area covered by the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development
Framework is rich in biodiversity, flora and fauna.
Hampshire has a large number of sites designated for their importance for nature
conservation and scientific interest. These include:
Internationally Designated Sites, collectively referred to as Natura 2000 Sites:
•
Nine Special Protection Areas (SPA’s) including Portsmouth Harbour, Solent and
Southampton Water, Avon Valley, New Forest, Chichester and Langstone
Harbours, Porston Down, Salisbury Plain, Thames Basin Heath and Wealden Heaths
Phase 23.
•
12 Special Areas of Conservation (SAC’s) including Butser Hill, Emer Bog, River
Itchen, Shoreheath Common and Woolmer Forest3.
•
Five Ramsar sites (wetlands of International importance) 3.
Nationally Designated Sites:
•
112 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in Hampshire (including three SSSIs in
Portsmouth and four SSSIs in Southampton).
Regionally/Locally Designated Sites:
•
3,640 Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) in Hampshire (including
eight SINCs in Portsmouth and 36 SINCs in Southampton4).
•
268 Local Nature Reserves (LNRs).
Nearly a third of Hampshire is designated as National Park (New Forest National Park) or is
being considered for National Park status (the proposed South Downs National Park) or is
an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (East Hampshire, North Wessex Downs, Chichester
harbour and Cranbourne Chase & West Wiltshire Downs).
Hampshire’s relatively high number of designated sites (such as those listed above) can
restrict potential sites for minerals and waste development. Such restrictions are generally
known as ‘constraints’ and need to be taken account of when identifying sites. These
Landscape and Environmental constraints are shown below in Figure 2.
English Nature Annual Report: April 2004 – March 2005. Facts & Figures (http://www.englishnature.org.uk/about/annual_report/facts.htm)
4 Southampton Revised Deposit Local Plan Review (February 2003)
3
May 2006
15 of 226
Figure 2 - Environmental and Landscape Constraints
May 2006
16 of 226
Land use and Economic Growth
Urban Economy
Hampshire’s economy is worth £17.4 billion a year and is currently the third largest shire
county economy in England5. So that Hampshire can fulfil its potential in the emerging
global economy, it is crucial that there is an adequate supply of land for industrial and
business development.
Table 1 below shows that Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton all have
employment rates higher than the national average.
Working age
Southampton
Portsmouth
Hampshire
South East
Great Britain
Employment rate %
77.3
77.7
81.1
78.9
74.3
Unemployment rate %
3.9
4.9
3.1
3.9
5
Source: NOMIS, Local Areas Labour Force Survey, March 2003-February 2004
Table 1 - Employment and Unemployment Rates (2003-04)
Hampshire has a large number of employees based in High-tech manufacturing and
industries (aerospace, IT and pharmaceuticals) with over a quarter of the regional
total. (see Table 2 below).
Year 2003
Southampton
Portsmouth
Hampshire
South East
Great Britain
High tech manufacturing
Number of employees
700
1,800
12,300
46,600
261,700
% of all employees
0.63
1.85
2.36
1.29
1.02
Source: NOMIS, Annual Business Inquiry, 2004, the numbers are round to the nearest 100
Table 2 - High-tech manufacturing employment (2004)
Hampshire generally and Southampton in particular, have a high number of
employees in knowledge-based services (telecommunications etc). (see Table 3
below) .
Year 2003
Southampton
Portsmouth
Hampshire
South East
Great Britain
Knowledge-based services
Number of employees
16,900
9,900
67,700
518,500
3,117,300
% of all employees
15.18
10.19
13.01
14.37
12.20
Source: NOMIS, Annual Business Inquiry, 2004, the number s are round to the nearest 100
Table 3 - Knowledge-based services employment (2004)
5
The Economic Development Office – Service Plan 2005/6 (HCC, July 2005)
May 2006
17 of 226
Population Growth and Housing Demand
Hampshire’s population is growing rapidly. Between 1991 and 2001 there was a net
migration into Hampshire of around 35,9006. The population is expected to increase a
further 8% between 2001 and 2026. Portsmouth and Southampton experienced
considerably lower levels of net migration over the same period, with Portsmouth
experiencing a negative change (-2,700 and 7,600 respectively). The populations of
these cities are also expected to increase over the period to 2026 (Portsmouth by 7%
and Southampton by 2.6%)7. The current estimated population of Hampshire is
approximately 1.25 million (1.6m including the cities of Portsmouth and Southampton).
Population increases, people living longer and reducing household sizes (due to
people marrying and having children later, increasing divorce rates and people
remaining single for longer) have led to high level demands for housing. House prices
in the county more than doubled between 1998 and 2004 and as such there is a need
for affordable housing to be included in future stock.
In April 2004, there were a number of outstanding residential housing commitments
across Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton including sites with planning
permission or allocated in local plans. In particular there were three sites with over 1000
dwellings still outstanding at Andover Major Development Area (in Test Valley), Queen
Elizabeth II Barracks (near Fleet) and the west of Waterlooville (on the border between
Winchester and Havant). Smaller sites of less than 1000 dwellings are predominately
along the M27 corridor between Southampton and Portsmouth, around Basingstoke
town and in central Hart7. It is not yet known how much housing growth will be
expected in Hampshire.
An increase in housing coupled with economic growth will result in a number of
significant impacts including pressures on transport systems, a loss of tranquillity caused
by greater densities of development as well as an increase in waste production and
mineral demand. Population density is a particular issue for Portsmouth and
Southampton, with only Gosport Borough experiencing remotely similar issues (see
Table 4 below).
Potential waste management sites will be competing against use of the land for
housing or employment etc. This competition is likely to be worst in the large urban
areas in southern and northern Hampshire (including the Western Corridor).
Persons per sq. km.
Basingstoke & Deane
241
East Hampshire
213
Eastleigh
1454
Fareham
1466
Gosport
3043
Hart
391
Havant
2103
New Forest
226
Rushmoor
2320
Test Valley
176
Winchester
163
Portsmouth
4671
Southampton
4438
Hampshire
338
South East Region
421
England
380
Source: Office for National Statistics, Population from the year 2002 Mid-year Estimate
Table 4 - Persons per square kilometre
6
7
A Profile of Hampshire (Hampshire County Council, 2004)
A Profile of Hampshire (Hampshire County Council, May 2005)
May 2006
18 of 226
Rural Economy and the Countryside
The countryside is not only an important natural resource in terms of quality of life, but
also the basis of the rural economy. Farming and the sustainable management of land
should be supported and in some cases this may involve rural diversification. Planning
Policy Statement 10 (PPS10)8 identifies the use of redundant agricultural and forestry
buildings and their curtilages for sustainable waste management. However, the
necessary infrastructure must be available to support this use i.e. good access to the
strategic transport network etc. Hampshire has 4,204 agricultural holdings (covering
4,249 hectares) and Southampton which also has 29 agricultural holdings (covering 29
hectares). Portsmouth contains no agricultural holdings9.
The countryside around the towns and cities withinHampshire has a mixture of uses
which change rapidly under competing pressure for land availability. The choice and
extent of development within this ‘rural urban fringe’ is key to the quality of life of the
people who live there and the adjoining towns and cities. It is important that the
vitality of small rural towns is not compromised by inappropriate development.
The rural nature of the central part of Hampshire (the Downland area) is maintained
through protected open spaces such as the South West Hampshire Green Belt and
regional gaps (Meon Gap and Valley of the River Blackwater), which separate areas
of major urban development (see Figure 3).
Rural Hampshire is also home to a number of Market Towns, which form an integral part
of the English landscape and are also service centres for the surrounding areas. The
term ‘Market Town’ applies to the following towns in Hampshire: Alton, Petersfield,
Ringwood, Andover, Winchester, Hythe, Romsey and Lymington. However, ‘Market
Town’ can apply to small towns (less than 20,000 population) where there is a historical
centre providing services. Therefore, Alresford, Fordingbridge and Stockbridge are also
considered as Market Towns.
New patterns of living, shopping, transport and business all threaten the economic
vitality of Market Towns.
8
9
Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (ODPM, July 2005)
May 2006
19 of 226
Figure 3 - Land use Issues
May 2006
20 of 226
Transport
Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton have excellent road, rail, air and sea
transport links (see Figure 4). The M3 and M27 motorways connect the north to south,
east to west respectively. Although the area includes a strategic network of
Motorways and trunk roads there are areas that are prone to congestion within and
outside the area (such as the bottleneck on the A3 at Hindhead) that impact upon the
network, which is worsened by an inadequate public transport network. This can have
economic impacts as it leads to delays in deliveries and greater haulage costs.
Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton are connected by a rail network, which is
well used by passengers and freight. The Port of Portsmouth has a lack of rail access.
The Port of Southampton is the fifth largest port in the UK and the city is also home to
the second largest container terminal in the UK. The container terminal has 1,000 lorry
movements a day. 60% of exports arrive at the container terminal by road, 32% by rail
and 8% by sea.
Southampton International Airport is located just outside the city’s boundary in
Eastleigh. Total annual patronage exceeds 780,000 passengers. The airport has
excellent rail and road links. However, the airport does have its impacts and some
areas experience aircraft noise10. Bournemouth Airport is located 48kms from
Southampton and serves 500,000 passengers per year. Large areas around the airports
and around other airfields in the area have ‘safeguarding’ zones around them (see
Figure 4). These are relevant to minerals and waste sites since such sites often attract
large numbers of birds (either for food or for roosting) which can result in accidents due
to bird strikes (i.e. collision with large and flocking birds). The greatest threats come
from wetland restoration and wet-working of mineral sites and un-protected landfill
and landraise sites, which receive food waste. If a site is proposed within 13 kilometres
of an aerodrome or airport it may pose a hazard and consultation with the airport is
required11.
Southampton Local Transport Plan 2001/2 to 2005/6
Safeguarding of Aerodromes – Advice Note 5: Potential Bird Hazards from Landfill Sites (Civil Aviation
Authority, Airport Operators Association and General Aviation Awareness Council, January 2003).
10
11
May 2006
21 of 226
Figure 4 - Transport Issues
May 2006
22 of 226
Climate Change & Energy
Climate change is a global issue that has major implications for the area. Hampshire,
Portsmouth and Southampton have an important part to play in the reduction of
greenhouse gases and adapting to the consequences of climate change such as
flooding and water resources (see Figure 5).
Household waste (which contributes over 90% of municipal waste) is mostly
biodegradable. Landfilling of biodegradable waste is significant since one tonne, such
as paper, card, textiles, kitchen and garden waste, produces between 200 and 400m3
of landfill gas (methane and carbon dioxide). In 2001, the UK’s landfill sites released
25% of the UK’s methane emissions (or 2% of the world's total greenhouse gas
emissions)12. Methane gas is a significant ‘greenhouse’ gas and contributes to global
warming and therefore it’s prevention or capture is paramount in reducing climate
change.
However, waste management can also be used to create energy. At present
Hampshire has six landfill sites where the gas is being recovery to generate energy and
is a source of renewable energy. Hampshire also has three energy from waste
incinerators: Chineham, Marchwood and Portsmouth. The capcity of the three sites
combined is 420,000 tonnes of waste per annum which produces 36 Megawatts per
annum.
Over 70% of Hampshire’s water supply is from groundwater, with the rest from
groundwater-fed rivers. Nationally only one third of water consumed is from
groundwater13. Compared to other parts of the South East, Hampshire’s water
resources are relatively plentiful. However, climate change and an increase in water
consumption is likely to threaten these resources. Sustainable abstraction and
safeguarding of supplies are just some of the actions being implemented to protect
these resources.
Decreasing household sizes and changing lifestyles are resulting in a increase in the
current average daily water consumption (per head) from 160 litres in 2005 to a
predicted 225 litres by 202513. Hampshire experienced its driest August and September
on record in 2003, and its hottest temperatures ever in August 2003. This followed the
wettest November on record in 2002 and the wettest winter on record in 2000/2001
when 100 villages and 1,000 properties were flooded13.
Flooding is set to be an increasing issue due to sea level rises and freak periods of
heavy rain fall. This is likely to have an impact on the heavily populated areas located
along the coast, which also play an important business and commerce role. 39,065
properties in Hampshire lie within floodplain and large areas of the coastline are prone
to tidal flooding. Fluvial flooding affects large areas along the Test, Itchen, Avon,
Meon and Hamble valleys14. Development which may increase the risk of people and
property in terms of flooding and erosion should be resisted.
With increased sea level rises, freak weather occurrences and global temperature
increases expected due to climate change, decisions made on the location of future
waste facilities and minerals development must take into account areas identified by
the Environment Agency that are at risk of flooding (fluvial as well as coastal) or sites
that may affect water supplies.
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) - Limits Set On The Landfilling Of Waste
http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2005/050203a.htm - accessed 23 January 2006
13 A Profile of Hampshire (HCC, May 2005)
14 Integrated Sustainability Appraisal of the Issues and Options for the Core Strategy – Scoping Report
12
May 2006
23 of 226
Figure 5 - Climate Change and Hydrogeological Issues
May 2006
24 of 226
Natural resources
Hampshire is likely to be required by the South East England Regional Assembly to meet
a land-won sand and gravel apportionment to plan for the supply of 2.63 million tonnes
per year to contribute towards the needs of the region. Hampshire may also be
required to help meet the needs of Greater London in terms of some provision for
landfill of residual wastes.
For sand and gravel, Regional Planning Guidance for the South East (RPG9)15 requires
sufficient land-won reserves to be identified to sustain a supply for 7 years at the rate of
apportionment. This is known as the landbank. At the beginning of 2004, Hampshire’s
landbank was sufficient for 4.5 years of supply, indicating a potential shortfall in the
supply of sand and gravel in future years if new planning permissions are not
forthcoming.
Hampshire’s most abundant mineral resources are sands, gravels, chalk and clay.
Sand and gravel are supplied from land-won and marine dredged sources.
Land-won sand and gravels are supplied from across the area, Hampshire’s deposits
are shown below in Figure 9 below. Land-won sands and gravels are primarily located
along the south coast and the Avon Valley, north of Ringwood with some
concentration of gravels to the north of the county in the Bramshill area and sands to
the east around Bordon.
Marine dredged sand and gravels are extracted from a number of licensed areas off
the south coast and are supplied through nine active wharves in Hampshire,
predominantly located in Portsmouth and Southampton. There are two inactive
wharves in the area (see Table 13).
All of the current marine dredged reserves have an estimated life of around 20 years at
current extraction rates, although some areas would need to be licensed.
Crushed rock is imported into the county through rail depots at Botley, Eastleigh and
Fareham, and is also landed by bulk carrier ship at Southampton Docks.
The supply of primary aggregates reduced significantly between 1994 and 2003 from
0.559 to 0.452 million tonnes. The sales of land-won sand and gravels fell from 0.275
million tonnes to 0.18. However, marine dredged sand and gravel landings also
reduced over the time period from 0.174 million tonnes, but increased in 2002 and 2003
to reach 0.176 million tonnes.
15 Proposed Changes to Regional Planning Guidance for the South east (RPG9) – Waste and Minerals
(Government Office for the South East, August 2005)
May 2006
25 of 226
Other significant minerals supplied in the Framework area include chalk, clay, oil and
gas.
Chalk extraction is permitted at 11 sites but excavation has only occurred at a few sites
in recent years. Chalk is extracted for use as an aggregate and limited specialist
industrial use. However, it is estimated that only 20,000 tonnes were extracted in 2003.
There are currently three sites with planning permission for clay extraction, two of which
(Michelmersh and Selborne) are linked to craft brickworks.
Oil and gas is extracted from three productive oil fields at Humbly Grove (near Alton),
Horndean and Stockbridge. Oil is transferred via a pipeline to a rail terminal at Alton
and then on to the Fawley refinery by rail. An active oil exploration borehole is
temporarily situated at Matterley Farm, which is within the boundary of the proposed
South Downs National Park. It is due to be restored to agriculture during 2006/07.
May 2006
26 of 226
Health and Quality of Life
Data for 2001 and 2002 for mortality for all ages from all causes shows that Gosport,
Portsmouth, Rushmoor and Southampton are among the county’s district and city
councils that have a higher mortality rate than England’s average. The New Forest
and Hart have the lowest mortality rates in the county, which were significantly lower
than the national average. Gosport and Rushmoor have the highest number of
mortalities caused by cancer and circularity disease (among those less than 75 years
old)16.
As a region, the South East is the least deprived in England and Hampshire & the Isle of
Wight is one of the least deprived areas in England. Only Havant District appears in the
upper half of the list of most deprived districts in England, with Gosport just outside.
Hart is the least deprived of all districts in England (354). Eight more of Hampshire’s
district councils are shown to reside in the lowest quartile (least deprived) deprived
districts. Southampton and Portsmouth perform poorly compared to Hampshire’s
districts as Table 5 below indicates.17 (see Figure 6).
Havant
Gosport
New Forest
Rushmoor
Eastleigh
Basingstoke & Deane
Test Valley
East Hampshire
Fareham
Winchester
Hart
Portsmouth
Southampton
Hampshire & the Isle of Wight
South East
Indices of Deprivation
137
189
286
287
311
313
317
328
330
338
354
119
89
41 (of 47)
9 (of 9)
Source: A Profile of Hampshire (2005) and The State of the District (2005)
Table 5 - Indices of Deprivation (2005)
A study of Quality of Life measuring unemployment, disposable income, house prices,
vehicular congestion, school quality, probability of theft and population density was
undertaken of the 376 local authorities in England and Wales in 2001
16
17
A Profile of Hampshire (HCC, May 2005)
Source of data for table include A Profile of Hampshire (2005) and The State of the District (2005)
May 2006
27 of 226
Figure 6 - Health and Quality of Life Issues
May 2006
28 of 226
Table 6 below shows the results for the Districts in Hampshire (1=highest, 376 = lowest).
When comparing the results to the indices of Deprivation, it is surprising that Hart has a
low ranking. This is likely to reflect the weighting attached to the Quality of Life study
such as house prices.
Although waste management facilities should be located as close to the source of
waste as possible, some facilities are unsuitable for location close to residential
properties as the operations on site may lead to a loss of quality of life or could
potentially have health effects. These are generally open air facilities such as
aggregate recycling facilities (which produce high levels of noise and dust), landfill
and open composting facilities (which emit bioaerosols). Such facilities would be
better suited in more rural areas, away from residential areas. Nearby development
must also be taken into consideration during mineral extraction as this can lead to
instability and damage caused by subsidence.
Public perception is a major obstacle to the siting of minerals and waste facilities.
Concerns usually relate to potential health effects, noise, dust and visual impact of the
proposed facility. The Environment Agency recommends a 250m buffer between
activities that produce bioaerosols and sensitive receptors. Sensitive receptors include
residential areas, schools, hospitals and prisons. Therefore, this ‘buffer zone’ is
potentially a constraint on development in urban areas.
Test Valley (Highest Quality of Life)
Winchester
East Hampshire
Eastleigh
New Forest
Basingstoke & Deane
Fareham
Rushmoor
Gosport
Havant
Southampton
Hart
Portsmouth (Lowest Quality of Life)
Rank (out of 376)
31
48
49
79
83
87
108
183
199
244
307
335
349
Source: A Profile of Hampshire (2005)
Table 6 - Rank of Quality of Life (2005)
May 2006
29 of 226
Culture and Recreation
The countryside of Hampshire, in particular the New Forest National Park; its military
heritage; its historic settlements such as Winchester; the coast and the sailing waters of
the Solent, combine to produce an attractive location for recreation and cultural
activities.
Hampshire has an extensive network of over 3,000 miles of rights of way providing
access to most parts of the county – on footpaths, bridleways and byways (see Figure
7).
The coast is rich in maritime heritage including the cities of Portsmouth and
Southampton, as well as smaller locations such as Buckler’s Hard. The coast is also
important in terms of nature conservation.
Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton are also home to a number of listed
buildings (i.e. buildings that are defined as those of special architectural or history
interest, meriting special protection). Listed buildings are graded either Grade I
(buildings of exceptional and often national interest), Grade II* (outstanding buildings,
often of regional interest) or Grade II (important buildings of special interest which
warrant every effort made to preserve them).
Table 7 shows that the majority of buildings are Grade II listed with an uneven spread
across the county. Over 40% of all listed buildings are within Winchester and Test
Valley.
Basingstoke & Deane
East Hampshire
Eastleigh
Fareham
Gosport
Hart
Havant
New Forest
Rushmoor
Test Valley
Winchester
Portsmouth**
Southampton**
Hampshire
(** Data not fully up-to-date)
All grades
listed
1,820
1,594
213
594
344
1,073
288
1,797
107
2,461
2,822
436
460
13,113
Listed Buildings
Grade I
Grade II*
32
16
0
4
6
13
2
24
4
22
70
9
15
193
63
70
9
25
38
37
10
68
2
104
151
23
19
577
Grade II
Unlisted
1,725
1,508
204
565
300
1,023
276
1,705
101
2,335
2,601
404
426
12,343
1,326
271
89
62
63
63
66
122
22
263
470
108
154
2,817
Source: HCC Archaeology and Historic Buildings database (June 2003)
Table 7 - Listed Buildings (2003)
Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton have 57 Parks and Gardens of Special
Historic Interest. There is also one registered battlefield, which commemorates the Civil
War battle at Cheriton.
V:\Desktop\63766_Technical Doc.doc
May 2006
30 of 226
Figure 7 - Culture and Heritage Issues
May 2006
31 of 226
4. Policy Context
Relationship to other Plans and Programmes and Saved Policies
It is important that the policies and approaches contained within the Strategy take account
of relevant European, national, regional and local strategies, plans and proposals already in
place and being developed.
The European, national and regional strategies provide a context to the legislation from
which polices on minerals and waste are founded. Local strategies reflect the ‘bottom-up’
approach that is required to gain an understanding of what the needs of the community are
in relation to minerals and waste and how best to involve the community in meeting these
needs. Policies from the Hampshire County Structure Plan and the Hampshire, Portsmouth
and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan will be saved for a period of three years,
until September 2007. The policies relating to minerals and waste will form part for the
Strategy until then, or until new policies are produced to replace the saved policies.
This section provides a summary overview of the main relevant plans and programmes and
their relationship with the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework (HMWDF).
More detail of the plans, programmes and Minerals and Waste Local Plan policies is provided
in Appendix 1.
European Context
The European Union (EU) has produced several Directives which implement the concept of
sustainable development. A number of Directives have been produced in relation to waste
management in recent years, particularly in relation to the minimisation and disposal of
waste. The UK government is required to adopt the Directives, the most relevant of which
are summarised below.
Landfill Directive
The principle objective of the Landfill Directive is to prevent or reduce, as far as possible the
negative effects of landfilling on the environment and human health.
The Directive requires all Member States to reduce quantities of biodegradable waste going
to landfill by 2016 to 35% of the level of arisings in 1995 (or by 2020 for those Member States
that were landfilling over 80% of their waste, which includes the UK). More detail on the
targets set out in the Directive are provided in Appendix 1.
This diversion of biodegradable waste and ensuring high and consistent standards of landfill
practice will help to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. The HMWDF will need to reflect
the requirements and targets set out in the Landfill Directive, particularly as the adopted
Hampshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan predates the Directive.
In July 2004 the co-disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous waste at the same time, was
banned. Landfills are now classified as hazardous, non-hazardous or inert landfills and strict
criteria on the wastes acceptable at each category of landfill now apply.
With the exception of Inert waste, only waste which has been treated to reduce either its
quantity or its effect on the environment can be landfilled. The HMWDF will need to take into
account the need to treat wastes prior to landfill.
There are currently no hazardous waste landfill sites within Hampshire, and therefore, the
HMWDF will need to take this into account. Similarly, there are only four hazardous (not
including clinical) waste treatment sites within Hampshire and therefore the HMWDF will need
to consider whether there is a need for new sites.
May 2006
32 of 226
Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive
The Directive came into effect in August 2004 and involves a target collection rate of at least
4 kg on average per inhabitant per year of WEEE from private households. The Directive
seeks to increase re-use, recovery and recycling as well as to reduce the amount of WEEE
produced. More detail on the types of waste included and the responsibilities of
householders and producers is provided in Appendix 1.
Separate collection of WEEE and the treatment of WEEE at appropriate facilities is
encouraged. Co-disposal is to be minimised.
The legislation was implemented in the UK during 2005. However in January 2006, the
Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) announced an immediate review of progress on the
implementation of the WEEE Directive. This will set the timescale for implementation back,
although the DTI plans to consult on revised regulations in Spring 2006.
The Government is looking at the role that civic amenity and other sites (e.g transfer stations)
might play in providing these collection facilities.
The HMWDF will need to consider the need for infrastructure to meet the requirements of the
WEEE Directive.
EU Packaging Directive
The Directive has been adopted in the UK since 1997 and is aimed to reduce quantities of
packaging waste entering the waste stream and being disposed of inappropriately.
Although its requirements primarily fall on producers and users of packaging, the HMWDF will
need to consider the need for a network of facilities able to handle packaging waste.
Thematic Strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste
The Thematic Strategy seeks to simplify and modernise legislation to reduce the
administration burden and increase cost-effectiveness. It also aims to increase the
prevention of waste at source, development standards for recycling activities and materials
and introduce ‘life-cycle thinking’ into waste policy to help reduce the negative
environmental impacts of resources.
The long-term goal for the EU is to become a recycling society, that seeks to avoid waste
and uses waste as a resource. As such, the Strategy continues to move waste away from
landfill and channels it to a variety of options further up the waste hierarchy including
composting and energy recovery.
May 2006
33 of 226
Future Legislation
It is anticipated that the UK Government will adopt the Directive on Batteries and
Accumulators and Spent Batteries and Accumulators COM (2003) by mid 2006, which will
prevent the disposal of spent batteries in incinerators or landfill, and promote the recovery of
the various metals contained in waste batteries.
The European Commission is in the process of producing a set of Thematic Strategies for the
Sixth Environment Action Programme for the European Community. Four priority areas for
urgent action have been identified including:
•
Climate change
•
Nature and Biodiversity
•
Environment and Resources and Quality of Life
•
Natural Resources and Waste.
Thematic Strategies that are currently subject to consultation and will be submitted in the
near future include:
•
Soils
•
Protection and conservation of the marine environment
•
Sustainable use of natural resources.
Many of the Thematic Strategies will be relevant to the Framework. Therefore, the HMWDF
should reflect any recommendations that arise from the work being undertaken by the EC.
May 2006
34 of 226
National Context
There are a number of national strategies that have particular relevance to the preparation
of the HMWDF. Planning policy has previously been produced for both waste and minerals in
the form of Planning Policy Guidance and Mineral Planning Guidance. These guidance
documents are currently being replaced under the new planning system by Planning Policy
Statements and Mineral Policy Statements. Along side these documents is the governments
sustainable development strategy and the national waste strategy, both of which have
direct influence on the HMWDF.
The UK Sustainable Development Strategy
The Governments most recent strategy for sustainable development identifies four priorities
for action, which are shared across the UK. The goal of sustainable development is to enable
all people throughout the world to satisfy their basic needs and enjoy a better quality of life
without compromising the quality of life of future generations. More detail on the plan for
achieving the goal is provided in Appendix 1.
In order for sustainable development to be achieved, these priorities should be taken into
account within the HMWDF:
•
Sustainable Consumption and Production;
•
Climate Change and Energy;
•
Natural Resource Protection and Environmental Enhancement; and
•
Sustainable Communities.
Waste Strategy 2000
This strategy describes the governments vision for managing waste and resources better. It
sets out the changes needed to deliver more sustainable development18.
The Strategy sets out a number of key waste management principles that should underpin all
waste management decisions:
•
The Waste Hierarchy – Represents priorities for consideration of waste management
options, starting with the ideal of prevention and reduction with disposal as the last resort
(as shown in Figure 8 below). Waste Management Strategies, should provide a balance
of the various methods the emphasis being on ‘maximising’ activities towards the bottom.
Waste Reduction
Waste Re-Use
Waste Recycling & Composting
Incineration with Energy
Landfill with Energy
Landfill
Figure 8 - Waste Hierarchy
18
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions - Waste Strategy 2000: England and Wales (Part 1)
May 2006
•
35 of 226
Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO) – Requires waste managers to take
decisions which minimise damage to the environment as a whole, at acceptable cost, in
both the long and short term.
However, current government guidance states that BPEO is to be replaced by
Sustainability Appraisal (see PPS10 below). The targets will need to be taken into account
within the Framework and where possible, policies should aim to meet or exceed those
set in Waste Strategy 2000.
•
Proximity Principle – Requires waste to be disposed of as close to the place of production
as possible. This avoids passing the environmental costs of waste management to
communities which are not responsible for its generation, and reduces the environmental
costs of transporting waste.
•
Regional Self-Sufficiency - The Government believes that waste should not be exported
from the UK for disposal. Waste Planning Authorities and the waste management industry
should aim, wherever practicable, for regional self-sufficiency in managing waste
There are a number of different targets (see Appendix 1) set out within the strategy, mostly
related to the reduction of biodegradable waste sent to landfill, which supports the Landfill
Directive.
A Review of England’s Waste Strategy – A Consultation Document
The consultation document reviews the existing waste strategy for England. It examines the
progress made since Waste Strategy 2000 and looks to build on the progress.
The revised document links closely with the Government’s action plan on sustainable
consumption and production.
The document proposes new targets including:
• Increased national targets for recycling and composting of household waste (40% by
2010 and 50% by 2020)
• National landfill targets for commercial and industrial waste (landfilling as % of total –
53% by 2002, 37% by 2010, 36% by 2015 and 35% by 2020).
The review examines the policy framework, action for waste prevention, roles and
responsibilities, waste crime as well as proposals for closing the resources loop and driving
investment.
The revised Waste Strategy is expected in 2006.
Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (PPS10)
PPS10 has replaced PPG10 under the new planning system. Key planning objectives within
PPS10 include greater emphasis on the waste hierarchy, provision of facilities to meet the
communities needs, implementing legislation and targets, the delivery of waste
management without endangering human health and without harming the environment
and ensure waste is disposed of as near as possible to its place of production. It also seeks
the interests of business, the community and collection authorities to be reflected and that
the potential benefits of sustainable waste management are taken into consideration in
determining planning applications.
May 2006
36 of 226
The PPS also contains a new sequential approach to site identification and criteria for
assessment of site suitability:
In searching for sites and areas suitable for waste management facilities, PPS10 states that
waste planning authorities should consider:
-
‘opportunities for on-site management of waste where it arises;
-
a broad range of locations including industrial sites, looking for opportunities to
co-locate facilities together and with complementary activities’ (reflecting the
concept of resource recovery parks).
Waste planning authorities are also requested to prioritise the re-use of previously-developed
land, and redundant agricultural and forestry buildings and their curtilages.
The PPS will need to be taken into account during the preparation of the HMWDF.
Draft Minerals Policy Statement 1: Planning and Minerals and Associated Good Practice
Guidance (MPS1)
Draft Minerals Policy Statement 1 sets out core policies and principles for minerals planning in
England. Its main objectives for minerals planning are in line with the Government’s overall
aims for sustainable development.
The key policy messages are:
•
the need to maintain sufficient supply to meet the anticipated need for minerals
consistent with environmental acceptability;
•
the need to protect designated areas of national and international importance;
•
the need to encourage efficient use of extracted materials and the use of substitute or
recycled materials in place of primary minerals wherever practicable; and
•
the need to ensure that where extraction does take place, restoration and aftercare of
sites are of high quality
The HMWDF will need to incorporate the key messages set out in MPS1. The final MPS1
expected to produced in 2006.
Draft MPS Annexes
There are four draft annexes to MPS1:
1) Aggregate provision in England
2) Brick clay provision in England
3) Natural buildings and roofing stone provision in England
4) Onshore oil and gas in England
These annexes set out guidelines for supply and reserves, potential environmental impacts,
safeguarding, efficiency and restoration. Annexes 2 and 3 both encourage liaison between
industry, stakeholders, the community and planning authorities to help assist the planning
process. More detail on the content of the draft annexes is provided in Appendix 1.
May 2006
37 of 226
Minerals Policy Statement 2: Controlling and Mitigating the Environmental Effects of Mineral
Extraction in England (MPS2)
MPS2 supersedes MPG11: The Control of noise at Surface Mineral Workings. The statement
sets out how Mineral Planning Authorities should minimise any significant adverse
environmental effects that may arise from minerals extraction. Annexes on the potential
effects will be produced to support this statement. At present, the annexes on dust and
noise have been adopted.
The HMWDF will need to contain policies that reflect the guidance provided within the
statement and its accompanying annexes. The guidance is particularly relevant to
development control policies and the criteria used for the identification of new mineral sites
within the Framework area.
Minerals Planning Guidance 6: Guidelines for aggregate provision in England (MPG6)
This Guidance Note provides advice to mineral planning authorities and the minerals industry
on how to ensure that the construction industry receives an adequate and steady supply of
material at the best balance of social, environmental and economic cost, whilst ensuring
that extraction and development are consistent with the principles of sustainable
development.
The Framework needs to ensure that there is adequate supply of material. The HMWDF
should also include policies which ensure a sustainable approach to mineral extraction and
encourage the recycling of demolition and construction waste. The HMWDF should also
ensure that there are sufficient sites for mineral extraction to meet the local apportionment.
May 2006
38 of 226
Regional Context
Regional Planning Guidance for the South East
Within each of the regions in England, the Regional Assembly’s have produced Regional
Planning Guidance. The guidance produced for the South East, within which Hampshire falls,
is Regional Planning Guidance 9 (RPG9). This guidance provides a framework for the
preparation of Local Development Frameworks within the region. RPG9 is currently under
review. A number of strategies have been produced following a set of reviews including
strategies published on transport, renewable energy, minerals and waste.
The South East Plan
Under the new planning system, the RPG will be called the South East Plan, which is the
Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS). The South East Plan will have greater weight in directing
future planning decisions and will set the framework for land use planning in Hampshire. As
such, the South East Plan will heavily influence the preparation of HMWDF.
The emerging RSS is going through public consultation. Some stages, including those relating
to minerals and waste, are more advanced than others. In the case of minerals, waste and
energy, draft changes to Regional Planning Guidance (RPG9) have been produced and an
Examination in Public held. The plan itself was out for public consultation during the period
24th January – 15th April 2005. The South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) submitted
Part 1 of the Draft South East Plan: Core Regional Policies to the Secretary of State (via the
Government Office of the South East (GOSE)) on 29th July 2005. The full Plan, including Part 2
: Sub-regional Details, was submitted to Government in March 2006. There is currently a
period of consultation until 23 June 2006, followed by an Examination in Public between
November 2006 and March 2007 with final adoption at a later date. Once it has
Government approval it will have greater planning status and Local Development
Frameworks, including the HMWDF, will need to be in general conformity with it.
The policies within the South East Plan include the minerals and waste policies, some of which
are slightly changed from the version published in August 2005. Although all sections of the
consultation draft of the South East Plan are relevant, as they influence economic growth
and thereby affect the demand for primary resources and the production of waste, for the
purposes of this document, the key sections are:
•
•
•
Communications and Transport;
Sustainable Natural Resource Management;
Countryside and Landscape Management.
May 2006
39 of 226
The relevant policies from these sections of the draft South East Plan are set out in Appendix
1.
The draft South East Plan also identified a number of sub-regions within the region. Relevant
sections of the Sub-Regional Policy Framework are:
•
•
South Hampshire;
Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley.
Policies specific to the sub-regions are included in Part 2 of the South East Plan.
Proposed alterations to Regional Planning Guidance, South East – Regional Minerals Strategy
and Regional Waste Strategy were submitted to the Secretary of State. These were subject
to a joint Examination in Public which was carried out during early October 2004.
The Secretary of State’s Proposed Changes to Minerals and Waste Policies in the current RPG
9 were published on 19th August 2005. Following consultation the Secretary of State will
publish the final version in 2006.
The full draft policies are provided in Appendix 1 and a summary is set out below.
Minerals
The Proposed changes include:
•
The amount of land-won sand and gravel from across the region has increased from
12.67 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) to 13.25 mtpa. This increase has been
applied proportionally across the region leaving Hampshire with an apportionment
of 2.63 mtpa;
•
The amount of recycled and secondary aggregate to be supplied across the region
must increase. For Hampshire an apportionment of 1.7 million tonnes per annum has
been proposed (this proposal has not been through Examination in Public).
May 2006
40 of 226
Waste
The Proposed changes include:
•
Resource management should be the underlying theme of the strategy;
•
An aspiration to reduce waste growth to 1% by 2010 and 0.5% thereafter;
•
A strong policy approach to sustainable design, construction and demolition;
•
London’s future waste exports to be apportioned, giving Hampshire an
apportionment of 2.2 million tonnes of additional landfill void for London’s residual
waste, in the period to 2025 (this proposal has not been through an Examination in
Public);
•
The following Recycling/Composting targets are suggested for the Region:
MSW
C&I
CD&E
All Waste
%
%
%
%
2005
30
40
45
40
2010
40
50
50
50
2015
50
55
50
55
2020
55
60
60
60
2025
60
65
60
65
Year
•
The following Regional targets for diversion of waste from landfill have been
proposed;
MSW
C&I
CD&E
Mt/Yr
Mt/Yr
Mt/Yr
Mt/Yr
%
2005
1.7
4.3
9.8
16
64
2010
2.8
5.9
10.1
18.9
71
2015
4.5
7.5
10.4
22.2
79
2020
5.4
8.7
10.7
24.7
84
2025
5.8
9.5
10.9
26.2
86
Year
All Waste
•
Support for the concept of ‘Resource Parks’, particularly two strategic resource
recovery parks located at or with good access to Ports (this latter proposal has not
been through an Examination in Public);
•
A number of ‘regional scale’ hazardous waste facilities are also suggested, including:
two Air Pollution Control Residue treatment facilities, a waste electronic equipment
treatment plant, a sub-regional network of soil treatment facilities and cells for
stabilised non-reactive hazardous wastes;
•
Development in green belt should not be precluded where this is the nearest
appropriate location and there are no alternative sites and would not harm the
objectives of the green belt.
•
Small scale local development should not be precluded in AONBs/National Parks,
where this is the nearest appropriate location and would not compromise the
objectives of the designation.
May 2006
41 of 226
South West RSS
The South West RSS is also currently being prepared and will set the regional context for
planning in the South West from 2006 until 2026. A Draft RSS is due to be submitted in May
2006 with public consultation and the Examination in Public thereafter. Consultation on
potential approaches to development within the region have already taken place. The final
locations and extent of proposed development will have an impact on the South East and in
particular Hampshire, which shares its borders with Wiltshire and Dorset. Both of these
counties contain Joint Study Areas for which strategic visions of development are being
prepared.
The London Plan
The London Plan is the name given to the Mayor’s spatial development strategy. It replaces
previous strategic planning guidance for London (known as RPG3) and covers all 32
boroughs. The Plan aims to encourage London to be more self-sufficient, although it is
recognized that some waste will be exported to neighbouring counties. Targets for selfsufficiency in London are set out in Appendix 1.
In July 2005, the Mayor published early alterations to the Plan which include new policies for
housing, minerals and waste. The alterations include the amount of waste that will be
exported to the neighbouring counties. It aims to reduce the overall amount of waste
exported to 25% in 2010, 20% in 2015 and 15% in 2020. A breakdown of these targets into the
different waste streams is provided in Appendix 1. Examination in Public on these proposals is
scheduled to take place throughout the summer of 2006.
May 2006
42 of 226
Local Context
Local strategies help to provide the insight to the communities needs in relation to resource
use. Community involvement is a key element of the new planning system and will be
significant in the preparation of the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework.
The saved policies from the Hampshire, County Structure Plan 1996-2011 (Review) are also
provided for as background to the policies emerging in the Framework.
Community Strategies
The spatial area covered by the Framework is subject to a number of overlapping
Community Strategies at County, District and Unitary level. These documents tend to be
drafted differently, including elements such as visions, themes, priorities and often comments
about what the community would like to see happen. Although many of these elements are
not specifically relevant to the Strategy or the plan making process, many of them are and
they are all representative of the aspirations of the communities we serve.
This section summarises the relevant elements from the Community Strategies within
Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton at a County, Unitary and District level. Appendix 1
outlines how these elements have been accommodated in the plan making process.
Hampshire Community Strategy
The Hampshire Community Strategy ‘Shaping our Future Together 2004-2007’ includes
priorities for action and targets. The most relevant to the plan-making and appraisal process
are the following:
Priority 5 – protect and enhance the Hampshire Environment:
• Target 5c: All Hampshire Strategic Partnership (HSP) partners will give equal
considerations to environmental as well as social and economic principles when making
decisions.
• Target 5d: Develop and promote a strategic best practice model on fly-tipping and
related issues in order to reassure the public.
Priority 6 – Supporting the Hampshire economy
• Target 6b: Lead and co-ordinate effort to encourage appropriate business investment in
Hampshire
• Target 6f: To develop an integrated strategic approach to the provision of employment
land and premises
• Target 6l: HSP will work with partners to support the voluntary and community service to
build up their capacity.
May 2006
43 of 226
Southampton Community Strategy
The Strategy sets key challenges, the most relevant of which is Key Challenge 9 – Improving
the city’s environment
Long Term Key Actions include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Southampton prepares for the impacts of global warming and ensure the city plays its
part in reducing the causes of environmental damage.
Minimise waste production and maximise recycling, re-use and composting through new
practises and publicity campaigns. Ensure residual waste can be disposed of locally by
sustainable means.
Encourage local community groups to maximise recycling and re-use.
Encourage the development of a new environmental technology-based local business
economy.
Continue to develop local sources of energy that contribute to the reduction of CO2 –
including from wind and solar power and energy from waste. Use planning and other
processes to encourage more energy efficient buildings and greater use of renewable
energy.
Reduce the dependence on vehicles that use traditional fossil
Medium Term Key Actions include:
9A – By 2005, exceed recycling rate of 20% of household waste stream; by 2007, exceed
recycling rate of 26% of household waste stream.
9B – To reduce the amount of residual waste going to landfill through a range of actions
including waste minimisation and by increasing the level of home composting: By 2005,
reduce landfilled waste to 30% (of household waste stream). By 2007, reduce landfilled
waste to 25% (of household waste stream).
9C – To improve the city’s impact on global environmental issues by increasing the number
of energy efficient buildings and creating more local sources of sustainable energy. By 2007,
10% of energy in cities produced locally from sustainable sources.
9G – To raise awareness of the importance of air quality and measures that can be taken to
deal with climate change: By 2007, achieve a 10% reduction in CO2 emissions in the city
based on 1992 baseline of 1118k tonnes CO2 per annum.
Portsmouth Community Strategy
The Community Strategy ‘2004-2009: Proud of our past: Ambitious for our future’ contains
Section 4 - Environment and Transport sets out the vision for Portsmouth:
‘A Portsmouth that… treasures and sustains a safe, healthy and attractive environment.’
Outcomes of the Strategy include:
• Everyone takes responsibility for protecting the environment.
• A sustained improvement in urban design in the City.
• A cleaner, healthier environment.
May 2006
44 of 226
Material Resources Strategy (MRS)
Since its inception, the MRS has engaged in constant stakeholder dialogue with local
businesses, environmental groups, residents associations and anyone with an interest in the
project. Regular stakeholder events have taken place to discuss each step in its
development.
The partners involved in MRS development includes Hampshire County Council, Project
Integra, Hampshire Natural Resources Initiative, and the two unitary authorities of Portsmouth
and Southampton.
The ‘More from Less’ document is a synopsis of seventeen months of stakeholder dialogue on
issues related to natural resources, particularly minerals and wastes. ‘More from Less’ is
essentially an articulation of stakeholders views on these issues and the way forward.
The Material Resources Strategy and development of ‘More from Less’ and the views
contained therein are an important starting point in the development of the Strategy, in
particular they serve to partially fulfil requirements for ‘front-end’ consultation, under the new
planning regime.
The Community Strategies outlined in the section above are also closely linked to the MRS
process. The Community Strategies have been developed to ensure that the needs of the
community are met through community involvement, which the MRS process helps to deliver
specifically in relation to resource use.
The MRS stakeholder involvement process is an established and evolving process, from which
the Community Strategies and the community involvement required for the preparation of
the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework can build upon.
Joint Municipal Waste Strategy
In 2002, Project Integra adopted the Joint Interim Municipal Waste Management Strategy
(JIMWMS) aim is to provide a long-term solution to dealing with Hampshire’s household waste
in an environmentally sound, cost effective and reliable way. The short-term aim of the
Strategy is to achieve 40 recycling rate for Hampshire. More detail on the objectives of the
JIMWMS is provided in Appendix 1.
Project Integra are currently working on the ‘Hampshire Joint Municipal Waste Management
Strategy’. This will be closely linked to the Strategy, particularly as both strategies use the
‘More from Less’ document as their starting point. The HMWDF will need to complement the
JIMWMS, to ensure that their strategic approaches are compatible.
Hampshire County Structure Plan
The policies with the 199-2011 County Structure Plan were adopted in January 2000. The
policies will be saved for a period of three years, until September 2007. The Minerals and
Waste policies are outlined in Appendix 1 will form part of the Hampshire Minerals and Waste
Development Framework until new policies are produced to replace them.
May 2006
45 of 226
Portsmouth Local Transport Plan
The Provisional Local Transport Plan (LTP) for Portsmouth was published in July 2005 and
anticipates the submission of the full LTP in March 2006. It also supersedes the current LTP
(2000-2005). It takes into consideration changes to local circumstances and the sub-region
as well as fulfils government guidance. In order to ensure that sufficient transport
infrastructure is provided for the needs of the sub-region, the LTP is closely linked with the
Solent Transport Strategy, which considers the transport needs of the Isle of Wight,
Southampton, Portsmouth and Hampshire.
It seeks to make improvements to public transport as well as expanding opportunities for
cycling and walking.
Heavy HGV movements have led to congestion problems and commercial deliveries have
also been affected. There are a number of opportunities for improving freight access to the
continental ferry port and in the north of the city centre.
The Port of Portsmouth has a lack of rail access. However, there are opportunities to shift
some of the freight to rail. It is proposed that the Fratton Goods Yard site is used as an inter
modal railhead for the city. This will require transport of freight from the port to the site by
road, but the remainder of its onward journey would be by rail.
The European Commission is also exploring the development of the ‘Motorways of the sea’
which will ultimately establish a more sustainable ‘short sea’ transport system which will
encourage transport by small ship for coastal and continental trades, rather than road.
All the proposals for freight movement in Portsmouth will have a direct impact on possible
movement of waste in and around Hampshire. The freight transport proposals will also have
a direct impact on the Waste Management and Minerals Sites Plans.
(See http://www.portsmouth.gov.uk/living/5178.html for more details)
Southampton Local Transport Plan
Southampton Local Transport Plan was submitted in July 2000 and covers the period 2001/2
to 2005/6.
The Southampton Port is the 5th largest in the UK and the city is also home to the second
largest container terminal in the UK. The container terminal has 1,000 lorry movements per
day. 60% of exports arrive at the container terminal by road, 32% by rail and 8% by sea.
The city is located at intersections of major inter-urban road and rail links connecting the city
with London, the Midlands, the North and the south coast. The city is also served by
Southampton International Airport, which is located just outside the city boundaries.
Southampton experiences high volumes of freight traffic. The Railtrack Network Management
Plan includes proposals to increase the gauge capacity for freight services, particularly
through Southampton City Centre rail tunnel. This will enable larger containers to use this
route and will help to encourage more freight to use rail access modes to the Docks.
The LTP also encourages partnership working with passenger and freight transport operators,
business and industry and Southampton’s Communities and neighbourhoods to promote
positive and practicable improvements to transport systems.
(See http://www.southampton.gov.uk/transport/transportplanning/localtransportplan/default.asp for
more details)
May 2006
46 of 226
Hampshire Local Transport Plan
A provisional Hampshire Local Transport Plan was published in September 2005 and covers
the period 2006 to 2011. Submission of the full LTP is scheduled for March 2006.
The vision of the LTP is: ‘enhances the quality of life and economic prosperity by connecting
people, communities, employment, goods, services and amenities’.
Due to the diverse nature of Hampshire, the LTP includes separate strategies for different
areas including:
•
The Solent Area (in partnership with Southampton City Council and Portsmouth City
Council)
•
New Forest
•
Central Hampshire
•
North Hampshire
Each of the strategies include polices and targets tailored to each individual area. The
strategies are set within the overarching Hampshire-wide LTP framework.
Problems identified within the LTP include, amongst others, congestion and poor air quality.
Air Quality Management Areas have been declared or are imminent in Eastleigh,
Winchester, Lyndhurst, Totton and a section of the M3 at Farnborough.
Particular issues facing the different areas include:
•
Solent Area – acute congestion problems and improvements are vital for the
continued success of the ports.
•
Central Hampshire – congestion is generally limited to Winchester, which has led to
poor air quality. Good road networks in Andover.
•
North Hampshire – congestion and poor air quality on the M3. Diversion by drivers on
to local roads has caused a reduction in quality of life for some smaller settlements.
•
New Forest – seasonal congestion problems and poor air quality, particularly at
Lyndhurst. Residents are concerned about the noise and environmental damage
caused by heavy goods vehicles on suitable roads as well as safety issues for more
vulnerable road users.
It is important that the HMWDF take into account the issues and improvements proposed in
the LTP, especially when identifying suitable location for minerals and waste management,
and in particular, that the HMWDF does not worsen existing problems of congestion and air
quality.
May 2006
47 of 226
5. Minerals
Background
There are a variety of minerals which are either extracted or imported into Hampshire. There
is a general distinction made between aggregates such as sand, gravel and crushed rock
(mainly granite and limestone), and other minerals such as chalk, clay, oil and gas.
Minerals that are extracted from land are referred to as land-won. Minerals (usually sand
and gravel) that are removed from the seabed are known as marine dredged.
Mineral Uses
A distinction is often made between soft sand (sometimes known as ‘building sand’) which is
used mainly in making mortar and asphalt and sharp sand and gravel which is primarily used
for making concrete and concrete products. Sharp sand and gravel requires washing and
grading prior to sale / use. Sharp sand and gravel is also used as a drainage material and as
base material in construction. Unwashed or ‘as-raised’ sand and gravel is used as a loose fill
material in construction and for surfacing paths and tracks, if there is a element of clay
binding, the material is often known as ‘hoggin’.
Chalk is primarily used as agricultural lime but also as an aggregate. Clay is used for brick
making and as an engineering material for the lining and capping of landfill sites. Oil and gas
are used as an energy source and as an industrial raw material.
Hampshire’s Minerals – an overview
Hampshire’s most significant mineral resource is sand and gravel. These mineral reserves are
often located along river basins such as the Itchen, Test and Avon Valleys. The most readily
accessible areas are the Avon Valley, the lower Test Valley, and in the north east of the
county. Land-won supplies are generally supplemented by marine dredged supplies from a
number of licensed dredging sites off the south coast, supplied through Hampshire’s nine
wharves.
The supply of sand and gravel (from land-won and dredged sources) reached a high of 4.5
million tonnes in 1994 but have subsequently decreased to 3.6 million tonnes in 2003[1].
There are no viable deposits of rock in Hampshire and therefore crushed rock is imported by
rail or landed at wharves. The type of rock imported is usually either crushed limestone or
granite. In 2003, 0.95 million tonnes of crushed rock was supplied to Hampshire with 59.5%
imported by rail.
The extraction of clay has reduced significantly with only three sites permitted for clay
extraction in 2003. Only two brickworks now remain in operation.
The use of chalk as an agricultural lime continues on a small scale with approximately 20,000
tonnes extracted for sale in 2003.
The presence of oil and gas in commercial quantities has only been discovered in three
broad locations in Hampshire and these are now productive oilfields.
There are over 50 sites where (land-won) minerals are extracted.
May 2006
48 of 226
Regional Context
The South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) sets an aggregate apportionment for
Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton to meet in order to ensure the needs of the South
East region are met. Currently this apportionment stands at 2.7 million tonnes per annum
(mtpa)19 although the South East Plan recommends a revised figure of 2.63 mtpa20.
Historically, Hampshire has supplied just under 20% of the regional requirement for sand and
gravel.
Similarly the South East Plan also proposes a decrease in land-won aggregates over the
period between 2001 and 2016 with an increased supply of marine-dredged sand and
gravel and an increased level of recycling of construction and demolition waste. For the
period between 2001 and 2016 landings of marine dredged sand and gravel are to increase
to 120 million tonnes21 or 7.5 mtpa.
The South East Plan also states that in order to reduce the need for primary aggregate
extraction, the use of aggregates derived from recycled and secondary sources ,in the South
East, should increase from 6.6 mtpa to to 7.7 mtpa by 2016.
In December 200522, SEERA recommended an amendment to Policy M2 in the Proposed
Changes to RPG9 for minerals for inclusion in the draft South East Plan. This gave an
apportionment for the sub-region of Hampshire (including Portsmouth, Southampton and the
New Forest) to supply 1.7mtpa of recycled and secondary aggregate by 2016.
19 Government Office for the South East (GOSE) - Mineral Planning Guidance (MPG): Guidelines for Aggregates
Provision in England, April 1994 (revised in 2003 as Regional Guidelines for Aggregate Provision in England 2001-2016)
20 Government Office for the South East (GOSE) Regional Planning Guidance for the South East (RPG9) – Waste and
Minerals Examination-in-Public Panel Report
21 South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) - Proposed Alterations to Regional Planning Guidance, South East –
Regional Minerals Strategy
22 South East England Regional Assembly – Regional Planning Committee: Sub Regional Apportionment of Provision
for recycled and Secondary Aggregate
May 2006
49 of 226
Aggregates
Land-won Aggregate Reserves
The permitted reserves of land-won sand and gravel in Hampshire at the beginning of 2004
and 2005 (estimated) are shown below in Table 8.
Permitted reserves at
1.1.2004
Estimated Permitted
reserves at 1.1.2005
Soft Sand (Building Sand)
2,028,000
1,600,000
Sharp Sand and Gravel
10,094,000
9,600,000
Total - All Sand and Gravel
12,122,000
11,200,000
Table 8 - Land-won Aggregate Reserves (2004-05)
At the start of 2004 there was a permitted reserve of 12.1 million tonnes (mt)23 but estimated
sales (1.5 million tonnes) exceeded new permissions (0.9 million tonnes) and there has been a
net decrease in the permitted reserve during 2004. The Annual Monitoring Survey for 2004 is
still outstanding and therefore an estimation of reserves at the beginning of 2005 was 11.2
million tonnes (9.6mt of sharp sand & gravel and 1.6 mt of soft sand). During 2005 additional
permissions were granted for sand and gravel extraction totalling 1.2 million tonnes.
At the beginning of 2005, the estimated landbank of permitted reserves of sand and gravel
was sufficient for only 4.15 years at the current apportionment of 2.7 million tonnes per
annum (mtpa) allowed for in the Minerals and Waste Local Plan24. Using the split between
soft sand and sharp sand and gravel used in the previous Local Plan, this equates to 2.3 years
supply of soft sand (at 0.68 mtpa) and 4.8 years supply of sharp sand and gravel (at 2.02
mtpa)23.
If the revised apportionment figure of 2.63 mtpa is adopted in the Regional Minerals
Strategy25, then the 2005 estimated reserves (11.2 mt) along with the new permissions (1.2 mt)
would last 4.7 years.
Hampshire County Council - Minerals and Waste Planning in Hampshire Annual Report 2004/05
Hampshire, Portsmouth & Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (adopted in December 1998)
25 Proposed Changes to Regional Planning Guidance for the South East (RPG9) – Waste and Minerals
23
24
May 2006
50 of 226
A map indicating the soft sand and sharp sand and gravel deposits (highlighted in yellow
and grey respectively) in Hampshire is shown below in Figure 9.
Figure 9 - Map of Aggregate reserves in Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton
May 2006
51 of 226
Aggregate Supply
At the beginning of 2004, there were permitted reserves remaining at 17 sand and gravel
sites and 8 soft sand sites. In 2003, approximately 53% of all sand and gravel supplied came
from the New Forest area. The proportions supplied by district council area are shown below
in Table 9.
District
2003 Tonnage
Percentage of Total
New Forest
957,616
53.0%
East Hampshire
244,122
13.5%
Test Valley
231,228
12.8%
Hart
210,894
11.7%
Basingstoke & Deane
146,870
8.1%
Eastleigh
16,844
0.9%
1,807,574
100.0%
Total
Table 9 - Aggregate Supply by district (2003)
A survey of the three main operators in the New Forest district was conducted in 2005 to
obtain the destination of aggregate from this area. This survey indicated that over 56% of
aggregate stayed within the New Forest district. Over 18% was exported to destinations
further afield such as Berkshire, although some material was known to return to Hampshire to
meet a need in other districts. Approximately 16% was exported to Dorset. The remainder
(under 10%) was delivered to areas such as Southampton, Wiltshire and North East
Hampshire.
The proportions supplied by geographic area is shown below in Table 10.
Geographic area
2003 Tonnage
Percentage of Total
Forest (includes one site in the National Park)
833,048
46.1%
Downland
622,220
34.4%
North East Hampshire
210,894
11.7%
South Hampshire
141,412
7.8%
1,807,574
100.0%
Table 10 - Aggregate Supply by Geographic area (2003)
The existing Local Plan identified a number of Preferred Areas for future sand and gravel
extraction. These are shown, along with existing mineral extraction and processing sites,
below in Figure 10.
May 2006
52 of 226
Figure 10 - Sand and Gravel Extraction sites
Sand and Gravel Extraction Sites (marked in brown)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Bleak Hill (Hamer Warren), Harbridge (Cemex)
Nea Farm, Somerley (Tarmac)
Manor Farm, Pennington, Lymington (New Milton Sand & Ballast)
Badminston Farm, Fawley (Cemex)
Bury Farm, Marchwood (Marchwood Aggregates)
Beacon Hill, Ewshot (Cranstone)
Snails Lane, Blashford (Cemex)
Mockbeggar, Ibsley (Tarmac)
Squabb Wood, Romsey (Viridor Waste Management Ltd)
Manor Farm, Timsbury (Cemex)
Kimbridge Farm, Mottisfont (Cemex)
Mortimer Quarry, Mortimer West End (Hanson Aggregates)
Rookery Farm, Kingsley (Tarmac)
Eversley Quarry, Eversley (Lafarge Aggregates)
Bramshill Quarry, Eversley/Bramshill (Cemex)
Picees Land, Bramshill (Cemex)
Land north of Ripley(Manners Avon Tyrell Estate)
Ridge Farm, Romsey (Viridor Waste Management Ltd) – processing site only
Chandlers Farm, Eversley (Cemex) – processing site only
Blashford Quarry, Somerley (Tarmac) – processing site only
Soft Sand Extraction sites (marked in yellow)
Preferred Areas
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
PA 3 Roke Manor, Shootash
PA 5 Bleak Hill, Harbridge
PA 6 Plumley Wood and Farm,
Ringwood Forest
Bleak Hill, Harbridge (Cemex)
Rabbitfield Hill Sand Pit, Frithend (Grundon)
Frithend Sand Pit, Sleaford (Grundon)
Blue Haze Sand Pit, Somerley (Tarmac)
Kimbridge Farm, Mottisfont (Cemex)
Rookery Farm, Kingsley (Tarmac)
May 2006
53 of 226
The total sales of land-won sand and gravel, marine dredged sand and gravel landings and
crushed rock imports for the last 10 years is shown below in Table 11 between 1995 and 2004.
This data is represented graphically in Figure 11 for the years where complete data is
available (1994-2003). All figures in table below are in thousand tonnes26.
Note: Figures for 2004 are estimates.
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
488
568
504
901
752
711
504
386
308
300
2074
1741
1927
1803
1807
1699
1789
1807
1500
1200
2562
2309
2431
2704
2559
2410
2293
2193
1808
1500
1748
1478
1366
1525
1638
1620
1698
1715
1763
N/a
4310
3787
3797
4229
4197
4030
3991
3908
3571
N/a
N/a
N/a
N/a
161
193
306
328
436
385
N/a
Crushed Rock (Rail imports)
1019
638
518
592
546
623
731
614
565
N/a
Total Crushed Rock
1019
638
518
753
739
929
1059
1050
950
N/a
Total Primary Aggregates
5329
4425
4315
4982
4936
4959
5050
4958
4521
N/a
Year
Soft Sand (Land-won)
Sharp Sand & Gravel
(Land-won)
All Sand & Gravel Sales
(Land-won)
All Sand & Gravel Landings
(Marine Dredged)
Total Sand & Gravel
(Land-won & Marine Dredged)
Crushed Rock
(Marine imports)
Table 11 - Aggregate Supply (1995-2004)
6.0
5.0
Million Tonnes
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Year
Sand & Gravel Sales (Land-won)
Sand & Gravel Landings (Marine Dredged)
Crushed Rock (Marine imports)
Crushed Rock (Rail imports)
Figure 11 - Aggregate Supply Profile (1994-2003)
26 Hampshire County Council - Minerals and Waste Planning in Hampshire Annual Report 2003/04 (published in
March 2005)
May 2006
54 of 226
The contribution that Hampshire makes towards the regional totals of land-won and marine
imported sand, gravel and crushed rock is shown below in Table 12.
Land-won
Aggregates
Marine
Imported
Aggregates
Rail
Imported
Crushed Rock
Marine
Imported
Crushed Rock
Average amount that
Hampshire has
contributed towards
regional total
19%
26%
19%
10%
Period over which the
average is calculated (in
years)
10
10
8
6
Table 12 - Hampshire's average contribution towards regional totals
May 2006
55 of 226
Importation of Aggregates
Land-won aggregates are supplemented by imports through wharves and rail depots. In
2003, almost half (49%) of the total sand & gravel sold in Hampshire was from marine
dredged sources. The landings in 2003 of marine-dredged sand and gravel in Hampshire
contributed 27%.
During the period 1993 to 2003, landings of marine dredged sand and gravel at wharves in
Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton averaged 1.6 mtpa contributing 25.8% of the
regional total.
In 2003, 59% of crushed rock importation was by rail, the remainder being landed by ship.10%
of the regional total of marine imported crushed rock was imported through wharves in
Hampshire27.
Wharf Importation of Crushed Rock and Dredged Sand & Gravel
There are currently nine active and two inactive wharves in Hampshire, Portsmouth and
Southampton. Seven of the active wharves are ‘safe-guarded’ under Policy 21 of the
existing Local Plan28. This prevents development or change of use that would effect
aggregate importation. The wharves are listed below in Table 13 and their locations are
shown in Figure 12 and Figure 13.
Wharf
Location
Local Authority responsible
for Planning
Active
Importing
Wharf
Safeguarded
1
Burnley
Southampton (River Itchen- West Bank)
Southampton City Council
Yes
Yes
2
Leamouth
Yes
Yes
3
Supermarine
Yes
No
4
Southampton Docks
Southampton (River Test)
Yes
No
5
Kendalls
Portsmouth (Langstone Harbour)
Portsmouth City Council
Yes
Yes
6
Tipner
Portsmouth (Portsmouth Harbour)
Portsmouth City Council
Yes
Yes
7
Fareham
Portsmouth (Portsmouth Harbour)
Hampshire County Council
Yes
Yes
8
Marchwood
Marchwood (River Test)
Yes
Yes
9
Bedhampton
Havant (Langstone Harbour)
Yes
Yes
10
Bakers
Southampton (River Itchen-East Bank)
No
Yes
11
Willments
Southampton (River Itchen-East Bank)
No
Yes
Table 13 - Wharf Summary
27 Hampshire County Council - Minerals and Waste Planning in Hampshire Annual Report 2003/04 (published in
March 2005)
28 Hampshire, Portsmouth & Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (adopted in December 1998)
May 2006
Figure 12 - Wharves located in or near Southampton
Figure 13 - Wharves located in or near Portsmouth
56 of 226
May 2006
57 of 226
Sand & gravel is dredged at a number of licensed sites off the south coast and these are
shown below in Figure 14.
from www.crownestate.co.uk ©The Crown Estate 2005
Figure 14 - Licensed Dredging Areas offshore Hampshire
Future Dredging off the South Coast
Sand and gravel reserves off the south coast are estimated to have around 20 years of
remaining life at current extraction rates, however, in order to meet the needs of the
Thames/Medway region, which have traditionally been met by reserves nearby, increasing
amounts of sand and gravel are being dredged off the South coast. There is a need to find
alternative areas for extraction of sand and gravel to meet the Thames/Medway market. A
new reserve of sand and gravel has been identified in the eastern English channel,
approximately 20 miles south of the Sussex coast. Extraction in this area would ease the
pressure on south coast reserves. These waters (>40 metres) are deeper than existing
licensed dredging areas.
The Crown Estate owns most of the seabed out to the 12 mile limit and the right to exploit
natural resources (excluding hydrocarbons) on the UK continental shelf. It licences the
commercial dredging of marine aggregates but will only issue licenses if they receive a
favourable ‘Government View’ from the First Secretary of State. These decisions are issued by
the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
One application to dredge 62 million tonnes over 15 years, received a favourable
Government View in April 2005. There are currently (November 2005) thirteen other
applications awaiting a decision to extract the minerals in the eastern English Channel area.
Further background information can be found at www.eastchannel.info and
http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/41_government_view
May 2006
58 of 226
The historic pattern of marine aggregate extraction29off the South Coast (the South Coast is
one of seven extraction areas around the UK) in comparison with the UK total marine
aggregate extraction, is shown below in Figure 15.
25.00
Million Tonnes
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Year
2000
2001
SOUTH COAST
2002
2003
2004
UK YEARLY TOTAL
Figure 15 - Historic Pattern of Marine Aggregate Extraction (1993-2004)
During 2004, from a permitted licensed tonnage of 12.6 million (for the South Coast), 6.2
million tonnes of aggregate was dredged. Of this amount, just under 3.1 million tonnes was
landed at wharves along the South Coast and 1.61 million tonnes was landed at wharves in
Hampshire29.
Marine dredged aggregate from the South Coast region is landed at various ports around
the UK and in Europe. The breakdown of landing sites for 200430 is shown below in Figure 16.
17%
South Coast
11%
46%
Thames/Medway
Europe
East Coast
26%
Figure 16 - Destination of Marine Dredged Aggregate extracted from the South Coast (2004)
Crown Estate – Marine Aggregates Crown Estates Licenses – Summary of Statistics 2004
http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/43_landing_port_statistics_2004.pdf
30 Crown Estate – Marine Aggregates Crown Estates Licenses – brochure inserts to The Area Involved: 7th Annual
Report http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/40_area_involved_7th_inserts.pdf
29
May 2006
59 of 226
In 2003 the nine active wharves in Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton supplied 2.3 mt
of crushed rock and marine-dredged sand and gravel31 (this figure is slightly higher than the
figure of 2.15 mt recorded by Crown Estate and quoted in the Aggregates Monitoring
Report32. The specific contributions from 2001 to 2003 are listed and shown below in Table 14.
Location
2001
2002
2003
Southampton & Marchwood
1.356 mtpa
(65%)
1.256 mtpa
(66%)
1.486 mtpa
(65%)
Portsmouth & Environs
0.715 mtpa
(35%)
0.66 mtpa
(34%)
0.803 mtpa
(35%)
Total
2.071 mtpa
(100%)
1.916 mtpa
(100%)
2.289 mtpa
(100%)
Table 14 - Aggregate Throughput History from Wharves (2001-03)
From discussions with wharf operators, it appears that the market area for aggregate is
usually within 10 to 15 miles of the wharf. Some material is exported to Sussex from the
wharves closest to the border.
Crushed rock has been imported primarily into Southampton & Marchwood wharves. The
majority of which is used by Network Rail for rail ballast, a proportion of which leaves the
county. The specific contributions from 2001 to 2003 are listed and shown below in Table 15.
Location
2001
2002
2003
0.328 mtpa
0.435 mtpa
0.385 mtpa
Table 15 - Crushed Rock Throughput History (2001-03)
Discussions with the dredging industry indicate that the current working capacity is very
much linked to market demand . In order to establish where wharf capacity could be
expanded, an informal survey of wharf operators was undertaken in 2004. Each operator
was asked to estimate the maximum annual throughput that each wharf could operate at, if
expansion were possible. This resulted in a theoretical annual throughput of 4.39 mtpa, the
split between each area is shown below in Table 16.
Location
Maximum Contribution
Portsmouth & environs
1.57 mtpa (36%)
2.82 mtpa (64%)
Total
4.39 mtpa (100%)
Table 16 - Maximum Estimated Dredged Aggregate Landing Capacity (in 2004)
31
32
South East England Regional Assembly(SEERA) - Aggregates Monitoring Survey 2003
South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) - Aggregates Monitoring Report 2003 (published in February 2005)
May 2006
60 of 226
Rail Importation of Crushed Rock
There were three active rail depots importing crushed rock in 2003, located at Eastleigh,
Botley and Fareham. All three of these are safeguarded and they all imported crushed
limestone. The majority (86%) of this imported limestone was used as roadstone, railway
ballast, concrete aggregate, armourstone and other screened and graded material whilst
the remaining amount (14%) was used as fill material in construction. A further rail depot at
Micheldever is currently designated as a ‘preferred’ site for a future rail aggregate depot
under the existing Local Plan, although this site is not operational. A map showing these sites
is shown below in Figure 17. Railways lines are shown in red.
Figure 17 - Rail Depots in Hampshire
1.
2.
3.
4.
Fareham Rail Aggregate Terminal, Fareham (Hanson)
Botley Rail Aggregate Terminal, Curdridge (Foster Yeoman)
Eastleigh Rail Aggregate Terminal, Eastleigh (Foster Yeoman)
Micheldever Rail Terminal, Micheldever
Note: The site at Micheldever (4) is identified as preferred site for an aggregates depot in the current
local plan.
May 2006
61 of 226
Recycled and Secondary Aggregates
The manufacture of aggregate from recycled construction and demolition waste takes
place both at permitted sites and at construction/demolition sites using mobile plant. At the
end of 2005 there were 15 sites in Hampshire with planning permission for aggregates
recycling. In addition there is one site just outside the county and another with permission to
recycle incinerator bottom ash. All these are shown below in Figure 18.
Figure 18 - Aggregates Recycling Sites
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Facility Location and Operator
Permission
Size
Manor Farm, Pennington (New Milton Sand and Ballast)
Blashford Quarry, Ellingham (Tarmac)
Rookery Farm, Swanwick, Fareham (Raymond Brown)
Beacon Hill, Ewshot (Cranstone Bros)
Butser Lime Quarry, Buriton (George Ewen)
Cherque Farm, Lee-on-the-Solent, Gosport (Trucks Ltd)
Wallington Depot, Fareham (SITA)
Warren Farm, Fareham
Eastleigh Rail Sidings, Eastleigh (Foster Yeoman)
Lee Lane, Nursling (Raymond Brown)
Bleak Hill, Harbridge (Trucks Ltd)
Micheldever Depot, Micheldever (Foster Yeoman)
Lode Farm, Kingsley (Tarmac)
Eastleigh Railhead, Eastleigh (Foster Yeoman)
Bunny Lane, Timsbury (SITA)
Pound Bottom, Redlynch, Wiltshire (CSG)*
Cracknore Hard Lane (Ballast Phoenix)#
Permanent
21/10/2009
31/08/2009
refused
Permanent
31/12/2010
31/12/2006
Permanent
30/4/2009
Permanent
31/07/2010
31/12/2010
Permanent
31/12/2018
Permanent
31/10/2010
n/a
Permanent
Medium
Medium
Small
Large
Small
n/a
Medium
Large
Large
Large
Small
Medium
Medium
Medium
Small
Small
Medium
* = Site 17 is located on the country boundary with Wiltshire
# = Site 18 recycles Incinerator Bottom Ash into an aggregate
May 2006
62 of 226
Cross border movements
Historically land-won aggregates in Hampshire have supplied adjacent conurbations such as
Bournemouth, Poole, Salisbury, Guildford, etc.
In 2004, Nine sand and gravel quarries that were situated within 5 miles or less of the county
border were approached to obtain an estimate of how much of their product leaves
Hampshire. Detailed records are not generally kept and many sites could only provide a
very rough estimate. The average figure, across all sites that were approached, suggests
that just over half (53%) of quarry product from sites near the county border goes over the
border into adjoining areas.
May 2006
63 of 226
Other Minerals
Chalk
Chalk extraction is carried out at a small scale mostly for use as agricultural lime and recently
as both an aggregate and for specialist industrial uses. Historical production records for
chalk are incomplete. In 2003, it is estimated that approximately 20,000 tonnes of chalk was
excavated and sold, mainly for agricultural use. Most of this was supplied from two sites, the
majority coming from Manor Farm, Monk Sherborne and most of the remainder from
Somborne Chalk Pit, Michelmersh[1].
Hampshire has permitted reserves of over 11 million tonnes of chalk (mostly located at
dormant sites)and 11 sites with existing planning permission for extraction of chalk. These sites
are shown below in Figure 19.
Figure 19 - Chalk extraction sites
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Somborne Chalk Quarry, Michelmersh (Somborne Chalk Quarry)
How Park Farm, Kings Somborne (Tarmac)
Apsley Farm, Hurstbourne Priors (Cliffville)
Wolverton Chalk Pit (Kingsclere), Baughurst (Kingsclere)
Manor Farm Chalk Pit, Monk Sherborne (G B Foot)
Renown Chalk Pit, Froyle (Cleanecology)
Ropley Lime Quarry, Ropley (Dudman Group)
Butser Hill Lime Quarry, Buriton (George Ewen)
Chalton Chalk Quarry, Rowlands Castle (Wessex Construction)
Warren Farm, Fareham (Veolia Environmental Services)
Portchester Chalk Pit, Fareham (Sturgess Trust)
May 2006
64 of 226
Clay
Clay is used to produce bricks and tiles and also in landfill engineering, where it is used as a
low permeability material for the lining and capping of landfill sites. There are currently three
sites with planning permission allowing clay extraction. Historical production records for clay
extraction are incomplete. There are two remaining craft brickworks (located at
Michelmersh and Selborne) which are important producers of local, high quality, hand-made
bricks and tiles. Both sites were identified within the current local plan for extension, through
their allocation as Preferred Areas (8&9). Michelmersh received permission in the 04/05
financial year which will provide a 25 year supply for the brickworks. The sites are shown
below in Figure 20.
Figure 20 - Clay extraction sites
1.
2.
3.
Michelmersh Brickworks, Michelmersh (Michelmersh Brick & Tile)
Searchfield Farm, Downton (Sussex Hand Made Bricks)
Selborne Brickworks, Selborne (Selborne Tile and Brick)
Note: Both sites at Selbourne (1) and Michelmersh (3) are identified as preferred areas for extensions to
their current clay workings.
May 2006
65 of 226
Oil & Gas
Oil and Gas is extracted from three productive oil and gas fields at Humbly Grove (near
Alton), Horndean and Stockbridge. There are three production centres and eleven satellite
wellsites. Oil from Humbly Grove is transferred via a pipeline to the rail terminal at Alton,
adjacent to the materials recovery facility (MRF) waste site and then onto Fawley Refinery by
rail. Oil is also imported via a pipeline form the Wytch Farm oilfield in Dorset directly to the
Hamble Oil Terminal. There is currently one site (No. 5 below) within the boundary of the
proposed South Downs National Park. The sites are shown below in Figure 21.
Figure 21 - Oil and Gas extraction sites
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Fullerton Wellsite, Goodworth Clatford (Star Energy)
Folly Farm Wellsite, Crawley (Star Energy)
Hill Farm Wellsite, Barton Stacey (Star Energy)
Larkwhistle Farm Wellsite, South Wonston (Star Energy)
Matterley Farm, Itchen Valley (Star Energy) [within proposed South Downs National Park]
Herriard ‘A’ Wellsite, Tunworth (Star Energy)
Herriard ‘X’ Wellsite, Herriard (Star Energy)
Weston Common Gathering Station, Weston Patrick (Star Energy)
Humbly Grove ‘C’ Wellsite, Weston Patrick (Star Energy)
Humbly Grove ‘A’ Wellsite, Upton Grey (Star Energy)
Humbly Grove ‘X’ Wellsite, South Warnborough (Star Energy)
Holybourne Rail Export Terminal, Alton (Star Energy)
Horndean ‘B’ Wellsite, Horndean (Star Energy)
Horndean ‘X’ Wellsite, Horndean (Star Energy)
Horndean ‘C’ Wellsite, Rowlands Castle (Star Energy) )
May 2006
66 of 226
6. Waste
Background
The total amount of waste produced in one year in the UK was approximately 330 million
tonnes in 2002/03. This figure includes minerals waste from mining and quarrying which
contributed almost 100 million tonnes. The majority (nearly 220 million tonnes) was controlled
wastes (see below) from households, commerce and industry (including construction and
demolition wastes).
Household wastes generated approximately 9 per cent of total arisings. Waste from the
agriculture sector excludes manure or straw and represents less than 1 per cent of total
arisings33.
Waste can be designated by three terms which describe the type of waste; Inert, Non-inert
and Hazardous. These terms are also used in the classification of landfills as set out in the
Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations 2004.
Inert waste is chemically inert, non-combustible, non-biodegradable and non-polluting.
Examples are glass, concrete, bricks, tiles and ceramics, ferrous and non-ferrous metal,
plastic, soil and stones and cable.
Non-inert waste consists of items like wood, paper, card, textiles, food and garden wastes.
Hazardous waste can include wastes such as clinical, asbestos, organic and inorganic
chemical processes, oils, paints and adhesives amongst others.
Although waste is generated from a number of sources, it is generally defined into those that
that are classified as either ‘controlled’ or not controlled, as specified by the Environmental
Protection Act (Controlled Waste Regulations 1992). Approximately 70% of all waste is
‘controlled’ while the remainder of uncontrolled waste is mining and quarrying waste33. Of
the total UK controlled waste, the South East region contributes approximately 10% and
Hampshire 2.3%.
The three largest controlled sources (or streams) of waste used when planning how to
manage waste are listed below and based upon their origin:
municipal solid waste (MSW) - including household, street litter, waste from civic amenity
sites, etc.
commercial & industrial (C&I) - waste from shop, offices and businesses including industrial
premises
construction, demolition and excavation (CD&E) - waste from building and civil engineering
activities.
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) –
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/kf/wrkf02.htm - accessed 5 January 2006
33
May 2006
67 of 226
Composition of the Waste Stream
The make-up of waste in the United Kingdom as estimated by Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs, Environment Agency and Water UK in one year34 is shown below in
Table 17.
Waste Type
Tonnes
Percent of Total
Construction, Demolition & Excavation (CD&E)
108,900,000
33%
Minerals (mining & quarrying)
95,700,000
29%
Industrial
42,900,000
13%
Commercial
36,300,000
11%
Household
29,700,000
9%
Dredged Material
16,500,000
5%
Agriculture
n/a
< 1%
Sewage Sludge
n/a
< 1%
330,000,000
100%
Total
Table 17 - UK Waste Composition Table (2002-03)
Estimates shown in the chart are mainly based on data for the period 2002/3, although
estimates for sewage sludge and dredged materials relate to earlier years.
The figure for construction and demolition wastes includes excavated soil and miscellaneous
materials as well as hard materials, such as brick, concrete and road planings.
Waste from the agriculture sector excludes manure or straw and represents less than 1 per
cent of total arisings.
Biodegradable municipal waste (BMW) makes up the majority of household waste and
consists of paper and card, food and garden waste and textile waste.
The breakdown of waste produced by a typical household in Hampshire (households
produce the majority of municipal waste) was measured in a survey undertaken by MEL
Research in 199835. The findings of this study are shown below in Figure 22.
10%
Paper and Card
4%
5%
33%
Putrescible (Garden & Food Waste)
Plastics
5%
Metals
Textiles
13%
Glass Bottles/Jars
30%
Miscellaneous
Figure 22 - Composition of Household Waste
34 Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) –
35 MEL Research Ltd – Hampshire Household Waste Compositional Study 1998
May 2006
68 of 226
Commercial and Industrial (C&I) waste is broadly similar to MSW and is produced by
commercial sources such as trade, business, sport, recreation and entertainment sites. It is
also the source of most hazardous waste. The main industrial element includes general
industrial (paper and packaging, floor sweepings and general rubbish), chemicals, other
general and biodegradable, paper & card waste, metals mineral waste and residues, etc.
Construction, Demolition and Excavation (CD&E) waste arises largely from the construction,
repair, maintenance or demolition of structures (e.g. roads) and buildings. The make up is
mostly of brick, concrete, hardcore, subsoil and topsoil. Timber, metal, plastics and
occasionally some hazardous waste is included.
Resource Streams
In 2004, during the development of the Material Resources Strategy (MRS) by Hampshire
County Council, Portsmouth City Council, Southampton City Council, Hampshire Natural
Resources Initiative and Project Integra set out to investigate specific aspects of waste
creation:
•
Resource Stream - looking at all the types of waste, their arisings, recycling potential
and estimated growth rates
•
Process Chain - looking at issues like product design, business practice, retail,
consumption, etc. that could influence the MRS
•
Unavoidable Waste - looking at the residue waste that the resource groups felt could
not be recycled
The resource stream groups consisted of 12 teams of MRS stakeholders who were considered
to have detailed knowledge of their respective resource stream. They looked at current
trends, waste arisings, disposal options and likely changes by 2020 with each group
producing a background paper summarising their findings36. These twelve resource streams
are listed below and are summarised in the next section.
36
•
Agricultural Waste
•
Biowaste – Food, Green, Wastewater
•
Paper & Card
•
Plastics
•
Glass
•
Metals
•
Construction Waste & Soil
•
End of Life Vehicles & Abandoned Vehicles (ELVs & AVs)
•
Chemical & Hazardous Waste
•
Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE)
•
Wood
•
Textiles
Material Resources Strategy (MRS) accessed 05/05/05 www.mrs-hampshire.org.uk
May 2006
69 of 226
Environmental consultants Entec UK Ltd, collated data from these papers into one
document; Hampshire Material Resources Strategy: Aggregation of the Resource Stream
Data37. From a baseline study year of 2004, projections for waste growth were generated up
to the year 2020. The study also looked at the level of recycling that could be achieved
under two scenarios; business as usual and a stretching best practice. Additionally a figure
for the amount and type of residual waste was calculated.
The 12 resource streams that were researched for the Material Resources Strategy are
summarised below in Table 18. Estimated arisings in the year 2004 and projections for the
year 2010. Biological waste has been subdivided into two sub-streams and an extra stream
referred to as Miscellaneous has been added for waste such as packaging, mixed general
waste, inert waste (including glass and ceramic), etc. that could not be allocated to the
other waste streams37.
Arisings per
year
in 2004
Predicted
Arisings
in 2010
Agricultural Waste
998,100
998,100
Biodegradable Food Waste (including Household and C&I, but not Garden waste)
512,358
549,000
Biowaste (green) (household only)
244,000
261,600
unknown
unknown
Paper & Card
865,790
865,790
Plastics
296,052
374,600
Glass
90,000
90,000
Metals
178,976
195,490
2,875,500
2,947,390
End of Life Vehicles & Abandoned Vehicles (ELVs & AVs)
69,900
72,700
Chemical & Hazardous Waste
134,674
180,000
8,480
8,978
Wood
145,420
155,913
Textiles
40,000
40,000
Miscellaneous
209,450
222,335
5,670,600
5,963,796
Resource Stream
Biowaste - Wastewater
Construction Waste & Soil
Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE)
Total (without agricultural waste)
Table 18 - Resource Stream Arisings 2004 and 2010
37
Entec UK Ltd - Hampshire Materials Resources Strategy: Aggregation of the Resource Stream Data
www.mrs-hampshire.org.uk
May 2006
70 of 226
Waste Arisings
To calculate a reasonable figure for waste arisings in Hampshire requires data to be collated
from a number of sources as there is no single point of reference. For example, for municipal
waste the best source of information is that supplied by Project Integra, a partnership of all
the district and city councils responsible for planning the collection of all household waste.
For construction, demolition and excavation waste the best source is the Office of the
Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) and the Environment Agency (EA) while for commercial and
industrial waste and hazardous waste, the Environment Agency38 is a good source. The
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)39 supply national information
and the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA)40 supply data for the South East
Region of the UK. Unfortunately much of this data is out of date or relates to differing time
periods.
Waste going into licensed waste sites is generally recorded at the weighbridge. This is
collated and returned to the Environment Agency and referred to as site input returns or
‘waste returns’ by the Environment Agency. Although generally a requirement of their waste
management license, some waste operators do not supply this information. There is also a risk
that returns may be deliberately or accidentally inaccurate.
Waste returns do not equate to waste production (or waste arisings) as some waste is re-used
or recycled on-site or is managed outside the waste licensing system and hence does not
enter a regulated waste management facility. Significant quantities of waste (e.g.
Agricultural, CD&E, etc.) are also sent to sites that are ‘exempt’ from a waste management
license and hence are not required to report on the quantities handled. There are over 250
sites carrying out waste processing activities in Hampshire.
For these reasons, overall waste returns are likely to an underestimation of actual waste
arisings. However, as the only comprehensive measurement of waste production they do
give a guide to waste arisings. The last available of these predicts 33.01 million tonnes arising
in the region in 2002-03.
For the 1998-99 survey the South East region produced 4 million tonnes of municipal solid
waste and 9 million tonnes of commercial and industrial waste. In the 2002-03 survey, the
production of commercial and industrial waste reduced to 8.85 million tonnes.
The waste that is deposited (treated or disposed) in Hampshire from waste arisings in
Hampshire and waste imported to Hampshire based upon waste returns as recorded by the
Environment Agency38 is shown below in Table 19.
Inert
(CD&E)
Special
(Hazardous)
Municipal
(MSW)
Comm./Ind.
(C&I)
Total
Portsmouth
455,116
94,518
220,146
769,780
Southampton
102,148
133,200
76,122
311,470
Hampshire (excluding Portsmouth and
Southampton)
1,590,793
704,608
1,172,107
3,559,118
Hampshire (including Portsmouth and
Southampton)
2,148,057
932,326
1,468,375
4,640,368
91,610
Table 19 - Waste Deposits in Hampshire (2002-2003)
Environment Agency – Strategic Waste Management Information 2002-2003
Regional Waste Management Strategy – No Time to Waste
38
39
May 2006
71 of 226
For comparison, the estimations from work undertaken on the Material Resources Strategy
are shown below along with the actual municipal waste handled by Project Integra in Table
20 below.
To calculate a figure for overall waste from the controlled waste streams in one year, the
most recent data available across all three major waste streams is for the year 2002-03.
Taking into account the reliability of the waste recording method, an estimation for the three
main waste streams can be calculated. Using the Project Integra figure for municipal waste
arisings and Environment Agency data for commercial and industrial waste, construction
and demolition and excavation waste returns and hazardous waste, we can arrive at a final
figure of:
4,672,663 tonnes for the year 2002-03.
Note: This does not include the waste reused on site or managed at sites exempt from a waste
management license.
Project Integra
Environment
Agency
Year
2002-03
2002-03
(Haz 03-04)
MSW
898,261
Entec UK Ltd
2004
2004
(without exempt sites)
876,469
876,469
CD&E
2,148,057
2,875,500
1,875,500
C&I
1,468,375
1,918,631
1,918,631
Hazardous
157,970
Total
4,672,663
Haz. Waste within MSW and C&I data
5,670,600
4,670,600
Table 20 - Waste Arisings (and EA Waste Returns) in Hampshire (2002-03)
We believe that the data on Municipal Solid Waste and Hazardous waste is accurate
because the mechanisms for collection and monitoring these wastes are rigorous. The other
data is less reliable. We believe that the estimates of Construction, Demolition and
Excavation wastes are generally accurate because they are reasonably consistent with
surveys carried out by third parties, however, this figure does not include what may be up to
one million tonnes of waste which is either reused on-site or handled by sites that are exempt
from waste management licensing. Discussions with the waste management industry
indicate that the data for Commercial and Industrial wastes may be slightly high and are
more likely to be in the region of 1 - 1.25 million tonnes per year.
May 2006
72 of 226
The total waste arisings can be split across geographic areas based upon population. The
breakdown between the waste streams based upon population is shown below in Table 21.
Region / Totals
Population
(2006
estimate)
Waste
Arisings
% of Hants
based upon
population
population
(tonnes)
CD&E
MSW
C&I
Hazardous
HAMPSHIRE (total)
1,676,660
100%
4,672,663
2,148,057
898,261
1,468,375
157,970
South Hampshire (total)
1,003,660
59.9%
2,797,088
1,285,841
537,705
878,979
94,562
South Hampshire (exc.
Portsmouth and Southampton)
589,870
35.2%
1,643,901
755,713
316,019
516,593
55,576
Portsmouth City
191,600
11.4%
533,968
245,469
102,649
167,798
18,052
Southampton City
222,190
13.3%
619,219
284,659
119,037
194,588
20,934
Forest (total)
171,200
10.2%
477,115
219,333
91,719
149,932
16,130
Forest (exc. Nat. Parks)
136,800
8.2%
381,246
175,262
73,290
119,806
12,889
New Forest National Park
(NFNP)
34,400
2.1%
95,869
44,072
18,430
30,127
3,241
Downland (total)
195,240
11.6%
544,112
250,132
104,599
170,986
18,395
Downland (exc. Nat. Parks)
155,140
9.3%
432,358
198,758
83,115
135,868
14,617
proposed South Downs NP
(Hants only)
40,100
2.4%
111,754
51,374
21,483
35,119
3,778
306,560
18.3%
854,348
392,750
164,238
268,477
28,883
Table 21 - Waste Arisings In Hampshire's Geographic areas
Notes: 1) Agricultural waste is not included in the above figures as it is currently exempt from waste
management licensing. The Environment Agency calculated these arisings in Hampshire as 988,100
tonnes in 199841.
41
May 2006
73 of 226
Municipal Waste Arisings
Municipal waste includes waste from a variety of sources which can be grouped into either
household or non-household. These are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
regular household collection
other household sources (not collected regularly)
civic amenity sites (also known as household waste recycling centres)
household recycling (materials collected by local authorities for recycling)
non-household sources (excluding recycling)
non-household recycling
According to the Municipal Waste Management Survey, published by Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) in March 200542, the majority of municipal waste
is from household waste and is over 90% of the total in the South East region. The remainder is
generated by the commercial sector.
The Municipal waste arisings in 1996/97 to 2004/05 for the South East region as published by
DEFRA are shown below in Table 22. The figures for 2004/05 are provisional and are the first
year that data has been derived from WasteDataFlow – DEFRA’s new online system for
quarterly municipal waste data reporting by Local Authorities. All figures are in thousand
tonnes.
Household waste
from:
19961997
19971998
19981999
19992000
20002001
20012002
20022003
20032004
20042005
Regular
Household
collection
2,327
2,379
2,418
2,486
2,540
2,529
2,492
2,395
2,381
Other
household
sources
120
196
132
127
178
192
191
171
157
Civic amenity
sites
872
840
803
872
757
751
739
672
613
Household
recycling
453
474
514
610
683
745
835
957
1,119
Total household
3,772
3,890
3,868
4,095
4,157
4,216
4,257
4,195
4,270
Non-household
sources (excl.
recycling)
183
90
123
120
108
150
151
181
192
Non-household
recycling
5
25
56
68
78
111
130
152
173
Total municipal
waste
3,960
4,006
4,047
4,284
4,344
4,477
4,538
4,529
4,635
Household
Proportion of
Municipal Waste
95.3%
97.1%
95.6%
95.6%
95.7%
94.2%
93.8%
92.6%
92.1%
Table 22 - Municipal Waste Arisings History in the South East Region (1997-2005)
42 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) - Municipal Waste Management Survey and
WasteDataFlow
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/wastats/index.htm – accessed 27 March 2006
May 2006
74 of 226
Hampshire has a waste management partnership, known as Project Integra that was formed
in 1993. It consists of the 11 district councils in Hampshire; Portsmouth and Southampton City
Councils; Hampshire County Council and the county’s disposal contractor – Hampshire
Waste Services. Waste collection services are currently organised by the Waste Collection
Authorities i.e. District, Borough and City Councils.
The actual municipal growth over the last 10 years in Hampshire is shown below in Table 23.
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
764,559
790,649
814,773
855,993
860,839
885,009
900,065
881,291
900,488
Table 23 - Municipal Waste Growth (1997-2005)
The waste arisings by district, borough or city council as recorded by Project Integra43 for the
year 2004-05 are shown below in Figure 23.
120,000
100,000
Tonnes
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
Ha
rt
Ea
ig
st
h
Ha
m
ps
hi
re
Te
st
Va
lle
y
Fa
re
ha
m
W
in
ch
es
te
r
Ru
sh
m
oo
r
G
os
po
rt
t
Ea
st
le
Ha
va
n
Fo
re
st
Po
rts
gs
m
to
ou
ke
th
an
d
D
ea
ne
N
ew
Ba
sin
So
ut
ha
m
pt
o
n
0
Figure 23 - Municipal Waste Arisings by District Council and City Council (in 2004-05)
43
Project Integra - Waste Volume Service Plans (published from years 1999–2004)
May 2006
75 of 226
The district and city council waste arisings for both district (which includes approximately 95%
of household waste) and household waste recycling centres (HWRC’s) for the last 9 years44
are shown in Figure 24 and Figure 25. All figures are in tonnes.
100,000
Southampton
90,000
Portsmouth
New Forest
80,000
Basingstoke and Deane
70,000
Winchester
Tonnes
60,000
Test Valley
Havant
50,000
Fareham
40,000
Eastleigh
East Hampshire
30,000
Hart
20,000
Rushmoor
10,000
Gosport
0
1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05
Year
Figure 24 - District Waste Arisings (1997-2005)
The overall trend of all household domestic waste collected shows that waste received has
gradually increased over the years from a total figure of 547,916 tonnes to 635,710 tonnes.
The one district which has shown the longest sustained reduction or no growth in waste
arisings since 2000/01 is East Hampshire. This has been due to the increasing range of
materials recovered over the period and the high participation in recycling.
Total collected household waste in 2004/05 was 635,712 tonnes which across 707,782
dwellings works out at 0.90 tonnes per household.
44
Project Integra - Waste Volume Service Plans (published from years 1999–2005)
May 2006
76 of 226
40,000
New Forest
35,000
Havant
Eastleigh
30,000
Southampton
Rushmoor
25,000
Tonnes
East Hampshire
Gosport
20,000
Portsmouth
Fareham
15,000
10,000
Test Valley
Winchester
5,000
Hart
0
1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05
Year
Figure 25 - Household Waste Recycling Centre Waste Deposits (1997-2005)
The overall trend of all household waste recycling centres is that waste received has
gradually increased over the years over the years from a total figure of 170,594 tonnes to
251,808 tonnes. East Hampshire shows a significant sustained growth over this period while
the low deposits at both Southampton and Portsmouth indicate that relative to their
population, there is insufficient ‘bring’ capacity.
HWRC arisings that have significantly changed in the last two years are Southampton,
Portsmouth and Eastleigh and this is due to the way the waste amounts are apportioned to
the cities and borough. This is to ensure the waste deposited at the HWRC is representative of
their users, some of whom use an HWRC outside their district or city. See note 3 below.
May 2006
77 of 226
Notes to Figure 24 and Figure 25 above.
Source: Waste Volume Service Plans 1999-2005, 2000-2006, 2002-2008, 2003-2009, 2004-2010, 2005-2011
1.
District Arisings include all kerbside collections, litter, highway sweepings, flytipped waste,
clinical, any external recycling undertaken outside of the contract
2.
HWRC Arisings include all waste types taken at the HWRC’s in the District area
3.
For 2003/04 HWRC Arisings have been compiled based on the percentage usage at the sites
rather than in District Areas - see below for the contribution from each HWRC:
Portsmouth
Havant
31% Havant HWRC
57% Paulsgrove (Portsmouth) HWRC
Southampton
4.
69% Havant HWRC
43% Paulsgrove (Portsmouth) HWRC
Eastleigh
100% Chapel (Southampton) HWRC
97.3% Eastleigh HWRC
2.7% Eastleigh HWRC
15% Hedge End HWRC
55% Netley HWRC
85% Hedge End HWRC
45% Netley HWRC
100% Fair Oak
For 2004/05 HWRC Arisings have been compiled based on slightly different percentage usage
at the HWRC sites - see below for the contribution from each HWRC
Portsmouth
Eastleigh
30.5% Havant HWRC
75.4% Paulsgrove (Portsmouth) HWRC
1% Segensworth HWRC
6% Waterlooville HWRC
91.5% Eastleigh HWRC
88% Hedge End HWRC
38% Netley HWRC
100% Fair Oak HWRC
Southampton
96% Chapel (Southampton) HWRC
8.5% Eastleigh HWRC
12% Hedge End HWRC
10.5% Marchwood HWRC
62% Netley HWRC
Havant
69.5% Havant HWRC
24.6% Paulsgrove (Portsmouth) HWRC
New Forest
94% Waterlooville HWRC
Fareham
100% Efford HWRC
99% Segensworth HWRC
100% Somerley HWRC
The total waste collected from households and household waste recycling sites was 887,518
tonnes in 2004-05. Of this total, household waste accounted for 73% while household waste
recycling centres contributed 27%.
May 2006
78 of 226
Biodegradable Municipal Waste (BMW)
The total municipal waste arisings and the proportion that biodegradable waste contributes
to the total for Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton in 2001/0245 are shown below in
Table 24. All figures are in tonnes.
Biodegradable
Percent of Total
Hampshire
697,277
474,148
77.0%
Portsmouth
97,254
66,133
10.7%
Southampton
111,460
75,793
12.3%
Total (tonnes)
905,991
616,074
100.0%
Table 24 - Municipal Waste Arisings in Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton (2001-02)
The targets45 set by DEFRA to reduce the amount of BMW reaching landfill in Hampshire,
Portsmouth and Southampton have been based upon the BMW arisings in 2001/02 (as shown
above). The allowance for the amount of biodegradable waste which can be landfilled is
shown in Table 25 below.
By 2010
By 2013
By 2020
Hampshire
270,180
179,959
125,923
Portsmouth
37,684
25,100
17,563
Southampton
43,188
28,767
20,129
Total (tonnes)
351,052
233,826
163,615
Table 25 - Biodegradable Municipal Waste Allowances (2010-2013-2020)
45
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) - Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme: Final Allocation
of Landfill Allowances http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/localauth/lats/allocation.htm
(accessed 29 April 2005)
May 2006
79 of 226
Commercial and Industrial Waste Arisings
In 1998/99 Commercial and Industrial waste produced by businesses contributed
approximately 75 million tonnes or one fifth of all waste in the UK46. This figure was calculated
from a national waste production survey of 20,000 businesses in England and Wales carried
out by the Environment Agency47. Two-thirds of this was attributable to industry and the
remainder to commerce. The metals sector was the highest single contributor with over 9
million tonnes of waste. The food, drink and tobacco industries were next highest with more
than 7 million tonnes and the coke, oil, gas, electricity and water industries at just under 7
million tonnes46.
A second survey of 7,000 businesses in England & Wales producing commercial and industrial
waste was undertaken for the year 2002-0348. Data collected included the amount and type
of waste produced and the methods of waste disposal or recovery. From this information an
estimate for commercial and industrial waste for England and Wales was calculated. The
new survey indicated a small drop in the total amount of waste from businesses (73 million
tonnes), although as both this and the previous survey figures are estimates, this cannot be
defined as a trend.
Previously in 2000, the Environment Agency produced a regional summary of amounts and
types of waste and how they are managed entitled Strategic Waste Management
Assessment in 2000: South East49. This document included a breakdown of the waste
composition of commercial and industrial waste in the South East region. The split between
commercial and industrial waste was much more even than the national split with just over
half of C&I waste from the industrial sector. This difference compared to the national
average above was attributed to the significantly higher amount of commerce in the South
East. This difference was highlighted by the General Waste (or mixed waste) stream with the
commercial stream contributing the majority (70%) of the combined totals for commercial
and industrial waste general waste.
46 Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) – accessed 6 January 2006
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/wrindustry.htm
47 Environment Agency - National Waste Production Survey 1998/99
48 Environment Agency – Commercial & Industrial Waste Survey 2002/03 - accessed 6 January 2006
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/subjects/waste/1031954/315439/1173610/?version=1&lang=_e
49 Environment Agency - Strategic Waste Management Assessment 2000: South East
May 2006
80 of 226
The amounts of industrial and commercial waste produced in Hampshire and the South East
as recorded by the Environment Agency in 1998/99 are shown below for industrial,
commercial and combined wastes in Table 26 and Table 27. All figures are in thousand
tonnes.
Industrial Wastes
Hampshire (tonnes/percent)
Hampshire’s Contribution
towards the South East Total
275 (30%)
201(22%)
137 (15%)
97 (11%)
73 (8%)
62 (7%)
33 (4%)
31 (3%)
10 (1%)
20%
32%
16%
26%
23%
21%
14%
17%
1%
919 (100%)
19%
General Industrial
Chemicals & other
Other general & biodegradable
Paper & Card
Metals & scrap equipment
Contaminated general
Food
Inert/Construction & Demolition
Minerals wastes & residues
Total (in thousand tonnes/percent)
Table 26 - Industrial Waste Returns (1998/99)
Commercial Wastes
General Commercial
Paper & Card
Food
Chemicals & other
Hampshire
593 (72%)
85 (10%)
62 (8%)
24 (3%)
21 (3%)
13 (2%
13 (2%)
6 (1%)
1 (0%)
20%
20%
19%
21%
21%
20%
21%
21%
25%
818 (100%)
20%
Table 27 - Commercial Waste Returns (1998/99)
The two tables above are combined in Table 28 below. All figures in thousand tonnes.
Waste Type
Hampshire
General Commercial & Industrial
Chemicals & other
Paper & Card
Food
Inert/Construction & Demolition (see note 5)
868 (50%)
214 (12%)
199 (11%)
182 (10%)
94 (5%)
86 (5%)
46 (3%)
37 (2%)
11 (1%)
20%
31%
17%
23%
23%
21%
15%
18%
2%
1,737 (100%)
19%
Table 28 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Returns (1998/99)
May 2006
81 of 226
Notes to tables above:
1) The ‘paper & card’ waste stream comprises only that waste collected separately, it does not include
the paper & card component in the general industrial & commercial waste streams.
2) The ‘food’ waste reported here comprises waste collected separately for recovery or disposal. It
does not include food collected as part of the general industrial & commercial waste stream. This
waste material may be used as animal feed or, particularly in the case of large volume animal and
vegetable wastes from the food processing industries (for example, spent hops from brewing) may be
spread on land.
3) The figure for Inert/Construction & Demolition waste is artificially low since it does not take into
account the material that is processed on sites exempt from a waste management license
4) General Industrial and commercial waste consists mainly of paper and packaging, floor sweepings
and general rubbish50.
5) Due to the way the national waste survey was conducted, the waste produced and recorded was
only from the companies own operations. Hence, this figure is artificially low since it does include inert
construction and demolition waste from buildings that companies were demolishing as part of their
contract.
Viridis/TRL Ltd produced estimations on C&I arisings for Hampshire on behalf of SEERA in 2003
using Environment Agency data for the year 2000. This data is shown below in Table 29. All
figures in thousand tonnes.
Waste Type
General Commercial & Industrial
Industrial
Commercial
C&I
Combined
Percentage of
Total
292
629
921
50%
Chemicals & other
213
14
227
12%
145
66
211
11%
Paper & Card
106
90
196
11%
77
23
100
5%
65
25
90
5%
Food
34
14
48
3%
32
6
38
2%
11
1
12
1%
975
868
1,843
100%
Table 29 - Commercial and Industrial Waste produced in Hampshire (2000)
50
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/index.htm- accessed 5 July 2005
May 2006
82 of 226
The Environment Agency commercial and industrial survey data for 2002-03 was released in
a format with different waste types to those used in the previous 1998-99 survey. This is shown
below for industrial, commercial and combined wastes in Table 30, Table 31 and Table 32.
All figures are in thousand tonnes.
Hampshire
South East Total
Contribution towards
South East Total
Mixed
142 (25%)
724
20%
Chemicals
126 (22%)
579
22%
Non-metallic
97 (17%)
607
16%
Metallic
71 (13%)
271
26%
Animal & plant
67 (12%)
391
17%
Waste type
Mineral wastes
48 (9%)
925
5%
Common sludges
6 (1%)
71
8%
Discarded equipment
4 (1%)
14
29%
560 (100%)
3581
16%
Total (in thousand tonnes)
Table 30 - Industrial Waste Type (2002-03)
Hampshire
South East Total
South East Total
Mixed
521(51%)
2,689
19%
Non-metallic
Waste Type
295 (29%)
1,520
19%
Animal & plant
74 (7%)
374
20%
Chemicals
62 (6%)
328
19%
Mineral wastes
34 (3%)
183
19%
Metallic
20 (2%)
104
19%
Discarded equipment
Common sludges
9 (1%)
45
20%
5 (<1%)
27
19%
1019 (100%)
5,271
19%
Table 31 - Commercial Waste Type (2002-03)
Hampshire
South East Total
South East Total
Mixed
663 (42%)
3,413
39%
Non-metallic
392 (25%)
2,127
24%
Chemicals
188 (12%)
907
10%
Animal & plant
141 (9%)
765
9%
Metallic
91 (6%)
375
4%
Mineral wastes
82 (5%)
1,107
13%
Discarded equipment
13 (1%)
59
1%
Common sludges
11 (1%)
98
1%
1579 (100%)
8852
18%
Waste Type
Table 32 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Type (2002-03)
May 2006
83 of 226
The tables above highlight a significant change in the split between industrial and
commercial waste from 1998-99 to 2002-03. The proportion between industrial and
commercial was 53% : 47% in 1998-99. The latest data (2002-03) show this has now changed
to 35% : 65%, which highlights the increasing waste from the commercial sector.
The most up to date figures51 from the Environment Agency for the year 2002-2003 show that
1,468,375 tonnes of C&I waste was managed through regulated sites. These ‘site inputs’ that
refer to the quantity of waste deposited at licensed waste handling facilities within district
and city council areas is shown below in Table 33.
District or Unitary Authority
Tonnage
Percent of Total
New Forest
380,551
25.9%
280,310
19.1%
Portsmouth
220,146
15.0%
Test Valley
175,418
11.9%
Hart
126,827
8.6%
Southampton
76,122
5.2%
Eastleigh
70,212
4.8%
Havant
43,052
2.9%
East Hampshire
30,838
2.1%
Rushmoor
19,935
1.4%
Winchester
17,608
1.2%
Fareham
15,435
1.1%
Gosport
11,921
0.8%
1,468,375
100.0%
Hampshire
Table 33 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Returns (in 2002-03)
This shows that the first five areas are dealing with over 80% of all commercial & industrial
waste managed in Hampshire.
The data can be analysed further to show the waste facilities that handled the amounts of
waste. This is shown below in Table 34 for the three areas handling the most waste.
Waste Facility Type
Metal Recycling
Landfill inputs
Transfer and HWRC
Treatment
Total
New Forest
Basingstoke & Deane
Portsmouth
3,323 (0.9%)
178,459 (63.7%)
133,521(60.7%)
158,639 (41.7%)
71,036 (25.3%)
77,280 (35.1%)
29,149 (7.7%)
30,325 (10.8%)
4,185 (1.9%)
189,441 (49.8%)
490 (0.2%)
5,160 (2.3%)
380,552 (100%)
280,310 (100%)
220,146 (100%)
Table 34 - Waste Managed by Facility Type in 2002-03 (in tonnes)
In New Forest district there are the Blue Haze and Efford landfill sites and the Marchwood oil
treatment facility. In Basingstoke and Deane borough, along with the Apsley Farm landfill site
there are five metal recycling sites. In Portsmouth City there are nine metal recycling sites
and one landfill site (now closed)
51
Environment Agency – Commercial & Industrial Waste Survey 2002-2003
May 2006
84 of 226
The amount of C&I waste that is handled by each district or city council area and how that
corresponds with it’s population is highlighted below in Table 35.
Amount of C&I waste
handled (Tonnes)
Census Population
(2003)
New Forest
380,551
171,200
2.2
280,310
154,400
1.8
Portsmouth
220,146
188,700
1.2
Test Valley
175,418
111,300
1.0
Hart
126,827
85,700
0.7
Southampton
76,122
221,100
0.4
Eastleigh
70,212
115,900
0.4
Havant
43,052
116,300
0.3
East Hampshire
30,838
110,200
0.2
Rushmoor
19,935
90,000
0.1
Winchester
17,608
109,600
0.1
Fareham
15,435
109,000
0.1
Gosport
11,921
77,400
0.1
1,468,375
1,660,800
Average = 0.7
Hampshire
Waste Handling
Tonnage per person
Table 35 - C&I Waste Handling Capacity versus population (in 2002-03)
May 2006
85 of 226
Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste Arisings
Construction, Demolition and Excavation (CD&E) waste is produced by households, industry
and businesses from the construction, modification, extension and destruction of, buildings,
built infrastructure and civil engineering projects. It is the source of approximately half of all
controlled waste. The waste is generally inert and with the exception of contaminated soils,
is relatively easy to reuse or recycle.
Recording and estimating the actual arisings of this waste stream can pose significant
challenges due to its properties and the fact that much of the waste is reused on site or
managed at exempt sites.
National surveys designed to generate estimates for construction, demolition and excavation
waste used and disposed of at licensed landfills, recycled aggregate and soil and CD&E
waste spread on registered exempt sites were conducted in 1999, 2001 and 2003 on behalf
of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. These surveys showed that the South East region in
the year 2001 produced approximately 13.44 million tonnes52 and by 2003, CD&E arisings had
increased to 15.23 million tonnes53.
Construction, demolition and excavation waste is used and disposed of in a variety of ways
and Table 36 below indicates the proportions in use and disposal, and the share that the
South East region contributes in England as calculated by ODPM. All figures are in million
tonnes.
England
South East
Bands (90%
confidence)
Recycled as aggregate and soil
45.45 (50%)
5.52 (36%)
+/-10%
Used at Para 9 & 19 (exempt) sites
16.43 (18%)
2.91 (19%)
+/-38%
Used to backfill quarry voids
13.41(15%)
2.74 (18%)
+/-26%
Disposed of as waste at landfills
9.19 (10%)
2.07 (14%)
+/-19%
Used for landfill engineering or restoration
6.45 (7%)
1.99 (13%)
+/-31%
90.93 (100%)
15.23 (100%)
Use
Total CD&E waste
Note:
Para 9 & 19 refer to the Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994
Table 36 - Regional estimates for use and disposal of CD&E Waste in England (in 2003)
The split in the regional estimate of 5.52mt for the production of recycled aggregate and soils
in the South East were 4.82mt (±14%) and 0.70mt (±19%) respectively.
The data above indicates that compared with the national perspective, the region is
recycling less (by 14%) and sending more to landfill.
52 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) - Survey of Arisings and Use of Construction and Demolition Waste in
England and Wales in 2001
May 2006
86 of 226
Both SEERA54 and Entec Uk Ltd in their work on the Material Resources Strategy55 have
produced an estimate of CD&E waste arisings in Hampshire that includes waste produced at
sites exempt from a waste management license (WML). The actual inert waste returns at
licensed sites for the year 2002-03 as recorded by the Environment Agency56 were 2,148,057
tonnes and this was 17.7% of the regional total. This percentage has been applied to the
ODPM survey figure for the region in 2003 (which also includes sites exempt from a waste
management license) to arrive at an approximate figure for Hampshire. All figures are shown
below in Table 37.
Year
Exempt Sites
included
CD&E
Waste Arisings
SEERA
2005
Yes
3,023,576
Entec UK Ltd
2004
Yes
2,875,500
2002-03
No
2,148,057
2003
Yes
2,696,595
Organisation
Environment Agency
ODPM (17.7% of regional total)
Table 37 - Estimations of CD&E Waste Arisings and Waste Returns in Hampshire
A significant amount of construction, demolition and excavation waste arisings are not
recorded by the Environment Agency as this material is deposited on sites that are exempt
from a waste management license. This can also include sites where the waste is re-used on
site for engineering purposes, an example being whereby a old building is demolished and
the concrete and brick rubble is crushed and used as infill.
In August 2004, consultants Viridis/TRL Ltd produced a report57 for the Department of Trade &
Industry estimating the total the total arisings of inert CD&E waste in Hampshire. The report
used figures supplied from the Southern region of the Environment Agency licensed sites in
the area of Hampshire and was stated as 1.54 million tonnes per annum. This report did not
include sites in the south western fringe of Hampshire which are part of the Environment
Agency’s South West Region or the north east corner of the county (Thames region) and
therefore the major urban areas of Basingstoke, Aldershot, Farnborough and Fleet were not
taken into account in this Hampshire total.
55 Entec UK Ltd - Hampshire Materials Resources Strategy: Aggregation of the Resource Stream Data
56 Environment Agency – Strategic Waste Management Assessment 2002-2003
57 Viridis Ltd - Optimising the use of Recycled and Secondary Aggregate in Hampshire (work was carried out under a
Partners in Innovation collaborative construction research project part funded by the Department of Trade and
Industry).
May 2006
87 of 226
The most up to date waste return figures58 from the Environment Agency for the year 20022003 show that CD&E waste returns were 2,148,057 tonnes. The quantity of waste handled at
licensed waste facilities in each district and city council area is shown below in Table 38. It
includes all waste recorded entering both open gate and restricted user landfill sites, transfer
and civic amenity facilities, physical treatment facilities and metal recycling facilities.
The table does not indicate the location of waste arisings, it shows where the waste has been
deposited.
Tonnage
Percent of Total
Portsmouth
455,116
21.2%
Test Valley
444,300
20.7%
Eastleigh
287,014
13.4%
East Hampshire
212,459
9.9%
Fareham
178,566
8.3%
New Forest
158,917
7.4%
Southampton
102,148
4.8%
Rushmoor
94,098
4.4%
Gosport
75,364
3.5%
Havant
73,837
3.4%
63,760
3.0%
Winchester
1,652
0.1%
826
0.0%
2,148,057
100.0%
Hart
Hampshire
Table 38 - Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste Returns (in 2002-03)
58
Environment Agency – Strategic Waste Management Assessment 2002-2003
May 2006
88 of 226
The amount of CD&E waste that is handled by each district or city council area and how
that corresponds with it’s population is shown below in Table 39.
Amount of CD&E
waste handled
(Tonnes)
Census Population
(2003)
Waste Handling
Tonnage per person
455,116
188,700
2.4
Test Valley
444,300
111,300
4.0
Eastleigh
287,014
115,900
2.5
East Hampshire
212,459
110,200
1.9
Fareham
178,566
109,000
1.6
New Forest
158,917
171,200
0.9
Southampton
102,148
221,100
0.5
Rushmoor
94,098
90,000
1.0
Gosport
Havant
75,364
73,837
77,400
116,300
1.0
0.6
63,760
154,400
0.4
Winchester
1,652
109,600
0.0
Hart
826
85,700
0.0
Total
2,148,057
1,660,800
1.3
Portsmouth
Table 39 - CD&E Waste Handling Capacity versus population (in 2002-03)
The table above highlights that some local authorities are dealing with a great deal more
waste than their respective populations compared with the average of 1.3 tonnes per
person. With the recent closure of the Paulsgrove landfill site in Portsmouth, inert waste will
have to be deposited in other local authorities and/or directed to new inert recycling
facilities .
May 2006
89 of 226
Composition of Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste
The Building Research Establishment in their Digest 433 on Recycled Aggregates59 estimated
the UK arisings of construction, demolition and excavation waste and calculated a
percentage for each waste type in it’s composition. Viridis/TRL Ltd used these estimated
percentages to apportion a tonnage for each waste type from their estimation of
Hampshire’s total CD&E arisings - 1.54 million tonnes. The limitation of this estimation of
Hampshire’s total is that it based upon Environment Agency waste return data in its Southern
region. It does not include a significant part of north-east Hampshire.
The percentages and respective tonnages for construction and demolition wastes are shown
below in Table 40. The remaining contribution of 659,119 tonnes from CD&E waste, namely
excavation waste, is generally soil or clay waste60
Waste Type
Percent
Indicative
Tonnages
Packaging
25
55,440
Timber
19
42,134
Miscellaneous
14
31,046
Plastic
13
28,829
11
24,394
6
13,306
3
6,653
Insulation
3
6,653
Plaster and Cement
3
6,653
Metal
3
6,653
Construction
Inert
Waste
Composition Concrete
Ceramic
Total Tonnage
by Type
221,761
100%
Concrete
Demolition
Waste
Composition
40
263,648
Masonry
24
158,189
Paper, cardboard, plastic and other
17
112,050
Asphalt
15
98,868
Wood based
3
19,774
Other
1
6,591
659,120
100%
Excavation
Waste
Total
Soil or clay waste
n/a
659,119
659,119
1,540,000
Table 40 - Composition of Construction, Demolition & Excavation Waste
The amount of hazardous construction, demolition and excavation waste (including
asbestos) was 50,425 tonnes in 2002-03 according to the Environment Agency waste return
figures and shown below in Table 41. The majority of this waste is likely to be contaminated
soils.
In comparison, CD&E arisings in 2004 were estimated as 2,875,500 tonnes by Entec UK Ltd as
part of their work on the Material Resources Strategy. This figure includes the North East
Hampshire geographic area with a population of approximately 320,000 which is similar to
the area omitted in the Viridis/TRL report. It also includes an estimated 1,000,000 tonnes of
material which is processed on sites without a Waste Management License.
Building Research Establishment Digest 433: Recycled Aggregates (1998)
Viridis Ltd - Optimising the use of Recycled and Secondary Aggregate in Hampshire (work was carried out under a
Industry).
59
60
May 2006
90 of 226
Hazardous Waste Arisings
The types and quantities of hazardous (or special) waste returns including imports, as
recorded by the Environment Agency61 in 2003 are shown below in Table 41. The majority of
waste arising is from the commercial and industrial sector while only a very small amount (6%)
is generated by the municipal waste stream62. This hazardous municipal waste consists
mainly of oils, paint, batteries, fluorescent tubes and garden chemicals which are usually
received at household waste recycling centres.
Type of Hazardous Waste
Hampshire
Hampshire’s contribution
to the South East Region
Oil and Oil/Water Mixtures
57,242 (36.2%)
42.8%
Construction, Demolition & Excavation Waste and Asbestos
50,425 (31.9%)
38.4%
Unclassified
10,550 (6.7%)
56.6%
Organic Chemical Processes
8,982 (5.7%)
25.5%
Inorganic Chemical Processes
8,038 (5.1%)
52.7%
Not Otherwise Specified
6,707 (4.2%)
24.7%
Waste/Water Treatment and Water Industry
3,881 (2.5%)
17.9%
Metal Treatment and Coating Processes
2,542 (1.6%)
33.2%
MFSU Paints, Varnish, Adhesive and Inks
2,260 (1.4%)
32.9%
Petrol, Gas and Coal Refining/Treatment
1,651 (1.0%)
60.7%
Shaping/Treatment of Metals and Plastics
1,308 (0.8%)
20.8%
Packaging, Cloths, Filter Materials
1,193 (0.8%)
25.2%
Mining and Minerals
947 (0.6%)
89.9%
Photographic Industry
838 (0.5%)
46.0%
Solvents
550 (0.3%)
36.2%
Healthcare
414 (0.3%)
18.8%
Municipal and Similar Commercial Wastes
284 (0.2%)
6.8%
Wood and Paper Production
58 (0%)
7.6%
Thermal Process Waste (inorganic)
46 (0%)
0.2%
Agricultural and Food Production
39 (0%)
14.4%
Leather and Textile Production
17 (0%)
98.2%
157,970 (100%)
35.6%
Total Waste Returns
NOTE: This list does not include Air Pollution Control Residues from incinerators
Table 41 - Hazardous Waste Returns in Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton (2002-03)
The movements63 of the most significant types of hazardous waste is shown below in Table 42.
The table also indicates the proportion that is imported or exported as a percentage of total
imports or exports.
Imported
Percentage of
total imports
Exported
Percentage of
total exports
Oil and Oil/Water Mixtures
29,257
27.5%
10,609
27.5%
Construction, Demolition & Excavation Waste and Asbestos
35,045
32.9%
2,319
6.0%
Unclassified
10,773
10.1%
85
0.2%
Organic Chemical Processes
4,783
4.5%
11,024
28.6%
Inorganic Chemical Processes
8,038
7.6%
517
1.3%
Type of Hazardous Waste
Table 42 - Hazardous Waste Movements (2003)
63 Environment Agency Hazardous Waste Interrogator http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/apps/wastesurvey2/
- accessed 10/1/06
61
62
May 2006
91 of 226
As part of their work on the Material Resources Strategy, Entec Uk Ltd apportioned the total
amount of hazardous waste arisings across the main waste streams64. The results that are
based upon national estimates of hazardous waste are shown in Table 43 below are higher
than the arisings from Hampshire quoted by the Environment Agency above.
Waste Stream
Tonnes
Percent
MSW
9,001
6
C&I
88,273
66
CD&E
37,400
28
Total
134,674
100
Table 43 - Origin of Hazardous Waste Arisings
The quantity of hazardous waste (including imported hazardous waste) arriving at licensed
waste handling facilities by district and city council distribution in Hampshire, as recorded by
the Environment Agency65 in 2002-03, are shown below in Table 44.
District
Tonnage
Percentage of Total
New Forest
57,342
36%
Eastleigh
25,572
16%
Southampton City
19,235
12%
Portsmouth City
16,348
10%
9,099
6%
Test Valley
8,298
5%
East Hampshire
4,653
3%
Gosport
4,651
3%
Winchester
3,723
2%
Fareham
3,213
2%
Havant
2,031
1%
Rushmoor
2,016
1%
Hart
1,790
1%
Total
157,970
100%
Table 44 - District and City Council Waste Returns of Hazardous Waste (in 2002-03)
64
65
May 2006
92 of 226
Table 44 above indicates that the main producers of hazardous waste in this period were
located in New Forest district, Southampton and Portsmouth cities and Eastleigh borough
council. The main producers of hazardous waste in the past have been:
•
New Forest District - Esso Petroleum at Fawley Oil Refinery, Exxon Chemical in Hythe,
KD Offshore oil treatment plant at Marchwood
•
Southampton City - Laporte Performance Chemicals, Nalcon Exxon Chemical
•
Portsmouth City - HM Naval Base
•
Eastleigh Borough - Pirelli cables factory at Eastleigh
Incinerators (municipal, commercial and hazardous), produce residues of Incinerator Bottom
Ash (IBA), Air Pollution Control (APC) residues or a mixture of both and these have historically
been disposed of to landfill. Bottom ash and mixed ash have been disposed of locally, and
APC residues have generally been disposed of out of County to landfill.
The use of incinerators in Hampshire to burn municipal waste to generate energy results in
APC residues. The predicted arisings are expected to be in the region of 16,800 tonnes per
annum from 200666.
In Hampshire, there is one hazardous waste incinerator at Fawley operated by Veolia
Environmental Services. The hazardous waste incinerator produces bottom ash and sludge
at around 20% of the input waste volumes. If running at maximum capacity, this equates to
7,000 tonnes of residual material a year66 There is also one clinical waste incinerator at
Gosport.
66 South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) - Overview of Hazardous Waste in South East England (By Beyond
Waste)
May 2006
93 of 226
Fly-Tipping - Waste Arisings
Fly-tipping is a significant problem in Southampton and Portsmouth. Southampton generated
50% of all incidents while 38% occurred in Portsmouth. Although fly-tipping occurs in other
areas of Hampshire, it amounts to only 12% of the total number of incidents. In the year
ending September 2005, there were 48,299 incidents, the majority (over 87%) occurred on the
highway and council land. The most common type of waste dumped was from the
household; black bags (24%) and other household (44%)67. The actual tonnage of fly-tipped
waste was unavailable but the most common designation was that identified as ‘small van’
not including Southampton City.
The total cost to clear all fly-tipped waste in the year Oct 2004 to September 2005 was
£1,849,614. In the same period there were 286 prosecutions and 759 fines. Almost all fines
(750) were in the range of £501 to £1000. Therefore, although not directly related, over £1
million of clearance costs were not met by fines in this year alone.
The two highest areas for fly-tipping were Southampton and Portsmouth with 24,060 and
18,047 incidents respectively. The remaining incidents in districts and boroughs are shown
below in Figure 26.
1,200
Number of Incidents
1,000
800
600
400
200
BC
R
us
hm
oo
rB
C
Ba
si
ng
st
ok
e
&
D
ea
ne
H
ar
tD
C
tB
C
os
po
r
G
C
in
ch
es
te
rC
C
Ea
st
le
ig
Ea
h
st
BC
H
am
ps
hi
re
BC
W
H
av
an
tB
BC
ha
m
Fa
re
Fo
re
N
ew
Te
st
Va
lle
y
BC
st
D
C
0
Council
Figure 26 - Fly-tipping Incidents by Borough and District (2004-05)
67
Environment Agency – Flycapture Waste Data – October 2004-September 2005
May 2006
94 of 226
The type of waste cleared for districts and boroughs only is shown below in Figure 27.
1,800
1,600
Winchester CC
1,400
Test Valley BC
Number of Incidents
Rushmoor BC
1,200
New Forest DC
1,000
Hart DC
Havant BC
800
Gosport BC
600
Fareham BC
East Hampshire BC
400
Eastleigh BC
Basingstoke & Deane BC
200
ot
he
rh
o
co
b
la use
ns
ck
h
tru
ba old
ct
io
g
s wa
n
ho st
/d
us e
em
eh
ol
ol
iti
d
on
gr
ot
/
he ex ee
r ( ca n
un va
t
id
bl
e ion
ac
w ntif
k
ba hite ied
gs
g )
co ood
m
m s
er
ot
ci
he
al
r c ve
t
om hic yre
m le s
er
pa
c
rts
ot ial
w
he
as
r
an ele te
ch
c
i
m
t
em
al rica
ic
ca
l
al
rc
/d
a
ru as ss
m be
s
/ o sto
s
il
or
fu
cl el
in
ic
al
0
Waste Type
Figure 27 - Fly-tipping incidents by Waste Type - Districts and Boroughs (2004-05)
The type of waste cleared for the cities only is shown below in Figure 28.
30,000
other (unidentified)
other commercial waste
25,000
Number of Incidents
other household waste
chemical / drums / oil or fuel
20,000
black bags household
black bags commercial
15,000
construction / demolition / excavation
clinical
asbestos
10,000
tyres
other electrical
5,000
white goods
vehicle parts
green
0
Portsmouth CC
Southampton CC
animal carcass
City
Figure 28 - Fly-tipping Incidents by Waste Type - Cities (2004-05)
May 2006
95 of 226
The method of tipping is shown below (for districts only) in Figure 29. Across Hampshire, the
most common method used was the ‘small van load’ with 1,772 incidents, but if the cities are
included, then the ‘single item’ was the most fly-tipped item due to Southampton City
recording a figure of 19,927 as opposed to Portsmouth with only 4,502.
1,200
Number of Incidents
1,000
significant multiple loads
800
tipper lorry load
single item
600
car boot load or less
transit van load
400
small van load
200
Ba
si
ng
st
ok
e
&
D
ea
ne
Ea
BC
Ea
st
le
st
i
gh
H
am
BC
ps
hi
re
Fa
BC
re
ha
m
BC
G
os
po
rt
BC
H
av
an
tB
C
H
ar
N
ew
tD
C
Fo
re
st
R
us
D
C
hm
o
Te
or
st
BC
Va
lle
W
y
in
BC
ch
es
te
rC
C
0
Council
Figure 29 - Fly-tipping Incidents by method - Districts and Boroughs (2004-05)
May 2006
96 of 226
Existing Waste Recycling & Disposal
As part of the Material Resources Strategy, the resource stream groups estimated a figure for
recycling for each waste stream. In the summary68, from total waste arisings of 5,670,600
tonnes in 2004 (including exempt CD&E sites), an estimated figure of 2,134,864 tonnes (almost
38%) was recycled.
As stated by Entec Uk Ltd, the amount of CD&E waste taken to exempt sites is estimated to
be approximately 1 million tonnes for “material used for engineering purposes on sites
exempt from a waste management license, is 100% recycled and that none of the non-inert
fraction is recycled”.
By estimating the recycled figure above, a figure for the remaining ‘residual’ waste was also
calculated at 3,535,736 tonnes.
Further information about the three main waste streams in respect of recycling and disposal
is shown in the following sections.
Municipal Waste Recycling
The amount of municipal waste recycled by Project Integra, (excluding Material Recycling
Facility rejects from the kerbside recycling figures) during the years 2003/04 and 2004/0569 is
shown below in Table 45. This includes wastes collected at the kerbside, waste deposited at
‘bring’ sites such as glass, paper and can banks and household waste recycling centres
(HWRC).
2003-04
Tonnes per annum
2004-05
Tonnes per annum
Kerbside collection
74,903 (38%)
86,563 (38%)
HWRC compostables
53,109 (27%)
65,679 (28%)
HWRC
32,525 (16%)
36,000 (16%)
District & Unitary banks
31,426 (16%)
29,748 (13%)
Kerbside compostables
2,791 (1%)
8,073 (4%)
Fridges
2,634 (1%)
2,640 (1%)
Third Party (Salvation Army etc)
1,278 (1%)
1,763 (1%)
198,666 (100%)
230,466 (100%)
Origin
Total
Table 45 - Municipal Waste Recycling Tonnages (2003-05)
As the above table shows, compostable material from kerbside collection and household
waste recycling centres was almost a third (32%) of the total material recycled in the 2004-05
year.
68
69
Project Integra website, accessed 05/08/05 and 04/01/06 www.integra.org.uk/recycling/index.html
May 2006
97 of 226
The recycling and composting rate for all districts and city councils in the year 2003/200470
has been published by the ODPM. These Best Value (BV) Indicators are measures of
performance set by the departments in central government and are shown below in Table
46 along with the collection methods as of January 2006.
District
Or
City Council
East Hampshire
Recycling
Residual
Frequency of Frequency of
Dry
Collection
Collection
Mixed
Weekly (W) Weekly (W)
Recyclables
or
or
Fortnightly (F) Fortnightly (F)
F
F
Y
Eastleigh
F
F
New Forest
W
Fareham
F
Havant
F
Green
Waste
Glass
Textiles
Household
Waste
Recycled
2003-04
(BV 82a)
Household
Waste
Composted
2003-04
(BV82b)
32.2%
4.0%
28.8%
2.2%
Y
Y
Y
Y (in parts) Y (in parts)
W
Y
Y (in parts)
24.4%
0.0%
F
Y
Y
21.2%
0.0%
F
Y
19.0%
0.0%
Winchester
F
W
Y
Y (trial)
17.9%
0.0%
Rushmoor
F
W
Y
Y
Y (in parts)
16.7%
0.0%
Hart
W
W
Y
Y
Y (in parts)
16.6%
0.2%
Basingstoke & Deane
F
W
Y
16.2%
0.0%
Gosport
F
F
Y
Y
14.3%
1.0%
Test Valley
F
W
Y
Y
13.5%
0.0%
Portsmouth
F*
W
Y
13.1%
2.3%
F
W
Y
9.7%
3.3%
Southampton
Y
* = For communal residents, the recycling collection is weekly.
Table 46 - Household Waste Materials Collected and Recycling Rate
The data above suggests that the fortnightly kerbside collection of recyclables and green
waste obtain the highest recycling figures.
The type of materials separated for reuse or recycling including green waste (material for
composting), in order of greatest amount first from all the household waste recycling centres
in 2004-05 are shown below in Table 47.
Material
Tonnes
Percent
Green
66,128
47.6%
Rubble
30,634
22.0%
Ferrous
19,820
14.3%
Card
4,989
3.6%
Bricabrac
3,833
2.8%
Wood
3,608
2.6%
Glass
3,567
2.6%
Fridges
2,254
1.6%
Non-Ferrous
1,263
0.9%
Paper
1,168
0.8%
Batteries
879
0.6%
Textiles
464
0.3%
0.3%
Oil
367
Plastics
66
0.0%
Cans
0
0.0%
Other
0
0.0%
139,040
100.0%
Table 47 - Waste Recycled at Household Waste Recycling Centres (2004-05)
70 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) – Best Value Performance Indicators
www.bvpi.gov.uk/pages/keyfacts_Step1.asp - accessed 10 January 2006
May 2006
98 of 226
The total household waste handled and the amount/percentage recycled (including green
waste) for the last 8 years71 is shown below in Table 48 for the waste collection authority
(WCA) – this is the Hampshire consolidated figure for all district and city councils.
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
Total Handled
(WCAs)
585,608
612,092
622,029
645,232
658,411
657,840
657,737
648,199
648,682
Total Recycled
(WCAs)
39,237
57,829
75,894
85,602
90,749
100,555
113,384
122,600
142,343
Percent
Recycled (%)
7%
9%
12%
13%
14%
15%
17%
19%
22%
Table 48 - Total Household Waste handled and recycled by WCA (1997-2005)
Table 49 shows similar data for Household waste recycling centres but over a shorter period
as the way waste was handled and recycled has changed and therefore comparison data
is not possible. All figures below include the following materials (with 2004-05 year tonnages
in brackets); green waste(66,128), rubble (30,634), bric-a-brac(3,833) and fridges(2,254).
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
Total Handled (HWRC)
210,771
202,428
227,169
242,328
233,091
251,806
Total Recycled (HWRC)
98,383
95,749
118,250
127,376
121,510
139,039
Percent Recycled
(HWRC)
47%
47%
52%
53%
52%
55%
Table 49 - Total Household Waste handled and recycled by HWRC’s (2000-2005)
Table 50 shows the total waste handled and recycled by Project Integra over the last five
years.
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
TOTAL HANDLED
856,003
860,839
885,009
900,065
881,290
900,488
TOTAL RECYCLED
183,985
186,498
218,805
240,760
244,110
281,382
PERCENT RECYCLED
21.5%
21.7%
24.7%
26.7%
27.7%
31.2%
Table 50 - Total Household Waste handled and recycled by Project Integra (2000-2005)
71
Project Integra - Waste Volume Service Plans (1999-2005)
May 2006
99 of 226
The method of waste treatment by Project Integra72 over 18 months and the change in
emphasis of waste disposal from landfill to incineration is shown below in Figure 30. All figures
are in tonnes.
55,000
50,000
45,000
40,000
Tonnes
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
Landfilled (tonnes)
Composted (tonnes)
ct
-0
5
5
O
Au
g0
4
05
Ap
r-0
5
Ju
n05
Fe
b-
D
ec
-0
ct
-0
4
4
Energy Recovered (tonnes)
O
Au
g0
3
04
Ap
r-0
4
Ju
n04
Fe
b-
D
ec
-0
3
ct
-0
3
O
Au
g0
Ap
r-0
3
Ju
n03
0
Recycled (tonnes)
Figure 30 - Waste Treatment method by Project Integra (April 2003-Oct 2005)
72
Hampshire County Council – Waste Management
May 2006
100 of 226
Municipal Waste Disposal
The total amount of municipal waste collected and disposed of from households, including
that delivered to Household Waste Recycling Centre’s and bank material (e.g. bottle banks)
and the small amount from non-household waste up to 2003/0473 is shown below in Figure 31.
The trend indicates that municipal waste arisings have steadily increased until 2002/03 and
then plateaud. Recycling rates have also increased over the same period from a figure of
21.5% in 1999/00 to 31.27% in 2004/05.
1,000,000
900,000
800,000
Tonnes
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02 2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
Year
MSW Recycled (WCA and HWRC)
MSW Disposed (WCA and HWRC)
Figure 31 - Municipal Waste Collected and Disposed (1997-2005)
The disposal method for residual municipal waste has traditionally been landfill but since
2002-03 the use of energy recovery methods such as burning waste for energy have become
more widespread. In Hampshire, the need to divert waste from landfill has resulted in the
design and installation of dedicated Energy from Waste (EfW) municipal waste incinerators.
There are three of these incinerators at in Chineham, Marchwood and Portsmouth.
The use of waste incinerators to recover energy from non-hazardous waste produces
incinerator bottom ash (IBA). After removal of metals and the small percentage of raw
material that is not usable, this ash can be recycled into a secondary aggregate, known as
Incinerator Bottom Ash Aggregate (IBAA) which can be used within asphalt (for road
surfacing), concrete and block manufacture and also as a construction fill material.
Typically 90% of incinerator bottom ash can be recycled74.
Viridis Ltd - Optimising the use of Recycled and Secondary Aggregate in Hampshire (work was carried out under a
Industry.
73
74
May 2006
101 of 226
The waste capacity, power generation and arisings from bottom ash figures for all three
incinerators along with the air pollution control residues for all, are shown below in Table 51.
90,000
Maximum
Power Generation
(megawatts per
annum)
8
Marchwood
165,000
14
40,000
N/a
Portsmouth
165,000
14
40,000
N/a
Total
420,000
36
105,000
16,800
Waste Capacity
Incinerator Location
(tonnes per annum)
Chineham
Air Pollution
Incinerator
Control Residues
Bottom Ash Arisings
(tonnes per
(tonnes per annum)
annum)
25,000
N/a
Table 51 - Incinerator Waste Capacity
The increasing diversion of municipal waste from landfill by the use of energy recovery is
shown below in Table 52.
Disposal Method
Landfill
Energy Recovery
Total Residual Municipal Waste
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
640,139 (97.6%)
537,224 (84.8%)
443,191 (72%)
15,725 (2.4%)
95,995 (15.2%)
172,391 (28%)
655,864 (100%)
633,219 (100%)
615,582 (100%)
Table 52 - Municipal Residual Waste Disposal Method (2002-04)
Putting this into context with recycling and composting, the treatment of household waste75
in 2004-05 was as shown below in Table 53.
Tonnes
Percentage of
Household Waste Arisings
Recycling
156,714
18.5%
Composting
73,751
8.7%
Energy Recovery
172,391
20.4%
Landfill
443,191
52.4%
Total
846,048
100%
Waste
Table 53 - Household Waste Treatment (2004-05)
75
Project Integra - Waste Volumes & Performance 2004/05 (from HCC Waste Management section)
May 2006
102 of 226
Municipal Waste Transfer, Recycling and Treatment Site Locations
There are currently 26 household waste recycling centres, 9 waste transfer stations, 2 Material
Recovery Facilities (MRF) and 3 Energy from Waste incinerators; these are shown below in
Figure 32.
Figure 32 - Municipal Waste Transfer, Recycling and Incineration Sites
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
Wade Road, Basingstoke (Hampshire Waste Services)
Springwell Lane, Hartley Wintney (Hampshire Waste Services)
Ivy Road, Aldershot (Hampshire Waste Services)
Eelmoor Road, Farnborough (Hampshire Waste Services)
Shepherds Spring, Andover (Hampshire Waste Services)
Casbrook, Timsbury (Hopkins Recycling)
Bar End Depot, Winchester (Hopkins Recycling)
Prospect Road, Alresford (Hampshire Waste Services)
Claylands Road, Bishops Waltham (Hopkins Recycling)
Omega Park, Alton (Hopkins Recycling)
Station Road, Bordon (Hopkins Recycling)
Bedford Road, Petersfield (Hopkins Recycling)
Manor Farm (Efford), Pennington, Lymington (Hampshire Waste Services)
Somerley Landfill, Somerley (Hampshire Waste Services)
Marchwood Waste Transfer Station, Marchwood (Hampshire Waste Services)
Town Depot, Chapel, Southampton (Hampshire Waste Services)
Grange Road, Netley (Hampshire Waste Services)
Woodside Avenue, Eastleigh (Hopkins Recycling)
Knowle Lane, Fair Oak (Hopkins Recycling)
Shamblehurst Lane, Hedge End (Hopkins Recycling)
Barnes Wallis Road, Segensworth (Hopkins Recycling)
Grange Road, Gosport (Hopkins Recycling)
Paulsgrove (Portway), Portsmouth (Hampshire Waste Services)
Hambledon Road, Waterlooville (Hopkins Recycling)
Harts Farm Way, Havant (Hopkins Recycling)
Fishery Lane, Hayling Island (Hopkins Recycling)
May 2006
103 of 226
Waste transfer facilities are located at the following sites (shown on the previous map as
yellow squares):
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
Marsh Lane Waste Transfer Station, Lymington (Hampshire Waste Services)
Manor Farm, Pennington, Lymington (Hampshire Waste Services)
Netley Landfill, Netley (Hampshire Waste Services)
Otterbourne Incinerator Site, Otterbourne (Hampshire Waste Services)
Harewood Waste Transfer Station, Longparish (Hampshire Waste Services)
Wade Road, Basingstoke (Basingstoke Skip Hire)
Rushmoor Transfer Station, Farnborough (Hampshire Waste Services)
Waste transfer (material recovery) facilities are also provided at these locations (shown on
the previous map as blue circles):
M1 Alton Materials Recovery Facility (Hampshire Waste Services)
M2 Portsmouth Materials Recovery Facility (Hampshire Waste Services)
Incineration of municipal waste for energy is carried out at these locations(shown on the
previous map as red circles):
X Chineham Incinerator, Old Basing (Hampshire Waste Services)
Y Marchwood Incinerator, Marchwood (Hampshire Waste Services)
Z Portsmouth Incinerator, Hilsea, Portsmouth (Hampshire Waste Services)
May 2006
104 of 226
Green Waste Composting Site Locations
The majority of compost produced from green waste is derived from the municipal waste
stream from both kerbside collection and that delivered to Household Waste Recycling
Centres. This green waste is primarily composted at the three sites run by Hampshire Waste
Services. There are many other sites which produce compost but these are exempt from a
waste management license due to their small scale of operations. There are currently 14 sites
that are permitted or licensed to compost green waste and these are shown below in Figure
33.
Figure 33 - Composting Sites
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Chilbolton Down, Leckford (Hampshire Waste Services)
Little Bushywarrren Copse, Herriard (Hampshire Waste Services)
Down Farm, Odiham (GK Benford)
Down End Quarry, Fareham (Hampshire Waste Services)
Manor Farm, Hayling Island (Fieldfare UK)
The Pebbles, Boarhunt (K Butler)
Broughton Down Farm, Broughton (A W Jepson Turner)
Hurst Farm, Fishers Pond (MC Wright)
Blackbarn Farm, Grateley (Glover Bros)
Blackmoor Estate, Bordon (Williams / TJ Composting)
Thorns Farm, Lymington (TJ Composting)
Jubilee Farm, Godshill (S Bellows)
Everglade Farm, Sway (Roy Farmers)
Southley Farm, Overton (Laverstoke Park Produce)
May 2006
105 of 226
The total amount of permitted capacity and its variation over time as planning permission
expires for composting sites in Hampshire is shown in Figure 34 below. The majority of
capacity is at three municipal composting sites run by Hampshire Waste Services for Project
Integra:
•
•
•
Little Bushywarren Copse (Herriard)
Down End Quarry (Fareham)
Chilbolton Down (Leckford)
75,000 tonnes per annum
There are a significant number of smaller sites (most under 5,000 tonnes per annum) that are
exempt from a waste management license.
250,000
200,000
Tonnes
150,000
100,000
50,000
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
18
20
19
20
20
20
21
20
22
20
23
20
24
20
25
0
Year
Figure 34 - Composting Capacity with Planning Permission (2006-2025)
May 2006
106 of 226
Commercial & Industrial Waste Recycling
The Environment Agency national waste production survey mentioned above in 1998/9976
calculated that of the total waste produced in 1998/99 (75 million tonnes), 51% of C&I waste
in the UK was disposed of to landfill while 37% was reused or recycled in 1998/99.
The breakdown of how all commercial and industrial waste was managed in England and
Wales in 1998/99 is shown below in Figure 35.
2%
8%
2%
Re-used or Recycled
37%
Land Disposal
Treatment & Transfer
Land Recovery
Thermal
51%
Figure 35 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Management in England and Wales (1998/99)
The more recent Environment Agency commercial and industrial waste production survey in
2002/03 indicated that the total waste produced in England and Wales in 2002/03 was
73,179,000 tonnes. Of this total, 24 million tonnes (32.7%) of C&I waste were recycled and 7.5
million tonnes (10.2%) was reused. This combined total of 43% is a 6% increase on the previous
survey figure.
Disposal to landfill has dropped to 29 million tonnes (40% of the 2002-03 total) which is a 11%
drop on the previous survey figure. Over 5 million tonnes were treated or incinerated77. This is
represented below in Figure 36.
5%
3%
3%
Re-used or Recycled
6%
Land Disposal
43%
Land Recovery
Unsampled
Thermal
40%
Figure 36 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Management in England and Wales (2002/03)
Environment Agency – National Waste Production Survey 1998/99
Environment Agency – National Waste Production Survey 2002-03
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/subjects/waste/1031954/315439/1173610/?version=1&lang=_e
76
77
May 2006
107 of 226
Comparing the national data with Hampshire (see Figure 37 below), indicates that there is
less re-using and recycling of C&I waste (only 31% compared to 43% nationally). There is also
more disposal to landfill but twice as much (by percentage) in treatment and transfer.
6%
4%
6%
31%
11%
Re-used or Recycled
Land Disposal
Land Recovery
Unsampled
Thermal
42%
Figure 37 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Management in Hampshire (2002/03)
May 2006
108 of 226
Commercial & Industrial Waste Treatment & Disposal
In conjunction with the release of the 2002-03 commercial and industrial waste survey data,
the Environment Agency also defined the fate of the waste quantities from the previous
waste survey in 1998-99. This is shown below for industrial and commercial wastes in Table 54
and Table 55, and combined in Table 56. All figures are in thousand tonnes.
Industrial wastes
Hampshire
South East Total
South East Total
Land Disposal
378 (41%)
2,297
16%
Re-used or Recycled
337 (37%)
1,810
19%
148 (16%)
400
37%
Land Recovery
47 (5%)
315
15%
Unsampled
5 (1%)
85
5%
Thermal
4 (<1%)
52
9%
918 (100%)
4,958
19%
Table 54 - Industrial Waste Treatment and Disposal (1998-99)
Commercial Waste
Hampshire
South East Total
South East Total
Land Disposal
509 (62%)
2,262
22%
Re-used or Recycled
176 (22%)
953
18%
Unsampled
94 (12%)
656
14%
Land Recovery
21 (3%)
64
33%
16 (2%)
81
20%
Thermal
1 (<1%)
28
5%
817 (100%)
4,043
20%
Table 55 - Commercial Waste Treatment and Disposal (1998-99)
C&I Waste (combined)
Hampshire
South East Total
South East Total
Land Disposal
886 (51%)
4,559
19%
Land Recovery
513 (30%)
1,873
27%
Re-used or Recycled
243 (14%)
1,353
18%
Thermal
68 (4%)
343
20%
20 (1%)
741
3%
Unsampled
6 (<1%)
133
4%
1,735 (100%)
9,001
19%
Table 56 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Treatment and Disposal (1998-99)
May 2006
109 of 226
The fate of the waste quantities from the commercial and industrial waste survey in 2002-03 is
shown below for industrial, commercial and combined wastes in Table 57, Table 58 and Table
59. All figures are in thousand tonnes.
Waste Fate
Hampshire
South East Total
South East Total
Re-used or Recycled
185 (33%)
1257
15%
Land Disposal
161 (29%)
1310
12%
106 (19%)
345
31%
Land Recovery
45 (8%)
63
71%
Unsampled
40 (7%)
414
10%
Thermal
23 (4%)
192
12%
560 (100%)
3581
16%
Table 57 - Industrial Waste Fate (2002-03)
Waste Fate
Hampshire
South East Total
South East Total
Land Disposal
511 (50%)
2547
20%
Re-used or Recycled
301 (30%)
1565
19%
63 (6%)
354
18%
Unsampled
50 (5%)
523
10%
Land Recovery
48 (5%)
59
81%
Thermal
46 (5%)
223
21%
1019 (100%)
5,271
19%
Table 58 - Commercial Waste Fate (2002-03)
Waste Fate
Hampshire
South East Total
South East Total
Land Disposal
672 (43%)
3857
17%
Re-used or Recycled
486 (31%)
2822
17%
169 (11%)
699
24%
Land Recovery
93 (6%)
122
76%
Unsampled
90 (6%)
937
10%
Thermal
69 (4%)
415
17%
1579 (100%)
8852
18%
Table 59 - Commercial & Industrial Waste Fate (2002-03)
May 2006
110 of 226
The majority of C&I waste arisings (over 37%) were disposed to landfill in 2002-03 according to
the Environment Agency78. The location of the landfill sites receiving this waste and the
amounts input in this year, are shown below in Table 60.
District or City Council area receiving waste
Commercial and Industrial
tonnage to landfill
New Forest
158,639
Test Valley
134,147
Portsmouth City
77,280
71,036
Eastleigh
65,073
East Hampshire
26,772
Winchester
7,491
Fareham
4,879
Gosport
3,938
Hart
0
Havant
0
Rushmoor
0
Southampton City
0
Hampshire
549,254
Table 60 - C&I Waste disposed to landfill by receiving District and City (2002-03)
78
May 2006
111 of 226
The site inputs to various types of waste handling facility for all commercial and industrial
waste along with the previously shown landfill inputs by planning authority as recorded by
the Environment Agency is shown below in Table 61.
After land-filling, the majority of the remaining commercial and industrial waste was treated
or handled at Metal Recycling sites (34%), Biological Treatment (15.4%) and Transfer (10.5%).
All figures are in tonnes.
District or
Unitary
Authority
Landfill
Inputs
New Forest
158,639
3,323
Basingstoke
and Deane
71,036
178,459
28,571
240
Portsmouth
77,280
133,521
4,185
0
Test Valley
134,147
390
15,512
23,524
331
Hart
0
125,746
418
0
Southampton
0
44,732
21,149
3,168
Eastleigh
Havant
Metal
Biological
Physical
Transfer
Recycling treatment
treatment
189,441
28,884
1,735
Total
inert
380,551
1,754
250
3,425
280,310
220,146
1,513
618
45
175,418
126,827
7,072
76,122
65,073
2,454
2,685
0
43,052
43,052
30,838
26,772
3,957
109
Rushmoor
0
12
17,677
Winchester
7,491
7,000
3,092
26
Fareham
4,879
0
10,431
Gosport
3,938
86
Percent
Civic
Compost
Amenity Incinerator
-ing
(HWRC)
265
East
Hampshire
Hampshire
MRF
70,212
2,246
19,935
17,608
125
7,685
212
15,435
11,921
549,254
497,141
226,520
154,802
18,100
12,105
4,883
3,682
1,888
37.4%
33.9%
15.4%
10.5%
1.2%
0.8%
0.3%
0.3%
0.1%
Table 61 - C&I Waste Treatment and Disposal by Facility and District (2002-03)
1,468,375
May 2006
112 of 226
Commercial, Industrial & Municipal Waste (Non-Inert) Transfer & Recycling Site Locations
There are nine waste transfer stations (WTS) that provide transfer facilities for Project Integra in
addition to the transfer facilities at the Material Recovery Facilities at Alton and Portsmouth.
In addition to these there are 50 commercial waste transfer and recycling facilities handling
non-inert wastes. Sites that provide transfer or recycling facilities for commercial and
industrial wastes are shown below in Figure 38.
Figure 38 - Waste Transfer and Recycling Sites (Non-inert)
Waste transfer facilities for Project Integra: (shown on map as yellow squares)
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
Marsh Lane Waste Transfer Station, Lymington (Hampshire Waste Services)
Manor Farm, Pennington, Lymington (Hampshire Waste Services)
Netley Landfill, Netley (Hampshire Waste Services)
Otterbourne Incinerator Site, Otterbourne (Hampshire Waste Services)
Harewood Waste Transfer Station, Longparish (Hampshire Waste Services)
Wade Road, Basingstoke (Basingstoke Skip Hire)
Rushmoor Transfer Station, Farnborough (Hampshire Waste Services)
May 2006
113 of 226
Waste transfer and recycling facilities for commercial and industrial wastes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
Caird Avenue, New Milton (New Milton Sand & Ballast)
Lime Kiln Lane, Holbury (SMS Skips)
Fawley Waste Processing Plant, Fawley (Veolia Environmental Services)
Casbrook Park, Bunny Lane, Timsbury (BKP Environmental Services)
Unit 1 Yokesford Hill Industrial Estate, Romsey (Ace Liftaway)
Blackbarn Farm, Grateley (Glover Bros)
Vigo Lane, Yateley (SimsMetal UK)
Star Hill Sawmills, Hartley Wintney (UK Waste Management)
Calf Lane, Odiham (C G Comley)
Bessemer Park, Basingstoke (Lamp Recycling Company)
Broxhead Trading Estates, Linford, Bordon (Safety Autos Recovery)
Upperhill Farm, Swanmore (Duckworth)
Botley Road, Shedfield (Silverlake Garage)
Pegham Industrial Estate, Funtley (T Adams)
Havant Incinerator Site, Havant (Hampshire Waste Services)
New Farm, South Warnborough (Basingstoke Skip Hire)
Unit 3 Stubs Industrial Estate, Hollybush Lane, Aldershot (Taurus)
Hollybush Lane, Aldershot (Universal Car Spares/G Boulden)
Hollybush Lane, Aldershot (Chambers Waste Management)
Petersfield Depot, Petersfield (Raynesway Construction)
Botley Road, Hedge End (Cleansing Services Group)
Barfield Close, Winchester (C D Jordan & Sons)
Easton Lane, Winchester (Tesco Stores)
Stephenson Road, Calmore, Totton (Millbrook Industries)
Merryhill House, Budds Lane, Romsey (Merryhill Envirotec)
Totton Depot, Totton (Raynesway Construction)
Ambervale Farm, Sway (George Farwell)
Willments Wharf, Southampton (J&W Waste)
Imperial House, Empress Road, Southampton (SITA)
Unit 1600 Blueprint, Portfield Road, Dundas Spur, Portsmouth (Seek-IT)
Quartremaine Road, Portsmouth (SITA)
Unit D Pegham Industrial Estate, Laveys Lane, Titchfield (Pegham Services)
Mill Rythe Lane, Hayling Island (HMS Total Vehicle Recovery)
Solent Road, Havant (Tesco Stores)
River Way, Andover (Tesco Stores)
Canal Walk, Romsey (Environment Agency)
Chantry Road, Northam, Southampton (A&B Oil)
Unit D, Ackworth Road, Venture Industrial Park, Hilsea, Portsmouth (Bridge Skips)
Unit 33, Alchorne Place, Airport Ind Estate, Portsmouth (Cliftongrade Ltd)
Units 9-14 Dundas Spur, Dundas Lane, Portsmouth (CD Jordan & Sons
Unit 47, Old Reservoir Road, Farlington, Portsmouth (Tilbury Metals)
Alchorne Place, Burrfield, Copnor, Portsmouth (H&E Car Spares)
434 Havant Road, Farlington, Portsmouth (James Huntley & Sons)
Tipner Wharf, Tipner Lane, Portsmouth (Pounds Marine Shipping)
Unit 38, Marshlands Road, Farlington, Portsmouth (GE Heard)
Town Depot, Albert Road North, Southampton (Sothampton City Council)
10 Princes Street, Northam, Southampton (Charles Trent Ltd)
7 Ashley Cresent, Sholing, Southampton (James Huntley & Sons Ltd)
Drivers Wharf, Southampton (SITA)
Carisbrooke Yard, Whiteley Lane, Burridge (WC Collins & Sons)
May 2006
114 of 226
Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste Recycling
In the UK, approximately 275 million tonnes of aggregates are used each year as raw
construction materials. Of this amount, around 65 million tonnes (24%) are derived from
recycled or secondary sources79.
The last regional survey of CD&E recycling in 2003 on behalf of the ODPM 80 calculated that in
the south-east region 5.52 million tonnes of the total of 15.23 million tonnes (or 36%)
aggregate supplied was from recycled (or secondary) aggregate or soil.
In Hampshire, the total amount of primary aggregate supplied in 2003 was 4.521 million
tonnes81 as shown in Table 11. Combined with the figure for recycled and secondary
aggregate of 830,000 tonnes as recorded in the Aggregates Monitoring Survey82 of the same
year, the total aggregate supplied was therefore 5,351million tonnes. This figure does not
include any material from highways new works and maintenance or incinerator bottom ash.
This figure is estimated at approximately 50,000 tonnes.
The proportion that recycled and secondary aggregates contributed to the total aggregate
use in Hampshire in 2003 was 15.5%. This figure is less than half of the regional target
proposed in Policy M2 in the Regional Planning Guidance for the South East 83 which suggests
a contribution from recycled and secondary aggregate of 34% of primary aggregate
produced to be achieved by 2016. In order to meet this target, additional recycling of
aggregate will be required.
In 2004, the consultants Viridis/TRL84 estimated a figure of 500,000 tonnes for CD&E recycling
that also did not include waste recycled on exempt sites.
The total amount of CD&E recycling in Hampshire has been estimated at 1,466,505 tonnes in
2004 by Entec Uk Ltd85 which equates to 51% of the total amount of CD&E arisings. This figure
includes 1,000,000 tonnes that is estimated to be used for engineering purposes on sites
exempt from a waste management license. It is assumed that this is 100% recycled and that
none of the non-inert fraction is recycled.
In December 2004, there were 29 aggregate recycling and CD&E/inert waste recycling sites
in Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton capable of sorting, segregating or recycling
CD&E wastes, of which 10 sites were either inactive, due to begin operations or in the process
of applying for planning permission. These sites are spread throughout the county but they
are most common in the M27 corridor and in mineral producing areas. The majority of these
sites are relatively small scale and focus on segregating and sorting the contents of skips for
off-site processing at larger more strategic facilities. Typically they service an area of 10-25
miles radius and are located close to urban areas.
In terms of either segregated or a recycled (crushed) tonnage, annual recycling figures of
20-30,000 tonnes are predominantly achieved. There are a few sites recycling near to 50,000
tonnes and three which recycled over 100,000 tonnes in 2003. Many of the sites that recycle
construction, demolition and excavation waste have time limited planning permissions and
the reduction in CD&E recycling capacity is shown below in Figure 39.
79 AggRegain Website – sustainable aggregates information service run by the Waste & Resources Action
Programme http://www.aggregain.org.uk/sustainable.html - accessed 16 January 2006
81 Hampshire County Council - Minerals and Waste Planning in Hampshire Annual Report 2003/04
82 South East England Regional Assembly(SEERA) - Aggregates Monitoring Survey 2003
83 Government Office for the South East (GOSE) – Proposed Changes to Regional Planning Guidance for the South
East (RPG9)
84 Viridis Ltd - Optimising the use of Recycled and Secondary Aggregate in Hampshire (work was carried out under a
Industry.
85 Entec UK Ltd - Hampshire Materials Resources Strategy: Aggregation of the Resource Stream Data
May 2006
115 of 226
In the case of recycled construction, demolition and excavation waste (CD&E), movement is
limited by the market price paid for the product. Typically this limits it transportation to under
25 miles. Of the 19 aggregate and CD&E waste recycling sites that responded to the survey
at the end of 2004, the majority collected and distributed their product between 10 to 15
miles but would travel up to 25 miles. The majority of sites are generally distributed along the
M27 corridor with a further group in the north-east corner of the county.
3,000,000
CAPACITY (in tonnes)
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
YEAR
Figure 39 - Projected CD&E Recycling Capacity versus time limited consents (2005-2020)
Note:
The capacity figures shown above are based upon Planning Permission (and Licensed
capacity at four sites). There are 31 sites in total.
The 2003 Aggregate Monitoring Survey86 identified a figure for sales of aggregate from
recycled and secondary sources of approximately 830,000 tonnes. Sales included recycled
CD&E waste and spent railway ballast produced at all licensed and some exempt sites for
either aggregate or non-aggregate use.
86
South East England Regional Aggregates Working Party (SEERAWP) – Aggregates Monitoring Survey 2003
May 2006
116 of 226
Construction, Demolition & Excavation Waste Treatment and Disposal
The majority of CD&E waste arisings (almost 74%) were disposed to landfill in 2002-03
according to the Environment Agency87. The location of the landfill sites receiving this waste
and the amounts input in this year, are shown below in Table 62.
District or City Council
Inert/CD&E (tonnes)
Test Valley
410,709 (25.9%)
Portsmouth City
385,853 (24.3%)
Eastleigh
282,088 (17.8%)
East Hampshire
205,046 (12.9%)
New Forest
145,366 (9.2%)
Fareham
104,874 (6.6%)
45,455 (2.9%)
Gosport
5,584 (0.4%)
Havant
2,330 (0.1%)
Winchester
0
Hart
0
Rushmoor
0
Southampton City
0
Total
1,587,305 (100%)
Table 62 - Inert waste disposed to landfill (2002-03)
87
May 2006
117 of 226
The waste quantities shown above were deposited at a number of sites within each local
authority, such as landfill sites, transfer stations, metal recycling sites etc. The breakdown of
the waste type by waste facility is shown below in Table 63. All figures are in tonnes.
District or Unitary
Authority
Total Inert
Waste Returns
Landfill
Inputs
Portsmouth
455,116
385,853
Test Valley
444,300
410,709
Eastleigh
287,014
282,088
4,925
East Hampshire
212,459
205,046
2,953
Fareham
178,566
104,874
New Forest
158,917
145,366
Southampton
102,148
96,444
Rushmoor
94,098
92,178
Gosport
75,364
5,584
Havant
73,837
2,330
71,507
63,760
45,455
16,115
Winchester
1,652
Hart
2,148,057
Transfer
Civic
Amenity
62,299
17,459
Metal
Recycling
6,964
16,133
4,460
73,693
13,434
18,162
117
5,704
1,920
51,618
2,130
60
1,652
826
Hampshire
Physical
Treatment
180
1,587,305
109,494
646
429,258
4,813
17,187
Table 63 - CD&E Waste Treatment and Disposal by Facility and District (2002-03)
The data shows the most significant amounts of Inert / CD&E waste were destined for landfill
sites within the respective local authority. Although the data for the most recent years is not
yet available, landfill inputs into some sites such as Paulsgrove in Portsmouth have been
reducing as the site has recently reached capacity and is now closed.
May 2006
118 of 226
Construction, Demolition and Excavation (Inert) Waste Transfer & Treatment Sites
A map highlighting CD&E waste transfer and recycling treatment sites in Hampshire is shown
below in Figure 40.
Figure 40 - Waste Transfer and Recycling Sites (Inert)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Facility Location and Operator
Permission
Size
Home Farm, Ropley (T Kingsland)
Bar End Depot, Winchester (Hampshire County Council)
Manor Farm Chalk Pit, (GB Foot)
Eversley Haulage Park, Eversley (R Collard)
Beacon Hill, Ewshot, Crondall (Cranston Bros.)
Thruxton Airfield, Thruxton (Earthline)
Ambervale Farm (George Farwell)
Former MOD Oil Storage Depot, Fawley (Hampshire Turf)
Bury Farm, Botley (Wessex Demolition & Salvage)
Broadcut, Wallington, Fareham (Zebra Waste Disposal Services)
Wallington Depot, Fareham (SITA)
Farlington Redoubt, Portsdown Hill, Portsmouth (Lift and Shift Skip Hire)
Harts Farm Way, Havant (TJ Waste & Recycling)
Havant Lorry Park, Southmoor Lane, Havant (SITA)
New Lane, Havant (Wessex Construction & Plant Hire)
Blackmoor Estate, Blackmoor (Williams of Bordon)
Permanent
09/09/2008
31/12/2011
31/12/2010
Permanent
31/05/2008
Permanent
Permanent
Permanent
23/06/2008
Permanent
Permanent
Permanent
Permanent
Permanent
31/10/2007
Small
Small
Small
Medium
Small
Medium
Small
Small
Small
Small
Large
Medium
Small
Medium
Large
Small
Permanent
Permanent
31/12/2008
Permanent
Permanent
Large
Small
Medium
Medium
Medium
Non – Inert sites that provide transfer or recycle facilities for CD&E waste
A
B
C
D
E
Yokesford Hill (Ace Liftaway)
Calf Lane, Odiham (Comley&Sons)
New Farm, South Warnborough (Basingstoke Skip Hire)
Hollybush Lane, Aldershot (Taurus)
Willments Wharf, Southampton (J&W Waste)
May 2006
119 of 226
Hazardous Waste Recycling & Treatment
Only a small amount of hazardous waste is reused or recycled. In 2003 this equated to 0.2%
of the total. The majority of hazardous waste in Hampshire is treated primarily in three ways –
Treatment (a process which changes its properties to make it non-hazardous), Incineration
(without energy recovery) and Landfill.
Since July 2004, the landfilling of hazardous waste (with the exception of stabilised nonreactive hazardous waste) can only take place at a designated hazardous waste landfill site,
none of which exist in Hampshire or the South East region. The nearest landfill site accepting
hazardous waste is that at Pound Bottom in Wiltshire which has a ‘monocell’ – a designated
area for a type of waste – that only accepts asbestos waste. Its licensed capacity is 10,000
tonnes per annum.
The nearest landfill capacity currently available to deal with hazardous waste other than
asbestos requiring disposal from the region is in Purton, Swindon.
The quantities and percentages in relation to totals within Hampshire and the South East
region as recorded by the Environment Agency in 200388 are shown below in Table 64.
Hampshire
(tonnes/percent)
South East Region
(tonnes)
Hampshire’s
contribution to
South East Region
Treatment
37,618 (41.1%)
119,202
31.6%
Incineration without energy recovery
23,657 (25.8%)
26,056
90.8%
Landfill
21,327 (23.3%)
148,236
14.4%
Transfer (Short term)
5,067 (5.5%)
36,571
13.9%
Long term storage
3,724 (4.1%)
3,724
100.0%
Recycling / reuse
217 (0.2%)
53,800
0.4%
-
33
0.0%
91,610 (100%)
387,622
23.6%
Incineration with energy recovery
Total
Table 64 - Recycling & Treatment of Hazardous Waste (2003)
Analysis of this indicates that Hampshire provides more than would be expected of the
region’s treatment, incineration and long-term storage capacity and that it is particularly
deficient in landfill / short-term storage. Where hazardous waste are to be incinerated,
energy recovery should be encouraged.
88
May 2006
120 of 226
Hazardous Waste Transfer and Treatment Site Locations
There are currently nine hazardous waste transfer stations and five sites that treat hazardous
waste via incineration or chemical/biological treatment within Hampshire. There are six
clinical transfer sites (shown by letters below) while only one clinical incinerator located at
Haslar remains open since the one located at the Queen Alexandra Hospital, Cosham has
recently closed. These sites are shown on the map below in Figure 41.
Figure 41 - Hazardous Waste Treatment and Transfer Sites
Hazardous Waste Transfer
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Marsh Lane Depot, Lymington (New Forest Commercial Services)
Casbrook Park, Timsbury (BKP Environmental Services)
Shirley Depot, Southampton (Southampton City Council)
Unit E, West Bay Road, Southampton (Waste Services Ltd)
Unit 4/5 Peacock Trading Estate, Eastleigh (Safety Kleen UK Ltd)
Bar End Road, Winchester (Serco Ltd)
Unit 3b Whittle Avenue, Segensworth (Economic Insulations Ltd)
Unit A, Farrington Business Park, Alton (Morgan Irvine Ltd)
Canal Walk Depot, Romsey (Environment Agency)
Hazardous Waste Treatment
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Marine Oil Treatment Works, Marchwood (Veolia Environmental Services)
High Temperature Incinerator, Fawley (Veolia Environmental Services)
Liquid Waste Treatment, Botley (Cleansing Services Group)
Oil Fuel Treatment, Gosport (Royal Naval Stores)
Royal Naval Hospital, Haslar Incinerator, Gosport (Royal Naval Stores)
Clinical Waste Transfer
A
B
C
D
E
F
Unit 6, Speedwell Close, Chandlers Ford, Eastleigh (Cannon Hygiene Ltd)
Unit 1, Wessex Park, Wessex Way, Colden Common (Personnel Hygiene Services Ltd)
Brickfield, Odiham Road, Winchfield, Hook (Mr & Mrs B J Spurgeon / Dignity)
6 Crompton Way, Segensworth West Ind Est Fareham (Rentokill Ltd)
Queen Alexandra Hospital, Cosham (NHS Trust)
Chineham Waste Transfer Station, Reading Road, Basingstoke (Veolia Environmental Services)
May 2006
121 of 226
Existing Waste Disposal to Landfilll
According to data received from the Environment Agency89, 2,805,830 tonnes of waste was
landfilled in Hampshire in 2002-03. The destination council of this waste is shown below in
Table 65. The landfill site at Pound Bottom on the Wiltshire/Hampshire border is also included
as some waste from Hampshire is deposited at this site.
District or City Council
Commercial
& Industrial
Inert/CD&E
Special
Municipal
Portsmouth
385,853
4,543
186,701
77,280
654,377 (23.3%)
Test Valley
410,709
644
0
134,147
545,499 (19.4%)
New Forest
145,366
5,283
203,320
158,639
512,607 (18.3%)
East Hampshire
205,046
46,392
151,957
26,772
430,167 (15.3%)
Eastleigh
282,088
1,379
52,753
65,073
401,293 (14.3%)
45,455
530
4,864
71,036
121,885 (4.3%)
Fareham
104,874
0
0
4,879
109,752 (3.9%)
Gosport
5,584
0
7,935
3,938
17,457 (0.6%)
0
2,971
0
7,491
10,462 (0.4%)
Winchester
Havant
Total
2,330
0
0
0
2,330 (0.1%)
Hart
0
0
0
0
0
Rushmoor
0
0
0
0
0
Southampton
0
0
0
0
0
1,587,305
61,742
607,530
549,255
2,805,829 (100%)
56.6%
2.2%
21.7%
19.6%
100.0%
Total
Percent of Total
Pound Bottom Site (Wiltshire) *
128,201
* 2005 Calender Year
Table 65 - Destination of Landfill Waste in Hampshire (2002-03)
A number of significant non-hazardous landfill sites have closed recently including those at
Cherque Farm in Gosport and Paulsgrove in Portsmouth and others are others are reaching
their permitted void capacity and are due to close shortly.
Based upon surveys of the remaining void capacity and an estimated average annual waste
input amount, the total void capacity of all active landfill sites is estimated at approximately
8,700,000 tonnes (March 2005). Significantly, only an estimated 2,700,000 tonnes of permitted
void space is available for non-hazardous waste and at previous annual waste input rates it
would take less than 3 years before all non-hazardous landfill void is exhausted. See Figure 42
below.
However, since 2002-03, the municipal waste incinerators at Marchwood and Portsmouth
have become operational and the amounts going to landfill have reduced substantially.
89
May 2006
122 of 226
4,000,000
2,000,000
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Tonnes
-2,000,000
-4,000,000
-6,000,000
-8,000,000
-10,000,000
-12,000,000
Year
Figure 42 - Non-hazardous landfill void depletion
Energy from Landfill
Methane gas from the decomposition of waste is captured at seven non-hazardous landfill
sites. It is then burned in gas engines to generate energy from waste. The list of sites and the
amount of energy generated (where available) is shown below in Table 66.
Number
Name (Operator)
Number of gas
engines installed
(9/1/06)
Energy
Generation
MWh
1
Efford (Veolia Environmental Services)
1
10,139
2
Netley (Veolia Environmental Services)
3
16,790
3
Somerley (Veolia Environmental Services)
1
6,266
4
Bramshill (Veolia Environmental Services)
1
5,792
5
Southleigh (Veolia Environmental Services)
3
24,513
6
Paulsgrove (Veolia Environmental Services)
3
14,604
7
Squabb Wood (Viridor Waste Management Ltd)
2
-
Total Energy Generated
Table 66 - Landfill Gas & Energy Generation Sites
78,104
May 2006
123 of 226
Non-hazardous and Inert Landfill Site Locations
There are currently five landfill sites within Hampshire that accept non -hazardous waste and
one in Wiltshire. Inert material is accepted at eleven landfill sites. These landfill sites are shown
below in Figure 43.
Figure 43 - Non-hazardous and Inert Landfill Sites
Inert Landfill Sites
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Holmsley, Bransgore (Raymond Brown Eco-Bio Ltd)
Bleak Hill, Somerley (Cemex)
Manor Farm, Pennington (New Milton Sand & Ballast)
Ridge Farm, Romsey (Viridor Waste Management Ltd)
How Park Farm, Kings Somborne (C Halse)
Thruxton Airfield (Earthline; Sita)
Manor Farm, Monk Sherbourne (GB Foot)
Selbourne (TJ Landfill)
Venthams Farm, Froxfield Green (nr Petersfield) (Hugh Toomer)
Rookery Farm, Fareham (Raymond Brown Eco-Bio Ltd)
Non-hazardous Landfill Sites
A
B
C
D
E
F
Blue Haze (Chatsworth), Somerley (Veolia Environmental Services)
Efford, Pennington (Veolia Environmental Services)
Mortimers Lane, Fair Oak (Sita)
Southleigh, Emsworth (Veolia Environmental Services)
Squabb Wood, Romsey (Viridor Waste Management Ltd)
Pound Bottom, Redlynch, Wiltshire (CSG)
May 2006
124 of 226
Waste Imports and Exports
There is a longer term requirement to be net self-sufficient in waste management as stated in
the Regional Waste Strategy90 Policy W4. There is also a requirement to accept a declining
portion of London’s waste as stated in Policy W3.
The Environment Agency have collated information on all waste imported into Hampshire in
the year 2003-2004. The main sources of waste exported to Hampshire are shown below in
Table 67.
Waste Origin
Tonnes
Percentage
Not Codeable
220,117
36.1%
Dorset
214,038
35.1%
Surrey
69,825
11.5%
West Sussex
65,547
10.8%
Wiltshire
18,069
3.0%
London
787
0.1%
21,005
3.5%
609,388
100.0%
All other areas
Total Waste Imported
Table 67 - Origin of Waste Imports into Hampshire (2003-04)
Over a third of waste is of unknown origin (uncodeable) but the destination facility of this
waste is shown below in Table 68. It indicates that almost 60% is classified as from the
municipal and commercial & industrial waste stream. Approximately a fifth of all waste of
unknown origin was delivered directly to a physical treatment facility and over 40%
deposited in landfill.
Waste Handling Facility (Destination)
Not codeable
Percentage
A4 - Household, Commercial & Industrial Waste Landfill
69,326
31.5%
A11 - Household, Commercial & Industrial Waste Transfer Stn
59,982
27.3%
A16 - Physical Treatment Facility
41,780
19.0%
A1 - Co-Disposal Landfill Site
24,315
11.0%
All other facilities
24,714
11.2%
220,117
100%
Total
Table 68 – Source Facility of Uncodeable Waste Imports to Hampshire (2003-04)
May 2006
125 of 226
Table 69 shows the amount of waste imported by destination type of waste handling facility.
Waste Handling Facility
Tonnes
Percentage
155,852
25.6%
144,352
23.7%
100,037
16.4%
A5 - Landfill taking Non-Biodegradable Wastes
83,555
13.7%
56,281
9.2%
A23 - Biological Treatment Facility
23,121
3.8%
A15 - Material Recycling Treatment Facility
17,750
2.9%
A20 - Metal Recycling Site (mixed MRS's)
13,934
2.3%
All other Facilities
14,507
2.4%
Total Waste Imported
609,389
100.0%
Note: MRS = Metal Recycling Site
Table 69 - Source Facility of Waste Imports to Hampshire (2003-2004)
The table above highlights that in 2003-04 over 55% of waste coming into Hampshire in the
year 2003-04 was deposited directly at landfill sites.
The Environment Agency have also collated information on all waste exported from
Hampshire through licensed waste management sites in the year 2003-2004. This data is
shown below in Table 70 and Table 71.
Waste Destination
Wiltshire
Tonnes
Percentage
192,403
23.3%
Surrey
176,176
21.4%
West Sussex
155,607
18.9%
Berkshire
92,655
11.2%
Dorset
74,803
9.1%
East Sussex
48,192
5.8%
Buckinghamshire
47,762
5.8%
South Wales
11,692
1.4%
Central London
0
0%
All other areas
34,193
4.1%
Total Waste Exported
824,891
100.0%
Table 70 - Destination of Waste Exports from Hampshire (2003-04)
The five closest counties to Hampshire accepted almost 84% of all waste exported.
May 2006
126 of 226
Table 79 below shows the destination facility of the waste exported from Hampshire.
Tonnes
Percentage
248,043
30.1%
117,268
14.2%
97,653
11.8%
93,781
11.4%
91,942
11.1%
A2 - Other Landfill Site taking Special Waste
88,386
10.7%
A6 - Landfill taking other wastes
21,387
2.6%
20,031
2.4%
46,401
5.6%
824,892
100.0%
Table 71 - Destination Facility of Waste Exports from Hampshire (2003-04)
Almost 70% of Hampshire’s exported waste was going directly to landfill in 2003-04. Analysis
indicates a shortage of capacity for managing C&I waste leading to export for ‘cheap’
landfill.
London’s Waste
In the 2000-01, the South East region managed 28.2 million tonnes of waste. Over 3 million
tonnes of this amount was imported to the South East from London91, all of which was
landfilled.
In 2003-04, the waste imported to Hampshire from London as recorded by the Environment
Agency was 787 tonnes.
May 2006
127 of 226
Balance of Movements
Combining the data from the import and export tables shown earlier it is possible to work out
the new movements of waste to and from Hampshire. This data is summarised below in Table
72.
Imported
(tonnes)
Exported
(tonnes)
Net Difference
(tonnes)
Is Hampshire a Net
Importer or Exporter ?
Not Codeable
220,117
-
-
N/A
Dorset
214,038
74,803
139,235
Importer
Waste Origin / Destination
Surrey
69,825
176,176
-106,351
Exporter
West Sussex
65,547
155,607
-90,060
Exporter
Wiltshire
18,069
192,403
-174,334
Exporter
Berkshire
5,323
92,655
-87,332
Exporter
East Sussex
1,476
48,192
-46,716
Exporter
279
47,762
-47,483
Exporter
-
11,692
-
N/A
Buckinghamshire
South Wales
London
787
0
787
Importer
All other areas
13,927
25,601
-11,674
Exporter
Total Waste
609,388
824,891
-215,503
Table 72 - Cross border movement summary – by County or Region (2003-04)
With the exception of Dorset, Hampshire exports more waste than it receives from each area.
The same check to the type of facility from which the waste originates or is exported to and
this is shown below in Table 73.
Imported
Tonnes
Exported
Tonnes
Net Difference
(tonnes)
144,352
20,031
124,321
155,852
117,268
38,584
53,763
46,401
7,362
100,037
97,653
2,384
147
21,387
-21,240
56,281
93,781
-37,500
13,934
91,942
-78,008
1,468
88,386
-86,918
83,555
248,043
-164,488
609,389
824,892
-215,503
Table 73 - Cross border movement summary – by Facility (2003-04)
The largest amount of waste being exported is Non-biodegradable waste going to Landfill. It
is likely this is commercial and industrial waste because the majority of landfill void during this
period was reserved for municipal waste. This would have led to a landfill shortage of
capacity for managing commercial and industrial waste and hence encouraged export for
‘cheap’ landfill. This indicates a need to increase competitive treatment and disposal
options for residual commercial and industrial waste in Hampshire.
May 2006
128 of 226
Municipal Waste Cross Boundary Movements
It is not possible to calculate the amount of municipal waste imported since the Environment
Agency combine household with commercial and industrial waste. This data is shown in the
following section in Table 76.
Figures on residual municipal waste going to landfill sites outside Hampshire are limited to the
two most recent years. The amount of municipal waste exported in 2003-04 and 2004-0592 are
shown below in Table 74. All figures are in tonnes.
Municipal Waste Exported
2003/04
2004/05
58,948
48,816
Table 74 - Municipal Waste Exported (2003-04)
The amount of recyclable waste imported and exported is available for the two most recent
years. The following Table 75, shows the amount of mixed dry recyclables that were imported
and exported from Hampshire. All figures are in tonnes.
Imported
Tonnes
Exported
Tonnes
Net Difference
(tonnes)
Recyclables (2003/04)
0
24,742
-24,742
Recyclables (2004/05)
5,432
15,938
-10,506
Table 75 - Cross border movements of recyclables (2003-04)
For the year 2005-06 it is expected that 19,534 tonnes of recyclables will be imported into the
county. With the recent commissioning of a new Materials Recycling Facility in Alton, the
amount of recyclables exported is expected to be zero and therefore Hampshire may
become a net importer of municipal dry mixed recyclables.
92
Hampshire County Council – Waste Management section
May 2006
129 of 226
Commercial & Industrial Waste Cross Boundary Movements
An accurate figure for movement of commercial and industrial (C&I) waste is difficult to
calculate as the waste classification as defined by the Environment Agency includes
household waste. It is also difficult to apportion a figure that goes to landfill. The data on
Household, Commercial & Industrial Waste is shown below with other waste types that are
likely to be predominately commercial and industrial in Table 76. C&I waste that is incorrectly
classified as another type of waste will also not be captured in any figures. A portion of the
cross boundary co-disposal figure shown above in Table 73 will include C&I wastes.
Imported
Tonnes
Exported
Tonnes
Net
Difference
(tonnes)
100,037
97,653
2,384
144,352
20,031
124,321
147
21,387
-21,240
13,934
91,942
-78,008
1,468
88,386
-86,918
259,938
319,399
-59,461
Total
Table 76 - Commercial and Industrial Waste Cross Boundary Movement (2003-04)
Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste Cross Boundary Movements
The waste classification as defined by the Environment Agency that is closest to that which
handles CD&E waste is termed ‘physical treatment’. An accurate figure for movement of
CD&E waste is difficult to calculate as it is difficult to apportion an accurate figure that is
disposed to landfill. The Environment Agency data on waste treated at physical treatment
facilities and that delivered to landfill sites accepting non-biodegradable (inert) waste is
Imported
Tonnes
Exported
Tonnes
Net
Difference
(tonnes)
56,281
93,781
-37,500
83,555
248,043
-164,488
139,836
341,824
-201,988
Total
Table 77 - Construction, Demolition & Excavation Waste Cross Boundary Movement (2003-04)
May 2006
130 of 226
Hazardous Waste Cross Boundary Movements
In recent years, the arisings of hazardous waste in Hampshire have always exceeded the
deposits of hazardous waste93, as shown below in Table 78.
Year
1998/99
2000
2001
2002
2003
Arisings
152,493
145,519
254,187
181,401
157,970
Deposits
115,499
100,262
192,596
106,206
91,610
Table 78 - Historic Waste Returns of Hazardous Waste in Hampshire (1999-2003)
In the year 2002 –2003, the Environment Agency figures show that from total hazardous waste
returns of 157,970 tonnes within Hampshire, 52,760 tonnes (or 33%) was disposed of within its
borders93. The imports and exports of hazardous waste are shown below in Table 79.
Imported
Tonnes
Exported
Tonnes
Net Difference
Is Hampshire a Net
Importer or Exporter ?
South East Region
18,676
7,786
10,890
Importer
England & Wales
86,534
31,064
55,470
Importer
Total
105,211
38,851
66,360
Importer
Table 79 - Hazardous Waste Imports and Exports (2003)
Table 79 also above indicates that the balance (or net) movements of hazardous waste is
such that Hampshire imported more hazardous waste (66,360 tonnes) than it exported in
2002-2003.
The data on cross boundary movements does not give sufficient detail to show the individual
waste stream. Therefore it is not possible to indicate which waste type is mostly imported or
exported except in the way it has been shown above by using the data based upon the
waste facility.
93
May 2006
131 of 226
Waste Growth
Municipal Waste Growth
The growth of both household waste and waste collected at Household Waste Recycling
Centres is shown below in Table 80.
Arisings Growth
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
Average
Household
3.1%
1.7%
3.6%
2.0%
-0.1%
-0.3%
-1.2%
0.1%
1.1%
HWRC
4.7%
7.6%
9.7%
-4.0%
12.2%
6.7%
-3.8%
8.0%
5.1%
Table 80 - Household and HWRC Waste Arising Growth (1998-2005)
The total amount of municipal waste arisings in all of Hampshire is shown below in Figure 44
(this includes the small amount from non-household waste)94.
950,000
900,000
Tonnes
850,000
800,000
750,000
700,000
650,000
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
Year
Figure 44 - Muncipal Waste Arisings (1997 to 2005)
The growth rate of municipal waste over the last seven years that data is available for, is
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
Average
3.4%
3.1%
5.1%
0.6%
2.8%
1.7%
-2.1%
2.2%
2.1%
Table 81 - Municipal Growth Rate (1998-2005)
94
May 2006
132 of 226
The growth in municipal waste arisings has been approximately 2% over the last few years
The growth rate for the England, the South East Region95 & 96 and Hampshire97 over the last 4
years is shown below in Figure 45. Figures for 2004/05 for England and the South East are
provisional and based upon WasteDataFlow (www.wastedataflow.org). This is an internet
based system for local authority data reporting and has replaced the Defra Municipal Waste
Management Survey for 2004/5 onwards.
4.0%
3.0%
Growth
2.0%
1.0%
0.0%
-1.0%
-2.0%
-3.0%
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
Year
England
South East
Hampshire
Figure 45 - Municipal Waste Growth (2001-2004)
Project Integra has estimated that the total amount of municipal solid waste (MSW) handled
will increase up to the year 2009/10 to reach a figure of 1,019,75797. From an actual figure of
900,488 tonnes in 2005, this represents a 13% increase and is shown below split into projected
recycling and disposed tonnages in Figure 46.
1,200,000
1,000,000
Tonnes
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
Year
MSW Recycled
MSW Disposed
Figure 46 - Municipal Waste Growth in tonnes (2005-2010)
95 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) - Municipal Waste Management Survey and
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/wastats/index.htm - accessed 27 March 2006
96 Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) –
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/wrindustry.htm - accessed 6 January 2006
97 Project Integra - Waste Volume Service Plans (1999-2005)
May 2006
133 of 226
To date, waste growth has increased in line with economic growth. This has led to waste
arisings increasing by 70% over the last 15 years – an annual growth rate of 3% 98. If this rate of
growth were to continue it would result in waste arisings surpassing 9 million tonnes by 2020.
In an effort to reduce this growth, the South East England Regional Assembly have set targets
to limit waste growth that involves reducing growth of all waste to 1% per annum by 2010
and 0.5% per annum by 202099. This target if met, would result in waste arisings reaching 6,5
million tonnes - approximately 1 million tonnes more than current waste arisings.
The growth of waste arisings based upon the historic growth rate and the Regional Waste
Strategy target are shown below in Figure 47.
9,500,000
9,000,000
8,500,000
Tonnes
8,000,000
7,500,000
7,000,000
6,500,000
6,000,000
5,500,000
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
18
20
19
20
20
5,000,000
Year
Regional Target
Historic Trend Continues (3% growth)
Figure 47 - Projected waste growth until 2020
These projections indicate waste arisings could reach the following amounts shown in Table
82 below.
Year
3% per annum
Regional Waste Strategy –
waste growth targets
2010
6,770,993
6,026,826
2015
7,849,437
6,377,260
2020
9,099,648
6,573,568
Table 82 - Projected Waste Arisings in 2010, 2015 and 2020
98
Hampshire County Council et al (2005) - More from Less: How to Make Better Use of Hampshire’s Material
Resources
May 2006
134 of 226
The waste growth up to 2020 based upon the regional waste strategy growth figures
apportioned across the sub-regional areas as a proportion of population is shown below in
Table 83.
Population
(2006
estimate)
% of Hants
population
2005
2010
2015
2020
HAMPSHIRE (total)
1,676,660
100.0%
5,684,149
6,026,826
6,377,260
6,573,568
1,003,660
59.9%
3,402,570
3,607,699
3,817,471
3,934,982
South Hampshire
(exc. Portsmouth and
Southampton)
589,870
35.2%
1,999,755
2,120,313
2,243,600
2,312,664
Portsmouth City
191,600
11.4%
649,555
688,714
728,760
751,193
Southampton City
222,190
13.3%
753,260
798,671
845,111
871,125
Forest (total)
171,200
10.2%
580,396
615,386
651,168
671,212
136,800
8.2%
463,774
491,733
520,326
536,343
New Forest National Park
(NFNP)
34,400
2.1%
116,622
123,652
130,842
134,870
Downland (total)
195,240
11.6%
661,895
701,799
742,605
765,464
Downland (exc. Nat.
Parks)
155,140
9.3%
525,950
557,657
590,083
608,247
proposed South Downs NP
(Hants only)
40,100
2.4%
135,945
144,141
152,522
157,217
306,560
18.3%
1,039,288
1,101,943
1,166,016
1,201,909
Region / Totals
Table 83 – Projected Waste Growth (from Regional Waste Strategy)
Existing Waste Capacity
The waste capacity of waste sites can be defined by its planning permission which can be a
capacity figure estimated in the planning proposal or a limit imposed by vehicle movements
– see Table 84 overleaf. It can also be defined by the Waste Management Licence capacity
as issued by the Environment Agency or the actual inputs as supplied by the licensed waste
operators and recorded by the Environment Agency.
The first two of the three following tables show permitted and licensed capacity. The last
tables shows actual waste inputs in one year.
5
12
10
83%
Number of sites
Number of sites with permitted
capacity or actual throughput
Confidence figure
46%
19
41
139,563
0
270,040
270,040
0
98,875
98,875
0
75,000
94%
31
33
180,000
0
627,500
627,500
0
272,500
272,500
100,000
0
1,264,875
1,364,875
2,602,609
2,444,875
Physical
Treatment
11%
1
9
0
0
12,000
12,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13,500
12,000
2%
1
50
4,800
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
52,800
4,800
79%
11
14
375
0
160,625
160,625
3,000
0
3,000
0
0
39,200
39,200
258,618
203,200
Table 84 - Summary of Permitted Waste Capacity
100%
26
26
40,178
5,921
28,474
34,395
0
19,225
19,225
11,386
14,505
158,989
233,989
1,602,164
742,466
Waste
Transfer
Other
Physical & All Metal
Material
Recycling
Treatment sites (MRS) Composting
9%
4
44
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
73,000
0
494,000
567,000
6,237,000
567,000
Biological
Treatment
6%
1
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,000
5,000
40,000
5,000
Special &
Clinical
Waste
Transfer
100%
4
4
90,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
165,000
225,000
390,000
480,000
480,000
20%
1
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
35,000
35,000
35,000
44%
113
259
454,916
5,921
1,098,639
1,104,560
3,000
390,600
393,600
184,386
254,505
2,335,434
2,774,325
11,519,750
4,727,400
Hazardous &
Total
MSW & C&I
Clinical
Capacity
Incineration Incineration exc. Landfill
135 of 226
Notes:
1) These capacity figures are calculated from permitted capacity that is only available on some of the sites except for estimated landfill voids.
2) The total permitted capacity figure has been used to generate an averaged capacity for each site which is then pro-rata’d up to reach the pro-rata total.
3) A 0 (zero) indicates there is either the permitted capacity is unavailable or there are no permitted facilities.
4) Non-hazardous landfill void at Pound Bottom, Wiltshire (within the New Forest National Park) was approximately 560,000 tonnes in March 2005. This is not
included in the figures above.
5) Waste figures for Household Waste Recycling Centres are those recorded by Hampshire County Council Waste Management section.
80%
4
0
0
3,680,000
3,680,000
0
2,679,914
2,679,914
0
0
3,357,559
0
928,239
proposed South Downs NP (Hants
only)
928,239
Downland (total)
0
1,570,090
New Forest National Park (NFNP)
1,570,090
0
Southampton City
Forest (total)
0
Portsmouth City
113,370
695,500
Portsmouth/Southampton)
266,698
139,261
266,698
695,500
233,059
6,626,612
Civic
Amenity
(HWRC)
Actual
233,059
6,551,388
Non-haz
Landfill
(Estimated
Void 31.03.05)
Pro-rata Permitted Capacity
ALL Permitted Capacity / Actual
Throughput
Inert
Landfill
(Estimated
Void 31.03.05)
Permitted Waste Capacity
May 2006
136 of 226
83%
Confidence figure
60%
3
5
0
0
217,500
217,500
0
0
0
0
0
450,000
450,000
667,500
92%
24
26
66%
27
41
418,239
0
960,209
960,209
0
206,549
206,549
123,500
363,250
325,824
812,574
3,640,756
2,397,571
64%
21
33
200,000
0
534,000
534,000
10,000
204,999
214,999
74,999
0
1,982,500
2,057,499
4,724,497
3,006,498
Physical
Treatment
56%
5
9
0
0
100
100
0
0
0
0
2,450
174,999
177,449
399,485
177,549
56%
28
50
123,615
0
30,250
30,250
0
14,124
14,124
355,000
194,100
51,427
600,527
1,471,463
768,516
21%
3
14
0
0
101,999
101,999
0
0
0
0
0
35,000
35,000
639,329
136,999
Table 85 - Summary of Licensed Waste Capacity
47,059
0
66,804
66,804
0
93,250
93,250
24,999
7,111
165,997
198,107
405,220
405,220
Waste
Transfer
Other
Physical & All Metal
Material
Recycling
Treatment sites (MRS) Composting
16%
7
44
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
73,000
0
588,912
661,912
4,160,590
661,912
Biological
Treatment
75%
12
16
25,257
0
5,000
5,000
0
3,744
3,744
4,999
4,500
25,605
35,104
92,140
69,105
Special &
Clinical
Waste
Transfer
0%
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
60%
3
5
257
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,150
1,150
2,345
1,407
55%
143
259
814,427
0
1,698,362
1,698,362
10,000
522,666
532,666
656,497
571,411
3,351,414
4,579,322
15,535,824
7,624,777
Hazardous &
Total
Clinical
Capacity
MSW & C&I
These capacity figures are calculated from licensed capacity that is only available on some of the sites.
The total licensed capacity figure has been used to generate an averaged capacity for each site which is then pro-rata’d up to reach the pro-rata total.
A 0 (zero) indicates there is either no licensed capacity data is available or there are no licensed facilities.
Licensed Capacity can be much higher than actual (or potential) throughput.
10
Notes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
12
Number of sites
120,000
Number of sites with licensed
capacity data
0
200,000
only)
200,000
Downland (total)
0
408,914
408,914
0
Southampton City
Forest (total)
0
455,500
Portsmouth City
455,500
1,184,414
Pro-rata Licensed Capacity
ALL Licensed Capacity
Non-Haz
Inert Landfill Landfill
Civic
Amenity
(HWRC)
The existing waste capacity of those licensed waste handling sites where data is available is shown below in Table 85. These capacity figures are
dependent on the licensing bands, hence a site can be issued with a licensed amount that can be considerably higher than predicted throughput.
Licensed Waste Capacity
May 2006
137 of 226
100%
5
5
0
0
253,891
253,891
0
225,263
225,263
0
0
332,164
332,164
811,318
92%
24
26
39,321
0
27,676
27,676
0
10,752
10,752
11,062
14,134
109,204
134,400
229,828
212,149
79%
26
33
0
0
116,817
116,817
0
0
0
77,392
0
457,956
535,348
827,748
652,165
Physical
Treatment
33%
3
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,171
0
24,815
31,986
43,026
31,986
18%
9
50
137,160
0
0
0
0
24,744
24,744
87,861
0
218
88,079
1,083,260
249,983
21%
3
14
0
0
38,687
38,687
0
0
0
0
0
14,622
14,622
248,775
53,309
All Metal
Recycling
sites (MRS) Composting
Table 86 - Summary of Waste Inputs (2003-04)
46%
19
41
287,385
0
204,310
204,310
0
119,695
119,695
55,768
91,132
23,952
170,852
1,687,996
782,242
Waste
Transfer
Other
Physical &
Material
Treatment
11%
5
44
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
293,341
293,341
2,581,401
293,341
Biological
Treatment
50%
8
16
26
0
0
0
0
9
9
2,345
4,218
5,041
11,604
23,278
11,639
Special &
Clinical
Waste
Transfer
0%
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
60%
3
5
26
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
655
655
681
43%
112
259
463,918
0
387,490
387,490
0
155,200
155,200
241,599
109,484
929,804
1,280,887
6,725,312
2,287,495
Hazardous &
Total
MSW & C&I
Clinical
Capacity
Notes:
1) Waste input figures are calculated from waste return data that is supplied to the Environment Agency by waste operators. Not all operators supply returns.
2) The total input figure for each region has been used to generate an averaged capacity for each site which is then pro-rata’d up to reach the pro-rata total.
3) A 0 (zero) indicates there is no input data available or there are no licensed facilities.
58%
7
Number of sites with input data
Confidence figure
12
98,390
Number of sites
0
21,437
only)
21,437
Downland (total)
0
133,213
133,213
0
Southampton City
Forest (total)
0
61,695
Portsmouth City
61,695
314,735
Pro-rata Waste Inputs
ALL Waste Inputs (available)
Inert Landfill
Non-Haz
Landfill
Civic
Amenity
(HWRC)
The actual waste inputs as recorded by the Environment Agency at existing licensed waste handling sites in 2003-04 is shown below in Table 86. The
actual throughput of waste is significantly lower than the permitted or licensed capacity figures shown in Table 84 and Table 85.
Site Inputs
May 2006
May 2006
138 of 226
Types of Waste Handling sites
Below is a short description of the various facilities and technologies that are used to
process, treat or dispose of waste. Some of the facilities or technologies mentioned are
not yet is use within Hampshire.
An indication of the total capacity of each waste handling facility within Hampshire is
shown with the description. This figure either relates to the actual waste handled in one
year (if available) or the existing licensed capacity at each waste site. The capacity is
either from known licenses as issued by the Environment Agency or calculated from an
average site capacity for those sites which are exempt or do not have a capacity
figure stated as part of their license. Actual input or throughput information on many
sites is limited as many sites do not supply the Environment Agency with waste return
data hence the use of licensed capacities. The licensed capacity of any site is not a
maximum amount the site can handle, it just represents a charging band for the holder
of the waste management license. Since these charging bands are quite broad, the
actual throughput is often significantly lower than the licensed figure.
Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRC’s)
There are currently 26 civic amenity sites throughout Hampshire that receive waste for
re-use, recycling or disposal deposited by the public (these facilities are also referred to
as ‘bring’ sites). They accept a broad range of waste including general waste, wood,
metals, plastics, paper, cardboard, green waste, oils etc. along with bulky waste like
fridges, cookers, beds.
No recycling takes place on these sites, just the collection and separation of waste
materials that are then sent to a recycling or composting facility. The total licensed
capacity of all sites amounts to 405,220 tonnes per annum. The total amount of waste
delivered to HWRC’s in the year 2004/05 was 249,804 tonnes. Of this amount, 103,515
tonnes was sent for recycling (including composting and fridges but excluding rubble
and bric-a-brac).
Material Recovery Facility (MRF)
A Material Recovery Facility accepts all the dry mixed recyclables (plastic bottles, food
& drink cans, newspapers, magazines etc) that are collected from kerbside collections.
It then separates the mixture into one type and bales it together into a load which can
then be transported to a commercial facility which recycles the material into a new
product. There are two facilities in Hampshire, together they can handle up to 157,000
tonnes or recyclables a year.
Waste Transfer Station (WTS)
Waste Transfer Stations accept a wide range of waste which usually arrives in builder’s
skips. The waste can be either inert or non-inert and is emptied and then sorted using a
combination of manual and machine labour. Material resources like brick/rubble, soil,
wood, metals, plastics, green waste, etc. are then segregated and sent to other sites
for recycling. The remaining (residual) waste is removed for energy recovery or
disposal (landfill).
May 2006
139 of 226
Physical Treatment (Recycling)
These sites primarily receive construction, demolition and excavation (CD&E) waste
and are often located on active or dormant/closed landfill sites. Waste usually arrives
in bulk lorries or in builder’s skips whereby the contents are emptied and segregated
into suitable material for recycling or landfill. These sites mechanically sort CD&E waste,
it is then normally crushed and/or screened often off-site to produce a range of
marketable products used in the construction industry. Some sites may only screen
waste and then send the product to another location for further processing (e.g.
crushing).
Metal Recycling (End-of-Life Vehicle (ELV) dismantler)
These sites accept vehicles which have reached the end of their lives. Vehicles are
stripped of parts including plastics, tyres and glass and fluids such as oils and coolants
drained for re-use or reconditioning. The vehicle will then either be crushed or sent
away to another site for crushing and then onto a final destination where it will be
melted down for re-use.
Metal Recycling (all metals)
These sites accept all metal waste other than metals from vehicles. The metals are
separated into their various types and then transported to other facilities which melt
them down and supply the material for new products.
Biological Treatment
This category covers composting facilities, waste water treatment and other biological
treatment sites.
Composting (Aerobic Decomposition)
This category covers those sites which accept biodegradable green waste or ‘cuttings’
from households or civic amenity sites that are suitable for composting. The waste is
often composted in the open air by organising the waste into rows and is referred to as
‘windrow composting’. These are rotated over a number of weeks to aid the
decomposing process and keep the temperature within the optimum limits. The three
largest sites run by Hampshire Waste Services market the compost as ‘Pro-Grow’, a
range of high quality soil and lawn conditioners, woodchip mulch or pine bark and are
sold at all the household waste recycling centres. A recent expansion at one site will
mean that the three Hampshire Waste Services sites will be able to process over
100,000 tonnes of compost material per annum.
An alternative method of producing compost is via ‘In-Vessel’ composting (IVC).
Decomposition of shredded and mixed organic waste is carried out within an enclosed
container where the moisture, temperature and odour can be controlled. One
significant advantage of this method is the significant reduction in time required to
produce a stabilised output. Currently there are no In-Vessel composting facilities in
Hampshire.
May 2006
140 of 226
Anaerobic Digestion (AD)
This is a process which breaks down biodegradable material by the action of microbes
in the absence of oxygen. Outputs include a solid/liquid slurry, a liquor and a biogas.
The dewatered solids can be applied to land as a soil improver, the liquor can be
recycled in the AD process, applied as a liquid fertilizer or used in subsequent
treatment of the solids and the biogas can be fed back into the process to generate
the heat required in the AD process. A small percentage is sent to landfill. Currently
there are no facilities using Anaerobic Digestion in Hampshire excluding those used to
treat sewage sludge at waste water treatment works.
Wastewater Treatment
These sites treat waste water and sewage waste via anaerobic digestion. This process
breaks down biodegradable material in the absence of oxygen in an enclosed vessel
producing methane, carbon dioxide and solids. The methane can be captured and
burnt for energy, the solids can be formed into a soil conditioner and relatively harmless
residues discharged to sea.
Other Biological Treatment
These sites accept liquid waste like oils or leachate (e.g. from non-hazardous landfill
sites), and treat through a variety of processes with may involve heating, filtering or
drying to change its properties and stabilise the waste for final disposal and/or refine
into a resource for further use.
Incineration
There are three incinerators accepting municipal waste in Hampshire. These take the
household black bag/bin rubbish and burn it at high temperature to extract (or
recover) energy. There is also one commercial waste incinerator and one hazardous
waste incinerator that uses very high temperatures to dispose of hazardous waste.
There are also a small number of clinical waste incinerators that accept waste from
hospitals, nursing homes, dentists, surgeries and can include wastes from the
household.
Incinerators produce two solid wastes - bottom ash which is the solid remainder of
waste after burning, and flue gas treatment residues that are generated by the air
pollution control process - some of which is classified as hazardous waste.
Landfill and Landraising
Final disposal of waste has often resulted in it being deposited in previous mineral
extraction sites to restore the land to previous pre-excavation levels - referred to as
‘landfill’. An alternative method is to dispose of the waste on land where minerals
haven’t been extracted or above previous levels - referred to as ‘landraise’.
Landfill sites within Hampshire accept either inert or non-hazardous waste and are
usually located in areas previously used for mineral extraction. In the past, landfill sites
were often co-disposal, that is, they accepted both hazardous and non-hazardous
waste together, a practice that has stopped due to the landfill directive. The majority
of sites are ‘open gate’ sites that accept waste from a variety of waste producers
although over recent years many of these increased gate prices to husband void to
fulfil municipal waste disposal contracts. The other being known as ‘restricted user’
sites which is either within the ownership of the waste producer or restricted to specific
users.
May 2006
141 of 226
Non-hazardous waste must be deposited in sites which have been lined with an
impervious barrier. This barrier is often made of clay and/or man-made welded plastic
materials to prevent ‘leaching’ or draining of liquid breakdown products over time.
Typically up to 40% of a non-hazardous landfill site void space is taken up by the
engineering materials (e.g. clay) that are used to contain the waste. The waste is
deposited in cells that are then covered at the end of each day. Cover materials
usually include waste soils but may include synthetic or proprietary materials.
Non-hazardous landfill sites often have a system to capture the gasses which are
produced as the organic waste decomposes over a period of up to 20 years. The gas
contains approximately 50% methane. Methane gas is a significant contributor to the
greenhouse effect and therefore is a cause of climate change but if captured, can be
burnt to produce energy lessening the global warming potential.
May 2006
142 of 226
May 2006
143 of 226
Appendix 1
Detailed Policy Context
May 2006
144 of 226
(1999/31/EC)
EU Landfill
Directive
European
145 of 226
By 2010 to reduce the quantity of biodegradable municipal waste going to landfill to
75% of 1995 levels;
50% of 1995 levels;
35% of 1995 levels.
•
•
•
Choice of location;
Use of liners; and
Water and leachate management.
The Directive also sets out requirements for all types of landfilling including:
Only waste that has been treated to reduce its quantity or its effect on the environment
can be landfilled (except inert waste).
Certain wastes will be banned from landfills over a number of years – liquids (2002),
explosives (2002), infectious clinical wastes (2002) and tyres (2003 – whole tyres / 2006 –
shredded tyres).
Landfills are classified to receive only hazardous, non-hazardous or inert waste only.
In July 2004, the Landfill (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 came into
affect, which bans the co-disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous waste at the same
site.
The 2020 deadline reflects need to develop alternative management technologies. The
1995 levels are reference to arisings rather than disposal quantities.
•
•
•
The Directive sets out targets for a staged reduction in the amount of biodegradable
waste going to landfill:
The principle objective of the Directive is to prevent or reduce as far as possible the
negative effects on the environment and health caused by land filling. The Directive aims
to ensure high and consist standards of landfill practice across the EU, to stimulate the
recycling and recovery of value from waste, and to reduce emissions of methane.
Relevant Background National and European Plans and Programmes
Content
Relevant Plans
and
Programmes
May 2006
The regulations will lead to an increase in
hazardous waste requiring treatment
prior to disposal. There are four existing
hazardous waste (not including clinical
waste) treatment facilities in Hampshire.
The Sites Plans may need to identify new
hazardous waste treatment and disposal
sites to meet the Directive requirements.
There are currently no landfill sites
licensed to receive hazardous waste in
Hampshire, Portsmouth or Southampton.
This has implications for exporting
hazardous waste from the these areas
and the ability to satisfy the proximity
principle.
Requirements of the Directive are not in
the Minerals and Waste Local Plan as it
predates the Directive. Therefore, the
requirements will need to be
implemented through the emerging
Plan.
Implications for HMWDF
(2002/96/EC)
EU Waste
Electrical and
Electronic
Equipment
Directive
(WEEE)
May 2006
146 of 226
By 31 December 2006:
• producers will be required to achieve a series of demanding recycling and recovery
targets for different categories of appliance; and
• the UK must have reached an average WEEE collection rate of four kilograms for each
private householder annually.
By 1st January 2006:
• private householders will be able to return their WEEE to collection facilities free of
charge;
• producers (manufacturers, sellers, distributors) will be responsible for financing the
collection, treatment, recovery and disposal of WEEE from private households
deposited at these collection facilities;
• producers will be responsible for financing the collection, treatment, recovery and
disposal of WEEE from users other than private householders from products placed on
the market after 1st January 2006; and
• producers will also be responsible for financing the management of WEEE from
products placed on the market before 1st January 2006. However, it may be possible
for all or part of these costs to be recovered from users other than private
householders.
Separate collection of WEEE and the treatment of WEEE at appropriate facilities is
encouraged. Co-disposal is to be minimised.
The WEEE Directive effects those involved in manufacturing, selling, distributing, recycling
or treating electrical and electronic equipment. This includes:
• household appliances
• IT and telecommunications equipment
• audiovisual and lighting equipment
• electrical and electronic tools
• toys, leisure and sports equipment
• medical devices and
• automatic dispensers.
The WEEE Directive came into effect in August 2004. The Directive aims to:
• reduce the waste arising from electrical and electronic equipment; and
• improve the environmental performance of all those involved in the life cycle of
electrical and electronic products.
Changes in the management of WEEE
will need to be reflected in the ‘core’
Strategy and Sites Plans.
The obligations of this Directive are
placed on producers and distributors
although it is likely the existing household
waste recycling infrastructure will play a
role in the capture and transfer of this
waste.
Thematic
Strategy on the
Prevention and
Recycling of
Waste
The action undertaken under the Thematic Strategy will contribute to a continuing move
away from landfill with waste being channelled into a variety of options higher up the
waste hierarchy including composting and energy recovery. It concludes that it is up to
Member States to decide which option is the environmentally best option in given
circumstances.
The Thematic Strategy also sets out to simplify and modernise existing legislation and
amend the Waste Framework Directive.
Recycling will be encouraged with the proposal to set minimum standards for recycling
activities and recycled materials.
The Strategy also aims to prevent waste at source by clarifying the obligations of Member
States to develop publicly available waste prevention programmes.
It is proposed to take a “life cycle thinking” approach to waste and materials, which
means looking at the minimising the negative environmental impact of resources across
their entire life cycle.
The Strategy aims to improve the environmental impact of waste and materials in the EU
and reduce the harmful effects of waste management.
Material specific recycling targets:
• Glass – 60%
• Paper and cardboard – 60%
• Metals – 50%
• Plastics – 22.5 %
• Wood – 15%
On 27 May 2003 the European Commission adopted a communication towards a
thematic strategy on the prevention and recycling of waste. The communication follows
a mandate given by the Sixth Environmental Action Programme to develop seven
thematic strategies for priority areas of environmental policy.
Targets to be achieved by 2008:
• Overall recovery at a 60% weight minimum
• Overall recycling 55% to a maximum of 80%
(94/62/EC)
147 of 226
The Directive has been adopted in the UK since 1997 and is designed to reduce quantities
of waste entering the waste stream.
EU Packaging
Directive
May 2006
The review of the national Waste
Strategy will need to reflect the
approach set out within the Thematic
Strategy and as such, the Hampshire
Strategy will need to complement and
support the Thematic Strategy.
The obligations of this Directive are
placed on producers. However, the
Strategy will need to support delivery by
increasing recycling and reprocessing
capacity.
148 of 226
The Strategy sets out a number of key waste management principles that should underpin all waste
management decisions:
• The Waste Hierarchy
• Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO)
• Proximity Principle
• Regional Self-Sufficiency
(May 2000)
The Waste Hierarchy sets out the preference for different waste management approaches. The
intention is that decisions on waste management will give greater weight to those methods at the top
of the hierarchy:
This strategy describes the governments vision for managing waste and resources better. It sets out
the changes needed to deliver more sustainable development.
The shared priorities for immediate action include:
• Sustainable Consumption and Production
• Climate Change and Energy
• Natural Resource Protection and Environmental Enhancement
• Sustainable Communities
‘The goal of sustainable development is to enable all people throughout the world to satisfy their
basic needs and enjoy a better quality of life without compromising the quality of life of future
generations. For the UK Government and the Devolved Administrations, that goal will be pursued in
an integrated way through a sustainable, innovative and productive economy that delivers high
levels of employment; and a just society that promotes social inclusion, sustainable communities and
personal well-being. This will be done in ways that protect and enhance the physical and natural
environment, and use resources and energy as efficiently as possible. Government must promote a
clear understanding of, and commitment to, sustainable development so that all people can
contribute to the overall goal through their individual decisions. Similar objectives will inform all our
international endeavours, with the UK actively promoting multilateral and sustainable solutions to
today’s most pressing environmental, economic and social problems. There is a clear obligation on
more prosperous nations both to put their own house in order, and to support other countries in the
transition towards a more equitable and sustainable world’.
The Strategy builds upon the 1999 four central aims of sustainability and develops them further. A
‘purpose’ has now been adopted as the new framework goal for sustainable development:
Waste Strategy
2000
(March 2005)
Securing the
Future –
delivering the
UK sustainable
development
strategy
National
May 2006
The government’s
preference for the waste
hierarchy and the proximity
principle are reflected in
draft PPS 10 and as such the
Strategy and Sites Plans will
need to place greater
emphasis on these
approaches.
The National targets should
reflect or exceed the
Strategy’s performance
targets.
The Strategy should ensure
that policies and objectives
reflect the Government’s
priorities for action for
achieving sustainable
development.
(February,
2006)
A Review of
England’s
Waste Strategy
–A
Consultation
Document
May 2006
Reduction (TOP)
Re-use
Recovery (Recycling / Composting / Energy from Waste)
Disposal (BOTTOM)
149 of 226
To recycle or compost at least 25% of household waste by 2005
The review examines the policy framework, action for waste prevention and proposals for closing the
resources loop and driving investment. Proposals include:
The document proposes new targets including:
• Increased national targets for recycling and composting of household waste (40% by 2010
and 50% by 2020)
• National landfill targets for commercial and industrial waste (landfilling as % of total – 53% by
2002, 37% by 2010, 36% by 2015 and 35% by 2020).
The revised document links closely with the Government’s action plan on sustainable consumption
and production.
The consultation document reviews the existing waste strategy for England. It examines the progress
made since Waste Strategy 2000 and looks to build on the progress.
•
•
•
The Government and the National Assembly have set challenging targets to increase the recycling of
municipal waste.
The target to reduce the amount of industrial and commercial waste landfilled is to 85% of 1998 levels
by 2005. In meeting this target focus must be on recovering value and reducing environmental
impacts. This means not only putting waste materials to better use, but tackling any growth in waste.
Regional Self-sufficiency aims to ensure that waste is managed within the region that it arises by
providing sufficient facilities to manage the capacity for at least ten years.
The Proximity Principle emphasises that waste should be managed as near as possible to its place of
production. This is to minimise the environmental impacts caused by the transportation of the waste.
BPEO is a technique to guide decisions made in the waste management process. The procedure is
aimed to establish the option that provides the most benefits, or least damage to the environment as
a whole, at acceptable cost for both the long and short term.
¾
¾
¾
¾
The government has
broadened its approach in
terms of producing less
waste, establishing a joinedup method of dealing with
waste and securing longterm sustainability. The
Strategy should seek to
ensure that it complements
The National targets should
be reflected or be exceeded
by the Strategy’s
performance targets.
(July 2005)
PPS 10 –
Planning for
Sustainable
Waste
Management
May 2006
Future standards for local authorities on reducing and recycling household waste.
Piloting more recycling services for small businesses.
Encouraging energy recovery.
Placing further restrictions on the use of landfill in the longer term.
Strengthening advice on procurement for local authorities.
Continuing development of markets for recycled materials.
A new management for waste imports and exports.
Arrangements for better collection and management for household hazardous waste.
150 of 226
On-site management of where the waste arises.
Industrial sites, looking for opportunities to co-locate facilities together and with
complementary activities.
(i)
Assess their suitability for development against criteria including their support of policies,
the physical and environmental constraints, the cumulative effect on the well-being of the
local community, and the capacity of existing and potential infrastructure to support the
In deciding which areas to consider, authorities should:
(i)
(ii)
The identification of new sites and areas should consider:
Green belts will be protected but it is recognised that the benefits of sustainable waste management
are given significant weight when determining planning permissions.
The design and layout of new development is also required to support sustainable waste
management.
The revised Strategy will be published later in 2006.
PPS 10 focuses on national policy and aims to provide clarity on what is required at regional and local
levels to help ensure the delivery of sustainable waste management. Key planning objectives include
greater emphasis on the waste hierarchy, provision of facilities to meet the communities needs,
implementing legislation and targets, the delivery of waste management without endangering
human health and without harming the environment and ensure waste is disposed of as near as
possible to its place of production. It also seeks that the interests of business, the community and
collection authorities are reflected and the potential benefits of sustainable waste management are
taken into consideration in determining planning applications.
The issue of waste crime is examined in more detail due to the potential for a significant increase and
as such, proposals are set out for more targets prevention and enforcement.
The document also reviews delivery including the framework of roles and responsibilities.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Strategy will need to
include a ‘site selection
methodology’ that reflects
and supports that in PPS10.
The statement is a key
document in the preparation
of the Hampshire Minerals
and Waste Development
Framework. The continued
emphasis on the waste
hierarchy, proximity principle
and the approach to site
identification are all
significant for the
development of policies and
the preparation of the
Minerals and Waste
Management Site Plans.
this approach.
(July 2005)
Draft MPS 1
Annex 1:
Aggregate
Provision in
England
(November
2004)
Minerals Policy
Statement
(MPS) 1
Planning and
Minerals and
Associated
Good Practice
Guidance –
Consultation
Paper
May 2006
151 of 226
sustainable movement of waste and products arising from resource recovery.
Give priority to the re-use of previously-developed land and redundant agricultural and
forestry buildings and their curtilages.
the need to maintain sufficient supply to meet the anticipated need for minerals consistent with
environmental acceptability;
the need to protect designated areas of national and international importance;
the need to encourage efficient use of extracted materials and the use of substitute or recycled
materials in place of primary minerals wherever practicable; and
the need to ensure that where extraction does take place, restoration and aftercare of sites are
of high quality.
adhere to the guidance
provided in this Annex.
The Hampshire Minerals Sites
Plan will also need to take
into account the guidance
on provision and potential
environmental impacts.
Objectives of the policy include:
a) to conserve aggregate resources by the appropriate provision and phasing of supply in
development plans;
b) to safeguard specific resources of aggregates which are, or may become, of economic
importance, against other types of development which would be a serious hindrance to their
extraction;
c) to minimise the waste of aggregates and to encourage the efficient use of aggregate, including
recycling;
d) to encourage the use of alternatives to primary aggregate;
e) to reduce damaging environmental impacts during the extraction and processing of primary
aggregate and the production of alternatives;
f) to preserve or enhance the overall quality of the environment once extraction has ceased;
g) to protect areas of designated landscape or nature conservation from inappropriate
development;
The policies and objectives
contained within the Strategy
will need to reflect the key
policy messages in the draft
Statement.
The Annex replaces Minerals Planning Guidance 6. The aim of the policy is to ensure that, in line with
sustainable development, the supply of aggregates is achieved without acceptable cost to society
or the environment.
Draft Good Practice Guidance gives advice to local planning authorities, the minerals industry and
interested parties about how the policies in MPS1 might be implemented.
•
•
•
•
Draft Minerals Policy Statement 1 sets out core policies and principles for minerals planning in England.
Its main objectives for minerals planning are in line with the Government’s overall aims for sustainable
development. The key policy messages are:
PPS10 does not include the requirement for BPEO assessments.
(ii)
(July 2005)
Draft MPS 1
Annex 2: Brick
Clay provision
in England
May 2006
152 of 226
The Annex also covers safeguarding, supply and reserves, environmental impacts, efficiency,
restoration and encourages liaison between industry, stakeholders, the community and planning
authorities.
The objectives of policy are:
• to conserve brick clay resources, and to enhance the diversity of brick clay produced by the
appropriate provision and phasing of supply in minerals development plans;
• to safeguard and, where necessary stockpile, specific resources of brick clays, especially
‘premium brick clays’, such as clays of the Etruria Formation and fireclay, which is produced as a
by-product of open cast coal-mining, for possible future use;
• to minimise waste of brick clay, and waste arising from production of brick clay products, and to
encourage its efficient use, including its recycling;
• to reduce damaging environmental impacts during the extraction and processing of brick clay;
• to enhance the overall quality of the environment once extraction has ceased;
• to protect areas of designated landscape or nature conservation interest from inappropriate
development;
• to reduce the environmental impacts of the transportation to market of brick clay and brick clay
products and to encourage bulk transport, where possible, of brick clay by water and rail by
safeguarding wharves and railheads.
The aim of policy is to ensure that clays required for construction and environmental uses (such as
lining, daily cover and capping for landfill sites) are provided and made available, firstly at
acceptable social, economic and environmental cost, and, secondly at a level which reflects the
high initial investment in, and high levels of expenditure required to improve, existing brick making
plant and equipment.
The Annex states that national and regional guidelines for provision of aggregates in England are
published by the ODDPM and these are monitored annually. Also covered in the draft Annex is
provision of aggregates in RSSs and LDFs, phasing of land-won provisions and landbanks, marine sand
and gravel provision and provision of borrow pits.
h) to reduce the environmental impacts of the movement of aggregates and encourage movement
by water and rail by safeguarding existing wharves and railheads and, where appropriate, provision
of new facilities for this purpose; and
i) to encourage the supply of marine dredged sand and gravel to the extent that environmentally
acceptable sources can be identified and exploited, within the principles of sustainable
development.
(March 2005)
Minerals Policy
Statement
(MPS) 2:
Controlling
and Mitigating
the
Environmental
Effects of
Minerals
Extraction in
England
(July 2005)
Draft MPS 1
Annex 4:
Onshore oil
and gas in
England
May 2006
153 of 226
•
•
•
•
•
•
Conserve minerals as far as possible, whilst ensuring an adequate supply to meet the needs of
society;
Ensure that the environmental impacts caused by mineral operations and the transport of
minerals are kept to an acceptable minimum;
Minimise production of waste and to encourage efficient use of materials, including appropriate
use of high-quality materials, and recycling of waste;
Encourage sensitive working, restoration and aftercare practices during minerals extraction and
to conserve or enhance the overall quality of the environment once extraction has ceased;
Safeguard the long-term capability of best and most versatile agricultural land, and conserve soil
resources for use in a sustainable way; and
Protect areas of nationally-designated landscape or archaeological value, cultural heritage or
nature conservation from mineral development, other than in exceptional circumstances where it
has been demonstrated that the proposed development is in the public interest.
In order to reconcile potential conflict between the exploitation of resources and environmental aims,
MPAs should:
The statement sets out how Mineral Planning Authorities should minimise any significant adverse
environmental effects that may arise from minerals extraction.
MPS supersedes MGP 11: The Control of Noise at Surface Mineral Workings.
The Annex also covers conventional development, production and distribution and gas from coal
seams and workings.
The main objectives of policy are:
• to reduce damaging environmental impacts during the exploration for, appraisal and
development of resources;
• to preserve or enhance the overall quality of the environment once extraction or associated
development has ceased;
• to protect areas of designated landscape, nature conservation interest, natural and built heritage
and green belt from inappropriate development; and
• to reduce environmental impacts of oil and gas operations.
The aim of policy is to contribute to the delivery of the Government’s energy policy, as it relates to oil
and gas development on land, at acceptable social, economic and environmental cost.
The guidance is particularly
relevant to development
control policies and the
criteria used for the
identification of new mineral
sites within Hampshire,
Portsmouth and
Southampton and as such
should be addressed in the
Hampshire Minerals Sites Plan
and reflected in the Strategy.
contain policies and
objectives that reflect the
guidance provided within
the statement and the
accompanying annexes.
Existing policies opposing oil
and gas development in the
New Forest National Park will
need to be reviewed.
(June 2003)
Mineral
Planning
Guidance 6:
Guidelines for
aggregate
provision in
England
May 2006
154 of 226
To help meet this supply, local authorities should develop marine aggregate supplies as well as
encourage the recycling of demolition and construction wastes arisings.
This Guidance Note provides advice to mineral planning authorities and the minerals industry on how
to ensure that the construction industry receives an adequate and steady supply of material at the
best balance of social, environmental and economic cost, whilst ensuring that extraction and
development are consistent with the principles of sustainable development.
Annex 2: Noise
The key planning principle is that noise emissions should, as far as possible, be controlled, mitigated or
removed at source. Proposals for mineral working operations should include appropriate proposals
for the control or mitigation of noise emissions.
Annex 1: Dust
The key planning principle is that dust emissions should, as far as possible, be controlled, mitigated or
removed at source. Proposals for mineral working operations should include appropriate proposals
for the control and/or mitigation of dust emissions. Those making development proposals should carry
out a dust assessment study and MPAs should consider the results.
The Strategy needs to ensure
that there is adequate supply
of material for the
construction industry. It
should also include policies
which ensure a sustainable
approach to mineral
extraction and encourage
the recycling of demolition
and construction waste. The
Hampshire Minerals Sites Plan
should also ensure that there
are sufficient sites for mineral
extraction to meet local
apportionment.
155 of 226
T13 – Rail Freight
…providing enhanced capacity for the movement of freight by rail on the following corridors): (i) Southampton to West
Midlands…(iv) Portsmouth to Southampton/West Midlands.
(iii) encourage development with a high generation of freight and/or commercial movements to be located close to intermodal
facilities, rail freight facilities, or ports and wharves
(ii) safeguard and promote sites adjacent to railways, ports and rivers for developments, particularly new inter-modal facilities and
rail connected industry and warehousing, that are likely to maximise freight movement by rail or water
T12 – Freight and Site Safeguarding
(i) safeguard wharves, depots and other sites that are, or could be, critical in developing the capability of the transport system to
move freight, particularly by rail or water
Encouragement should be given to investment in landside infrastructure that supports short sea shipping connections linking the
region into the wider European network via these ports.
T11 – Ports and Short Sea Shipping
…maintain and enhance the role of the following ports… (ii) ‘niche’ markets – Southampton, Portsmouth… (iii) deep-sea containers –
Southampton…
T5 – Regional Spokes
(i) providing a level of service that supports the role of regional hubs (Basingstoke, Portsmouth and Southampton) as a focus of
economic activity
T3 – Regional Hubs
(iii) giving priority to the development of high quality interchange facilities between all modes of transport.
(iv) considering the applicability of the transport access and interchange aspects of the hub concepts at the local level.
Regional Spatial Strategies
Relevant Plans
Policies and Relevant Content
and
Programmes
Draft South East Communications and Transport
Plan Part 1:
The following key transport policies within the South East Plan have relevance to the Minerals and Waste Development Framework.
Core Regional
These policies are based upon those in the Regional Transport Strategy which was published by the Secretary of State in July 2004.
Policies
T1- Manage and Invest
(iv) encourage development that is located and designed to reduce average journey lengths
(July 2005)
(vii) include measures to minimise negative environmental impacts of transport and, where possible, to enhance the environment
and communities through such interventions.
May 2006
May 2006
156 of 226
(iii) ensuring that unavoidable damage to wildlife interest is minimised through mitigation…
(ii) ensuring damage to county wildlife sites and locally important wildlife and geological sites is avoided wherever possible
(i) providing the highest level of protection for nationally and internationally designated sites
NRM4 – Conservation and Improvement of Biodiversity
…local authorities and other bodies shall avoid a net loss of biodiversity, and actively pursue opportunities to achieve a net gain
across the region by:
(i) take account of River Basin Management Plans, Catchment Flood Management Plans and Shoreline Management Plans in
developing Local Development Documents and other strategies. Where locationally specific flood risk and land management
options such as flood storage, managed realignment and set back from coastal defences are identified, land should be
safeguarded for these purposes and appropriate land management activities encouraged.
(ii) require incorporation of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS), other water retention measures and flood storage measures to
minimise direct surface run-off, unless there are practicable or environmental reasons for not doing so.
In the preparation of Local Development Documents and considering planning applications, local authorities in conjunction with the
Environment Agency, should also:
NRM3 – Sustainable Flood Risk Management
Inappropriate development should not be allocated or permitted in zones 2 and 3 of the floodplain or areas with a history of
groundwater flooding, or where it would increase flood risk elsewhere, unless there is over-riding need and absence of suitable
alternatives.
(vi) not permit development that prevents a risk of pollution or where satisfactory pollution prevention measures are not provided in
areas of high ground water vulnerability (in consultation with the Environment Agency).
(iv) work with water and sewerage companies and the Environment Agency to identify infrastructure needs, and allocate areas and
safeguard these for infrastructure development
(iii) require development that would use significant quantities of water to incorporate measures to enhance water efficiency… and,
where appropriate, sustainable drainage solutions where these are consistent with protection of groundwater quality
(ii)…ensure the location of development does not lead to unacceptable deterioration of water quality…
NRM1 – Sustainable Water Resources, Groundwater and River Water Quality Management
(i) …take account of other plans and strategies including water and sewerage company asset management plans, the Environment
Agency’s Regional Water Resources Strategy, Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies, groundwater vulnerability maps and
groundwater source protection zone maps
The region faces similar environmental challenges as does the county of Hampshire. There are a number of policies in the Sustainable
Natural Resources Management section of the South East Plan that are relevant. These are detailed below:
Sustainable Natural Resource Management
May 2006
157 of 226
Policy C1a – The New Forest National Park
High priority should be given to conserving and conserving land within the New Forest National Park. The local planning authority
and other partners should also develop supportive sustainable land management policies, both inside the National Park and within
the zone of ‘New Forest commoning activity’, including protection of grazing land outside the National Park which is needed to
support National Park purposes.
There are a number of policies in the South East Plan relating to Countryside and Land Management issues that are important. These
are outlined below.
Countryside and Land Management
(iv)encouraging the use of best practice during construction activities to reduce the levels of dust and other pollutants.
(ii) mitigating the impact of development and reduce exposure to poor air quality through design…
(ii) reducing the environmental impacts of transport and congestion management, and support the use of cleaner transport fuels
NRM7 – Air Quality
(i) ensuring consistency with Air Quality Management Plans
(v) prevent development on unstable land or areas at risk of erosion, as identified in Shoreline Management Plans.
(iii) restrict development on the undeveloped coastline unless it specifically requires a rural coastal location and does not affect
environmental, cultural and recreational resources
NRM6 – Coastal Zone Management
(iii) ensure that development does not prejudice options for the managed realignment, significantly effect sediment inputs and
transport, lead to an increase in flood risk or preclude the delivery of sustainable flood risk management solutions in the future
(iv) promoting and encouraging the economic use of woodlands and wood resources, including wood fuel as a renewable energy
source
(ii) promoting the effective management and where appropriate, extension and creation of new woodland areas, including, in
association with areas of major development, where this helps to restore and enhance degraded landscapes, screen noise and
pollution, providing recreational opportunities, helps mitigate climate change, and contributes to floodplain management.
NRM5 – Woodlands
(i) protecting ancient woodland from damaging development and land uses;
(vi) …establishing accessible green networks and open green space in urban areas.
(iv) …identifying areas of opportunity for biodiversity improvement and setting targets reflecting those in figure NRM2. Opportunities
for biodiversity improvement, including large-scale habitat restoration, enhancement and re-creation in the areas of strategic
opportunity for biodiversity improvement (Map NRM4) should be pursued
(August 2005)
Proposed
Changes to
Regional
Planning
Guidance for
the South East
(RPG 9) – Waste
and Minerals
May 2006
158 of 226
Establishing a regional working group to identify opportunities and priorities for waste reduction in relation to supply chains,
product design, manufacture, labelling, retailing, procurement, consumption and resource recovery; and
Developing enhanced regional information and awareness programmes to alter individual and corporate behaviour.
•
Identifying and disseminating examples of good practice and encouraging local authorities and businesses to implement waste
minimisation programmes;
•
•
Encouraging waste reduction in all regional and local strategies;
•
The Regional Assembly, SEEDA, the Environment Agency and other regional partners will work together to reduce growth of all waste
to 1% per annum by 2010 and 0.5% per annum by 2020 by:
Policy W1: Waste Reduction
Landscape Character Assessments should be used to contribute to the framing of development policies and sustainable agrienvironment other land management regimes.
Waste:
(iii) support local economies and social well being of communities through small scale development proposals to meet local needs.
(ii) encourage the sustainable management of land and habitats in ways which contribute to landscape conservation and renewal,
avoiding fragmentation of landscapes and habitats and encouraging the linking of habitats
(i) protect and enhance its distinctive qualities
Policy C3 – Landscape and Countryside Management
Outside the nationally designated landscapes, positive and high quality management of the region’s open countryside should be
encouraged and supported by local authorities and other organisations, agencies, land managers, the private sector and local
communities, through a combination of planning policies, grant aid and other measures in order to:
In considering proposals for development, the emphasis should be on small-scale proposals that are sustainably located and
designed. Proposals which support the economies and social well being of the Areas and their communities, including affordable
housing schemes, will be encouraged provided that they do not conflict with the aim of conserving and enhancing natural beauty.
Policy C2 – Areas of Outstanding National Beauty
Priority should be given to conservation and enhancement of natural beauty in the region’s Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty
(AONBs) and planning decisions should have regard to their setting. Proposals for development should be considered in that
context. Positive land management policies should be developed, to sustain the Areas’ landscape quality. In drafting Local
Development Documents Local Planning Authorities should have regard to statutory AONB Management Plans.
Policy C1b – The South Downs
The Government is considering the designation of a South Downs National Park. Until there is a formal decision on this, Policy C2
dealing with AONBs should be applied to the areas of the South Downs currently designated AONB. Once a decision is taken by
Government on the designation, consideration will be given to reviewing policy on this matter in the South East Plan.
May 2006
159 of 226
The promotion of layouts and designs that provide an adequate space to facilities storage, re-use, recycling and composting.
•
Waste from adjoining sub-regions (waste planning authority area within or adjoining the region).
•
Waste planning authorities should collaborate in the preparation of plans including identifying and making provision for potential
flows across the regional and sub-regional boundaries, and identifying possible sites that could be served by sustainable transport
modes. Co-operation will be encouraged between county councils and unitary authorities at the sub-regional level, particularly in
respect of meeting the needs of the Region’s strategic growth areas.
Waste from London; and
•
Waste planning authorities should plan for net-sufficiency through provision for management capacity equivalent to the amount of
waste arising and requiring management within their boundaries. A degree of flexibility should be used in applying the sub-regional
self sufficiency concept. Where appropriate and consistent with Policy W3,capacity should also be provided for:
Policy W4: Sub-regional Self-sufficiency
The Regional Assembly should continue to work closely with all neighbouring regions to monitor and review waste movements and
management requirements.
Provision for recovery and processing capacity for London’s waste should only be made where there is a proven need, with
demonstrable benefits to the region, including improving the viability of recovery and reprocessing activity within the region, and
where this is consistent with the proximity principle. A net balance in movements of materials for recovery and reprocessing between
the region and London should be in place by 2016.
Provision for London’s exports will usually be limited to landfill in line with the Landfill Directive targets and, by 2016, new permissions
will only provide for residues of waste that have been subject to recycling or other recovery processes.
Waste authorities and waste management companies should provide management capacity equivalent to the amount of waste
arising and requiring management within the region’s boundaries, plus a declining amount of waste from London. Provision of
capacity for rapidly increasing recycling, composting and recovery should be made reflecting the targets and requirements set out
in the Strategy.
Policy W3: Regional Self-sufficiency
In particular, development in the Region’s strategic growth areas should demonstrate and employ best practice in design and
construction for waste minimisation and recycling.
The re-use of construction and demolition materials, and
•
Local development documents will require development design, construction and demolition which minimises waste production and
associated impacts through:
Policy W2: Sustainable Design, Construction and Demolition
May 2006
160 of 226
MSW
Mt/Yr
1.7
2.8
4.5
5.3
5.8
C&I
Mt/Yr
4.7
6.4
8.1
9.3
10.1
C&D
Mt/Yr
10.3
10.6
11.0
11.3
11.6
ALL WASTE
Mt/Yr (%)
16.7 (64)
19.8 (71)
23.6 (79)
25.9 (84)
27.5 (86)
Recycling; mechanical and/or biological processes (to recover materials and produce compost, soil conditioner or inert residue);
or
Thermal treatment (to recover energy).
•
•
MSW
Mt/Yr
0.9
1.4
2.2
3.0
3.5
4.2
(%)
(19)
(30)
(40)
(50)
(55)
(60)
C&I
Mt/Yr
3.0
3.5
4.9
5.9
6.9
7.9
(%)
(35)
(40)
(50)
(55)
(60)
(65)
C&D
Mt/Yr
5.2
5.8
6.4
6.4
7.7
7.7
(%)
(40)
(45)
(50)
(50)
(60)
(60)
ALL WASTE
Mt/Yr (%)
9.1
(35)
10.7 (40)
13.5 (50)
15.3 (55)
18.1 (60)
19.7 (65)
Waste authorities should adopt policies and proposals to assist delivery of these targets and waste management companies should
take them into account in their commercial decisions.
2002
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
YEAR
The following targets for recycling and composting should be achieve in the region:
Policy W6: Recycling and Composting Targets
Waste planning authorities should continue to provide landfill capacity to process residues and waste that cannot practicably be
recovered.
Priority will be given to processes higher up the waste hierarchy.
Re-use;
•
Waste planning authorities should ensure that policies and proposals are in place to contribute to the delivery of these targets, and
waste management companies should take them into account in their commercial decision. The optimal management solution will
vary according to the individual material resource streams and local circumstances and will usually involve one or more of the
following processes:
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
YEAR
A substantial increase in recovery of waste and commensurate reduction in landfill is required in the region. Accordingly, the
following targets for diversion from landfill of all waste need to be achieved in the region (policy W6 targets are a component of
these):
Policy W5: Targets for Diversion from Landfill
May 2006
161 of 226
2015-2019
1,035
2,320
2020-2024
1,104
2,499
2025
1,189
2,626
Activities of an industrial nature dealing with largely segregated materials and requiring enclosed premises, such as materials
recovery facilities, dis-assembly and re-manufacturing plants, and reprocessing industries;
Activities dealing with mixed materials requiring enclosed industrial premises, such as mechanical-biological treatment,
anaerobic digestion and energy from waste facilities; and
Hybrid activities requiring sites with buildings and open storage areas, including re-use facilities and enclosed composting
systems.
•
•
•
The Regional Assembly, SEEDA, Waste Resources Action Programme (WRAP) and other partners will work together to establish
regional and local programmes to develop markets for recycled and recovered materials and products.
Policy W9: New Markets
Waste collection authorities and waste management companies should provide separate collections of recyclable and
compostable materials as widely and as soon as practicably possible. Householders and small and medium-sized businesses should
be encouraged to separate waste for collection by such schemes through information and promotional campaigns. Civic amenity
sites should be organised to encourage separation of materials for re-use and recycling.
Policy W8: Waste Separation
In areas of major new development, consideration should be given to identifying sites for integrated resource recovery facilities and
new resource parks accommodating a mix of activities where they meet environmental, technical and operational objectives.
Activities requiring largely open sites, such as aggregate recycling and open windrow composting;
•
In bringing forward and safeguarding sites for waste management facilities, waste planning authorities should consider the type, size
and mix of facilities that will be required, taking into account:
ANNUAL AVERAGE TONNAGES TO BE MANAGED (THOUSAND TONNES)
Hampshire
2005-2009
2010-2014
MSW
828
937
C&I
1,857
2,101
Table 4 – Extract
Waste planning authorities should provide for an appropriate mix of development opportunities to support the waste management
facilities required to achieve the targets set out in this strategy. The annual rates of waste to be managed set out in Table 4 provide
benchmarks for the preparation of development plan documents and annual monitoring.
Policy W7: Waste Management Capacity Requirements
May 2006
162 of 226
Plastics;
•
Wood;
Tyres;
Electrical and electronic equipment;
End of life vehicles.
•
•
•
•
Include measures to ensure that appropriate materials are recycled, composted and recovered where this has not been carried
out elsewhere.
•
Proposed thermal facilities should, wherever possible, aim to incorporate generation and distribution of heat and power.
Operate to the highest pollution control standards; and
•
All proposed waste facilities should:
Waste development plan documents and municipal waste management strategies should only include energy from waste as part of
an integrated approach to management.
The Regional Assembly, SEEDA, the Environment Agency and other regional partners will promote and encourage the development
and demonstration of anaerobic digestion and advanced recovery technologies that will be expected to make a growing
contribution towards the delivery of the regional targets for recovery, diversion from landfill, and renewable energy generation over
the period of the Strategy.
Policy W12: Other Recovery and Diversion Technologies
Waste collection, planning and disposal authorities should encourage the separation of biomass waste, as defined in the
Renewables Obligation, and consider its use as a fuel in biomass energy plants where this does not discourage recycling and
composting.
Policy W11: Biomass
Glass;
•
Those requiring sub-regional facilities are:
Paper and card;
•
Those material streams requiring regional or pan-regional facilities are:
The Regional Assembly will work with waste authorities, the Environment Agency, SEEDA, industry and WRAP to encourage provision
of appropriate new or expanded regional and pan-regional scale recovery and processing facilities.
Policy W10: Regionally Significant Facilities
May 2006
163 of 226
MSW Landfill
(Mt/Yr)
3.1
2.6
1.5
1.1
1.0
C & I Landfill
(Mt/Yr)
4.4
3.7
2.9
2.4
2.1
C & D Landfill
(Mt/Yr)
2.5
2.2
1.8
1.6
1.3
LONDON’S WASTE
(Mt/Yr)
2.6
2.2
1.6
1.3
1.1
TOTAL
(Mt/Yr)
12.6
10.7
7.8
6.4
5.5
Identify criteria for the determination of large scale specialist hazardous waste facilities; and
Assess available landfill provision and, where necessary, encourage the creation of a protective cell for stable hazardous waste.
•
•
•
Good accessibility from urban areas or major new or planned development; and
The suitability of existing sites and potential new sites should be assessed on the basis on the following characteristics.
Waste development plan documents should, in identifying locations for waste management facilities, give priority to safeguarding
and expanding suitable sites with an existing waste management use and good transport connections.
Policy W17: Location of Waste Management Facilities
Waste development plan documents should identify infrastructure facilities, including sites for waste transfer and bulking facilities,
essential for the sustainable transport of waste materials. These sites and facilities should be safeguarded in local development
documents. Policies should aim to reduce the transport and associated impacts of waste movement. Use of rail and water borne
transport with appropriate depot and wharf provision should be encouraged wherever possible, particularly for large facilities.
Policy W16: Waste Transport Infrastructure
Identify and safeguard sites for storage, treatment and remediation of contaminated soils and demolition waste;
•
Waste development documents should:
The Regional Assembly’s Hazardous Waste Task Group should identify, provide and maintain guidance on regional hazardous waste
management requirements.
Policy W15: Hazardous Waste
Local development documents should secure high quality restoration and, where appropriate, aftercare of waste management
sites so as to help deliver the wider objectives of the regional spatial strategy.
Policy W14: Restoration
Landfill gas collection and energy recovery should be standard practice at all non-inert landfill sites.
2005
2010
2015
2020
2024
YEAR
Waste development plan documents should provide for continuing but declining landfill capacity. Non-inert landfill capacity should
be husbanded to provide for disposal of residual non-inert waste. At regional level there should be provision for at least the following
landfill capacity (million tonnes per year):
Policy W13: Landfill requirements
May 2006
Contaminated or derelict land; or
Land adjoining sewage treatment works; or
Redundant farm buildings and their curtilages, and
-
-
-
Capability of meeting a range of locally based environmental and amenity criteria.
Previous or existing industrial land use; or
-
Minerals recycling facilities should not be precluded from the Green Belt where this is consistent with the proximity principle, where
there are no alternative sites, and provided that the development would not cause harm to the objectives of the designation. In
very exceptional circumstances, mineral recycling facilities for local materials should not be precluded from Areas of Outstanding
To enable this target to be met, mineral planning authorities should assess the need for mineral recycling sites in their area and
identify sites to meet this scale of provision in their mineral development frameworks. Local planning authorities should safeguard
these sites through their local development frameworks.
The use of secondary aggregates and recycled materials in the South East should increase from 6.6mpta (29% of the guidelines for
primary aggregate production in the region) to at least 7.7mtpa (35%) by 2016 so as to reduce the need for primary aggregate
extraction.
Policy M2: Recycled and Secondary Aggregates
Local development documents should promote the use of construction materials that reduce the demand for primary minerals, by
requiring new projects to include a proportion of recycled and secondary aggregates wherever practicable.
The Regional Assembly, SEEDA, the construction industry, and other stakeholders will work to encourage the development of
sustainable construction practices, and to promote good practice, reduce wastage and overcome technical and financial
constraints, including identifying sustainable supply routes and seeking to reduce delivery distances. The long-term aspiration is that
annual consumption of primary aggregates will not grow from the 2016 level in subsequent years.
Policy M1: Sustainable Construction
Minerals:
Waste management facilities should not be precluded from the Green Belt where this is consistent with the proximity principle, where
there are no alternative sites, and provided that the development would not cause harm to the objectives of the designation. In
exceptional circumstances, small-scale waste management facilities for local needs should not be precluded from Areas of
Outstanding Natural Beauty and National Parks where this is consistent with the proximity principle and where the development
would not compromise the objectives of the designation.
•
Active mineral working sites; and
Compatible land uses, namely
•
-
Good transport connections including, where possible, rail or water, and
164 of 226
•
May 2006
165 of 226
2.63 mtpa
IV. A permitted reserve of gypsum sufficient to last at least 20 years at current production rates should be maintained throughout the
plan period in East Sussex to support the building product and cement industries, and the use of desulphurgypsum imported by
rail over the shortest practicable distance should be encouraged.
III. A permitted reserve of silica sand should be maintained throughout the plan period in Surrey and Kent, equivalent at current
production rates to at least ten years at existing sites and at least 15 years at new sites.
II. A permitted reserve of chalk for cement manufacture sufficient to last for at least 25 years at current production rates should be
maintained throughout the plan period in Kent and Medway.
I. A permitted reserve of clay for brick and tile product manufacture sufficient to last for at least 25 years at current production
rates should be maintained to supply individual works throughout the plan period, and new manufacturing capacity developed
if this would replace older plants or reduce net imports to the region; for small-scale manufacture, a long-term landbank of a
lesser period than 25 years may be appropriate.
Mineral planning authorities should plan for:
Future provision should be made in local development documents for clay, chalk, silica sand and gypsum as regionally significant
minerals of national importance. Where practicable, substitute and recycled waste materials should be used to conserve natural
resources, high quality reserves should be safeguarded for appropriate end uses, and new handling facilities developed where this
would increase the quantity of minerals and manufactured products being transported by rail or water.
Policy M4: Other Minerals
Hampshire / So’tton / Portsmouth
(Extract)
Mineral planning authorities should plan to maintain a landbank of at least seven years of planning permissions for land-won sand
and gravel which is sufficient, throughout the Mineral Plan period, to deliver 13.25 million tonnes (mt) of sand and gravel per annum
across the region based on the following sub-regional apportionment:
The supply of construction aggregates in the South east should be met from a significant increase in supplies of secondary and
recycled materials, a reduced contribution from primary land-won resources and an increase in imports of marine-dredged
aggregates.
Policy M3: Primary Aggregates
Natural Beauty and National Parks where this is consistent with the proximity principle and where development would not
compromise the objectives of the designation.
South East Plan
(March 2006)
May 2006
166 of 226
•
•
•
•
•
Policy W3 - Inclusion of an apportionment for the amount of London’s waste to be landfilled in Hampshire. Equating to 8.4% of
the total to be exported to the region, 1.4 million tonnes over the period 2006 – 2015, 0.8 million tonnes over the period 2016 –
2025. A total of 2.2 million tonnes.
Policy W10 – Inclusion of two strategic resource recovery parks located at or with good access to ports.
Policy W15 – Reference to priority needs for hazardous waste management, particularly hazardous landfill, air pollution
control residue treatment sites, waste electronic equipment treatment sites, a sub-regional network of soil treatment facilities
and a need for cells for the landfilling of stable non-reactive hazardous wastes.
Policy W17 – Amended to remove reference to the proximity principle.
Policy M2 – Addition of an apportionment for supply of recycled / secondary aggregates, in Hampshire equating to 1.7
million tonnes a year.
Section D6 on Waste and Minerals makes some revisions to the proposed changes to RPG9 particularly:
Existing minerals sites, and proposed sites and ‘areas of search’, should be identified in mineral development plan documents for the
extraction and processing of aggregates, clay, chalk, silica sand and gypsum. These should be safeguarded in local development
frameworks.
Mineral planning authorities should assess the need for wharf and rail facilities for the handling and distribution of imported minerals
and processed materials, and identify strategic sites for safeguarding in their minerals development frameworks. These strategic
facilities should be safeguarded from other inappropriate development in local development frameworks.
Policy M5: Safeguarding of Wharves and Rail Deport, and Mineral Reserves
(ongoing)
South West
Regional Spatial
Strategy
May 2006
167 of 226
To continue with the existing strategy expressed in RPG10 to focus the majority of growth in the region’s 11 Principal Urban Areas
(PUAs)
To focus major growth within a smaller number of PUAs, such as Swindon, Plymouth and Bristol which have the greatest potential
to link housing and economic development.
To adopt a differential approach which divides the South West into three sub-regions and develops a strategy which distributes
growth according to the particular function of settlements in those areas
Responses to these approaches were varied and it was felt by many that they were too broad and housing issues seemed to
dominate over transport/economy etc. Respondents considered that there needed to be a clearer policy framework for rural parts
of the region; a general cognition of the importance of the environment as a key regional asset. It was also felt that there was a
need to distinguish between the spatial strategy options and growth options.
-
-
-
There are 14 Joint Study Areas (JSA) for which strategic visions for growth are being developed and assessment of strategic options
including Swindon and South East Dorset.
Consultation has already taken place on three possible development strategies within the region. These included:
It will:
• include a Regional Transport Strategy to guide investment in transport facilities
• provide policy guidance on issues ranging from minerals extraction and waste treatment to economic development and
housing, health, culture, environment; and
• include District level housing numbers
The RSS will set the regional context for planning in the South West from 2006 until 2026.
A Draft RSS is due to be submitted in Dec 2005 with public consultation and the Examination in Public in 2006.
2010
million tonnes
All Wastes
5
C&I
2
C&D
0.3
Municipal
2.6
Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding
Waste to be managed outside of London
Amount of Waste to be Exported
%
25
25
5
50
2015
million tonnes
4.3
1.8
0.4
1.4
%
20
20
5
25
2020
million tonnes
3.4
1.5
0.3
1.2
%
15
15
5
20
The draft alterations were published in July 2005 and are due for public consultation in October 2005. The alterations include figures
on the amount of London’s waste that will be exported to neighbouring regions:
The Mayor has promoted the co-ordination of the boroughs’ waste policies by bringing forward, as an early alteration to this plan,
strategic guidance which will evaluate the adequacy of existing strategically important waste management and disposal facilities to
meet London’s future needs, both for municipal and other waste streams, and identify the number and type of new or enhanced
facilities required to meet those needs and the opportunities for the broad location of such facilities.
The Mayor aims to work closely with the South East England and East of England regional authorities to co-ordinate strategic waste
management across the regions.
The Plan contains targets for London to become more self-sufficient and aims for sufficient capacity to manage:
• 75% of waste arisings by 2010;
• 80% of waste arisings by 2015; and
• 85% of waste arisings by 2020.
Objective 4: To promote social inclusion and tackle deprivation and discrimination
Objective 5: To improve London’s accessibility
Objective 6: To make London a more attractive, well-designed and green city
The fundamental objectives of the Plan are:
Objective 1: To accommodate London’s growth within its boundaries without encroaching on open spaces
Objective 2: To make London a better city for people to live in
Objective 3: To make London a more prosperous city with strong and diverse economic growth
(Feb 2004)
168 of 226
The London Plan is the name given to the Mayor’s spatial development strategy. It replaces previous strategic planning guidance
for London (known as RPG3) and covers all 32 boroughs.
The London
Plan
May 2006
(2004)
Portsmouth
Community
Strategy 2004-2009:
Proud of our past:
Ambitious for our
future.
(2004)
Hampshire’s
Community
Strategy: Shaping
our Future Together
2004-2007
Outcomes of the Strategy include:
• Everyone takes responsibility for protecting the
environment.
• A sustained improvement in urban design in the City.
• A cleaner, healthier environment.
‘A Portsmouth that… treasures and sustains a safe, healthy
and attractive environment.’
Priority 6 – Supporting the Hampshire economy
• Target 6b: Lead and co-ordinate effort to encourage
appropriate business investment in Hampshire
• Target 6f: To develop an integrated strategic approach
to the provision of employment land and premises
• Target 6l: HSP will work with partners to support the
voluntary and community service to build up their
capacity.
Section 4 - Environment and Transport sets out the vision for
Portsmouth:
The opportunities to support this outcome are limited although
policies should require high standards of design in permanent
Although responsibility for achieving increases in recycling rate is
the responsibility of the city council and will be achieved through
the delivery mechanisms outlined in the review of the Project
Integra strategy, it is important that this strategy supports these
aspirations through delivery of appropriate new infrastructure.
One of the measures of success detailed in the Community
Strategy is a significant increase in the proportion of waste
recycled or reused. A graph shows an aspiration to increase
recycling of household waste from 14.5% (2003/4) to 35% by
2005/6.
6l – The proposed policies and plan objectives should support and
encourage community reuse, composting and recycling schemes.
Appraisal objectives should include community activities and
engagement.
6f – It is important, when it comes to identifying sites for minerals
and waste activities that we work with both local communities and
local authorities. The wording of policies relating to site
identification and allocation will need to reflect this need.
6b – Appraisal criteria should reflect economic objectives. Plan
objectives should require net self-sufficiency and increased
recycling / recovery rates for waste management to provide a
climate to encourage significant business investment, particularly
in the commercial and industrial waste sector.
5d – The preferred option should deter fly-tipping.
Priority 5 – protect and enhance the Hampshire
Environment:
• Target 5c: All Hampshire Strategic Partnership (HSP)
partners will give equal considerations to environmental
as well as social and economic principles when making
decisions.
• Target 5d: Develop and promote a strategic best
practice model on fly-tipping and related issues in order
to reassure the public.
169 of 226
5c – Environmental, social and economic objectives will need to
used to assess the sustainability of minerals and waste options
considered during the plan period.
The Community Strategy includes priorities for action and
targets. The most relevant to the plan-making and
appraisal process are the following:
Community Strategies
Content
Relevant Plans and
Programmes
May 2006
(January 2004)
Southampton’s
Community
Strategy
May 2006
Long Term Key Actions include:
• Southampton prepares for the impacts of global
warming and ensure the city plays its part in reducing
the causes of environmental damage.
• Minimise waste production and maximise recycling, reuse and composting through new practises and
publicity campaigns. Ensure residual waste can be
disposed of locally by sustainable means.
• Encourage local community groups to maximise
recycling and re-use.
• Encourage the development of a new environmental
technology-based local business economy.
• Continue to develop local sources of energy that
contribute to the reduction of CO2 – including from
wind and solar power and energy from waste. Use
planning and other processes to encourage more
energy efficient buildings and greater use of renewable
energy.
• Reduce the dependence on vehicles that use
traditional fossil
Objectives and policies to reduce the impact of transportation,
through the appropriate location of facilities, increased
sustainable transport and other techniques such as encouraging
The sustainability objectives should support the aim to develop
local sources of energy, energy efficiency and the recovery of
value, including energy, from waste. Policies should require new
permanent waste management facilities to be designed in such a
way that they maximise energy efficiency and where possible use
renewable sources.
Sustainability objectives should also support the aim to encourage
new technology and encourage the co-location of facilities
(including waste producers and people manufacturing products
from waste materials).
Plan objectives and policies should be fully consistent with the aim
to encourage local communities to maximise recycling and reuse.
Furthermore, they should be tested against a sustainability
objective that supports community facilities and local involvement
in waste management activities.
The Strategy should minimise waste production and maximise
recycling etc. Managing waste proximal to where it is produced
needs to be a key feature of the approach and should be
reflected in the plan objectives. Similarly the sustainability appraisal
process should encourage sustainable waste management.
The issue of global warming has been identified as important and
sustainability appraisal should encourage options that reduce
climate change.
Both these issues were identified as important and appropriate
sustainability objectives were developed by which the options and
policies in this document have been tested.
The measures of success detailed in the community strategy
include achieving air quality objectives by 2010 and achieving
water quality objectives over the lifetime of the strategy.
minerals and waste facilities and encourage sustainable design,
construction and demolition.
170 of 226
The Strategy sets key challenges, the most relevant of which
is Key Challenge 9 – Improving the city’s environment
(2003-2013).
Pride in our Place –
A Community
Strategy for
Basingstoke and
Deane
May 2006
The Strategy sets Issues for Action, the most relevant
include:
• Protecting and enhancing the natural environment and
access to it.
• Maximising the use of materials and minimising waste.
Improved partnership
• work across sectors for better planning and delivery of
The Vision for Basingstoke and Deane: ‘Is an area that is
healthy, vibrant, attractive and varied. Where we cherish
the natural environment for its own sake, for the life it
supports, and for the continued enjoyment and resources it
is able to provide…It is where businesses can reap the
benefits of social, economic and environmental investment.
We all look positively to the future, with confidence.’
9G – To raise awareness of the importance of air quality
and measures that can be taken to deal with climate
change: By 2007, achieve a 10% reduction in CO2 emissions
in the city based on 1992 baseline of 1118k tonnes CO2 per
annum.
9C – To improve the city’s impact on global environmental
issues by increasing the number of energy efficient buildings
and creating more local sources of sustainable energy. By
2007, 10% of energy in cities produced locally from
sustainable sources.
The Plan Objectives and policies set out in the Strategy should
reflect the priority objectives to help achieve their aim.
Protecting the environment, the sustainable use of resources and
efficient delivery of services are key sustainable issues and need to
be implemented through the Strategy.
The Vision for the Strategy should complement the Vision for
Basingstoke and Deane, particularly the need to protect the
natural environment, whilst ensuring a sustainable and prosperous
economic environment.
Air quality is identified as an important issue and the proposals
within this document will need to be assessed against appropriate
objectives. However, it is unlikely that the proposals within this
document will contribute towards the 2007 target.
Energy efficiency and use of renewable sources have been
identified as key sustainability issues and the policies and proposals
included in this document will be assessed against appropriate
objectives.
9A – By 2005, exceed recycling rate of 20% of household
waste stream; by 2007, exceed recycling rate of 26% of
household waste stream.
9B – To reduce the amount of residual waste going to
landfill through a range of actions including waste
minimisation and by increasing the level of home
composting: By 2005, reduce landfilled waste to 30% (of
household waste stream). By 2007, reduce landfilled waste
to 25% (of household waste stream).
reverse logistics should be included.
171 of 226
Medium Term Key Actions include:
(2004)
Eastleigh Borough
Community Plan
(2005-2015)
Working Together –
A Sustainable
Community
Strategy for East
Hampshire
May 2006
The Aim for the Environment: ‘A Borough with towns and
The Vision for the Environment is: ‘A Borough with a good
quality of life characterised by sustainable settlements,
wide understanding of environmental issues, and consensus
on the environment’.
Main themes of the Strategy include the Environment.
The desired aim will be ‘achieving a wide variety of high
quality sustainable land uses’, which will be co-ordinated by
Eastleigh Borough Council and Hampshire County Council.
Essential Factors for creating a sustainable community:
1) Communities are involved and participate in decision
making
2) Everyone, including disadvantaged groups, has access
to facilities and services and opportunities
8) The use of resources, energy, land and the production of
waste is minimised
10) Wildlife and natural habitats are protected and
enhanced
11) Heritage and local identity is protected and enhanced.
The Plan Objectives will need to reflect the Vision and Aim for the
environment, both directly and indirectly. The Strategy will have
an influence over the quality of life within settlements such as
traffic movements, nuisance impacts (noise, dust etc) and
employment opportunities etc. As such, the action to join up issues
The Community Plan already identifies an established working
relationship between Eastleigh BC and Hampshire CC to achieve
sustainable land use. Where appropriate, the policies set out in
the Strategy will need to implement the outcome of the coordinated approach between the councils.
The Plan Objectives and Policies need to reflect the essential
factors for creating sustainable communities. Ensuring the
community is involved is a requirement of the new planning system
and will need to be implemented throughout the production of
the various components of the Hampshire Minerals and Waste
Development Framework.
The East Hampshire Vision includes the fundamental elements of
sustainable development. The Strategy vision should reflect the
East Hampshire Vision.
172 of 226
The Priority for the Environment is to have an ‘Environment
that’s good to live in’. The Objectives involve:
• encourage improved awareness of recycling issues
• increase the efficiency with which we use natural
resources
• ensure that both urban and rural environmental issues
are considered in a balanced way to achieve the
overall well-being of the Borough
• plan for and reduce the negative aspects of climate
change and its impact on the Borough
The Vision includes: ‘a place where everyone is able to
enjoy a high quality of life without adversely affecting future
generations or other communities’.
services.
(2003-2006)
The Community
Strategy for
Gosport
Fareham
May 2006
The Community Goals include:
To conserve and enhance the built and natural
environment of Gosport, creating a clean, healthy and
attractive place in which to live and work.
To protect and enhance the environment for current
and future generations and contribute to the
achievement of sustainable development with the UK
The Vision of the Strategy is: ‘To improve the quality of life in
Gosport, by developing a healthy, safe and prosperous
community, where everyone is able to participate in
decisions that affect their lives’.
To promote the economic success of the Borough
•
•
To promote and maintain a safe, clean and healthy
Borough
•
Community Goal’s can be implemented through the Strategy and
Development Control policies, particularly in terms of sustainable
and attractive design of new development.
The Strategy’s Vision should ensure that it complements that of
Gosport’s.
The aims of NetworkFareham need to be reflected in the Strategy.
Education of the community is beyond the remit of the Strategy
but can be supported and encouraged in the Implementation
Plan.
can successfully be implemented through the Strategy.
173 of 226
Actions include:
•
Demonstrate how small-scale local initiatives can
help to tackle local and global environmental issues.
•
Make education about the environment a top
priority because of the long-term nature of the
problems and solutions.
•
Join up the issues better (e.g. land-use distribution
affects the need to travel, which in turn affects air
quality, noise levels and our perceptions of our towns
and villages).
‘NetworkFareham’ – Fareham’s Community Partnership are
currently working to develop a vision for Fareham. This
Vision will be known as Fareham’s Community Strategy.
NetworkFareham has several key aims including:
villages that provide a good quality of life, reducing the
need to travel, where the natural environment is valued
and respected, and where local organisations and
residents understand and take responsibility for the
environmental consequences of their actions’.
(2004-2007)
Changing Lives –
the Community
Strategy for the
New Forest District
(2005-2008)
Stronger Together –
A Community
Strategy for Havant
Borough
(2005-2016)
Community
Strategy
Planning the Future
of Hart Together
May 2006
The Aims include increasing recycling with the following
targets:
• Meet the borough’s statutory recycling target of 30% by
2006
• Work through Project Integra* to develop larger markets
for recycled materials by 2008.
The Vision for the New Forest in 2025 is that ‘The New Forest
District will be a place where
• all people have opportunities to enjoy safe and healthy
lifestyles develop as individuals and shape the communities
in which they live;
• businesses thrive within a local economy that harmonises
with the special environment and provides everyone with
sufficient resources to enjoy plenty of lifestyle choices; and
• the natural and built environment provides opportunities
for diversity of nature, the health, education and enjoyment
of everyone whilst making a significant contribution towards
the local economy’.
The Strategy’s Plan Objectives should reflect The Environmental
Quality Objective and the Key Priority Issues should be reflected in
the policies and Implementation Plan, where appropriate.
The Vision for the New Forest includes the key elements for creating
a sustainable community in 2025. The Strategy’s Vision should
complement that of the New Forest District.
The Strategy’s policies and Implementation Plan should enable
Havant to achieve their Aims.
The Priority Aim should be reflected in the Plan Objectives and the
Actions should be implemented through the Strategy’s policies
and Implementation Plan, where appropriate.
The Strategy’s Vision should complement the Vision for Hart.
174 of 226
This will be achieved through the following Actions:
• Devise robust policies within a long term planning
document (the Local Development Framework) that will
enhance Hart’s environment and take into account
local social and economic needs.
• Encourage everyone to take a balanced and
considerate attitude to all aspects of the environment
through improved communications.
The Strategy has Key Themes, which include ‘The
Environment’ and the sub-heading of Sustainability.
A Priority Aim is to ‘Enhance the environment whilst
providing for the needs of local communities’.
The Vision for Hart is ‘To improve, sustain and promote the
social, economic and environmental well-being of
communities in the Hart District’.
(2004-2016)
A Community
Strategy for
Rushmoor
May 2006
The Strategic Aims include:
• To introduce and support initiatives designed to
conserve the natural environment and improve
biodiversity
• To take action to encourage more efficient use of
resources and social and environmental responsibility
• To ensure that future land use and transportation
strategies are sustainable and meet the needs of the
Borough and integrate with plans for the wider
Blackwater Valley area.
• To support the development of the Aldershot Urban
Extension, making sure it is a high quality and
sustainable development.
Key Priority Issues include:
18) Partnership working/ Project Integra
19) Achieve statutory recycling targets by 2005/2006
20) Waste minimisation
21) Source separated recycling schemes
The Vision for Rushmoor is: To make Rushmoor a place to
live, work and visit, which:
• ensures that development of the Borough meets local
needs,
• has an environment which is clean and well cared for,
• takes account of the needs of future generations.
Policies within the Strategy should support and aid the
achievement of Rushmoor’s Strategic Aims.
The Vision for Rushmoor should be complemented by the Vision set
out within the Strategy.
175 of 226
Environmental Quality Objective D) Waste Management
states ‘To minimise creation of waste and reuse and recycle
a larger proportion of waste arising’.
(2004-2014)
A Community
Strategy for
Winchester
Your Test Valley – A
Community Plan for
the Future
May 2006
Actions for Improvement include:
QE4: Ensure at least 60% of new development is on
brownfield sites
QE5: Reduce volumes of waste generated and increase
recycling in support of the Hampshire Material Resources
Strategy and work of Project Integra, with better integration
of domestic and business initiatives
QE6: To promote the efficient use of energy and encourage
the use of renewable energy.
QE7: Review current levels of biodiversity within the district,
with targets set for improvement
The Shared Aim is ‘To protect our environment and use
natural resources carefully so that we, and the generations
to come, will continue to enjoy the natural and built
environment within this District’.
Key Areas for focusing attention:
Reducing and recycling our waste: linking to the work of
the Hampshire Natural Resources Initiative, we will draw
together our individual efforts to reduce waste and
maximise opportunities for reuse of ‘waste’ materials.
The Plan also states that is will ‘Deal with waste responsibly
and minimise the amount of waste created by identifying
ways of reducing household and business waste increasing
participation in recycling involving schools in recycling’.
The Strategy’s policies should help Winchester to achieve its
Shared Aim and the Actions for Improvement, where appropriate.
Winchester City Council states that it will work with the Hampshire
Natural Resources Initiative to help reduce waste. The Strategy will
also link with the Hampshire Natural Resources and as such, the
Strategy should complement the Community Strategy.
The Priority to create ‘A Clean and Attractive Community’ should
be supported through the policies within the Strategy and the
Implementation Plan, where appropriate.
The Strategy’s policies should help achieve the Aim of Test Valley’s
Community Plan.
176 of 226
Priority 2 includes ‘A Clean & Attractive Community’ with
the aim that everyone in the local community takes
personal responsibility for maintaining the local environment
and keeping Test Valley a beautiful place to live.
The Aim is to create a Test Valley community where
everyone has the opportunity to fulfil their potential and
enjoy a good quality of life.
177 of 226
Since its inception, the MRS has engaged in constant stakeholder dialogue with local businesses,
environmental groups, residents associations and anyone with an interest in having an input into how this
project develops. Regular stakeholder events have taken place to discuss each step in its development.
The Vision of More from Less is that
(March 2005)
Outcomes of the stakeholder process:
• Behaviour change achieved to maximise reuse, recycling and recovery.
• Overall year on year waste growth reduced to 1% by 2010 and 0.5% by 2020.
• An overall recycling rate of 60% by 2020.
• Cost of recycling to private and public sectors is optimised.
• Net self-sufficiency in dealing with all waste arisings by 2016.
• Materials and energy recovery maximised from unavoidable waste.
• Use of landfill for all waste materials reduced to a minimum practicable level by 2020.
• Demand for new materials reduced to minimum practicable levels, with extraction of land-won sand
and gravel reduced as far as practicable.
• New sites and facilities provided to meet needs in a sustainable and efficient way.
• A supportive policy framework and all sectors of the community involved in delivering solutions and
change.
This will be delivered through four aims:
1. To extract primary materials only where it can be shown that need cannot be met in a sustainable way.
2. To change minds and behaviours to use all resources efficiently and minimise wastage at all stages of
production and consumption.
3. Where waste is produced to maximise opportunities for business and the community to reuse, recycle
and compost such waste to produce sustainable products.
4. To recover value from and dispose of unavoidable waste using sustainable means, as far as possible
avoiding the landfilling of biodegradable /recyclable waste.
‘We will change the way we use material resources to maximise efficiency and minimise wastage’
The partners involved in MRS development includes Hampshire County Council, Project Integra, Hampshire
Natural Resources Initiative, and the two unitary authorities of Portsmouth and Southampton.
More From
Less – How to
make better
use of
Hampshire’s
material
resources: A
stakeholder
perspective
The More from Less document is the outcome of seventeen months of stakeholder led discussions on the
Material Resources Strategy (MRS). The MRS addresses the use of all material resources, including municipal,
construction, commercial and agricultural waste.
Material Resources Strategy (MRS) Stakeholder Involvement
Relevant Plans Content
and
Programmes
May 2006
The stakeholder
involvement within the
MRS process is an
important tool and it
should be made use of
and where possible built
upon during the
preparation of the
Hampshire Minerals and
Waste Development
Framework.
The objectives of the
Strategy should also
incorporate the four
aims and seek to
achieve the targets set
out in the outcomes, but
where possible try to
exceed them.
The Strategy should
incorporate the vision
and aims developed
within More from Less
and the MRS process as
these reflect stakeholder
opinions. However,
where possible the
Strategy should seek to
not only fulfil the vision
set out by the MRS but
go beyond it.
(April 2002)
Joint Interim
Municipal
Waste
Management
Strategy
178 of 226
Project Integra is currently in the process of producing the ‘Hampshire Joint Municipal
Waste Management Strategy’, which seeks to deliver waste management up to 2020.
The Strategy will seek to put into practice the concept of Material Resource
Management as embodied in ‘More from Less’.
The short-term aim of the Strategy is to achieve 40 recycling rate for Hampshire.
The objectives of Project Integra include:
I. To deliver a programme for the minimisation, reuse and recycling of waste
to achieve a minimum of 25% reduction in waste requiring disposal.
II. For the local authority partners, in consultation with local people and local
interest groups, to jointly develop specific proposals for the long term
III. To provide adequate waste processing facilities, taking into account local
views.
IV. To provide the most efficient methods for collection of waste based on the
process to be decided.
V. To develop composting and anaerobic digestion to further reduce waste
requiring final disposal, subject to technical investigations and affordability.
VI. To recover resources from residual waste through the development of
between three and five resource recovery facilities.
VII. To dispose of ultimate residual waste by using landfill.
The Joint Interim Municipal Waste Management Strategy was adopted by the Project
Integra Management Board. Project Integra’s fundamental aim is to provide a longterm solution to dealing with Hampshire’s household waste in an environmentally sound,
cost effective and reliable way.
Hampshire Joint Municipal Waste Strategy
Content
Relevant Plans
and
Programmes
May 2006
Staff should work closely to ensure that the
two documents are compatible.
The Hampshire Joint Municipal Strategy will
have close links to the Strategy,
particularly as both documents use the
stakeholder document ‘More from Less’ as
their starting point.
The Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for waste development, subject to the requirements of Policies 6-15 and
having regard to Policies 37-39 and 42-46, provided they are satisfied that where appropriate the proposed development pays particular
regard to the hierarchy of waste management options, in which option (i) is the most preferred and option (iv) is the least preferred:
(i)
the reduction of waste;
(ii)
the re-use of waste;
(iii)
the recovery of waste (recycling, composting, energy from waste);
(iv)
waste disposal.
The Minerals and Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for development of the production, loading, handling and
distribution of secondary or substitute aggregate materials, particularly recycled waste materials, for use in place of primary aggregates,
subject to the requirements of Policies 6-15 and having regard to the provisions of Policies 25 and 46.
The Minerals Planning Authorities will seek to safeguard unworked mineral deposits from sterilisation by other development and, in
particular, will oppose proposals for development which would prevent or prejudice their future extraction, unless they are satisfied that:
(i)
the area affected does not contain a workable mineral deposit; or
(ii)
there is an overriding need for the proposed development and the extraction of the mineral deposit cannot be reasonably be
undertaken prior to or in phase with it; or
(iii)
it is essential that the proposed development be undertaken without the delay that would be caused by the prior extraction of
the mineral deposit; or
(iv)
extraction of the mineral deposit would give rise to such serious adverse environmental , traffic or other impact that is most unlikely
that it would be permitted.
The Minerals Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for the extraction of minerals in advance of development which would
otherwise cause the permanent sterilisation of proven mineral deposits, provided that:
(i)
minerals extraction and restoration can be completed within an acceptable timescale to enable the subsequent development
to take place in accordance with an agreed programme; and
(ii)
the site can be worked and restored in a suitable manner and to an appropriate standard to allow the subsequent development
to take place; and
(iii)
the mineral extraction and restoration operations would not cause unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact.
Policy 2
Policy 4
Policy 5
Policy 3
The Mineral Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for minerals development, subject to the requirements of Policies 6-15 and
having regard to the provisions of Policies 16-20, to ensure that an adequate supply of minerals is available to meet the needs of the
construction industry.
179 of 226
Policy 1
Hampshire, Portsmouth & Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan
Policies
Content
May 2006
Policy 6
May 2006
180 of 226
Permission will be granted for minerals and waste development provided the Mineral/Waste Planning Authority is satisfied that:
(i)
there is clearly established need for the development (as assessed in relation to the other relevant policies of the Plan) which
outweighs any adverse environmental or other impact that the development would be likely to cause; and
(ii)
the development would not be likely to give rise to an unacceptable level of adverse environmental, traffic or other impact,
pollution risk or danger to public health, particularly in respect of any of the factors specified in Policy 7 and measures would be
taken to ensure that any such impacts would, as far as practicable, be minimised; and
(iii)
the proposals provide for the satisfactory working or operation and landscaping of the site and for its satisfactory restoration and
landscaping at the cessation of the operations or use or at the end of the life of the facility to a condition suitable for an agreed
beneficial after-use which is compatible with adjoining land uses and planning policies for the area.
Notwithstanding any need there may be for waste disposal, permission will not normally be granted for mineral extraction with restoration
by infilling with waste materials unless there is a need for the mineral to be extracted.
Policy 7
May 2006
181 of 226
The Mineral and Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for minerals and waste development provided they are
satisfied that, where appropriate, the proposed development pays due regard to:
(i)
the relationship of the proposal site to other properties and land uses (particularly residential and other environmentally-sensitive
properties) and the likely effects of the proposed development on the locality by reason of noise, dust, smoke, fumes, illumination
or any other factor and the need for buffer zones between the development and residential and other properties;
(ii)
the likely volume and nature of traffic that would be generated by the proposed development and the suitability of the proposed
access to the site and of the road network that would be affected, in terms of highway capacity and safety and environmental
impact, and whether any highway improvements required could be carried out satisfactorily without causing unacceptable
environmental impact;
(iii)
the likely visual impact of the proposed development and the need for additional planting and screening, including planting in
advance of the commencement of the development;
(iv)
the need to safeguard the character and amenities of individual settlements and to safeguard open gaps between settlements
from permanent development which would cause long-term harm to the function of the land;
(v)
the likely effects of the proposed development on and the need to protect and safeguard sites of nature conservation,
geological, archaeological, historic, architectural and landscape importance and their settings;
(vi)
the extent and quality of agricultural land to be taken by the proposed development and the proposals for its subsequent
restoration and the likely effects of the proposals on farm structure and management;
(vii)
the likely effects of the proposed development on and the need to maintain the distinctive character of the landscape; the likely
effects of the proposed development on and the need to safeguard and protect individual species, habitats and landscape
features, including woodland, trees and hedgerows; and the likely effects of the proposed development on forestry and
woodland management;
(viii)
the likely effects of the proposed development on sites used for recreation and public rights of way and the need to protect or
secure the satisfactory diversion of public rights of way;
(ix)
the likely effects of the proposed development on and the need to safeguard the flow and quality of watercourses, water
supplies, floodplains, groundwater, the drainage of the site and adjoining land and the level of the watertable in the locality and
the likely effects of the proposed development on the immediate setting of any river;
(x)
any potential danger to aircraft from birds being attracted to the site;
(xi)
the possible amenity implications of any landfill gas that might be generated at the site and of any provisions that might be made
to deal with it; and
(xii)
the likely cumulative impact of the proposed development in combination with any other significant development taking place
or permitted to take place in the locality and the need to minimise the impact of mineral extraction and waste disposal
operations by securing, where appropriate, the phased release of sites and progression of working and restoration.
182 of 226
Where proposed minerals or waste development would affect a nationally important archaeological site or monument or its setting,
whether scheduled or not, in determining applications for planning permission the Mineral and waste Planning Authorities will have
regard to the presumption in favour of the preservation of the site or monument in situ.
Where there is evidence that archaeological remains, the extent and importance of which are unknown, may exist within the site of a
proposal for minerals or waste development, an application for planning permission will be required to be accompanied by an
appropriate field assessment, the results of which will be weighed against the need for the development and any harm it would cause.
Where the preservation for archaeological remains which are affected by a proposal for minerals or waste development is not feasible or
justified, the Minerals/Waste Planning Authority will not normally grant permission for that development unless satisfactory provision has
been made by the applicant for a programme of archaeological investigation and recording prior to the commencement of the
development and the subsequent publication of the results.
Policy 12
Policy 13
Applications for planning permission for minerals or waste development in the following areas will not be granted save when the
development would not prejudice the purpose of the designation and where there is an overriding need for the development to take
place in the public interest:
(i)
the New Forest Heritage Area;
(ii)
Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty;
(iii)
National Nature Reserves, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Special Protection Areas, Special Areas of Conservation and Wetlands
of International Importance (Ramsar Sites);
(iv)
Scheduled Ancient Monuments and their settings;
(v)
Conservation Areas, Listed Buildings, and sites on the National Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest.
Applications for planning permission for minerals or waste development in the following areas will not be granted save where there is an
overriding need for the development to take place and any adverse effects can be satisfactorily ameliorated:
(i)
Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation and Local Nature Reserves;
(ii)
Ground Water Source Protection Zone 1 (Inner Source Protection) areas;
(iii)
sites in the County Register of Historic Parks and Gardens.
The Minerals and Waste Planning Authorities will impose conditions on planning permissions for mineral and waste development to
minimise any adverse environmental, traffic or other impact resulting from the development and to ensure appropriate restoration and
aftercare of the site. Where such impacts cannot be adequately be controlled by conditions, the Minerals and Waste Planning
Authorities will seek appropriate planning obligations and/or legal agreements in order to control operations and/or to secure the
enhancement of the environment or benefit to the local community.
Policy 11
Policy 10
Policy 9
Policy 8
May 2006
The Minerals Planning Authority will grant planning permission for the extraction of sand and gravel provided they are satisfied that such
permission is necessary to enable the production of land-won sand and gravel, including soft sand and hoggin, within Hampshire to be
maintained at an overall average level based on the most recent national and regional policy guidance and that the supply
requirement figure in Table 2 would not be likely to be exceeded.
The Minerals Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for the extraction of sand and gravel provided they are satisfied that such
permission is necessary in order to maintain landbanks of reserves of soft sand and sharp sand and gravel with planning permission for
extraction in accordance with the most recent national and regional policy guidance, unless exceptional circumstances prevail.
Policy 17
Policy 15
Policy 16
183 of 226
The Minerals and Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for minerals and waste development provided they are
satisfied that:
(i)
adequate provision has been made for the satisfactory restoration and aftercare of the site to the highest practicable standard
so as to be suitable for the agreed beneficial after-use when the operation or use of the site has ceased or the facility has
reached the end of its life, which after-use should normally be agriculture, woodland, heathland or other nature conservation or
amenity use; and
(ii)
in the case of mineral working and waste disposal by landfilling or landraising, the land will be progressively restored within the
shortest practicable timescale such that the rate of restoration is as far as practicable commensurate with the rate of extraction
and/or disposal and the land will be subject to appropriate aftercare to ensure that it is restored to a condition satisfactory for the
agreed after-use of the site; and
(iii)
the restoration and aftercare provisions can be ensured by means of conditions attached to the planning permission or through a
planning obligation or other appropriate legal agreement.
The Minerals and Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for mineral working or waste disposal by landfill or landraising
provided they are satisfied that, in the case of sites which are to be restored to agricultural land, woodland, heathland or other nature
conservation or amenity use, the site will be subject to a satisfactory programme of aftercare for a period of five years following
completion of the restoration of the site. The Minerals and Waste Planning Authorities will seek to ensure such aftercare by means of
conditions attached to the planning permission or, where appropriate, through a planning obligation or other appropriate legal
agreement. Exceptionally, in the event that the Mineral/Waste Planning Authority considers that a period of aftercare in excess of five
years or a long-term management plan is necessary in the case of schemes of restoration for nature conservation, it will seek a planning
obligation or other appropriate legal agreement to ensure this. The Mineral/Waste Planning Authority will normally require a scheme of
aftercare to be submitted for approval prior to the completion of restoration.
Policy 14
May 2006
Policy 20
Policy 19
Policy 18
May 2006
184 of 226
(b) it can be demonstrated that working of such land would be equally acceptable to working within a preferred area;
(a) there is a need for additional permitted reserves of sand and gravel (as assessed against Policies 16-18) which cannot be
reasonably be met from within the preferred areas; and
Or
(ii) the proposed development involves a small-scale extension to or deepening of an existing active sand and gravel extraction
(i)
Either
Minerals Planning Authorities will not grant planning permission for the extraction of sand and gravel from land outside the preferred
areas specified in Policy 19 unless they are satisfied that the proposal is in conformity with the other policies of the Plan and that:
Provided that the development proposals meet the specific criteria for the preferred area as set out in the text accompanying the
proposals map inset maps.
Area 1 - North of Welshman’s Road, Mortimer West End;
Area 2 – Bramshill Plateau, Hartley Wintney/Eversely
Area 3 – Roke Manor, Shootash
Area 4 – Gardners Lane (The Triangle), Ridge;
Area 5 – Bleak Hill, Harbridge;
Area 6 – Plumley Wood and Farm, Ringwood Forest;
Area 7 – Blue Haze (North), Ringwood Forest;
The Minerals Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for the extraction of sand and gravel, including soft sand and hoggin,
provided they are satisfied that such permission is necessary in order to meet the need for the mineral in accordance with Policies 16 and
17 of the Plan having regard to:
(i)
the existing level of permitted reserves of the mineral concerned; and
(ii)
the rate at which and the length of time over which it is expected that those reserves will be worked; and
(iii)
the proposed rate and length of time working of the mineral deposit that is the subject of the application.
The Minerals Planning Authority will grant planning permission for the extraction of sand and gravel from land within the following
preferred areas, as shown on the proposals map inset maps:
Policy 22
Policy 21
May 2006
185 of 226
the following existing aggregates wharves and rail-head aggregates depots:
the following preferred site for a rail-head aggregates depot, as shown on the proposals map inset map:
The Mineral Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for new wharf and rail-head depot facilities for the landing or unloading,
handling and distribution of marine-dredged, sea-borne aggregates provided they are satisfied that:
(i)
the location is suitable for the development proposed; and
(ii)
the development would not be likely to cause unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact; and
(iii)
in the case of preferred rail-head aggregates depot site A listed in Policy 21, the development proposals meet the specific criteria
for the preferred site as set out in the text accompanying the proposals map inset map.
any sites where permission is granted for the establishment of an aggregates wharf or rail-head aggregates depot or where such use is
established without the need for planning permission.
Site A – Micheldever Station
(ii)
RAIL-HEAD DEPOTS
Chickenhall Lane, Eastleigh
Botley Station
Fareham Station
AGGREGATES WHARVES
Bakers Wharf, Chapel, Southampton
Burnley Wharf, Chapel, Southampton
Leamouth Wharf, Chapel, Southampton
Willments Shipyard, Woolston, Southampton
Marchwood Power Station Wharf
Upper Quay, Fareham
Tipner Point Wharf, Portsmouth
Kendalls Wharf, Langstone Harbour, Portsmouth
Bedhampton Wharf, Havant
(i)
The Mineral planning Authorities will seek to safeguard the following sites for use for the landing or unloading, handling and distribution of
marine-dredged, sea-borne or rail-borne aggregates and will normally oppose proposals for development which would prevent or
prejudice the use of these sites for those purposes:
186 of 226
which would result in increased problems of noise , dust or traffic conflicts at Fareham Station rail-head aggregates depot;
The Mineral Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for the use of land and the erection of plant and buildings for the
production or supply of secondary or substitute aggregate materials (including aggregates produced for waste materials) provided they
are satisfied that:
(i)
the location is suitable for the development proposed; and
(ii)
the development would not be likely to cause unacceptable environ mental, traffic or other impact.
In assessing the suitability of proposed sites for the production or supply of secondary or substitute aggregate materials the Mineral
Planning Authority will have particular regard to the criteria for the location of waste recycling facilities in Policy 46.
The extraction of chalk will not be permitted unless the Mineral Planning Authority is satisfied that there is a clearly established need for
the chalk for agricultural, industrial or aggregate uses which cannot reasonably and satisfactorily be met from another source and that
the need outweighs any adverse environmental, traffic or other impact that the development would be likely to cause.
Policy 26
and in considering and determining planning applications relating to these sites they will seek to ameliorate existing environmental and
traffic problems.
(ii)
Or
Willments Shipyard, Woolston, Southampton;
Supermarine, Woolston, Southampton;
Upper Quay, Fareham;
Tipner Point Wharf, Portsmouth;
Kendalls Wharf, Langstone Harbour; and
Bedhampton Wharf, Havant
The Mineral Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for the development for the improvement, modernisation, extension and
increase in capacity of wharves and rail-head depots for the landing or unloading, handling and distribution of marine-dredged, seaborne aggregates provided they are satisfied that:
(i)
the location is suitable for the development involves; and
(ii)
the development would not be likely to cause unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact.
The Mineral Planning Authorities will not grant planning permission for development which would result in:
(i)
unacceptably increased disturbance, visual intrusion or adverse impact on nature conservation interests at the existing
aggregates wharves at:
Policy 25
Policy 24
Policy 23
May 2006
The Mineral Planning Authorities will not permit the extraction of minerals from borrow pits associated with specific major construction
projects, unless they are satisfied that:
(i)
there is a clearly identified need for the mineral which cannot be reasonably and satisfactorily be met from existing mineral supply
sources and which outweighs any adverse environmental impact or other detrimental effect that the development would be
likely to cause; and
(ii)
the material extracted from the borrow pits is only to be used in connection with the specific construction project with which it is
associated; and
(iii)
either the site is within the ‘area of disturbance’ created by the construction project it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of
the Mineral Planning Authority that supplying the mineral needs of the construction project from a borrow pit would result in less
environmental disturbance and traffic impact and less impact on natural resources than if the mineral were supplied from an
existing source or from one of the preferred areas in Policy 19; and
(iv)
the routeing of lorries between the borrow pit and the construction project minimises the use of public highways and undue
interference with footpaths and bridleways; and
(v)
the borrow pit is sited so as to minimise visual and noise intrusion and other environmental disturbance; and
(vi)
the development provided for a phased programme of working and restoration , using only materials derived from elsewhere on
the construction site, such that the site is restored to a satisfactory landform suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use prior to the
completion of the construction project.
Policy 28
Policy 29
187 of 226
The Mineral Planning Authority will permit the extraction of clay from land within the following preferred areas, as shown on the proposals
map inset maps:
Area 8 – Selborne Brickworks, Selborne; and
Area 9 – Michelmersh Brickworks, Michelmersh;
Provided that:
(i)
the clay is only to be used for the manufacture of bricks and/or tiles at the adjacent brickworks; and
(ii)
there is a need for additional permitted reserves of clay to enable the continued production of bricks and/or tiles at the adjacent
brickworks which outweighs any adverse environmental, traffic or other impact that the development would be likely to cause;
and
(iii)
the development proposals meet the specific criteria for the preferred area as set out in the text accompanying the proposals
map inset maps.
The extraction of clay (excluding borrow pits) from outside the preferred areas specified in Policy 27 will not be permitted unless the
Mineral Planning Authority is satisfied that there is a clearly established need for the clay for the lining or capping of landfill sites which
cannot reasonably and satisfactorily be met from another source and that the need outweighs any adverse environmental, traffic or
other impact that the development would be likely to cause.
Policy 27
May 2006
The Mineral Planning Authorities will not permit development for commercial production of oil or natural gas in advance of the
completion of a full appraisal programme for the oil or gas field which should, where appropriate, include consideration of exploratory
and/or appraisal programmes win any adjacent oil or gas fields.
Within the New Forest Heritage Area permission will not be granted other than in exceptional circumstances for development in
connection with the exploration for or the appraisal, production, processing or transportation of oil or natural gas.
Policy 33
Policy 34
Policy 32
Following the drilling of an initial exploratory borehole, development either in connection with an appraisal programme or of facilities for
producing, processing or transporting oil or natural gas will be permitted provided that the Mineral Planning Authority is satisfied that:
(i)
the development is necessary to confirm geological structures or to confirm or exploit the oil or gas resource, and the need for the
development outweighs any adverse environmental impact or other detrimental effect that would be likely to cause by it; and
(ii)
the proposed location of the development is the most suitable taking into account environmental, geological and technical
factors; and
(iii)
the development would not give rise to any unacceptable environmental impact; and
(iv)
the proposal is consistent with either an agreed overall scheme or a production strategy for the area.
The Mineral Planning Authorities will only permit development in connection with an appraisal programme if it is within the framework of
an agreed overall scheme which should, so far as is possible, provide for an appraisal of the full extent of the oil or gas reservoir.
Policy 31
188 of 226
The Mineral Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for operations for exploration for oil and natural gas, except within the New
Forest Heritage Area, provided they are satisfied that:
(i)
the proposed development is sited within the area of search at the location where it would have the least environmental impact;
and
(ii)
the proposed operations would not cause any permanent harm to the local environment or the nature conservation or
archaeological interest of the area, or unduly affect the amenities of local residents or have any other unacceptable impact;
and
(iii)
the proposal provides for the restoration and subsequent aftercare of any land disturbed as a result of the operations, whether or
not oil and gas is found.
Any permission granted for such operations will be without prejudice to the consideration of any further proposals for appraisal or
production of oil or natural gas.
Policy 30
May 2006
Mineral exploration operations (other than for oil and gas) which require planning approval will be permitted provided the Mineral
Planning Authority is satisfied that:
(i)
the operations would not be likely to cause unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact; and
(ii)
the proposals provide for the satisfactory restoration and aftercare of any land disturbed.
Any permission granted for mineral exploration will be without prejudice to the consideration by the Mineral Planning Authority of any
further proposals for mineral working that may be submitted.
Policy 36
189 of 226
In cases where it is not permitted by the Town and County Planning (General Permitted Development) Order the Mineral Planning
Authorities will grant planning permission for minerals processing and manufacturing plant and other development ancillary to the
extraction, landing or unloading of minerals within the boundaries of, or adjacent to, mineral extraction sites, aggregates wharves and
rail-head aggregates depots, provided that:
(i)
in the case of processing plant, it is required to process minerals either extracted from the mineral working site, landed at the
wharf or delivered by rail to the depot;
(ii)
in the case of manufacturing plant, the greater part of the minerals to be used to manufacture the product will be either
extracted from the mineral working site, landed at the wharf or delivered by rail to the depot, and the manufacturing activities
will remain ancillary to the primary use of the site as a mineral extraction site, aggregates wharf or rail-head aggregates depot;
(iii)
in the case of another ancillary development, the development is required solely in connection with the administration or
servicing of the mineral working site, wharf or depot;
(iv)
the plant or other development is to be designed, constructed and landscaped so as to minimise any adverse impact on the
amenities of the area and, in any case, it would not be likely to give rise to any unacceptable environmental, traffic or other
impact;
(v)
the size, type and nature of the plant or other development are appropriate to the scale of the mineral extraction site,
aggregates wharf or rail-head aggregates depot for which it is required; and
(vi)
the plant, structure or building would be removed as soon as extraction of minerals from the mineral working site has permanently
ceased or the use of the aggregates wharf or rail-head aggregates depot has ceased and the site would be restored to a
satisfactory condition suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use.
Where permission is granted for minerals processing or manufacturing plant at or adjacent to a mineral extraction site this will be subject
to conditions preventing the importation of material from elsewhere, with the exception of material that is necessary for the operation of
the plant but is not, or was not formerly, extracted from the mineral extraction site.
Policy 35
May 2006
The Waste Planning Authorities will normally only grant planning permission for the disposal of waste by landraising in exceptional
circumstances where the need for landfill capacity cannot be met by the landfilling of mineral workings and there is no other reasonably
practicable means of disposal available.
Policy 38
Policy 39
190 of 226
The Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for waste disposal by landfilling provided they are satisfied that:
(iii)
the waste to be disposed of cannot be practicably and reasonably be reduced, re-used, recycled or processed at a resource
recovery plant and there is a proven need for the disposal of the waste by landfilling which cannot reasonably be met by other
suitable existing or permitted waste disposal facilities within a reasonable distance of the source of the waste or by the preferred
areas in Policy 38; and
(ii)
the proposed landfilling would normally take place within a mineral working site that:
a) is an active extraction site; or
b) has been unsatisfactorily restored and landfilling would enable satisfactory restoration to be achieved; or
c) has been restored below original levels and there would be an environmental benefit from the raising of levels by infilling; and
(iii)
the proposed site is located near to and has adequate access to the Hampshire Lorry Route Network (as shown on the
proposals map), so that the development would not be likely to cause unacceptable traffic impact (including the environmental
impact of traffic) on the local highway network; and
(iv)
the proposed site is located and the proposal includes adequate measures to ensure that no unacceptable impact would be
likely to the caused to the occupants or users of houses, other residential buildings, schools, hospitals and other environmentally
sensitive buildings and land uses by reason of noise, dust, fumes, smell or other cause; and
(v)
the proposed site is located so as to avoid unacceptable impact on landscape, nature conservation and archaeological
interests; and
(vi)
the proposed site is located and the proposal includes adequate measures to ensure that there would be no significant risk of
pollution or danger to public health or safety.
The Waste Planning Authority will permit the disposal of waste by landfilling within the following preferred areas, as shown on the proposal
map inset maps:
Area 10 – Blue Haze/Chatsworth Sandpits, Ringwood Forest; and
Areas 11 – Apsley Farm, Andover;
Provided that the development proposals meet the specific criteria for the preferred area as set out in the text accompanying the
Policy 37
May 2006
Policy 42
Policy 41
Policy 40
May 2006
191 of 226
The Waste Planning Authority will normally permit the disposal of silt dredged from Basingstoke Canal by landfilling or landraising,
provided that:
(i)
the proposed site lies adjacent to the Basingstoke Canal; and
(ii)
the site is only to be used for the disposal of waste material derived from dredging or other maintenance of the Basingstoke
Canal; and
(iii)
the movement of waste between the Basingstoke Canal and the disposal site would not involve the use of any public
highway; and
(iv)
the site is located so as to avoid unacceptable environmental impact, including noise intrusion and impact on landscape,
nature conservation and archaeological interests; and
(v)
the development provides for a phased programme of waste disposal and restoration such that the site is restored to a
satisfactory landform suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use.
The Waste Planning Authorities will not permit the disposal of waste material from specific major construction projects by landfilling or
landraising, unless they are satisfied that:
(i)
the waste material cannot reasonably and practicably be re-used or recycled and there is a clearly identified need for the
disposal of the waste which cannot be reasonably and satisfactorily be met by existing waste disposal facilities and which
outweighs any adverse environmental or other detrimental effect that the development would be likely to cause;
(ii)
the site is only to be used for the disposal of waste arising from the specific construction project with which it is associated; and
(iii)
either the site is within the ‘area of disturbance’ created by the construction project or it can be demonstrated to the
satisfaction of the Waste Planning Authority that disposal of the waste at the site would result in less environmental disturbance
and traffic impact than the use of existing waste disposal facilities; and
(iv)
the routeing of lorries between the waste disposal site and the construction project minimises the use of the public highways
and undue interference with footpaths and bridleways; and
(v)
the site is located so as to avoid unacceptable environmental impact, including noise intrusion and impact on landscape,
nature conservation and archaeological interest; and
(vi)
the development provides for a phased programme of waste disposal and restoration such that the site is restored to a
satisfactory landform suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use prior to the completion of the construction project.
The Waste Planning Authorities will not permit the disposal of waste by landfilling or landraising where they consider there is a significant
risk that the type(s) of waste proposed to be deposited would:
(i)
cause pollution of surface drainage or groundwater; or
(ii)
give rise to the production of landfill gas such that it would cause an environmental problem in the locality; or
(iii)
give rise to any other unacceptable environmental or other effect in the locality.
The Waste Planning Authorities will normally seek to safeguard the following sites for waste recycling, storage, transfer or processing uses:
(i)
the sites listed in Policy 43;
(ii)
the existing waste recycling, storage, transfer and processing sites listed in Appendix 7; and
(iii)
any sites where planning permission is granted for waste recycling, storage, transfer or processing.
The Waste Planning Authorities will normally oppose proposals for development within or in proximity to any of these sites where the
proposed development would prevent or prejudice the use of the site for waste recycling, storage, transfer or processing.
Policy 44
192 of 226
The Waste Planning Authorities will permit the development of integrated waste processing plants at the following preferred sites, as
shown on the proposals map inset maps:
Site B – Chineham (Wildmoor) Incinerator, Reading Road, Basingstoke;
Site C – Marchwood Power Station Site, Normandy Way, Marchwood;
Site D – Town Depot, Chapel, Southampton;
Site E – Portsmouth Incinerator, Quartremaine Road, Copnor, Portsmouth;
Site F – Havant Incinerator, Harts Farm Way, Havant; and
Site G – Charleston Road, Fawley;
Provided that the development proposals meet the specific criteria for the preferred site as set out in the text accompanying the
Policy 43
May 2006
Policy 45
May 2006
193 of 226
The Waste Planning Authorities will normally permit waste processing facilities which enable the recovery of resources (materials and
energy) from waste and reduce the volume of waste requiring disposal by landfilling provided that:
(i)
there is a need for the disposal of biodegradable or combustible waste materials which cannot practicably or reasonably be
avoided, reused, recycled or composted; and
(ii)
the proposed site is appropriately located to help meet the waste disposal needs of the main urban areas of Hampshire; and
(iii)
the proposed site is located close to and has adequate access to the Hampshire Lorry Route Network (as shown on the proposals
map), so that the development would not be likely to cause unacceptable traffic impact (including the environmental impact of
the traffic) on the local highway network; and
(iv)
the proposed site is located within an urban area or within an area which is permitted or allocated for industrial development, or
is a site within the countryside that has already been disturbed by permanent development (a brownfield site); and
(v)
the proposed site is not located within the South West Hampshire Green Belt or a Strategic Gap or open countryside unless it can
be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the County Council that there is not other suitable site available and that the overall
benefit to be gained from the proposed facility outweighs the adverse environmental impact that it would have on the area
concerned; and
(vi)
likely to be caused to the occupants or users of houses, other residential buildings, schools, hospitals and other environmentally
sensitive buildings and land uses by the reason of noise, dust, fumes, smell or other cause; and
(vii)
interest; and
(viii)
pollution or danger to public health or safety; and
(ix)
the proposed siting, design and landscaping of the facility are of the highest practicable standard and are appropriate to the
location of the proposed development to ensure that it would not cause unacceptable visual intrusion.
Policy 48
Policy 47
Policy 46
May 2006
194 of 226
The Waste Planning Authorities will permit the use of land and the erection of plant buildings for the recycling, transfer, storage and other
treatment or handling of waste (excluding waste processing facilities covered by Policy 45) provided that:
(i)
the proposed site is located near to the likely source(s) of waste and/or the market(s) for the recycled or recovered materials;
and
(ii)
the proposed site is located close to and adequate access to the Hampshire Lorry Route Network (as shown on the proposals
map), so that the development would not be likely to cause unacceptable traffic impact (including the environmental impact of
traffic) on the local highway network; and
(iii)
the proposed site is located:
a) within an existing industrial site or on land which is permitted or allocated for industrial development; or
b) within an area of land in the countryside that has already been disturbed by permanent development (a brownfield site) ;
or
c) at a waste disposal landfill or landraising site provided that the proposed development is connected with the waste
disposal operation and is for temporary period commensurate with the operational life of the waste disposal facility; and
(iv)
likely to be caused to the occupants or users of houses, other residential buildings, schools, hospitals and other environmentally
sensitive buildings and land uses by reason of noise, dust, fumes, smells or other causes; and
(v)
interest; and
(vi)
pollution or danger to public health or safety; and
(vii)
the proposed site is located, if necessary, the proposal includes landscaping measures to ensure that the development would
not cause unacceptable visual intrusion.
The Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for the handling, storage, treatment, processing and disposal of difficult and
special wastes provided they are satisfied that:
(i)
either the waste(s) concerned would arise largely within Hampshire or the facility would form part of a regional or national
strategy for dealing with the waste(s) concerned to which the Waste Planning Authority has agreed; and
(ii)
the proposed means of handling, storage, treatment and processing and disposal and the proposed facility are appropriate to
the nature and hazards of the particular waste(s) concerned; and
(iii)
Any proposals to extend or increase the capacity of the existing special waste treatment and incineration plant at Charleston Road,
Fawley will be considered against the national and regional need for special waste treatment and incineration facilities and the
environmental and safety implications of the proposed development.
Policy 52
Any proposals for development within these sites should have regard to the issues set out in the text accompanying the proposals map
inset maps.
SITES FOR SEWAGE SLUDGE HANDLING/TREATMENT/PROCESSING
Site J – Slowhill Copse Waste Water Treatment Works, Marchwood
Site K – Millbrook Waste water Treatment Works, Southampton
Site L – Budds Farm Waste Water Treatment Works, Havant
Site M – Chickenhall Waste Water Treatment Works , Eastleigh
Site N – Fullerton Waste Water Treatment Works, Andover
Site O – Petersfield Waste Water Treatment Works, Petersfield.
SITES FOR WASTE WATER TREATMENT
Site H – Ashlett Creek, Fawley
Site I – Eastney, Portsmouth
Development for the treatment or disposal of waste water (sewage) and for the handling, treatment, processing and disposal of sewage
sludge will be permitted provided the Waste Planning Authority is satisfied that:
(i) the need for the proposed development cannot practicably and reasonably be met at a more environmentally acceptable site;
and
(ii) the proposed development is located and designed in such a way as to minimise any adverse environmental or other impact that
the development would be likely to give rise to, including visual intrusion, odour, noise, traffic and any secondary effects of sludge
disposal, having particular regard to the need to safeguard the amenities of the occupants or users of houses and other buildings in
the locality.
The Waste Planning Authorities will seek to safeguard the following sites, as shown on the proposals map inset maps, for possible future
development for the improvement of waste water (sewage) treatment or the handling, treatment and processing of sewage sludge
and will normally oppose proposals for development which would prevent or prejudice such development at these site:
Policy 50
Policy 51
195 of 226
The Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for the handling, storage, treatment and processing and disposal of clinical
waste provided they are satisfied that:
(i)
the waste would largely arise within Hampshire or the facility would form part of an agreed regional strategy for dealing with
clinical waste;
(ii)
where waste is to be disposed of by incineration the plant is of an appropriate type to deal with clinical waste; and
(iii)
The Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for the handling, transfer or dismantling of scrap vehicles or other scrap
metal provided they are satisfied that the development will be carried out on land which is permitted or allocated for general industrial
use and that the development would not be likely to cause unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact.
Policy 49
May 2006
Policy 53
May 2006
196 of 226
The Waste Planning Authorities will permit plant, machinery, buildings and other development ancillary to waste disposal, processing and
transfer facilities within the boundary of or adjacent to the facility, provided that:
(i)
the development is required solely in connection with the operation, administration or servicing of the waste facility; and
(ii)
any plant, machinery, building or other structure is to be designed, constructed and landscaped so as to minimise any adverse
impact on the amenities of the area and, in any case, it would not be likely to give rise to any unacceptable environmental or
traffic impact or other detrimental effect; and
(iii)
the size, type and nature of the development are appropriate to the scale of the waste facility for which it is required; and
(iv)
any plant, machinery, building or other structure would be removed as soon as the use of the waste facility has ceased and the
site would be restored to a satisfactory condition suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use.
MW2
MW1
197 of 226
seek environmental enhancement and public benefits through minerals and waste development;
conserve and prevent unnecessary sterilisation of mineral resources and encourage efficient use of materials;
encourage the use of secondary and recycled aggregate materials; and
seek the management of waste in accordance with the following hierarchy:
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
any adverse environmental or other impacts that the development would be likely to cause are outweighed by a clearly
established need for development; and
the proposals, where applicable, include a satisfactory scheme of working and landscaping including details of lorry
routeing and, in all cases, include satisfactory measures to ensure that the development would not have any
unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact; and
the proposals, where applicable, provide for the satisfactory and prompt restoration and aftercare of the site to a high
standard and to a landform compatible with the local landscape and suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Permission will be granted for minerals and waste development provided the mineral/waste planning authority is satisfied that:
having regard to the proximity principle and the principle of best practical environmental option.
3. recovery of waste (recycling, composting, energy from waste); and waste disposal;
2. re-use of waste;
1. reduction of waste;
seek to ensure an adequate supply of minerals and provision of waste management facilities to meet needs having
regard to the need to: maintain the environmental quality and diversity of Hampshire, including the protection of living
conditions; safeguard important socio-economic interests; prevent pollution; and protect features of particular
environmental or historical importance including those listed in Policy MW3, Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation
and historic parks and gardens;
(i)
Planning authorities will, through policies and proposals in local plans and day-to-day development control:
Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996-2011
Policies
Content
May 2006
MW5
MW4
MW3
May 2006
198 of 226
The mineral planning authorities will seek, through policies and proposals in the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals
and Waste Local Plan and day-to-day development control, to provide for an appropriate contribution towards national, regional
and local needs for minerals from sources within Hampshire, having regard to local environmental constraints. In considering
applications for mineral working, regard will be had to the aim of maintaining a stock of planning permissions sufficient for the
extraction of sand and gravel in accordance with national and regional policy guidance, unless exceptional circumstances prevail.
Areas for the extraction of sand and gravel will be identified in the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste
Local Plan.
Sites for wharves and rail depots will be identified in the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan
In order to encourage the use of marine-dredged, rail-borne and sea-borne aggregates in place of locally extracted minerals, the
establishment and improvement of rail depots and wharves for the importation of aggregates will be supported in principle.
Permission will be granted for facilities for the transportation of aggregates by rail and sea provided that the development would not
have unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact.
except where the mineral/waste planning authority considers that there is an overriding need for the development to take place in
the public interest which outweighs the harm that would be caused, having regard to the level of protection given to the
designation concerned in legislation or government guidance.
The New Forest;
Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty;
Special Areas of Conservation;
Special Protection Areas;
Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Sites);
Sites of Special Scientific Interest;
National Nature Reserves;
Nationally important archaeological sites and monuments, whether scheduled or not, and their settings;
Conservation Areas,
Listed Buildings; and
Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest on English Heritage’s National Register;
Permission will not be granted for minerals and waste development which is likely to cause material harm to any of the following
designated areas and sites:
199 of 226
facilities for composting, anaerobic digestion, incineration with energy recovery and other methods of resource recovery
waste processing sufficient only to cater for unavoidable non-inert waste which is not re-used or recycled;
landfill capacity sufficient only for the disposal of unavoidable waste which is not re-used, recycled or processed; and
waste transfer stations to serve areas of local waste processing and disposal facility shortage;
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
there is an overriding need for the proposed development and the extraction of the mineral deposit cannot be
reasonably be undertaken prior to or in phase with it.
(ii)
All mineral deposits will be safeguarded from development which would prevent or prejudice their future extraction unless the local
planning authority in consultation with the mineral planning authority is satisfied that:
MW9
the area concerned does not contain a workable mineral deposit; or
The Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan will establish the need for waste management facilities
in Hampshire. Sites for waste management development will be identified in the Minerals and Waste Local Plan including, in
particular, sites for a network of integrated non-inert waste management facilities and for the landfilling of inert and non-inert wastes.
As far as is practicable and environmentally acceptable, sites will be located to enable the provision of adequate facilities to serve
the main waste producing centres in Hampshire.
MW8
(i)
Waste disposal by landfilling will only be permitted within mineral working sites that are active or unrestored or have been
unsatisfactorily restored or where would be an environmental benefit from the raising of levels. Land-raising will normally be permitted
only in exceptional circumstances where the need for landfill capacity cannot be met by the infilling of mineral workings and there is
no other reasonably practicable means of disposal available and provided that the development would not have unacceptable
environmental, traffic or other impact.
provided that the development would not have unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact.
facilities for the re-use and recycling of waste, including the production of secondary and recycled aggregate materials;
(i)
Having regard to Policy MW1 (v), permission will be granted for:
The waste planning authorities will seek, through policies and proposals in the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and
Waste Local Plan and day-to-day development control, the provision of sufficient facilities to meet the need for the management of
all unavoidable waste (excluding special waste) arising in Hampshire.
Planning authorities will seek a reduction in the quantity of waste requiring treatment or disposal, including a significant reduction in
the quantity of non-inert waste disposed by landfilling.
MW7
MW6
May 2006
May 2006
200 of 226
May 2006
201 of 226
Appendix 2
Glossary
May 2006
202 of 226
May 2006
203 of 226
Aggregates - sand and gravel, crushed rock and other bulk materials used in the
construction industry.
Aggregates Levy - an environmental tax on the commercial exploitation of aggregates
in the UK introduced in 2002.
Agricultural waste – includes waste from farms and market gardens – including plastics,
packaging, tyres and machinery and dependent on its use, some organic matter such
as manure, slurry and crop residues.
Air Pollution Control Residues – materials captured in, and arising from, gas clean-up
systems.
Anaerobic Digestion - a biochemical process by which organic matter is decomposed
by bacteria under controlled conditions in the absence of oxygen, producing
methane gas and other by-products.
Behaviour Change - getting organizations and individuals to understand the impacts of
their actions and take responsibility for changing them.
Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPI’s) - measures of performance set by the
departments in central government. There are 97 indicators in total and they cover a
range of indicators from environmental issues e.g. recycling to others such as housing,
transport, education, etc.
Biodegradable Municipal Waste – the portion of municipal waste stream that can be
broken down by plants and animals (fungi and worms or micro-organisms).
Biological Treatment - technologies that use bacteria under controlled conditions to
break down organic materials and wastes.
Biowaste - Waste that is organic in nature (e.g. vegetable matter, wood, paper, oil)
and biodegradable.
Bottom Ash - the residual ash fraction arising from waste combustion, recovered from
the bottom of the furnace of incinerators and other combustion plant.
Business Practices - activities that contribute to the outputs from manufacturing and
service industries, e.g. production and assembly.
Chemical Treatment - technologies that use chemical processes to treat certain types
of waste, e.g. neutralise acids.
Civic Amenity Site - a site where the public can deliver household waste for reuse,
recycling or disposal. Called Household Waste Recycling Centres in Hampshire.
Climate Change - effect on the earth’s climate caused by man-made greenhouse gas
emissions. Also referred to as global warming.
Closed-loop System - a system for collecting used materials from a community and
then reusing, recycling or recovering value from them to the benefit of that
community.
Commercial Waste - a legal definition relating to waste from premises used for trade,
business, sport, recreation or entertainment, etc.
Composting - the controlled biological decomposition of organic material in the
presence of air to form a humus-like material.
Construction, Demolition & Excavation Wastes - wastes from building and civil
engineering activities. Legally classified as industrial waste.
Consumption - the process of using natural resources, materials, or finished products to
satisfy human needs and wants.
Contaminated Soil - soil containing substances which may cause risks to human health,
human activities or the environment.
Controlled waste – describes waste that must be managed and disposed of in line with
waste management regulations. It includes municipal, commercial and industrial
waste and can come from private homes, schools, hospitals, shops, offices, factories or
other businesses. It can be solid or liquid and include a range of materials such as scrap
metal, old newspapers, used glass or plastic bottles, aluminium cans, kitchen and
garden waste.
(Core) Strategy - part of the new Local Development Framework process setting out
the key elements of the planning framework for an area.
May 2006
204 of 226
Dry Recyclables - recyclable materials such as paper, metals, glass and plastics
excluding garden and food wastes.
Eastern English Channel - a channel covering 20 miles off the Sussex coast that is
proposed as a valuable new source of sand and gravel.
EC Directive – a European Community law that Member States must comply with and
transpose into their law.
Economic Development - efforts to increase wealth creation and employment
opportunities by encouraging new businesses to relocate in an area or existing
businesses to expand.
ELV – end of life vehicle such as an old car disposed of as scrap.
Energy Recovery Incineration (Energy from Waste) - burning of waste materials at high
temperatures under controlled conditions with the utilisation of the heat produced to
supply industrial or domestic users, and/or generate electricity.
Environment Agency (EA) – established in April 1996, combining the functions of former
local waste regulation authorities, the National Rivers Authority and Her Majesty’s
Inspectorate of Pollution. Intended to promote a more integrated approach to waste
management and consistency in waste regulation. The Agency also conducts national
surveys of waste arisings and waste facilities
Extended Life - passing products or items into shared or passed-on ownership to extend
their life.
Fly-ash - the accumulation of particles extracted by the gas-cleaning processes
involved with incineration and other thermal treatment plant.
Fossil Fuels – carbon based remains of organic matter (i.e. ancient plant and animal
life) that has been geologically transformed into coal, oil and natural gas.
Gasification - the breakdown of waste by heating it in a controlled system but with the
addition of oxygen. The process generates gas (that can be used as an energy
source).
Green Wastes - organic plant materials such as grass cuttings, hedge trimmings and
tree loppings. From household gardens, local authority parks and gardens and
commercial landscaped gardens
Green Waste Composting - the controlled biological decomposition of green wastes to
produce a quality soil conditioner.
Greenhouse Gas - gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, and CFCs which contribute
to global warming by trapping heat between the earth’s surface and the atmosphere.
Hazardous Wastes - waste materials that may pose a threat to human health or the
environment and require special management care. Can only be dealt with at
licensed hazardous waste disposal facilities.
Household Waste - a legal definition relating to waste from domestic sources such as
households, caravans and residential homes, etc.
Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC) – a site where the public can deliver
household waste for reuse, recycling or disposal.
Hydrogeology - the science that deals with subsurface waters and geological aspects
of surface waters.
Industrial Symbiosis - co-operation between local companies to identify and
implement synergies and linkages between different industries that lead to previously
unwanted or low value output resources becoming useful and competitively priced
inputs for others. Aims to create resource efficiently.
Industrial Waste - a legal definition relating to waste from any factory, industrial process
(excluding mines and quarries) or premises used for services such as public transport or
utilities, etc. Construction and demolition
waste is classified as industrial waste.
Inert - a material that will not react chemically with others. In the context of inert waste,
it is materials such as soil, clay, chalk and spoil.
May 2006
205 of 226
Kerbside Collections - collections from outside individual households.
Landfill - an engineered and controlled waste disposal facility at which waste is placed
on or in the land.
Landfill Tax - an environmental tax introduced in 1996 which applies to waste disposed
of at landfill sites licensed under UK environmental law.
Landfill Directive - a European Community Directive (1999/31/EC) which aims to
prevent, or reduce as far as possible, the negative effects of landfill.
Land-Won Aggregates - aggregates dug from the ground.
Local Development Framework - the new system introduced under the Planning Act
2004 for planning at local level, replacing local plans.
Local Strategic Partnership – a non-statutory body bringing together the public, private,
voluntary and community sectors at a local level to improve the quality of life and
delivery of services locally.
Major Development Area (MDA) - an area identified through the planning system for
major new development.
Marine-Won Aggregates – aggregates dredged offshore from the sea and landed at
wharves.
Market Development - the development of uses and demand for recycled materials.
Material Resources - materials that can be reused, recycled or have value recovered
from them.
Materials Recovery Facility - a plant for separating out recyclable waste streams, either
mechanically or manually, prior to reprocessing.
Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) - mechanical sorting and separation to
separate out biodegradable materials, which are sent to a biological treatment
process.
Mechanical Sorting - sorting of materials and/or waste using machinery.
Mineral Planning Area - a planning area designated by Government for the purpose of
ensuring the need for land-won aggregates is met.
Minerals - naturally occurring substances such as sand, gravel, chalk, clay, oil and gas
extracted from the ground.
Minerals and Waste Development Framework - the new means of planning for minerals
and waste introduced under the Planning Act 2004.
Minerals and Waste Local Plan - the old means of planning for minerals and waste
which has been replaced by the Minerals and Waste Development Framework system.
Mines and quarries waste – includes materials such as overburden, rock inter-bedded
with the mineral resource, and residues left over from the initial processing of extracted
material (e.g. tailings).
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) – household waste and any other wastes collected by a
Waste Collection Authority, or its agents, such as municipal parks and gardens’ waste,
street litter, waste from fly-tipping, waste delivered to council recycling points and Civic
Amenity site waste.
Municipal Waste Management Strategy - a strategy, setting out a strategic framework
for the management of municipal waste, jointly developed by waste collection
authorities (WCA’s) and the waste disposal authority (WDA) in an area.
Natural Resources - resources obtained from the earth. Some natural resources such as
wood can be replaced, while others such as water and natural gas are of limited
supply.
Natural Resources Initiative - a Hampshire initiative with the aim of providing a focus for
local community action in conserving natural resources (materials, energy, water) and
using them more efficiently.
Net Self-sufficiency - the aim is to be self-sufficient in overall terms, i.e. providing
management capacity equivalent to waste production. It is accepted that there will
be some cross-boundary movements of waste and that the final processing capacity
for recyclate falls outside this definition.
May 2006
206 of 226
New Forest National Park - new national park based on the New Forest that will be
managed by a National Park Authority and will take over responsibility for minerals and
waste planning in its area from April 2006.
Non-hazardous Wastes - wastes which do not pose a threat to human health or the
environment if properly regulated, including general household, commercial and
industrial wastes. Applies particularly to the categorization of landfill sites for these
waste types.
Non-inert - a material that can react chemically when mixed with others.
Oily Water - waste water contaminated with oil.
Organic - materials containing carbon, derived from living matter.
Physical Treatment - using physical means such as shredding, sieving or sterilization to
treat waste materials.
Process Chain - the activities involved with the lifecycle of goods and products (design,
business practices, retail, procurement and consumption).
Processing Facilities - plant for sorting and/or treating waste materials.
Processing Technologies - methods of recovering materials/energy from waste
materials and/or reducing the environmental impact of the material.
Project Integra - the municipal waste management partnership and plan in Hampshire,
Portsmouth and Southampton.
Proximity Principle - the concept that waste should generally be managed as near as
possible to its place of production to reduce the environmental impacts of transport.
Putrescible – material with a tendency to decay, e.g. biodegradable material such as
garden and kitchen waste
Pyrolysis - the breakdown of waste materials in a controlled process by the application
of heat in the absence of air. The process generates three main products; oil, gas and
a char.
Recycling - the series of activities by which discarded materials are collected, sorted,
processed and converted into raw materials and used in the production of new
products.
Recycled Aggregate – derived from reprocessing materials previously used in
construction. Examples include construction and demolition material, asphalt
pavements and railway ballast.
Regional Minerals Strategy – SEERA document setting out the regional framework for
the development of minerals such as sand, gravel, chalk and clay.
Regional Waste Strategy – SEERA document setting out the regional framework to 2016
for the management of waste materials.
Remanufacturing - refurbishing items to good as new standard.
Residual Waste – waste which cannot be recycled or has not be captured in a
recycling scheme
Resource Productivity - in the context of the waste hierarchy, means minimizing
material inputs whilst maximising outputs.
Renewable Resources - resources (e.g. forests, fresh water, fish, agricultural crops) that
can be created or produced at the same rate at which they are consumed.
Resource Recovery - recovery of materials, fuel or energy from waste.
Resource Stream - a specific material component (e.g. paper) of overall waste.
Reuse - when an item or its components are used in the same form more than once,
not necessarily for the same purpose.
RoHS - Restriction of Hazardous Substances.
May 2006
207 of 226
Secondary Aggregate - by-products of other industrial processes and not previously
used in construction. Examples include china clay waste, used foundary sand and
metallurgical slags.
Shredding - breaking down materials or waste to a smaller and more uniform particle
size as a more consistent feedstock for treatment processes.
Sites Document - part of the new Local Development Framework process setting out
sites and/or the location of resource extraction and processing facilities, and waste
management facilities.
Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) - small (0-49 employees) and medium (50-249
employees) sized businesses.
Societal Change - achieving change in the way society operates, including changing
personal behaviour.
Soil Conditioner - organic matter applied to soil to improve its structure and assist in
retaining moisture and nutrients.
South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) - the body responsible for strategic
planning and representing overall regional views in South East England.
South East Plan - the strategic regional plan prepared by SEERA covering housing,
transport, the economy and the environment. The plan is a legal document that local
authorities and other government agencies will have to follow.
Storage Facilities - sites for the storage of materials, particularly recyclables.
Stretching Best Practice - the best judgment as to the maximum practicable level of
achievement having regard to all relevant issues including best practice elsewhere.
Sustainable Development – Development which meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It
means meeting the following four objectives at the same time, in the UK and the world
as a whole:
· social progress which recognizes the needs of everyone
· effective protection of the environment
· prudent use of natural resources
· maintenance of high and stable levels of economic growth and employment
Thermal Processing - treatment of waste materials by the application of heat to
achieve its breakdown through chemical reaction.
Transfer Station - a local depot where materials and wastes are delivered by collection
vehicles for bulking up into larger loads for transport for final processing and/or
disposal.
Treatment Technologies - processes that render waste materials less harmful and/or to
facilitate the recovery of materials/energy from them.
Unavoidable Wastes - wastes for which no recycling or composting schemes are
available, no segregation of recyclables or compostables occurs, or wastes which are
contaminated or otherwise rejected for recycling and composting.
Unitary Authority – a local authority which has the responsibilities of both Waste
Collection and Waste Disposal Authorities.
Void Space – Unused licensed capacity at a landfill site.
May 2006
208 of 226
Waste - any substance or object which the producer or the person in possession of it
intends to, is required to, or does discard. Defined by the Environmental Protection Act
1990. Waste includes any scrap material, effluent or unwanted surplus substance or
article which requires to be disposed of because it is broken, worn out, contaminated
or otherwise spoiled. Explosives and radioactive wastes are excluded
Waste arisings – the amount of waste generated in a given locality over a given period
of time
Waste streams – Waste generated from different sources
Waste Collection Authority - the authority (generally a unitary, district or borough
council) responsible in law for the collection of household and other municipal waste.
Waste Disposal Authority - the authority (generally a unitary or county council)
responsible in law for arranging for the management of household and other municipal
waste.
Waste Hierarchy – preferred waste management options in the following order (most
preferable first): reducing waste; reusing waste; recovery (recycling, composting,
energy recovery) and only then disposal as a last option.
Waste management licencing – licences are required by anyone who proposes to
deposit, recover or dispose of waste. The licencing system is separate from, but
complementary to, the land use planning system. The purpose of a licence and the
conditions attached to it is to ensure that the waste operation which it authorises is
carried out in a way which protects the environment and human health.
WEEE - waste electrical and electronic equipment.
May 2006
209 of 226
Appendix 3
References
May 2006
210 of 226
May 2006
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
211 of 226
Environment Agency - Strategic Waste Management Information 2002-2003
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/subjects/waste/1031954/315439/923299/#
- accessed 6 January 2006
English Nature Annual Report: April 2004 – March 2005. Facts & Figures
http://www.english-nature.org.uk/about/annual_report/facts.htm
Southampton Revised Deposit Local Plan Review (February 2003)
The Economic Development Office – Service Plan 2005/6 (HCC, July 2005)
A Profile of Hampshire (Hampshire County Council, 2004)
Draft South East Plan Part 1: Core Regional Policies (July 2005)
Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (ODPM, July
2005)
Southampton Local Transport Plan 2001/2 to 2005/6
Safeguarding of Aerodromes – Advice Note 5: Potential Bird Hazards from Landfill Sites
(Civil Aviation Authority, Airport Operators Association and General Aviation Awareness
Council, January 2003).
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) - Limits Set On The Landfilling
Of Waste http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2005/050203a.htm - accessed 23 January
2006
Integrated Sustainability Appraisal of the Issues and Options for the Core Strategy –
Scoping Report
Government Office for the South East - Proposed Changes to Regional Planning
Guidance for the South east (RPG9) – Waste and Minerals (August 2005)
The State of the District (2005)
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions - Waste Strategy 2000:
England and Wales (Part 1)
Government Office for the South East (GOSE) - Mineral Planning Guidance (MPG):
Guidelines for Aggregates Provision in England, April 1994 (revised in 2003 as Regional
Guidelines for Aggregate Provision in England 2001-2016)
Government Office for the South East (GOSE) Regional Planning Guidance for the South
East (RPG9) – Waste and Minerals Examination-in-Public Panel Report
South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) - Proposed Alterations to Regional
Planning Guidance, South East – Regional Minerals Strategy
South East England Regional Assembly – Regional Planning Committee: Sub Regional
Apportionment of Provision for Recycled and Secondary Aggregate
Hampshire County Council - Minerals and Waste Planning in Hampshire Annual Report
2003/04
Hampshire, Portsmouth & Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (adopted in
December 1998)
Crown Estate – Annual Aggregate Dredging Report 2004 (inserts to the report)
http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/40_area_involved_7th_inserts.pdf - accessed 31
January 2006
Crown Estate – Marine Aggregates Crown Estates Licenses – Summary of Statistics 2004
http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/43_landing_port_statistics_2004.pdf
South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) - Aggregates Monitoring Survey 2003
South East England Regional Aggregates Working Party (SEERAWP) – Aggregates
Monitoring Report 2003 (published in February 2005)
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/kf/wrkf02.htm - accessed 5
January 2006
MEL Research Ltd – Hampshire Household Waste Compositional Study 1998
Material Resources Strategy (MRS) accessed 05/05/05 - www.mrs-hampshire.org.uk
Entec UK Ltd - Hampshire Materials Resources Strategy: Aggregation of the Resource
Stream Data - www.mrs-hampshire.org.uk
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/kf/wrkf02.htm - accessed 5
January 2006
South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) - Proposed Alterations to Regional
Planning Guidance, South East – Regional Waste Management Strategy – No Time to
Waste
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) - Municipal Waste
Management Survey
May 2006
212 of 226
34. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) –
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/wastats/index.htm – accessed 11 July
2005
35. Project Integra - Waste Volume Service Plans (published from years 1999–2005)
36. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) - Landfill Allowance Trading
Scheme: Final Allocation of Landfill Allowances
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/localauth/lats/allocation.htm(accessed
29 April 2005)
37. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) – accessed 6 January 2006
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/wrindustry.htm
38. Environment Agency - National Waste Production Survey 1998/99
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/index.htm- accessed 5 July 2005
40. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) - Survey of Arisings and Use of Construction
and Demolition Waste in England and Wales in 2001
42. Building Research Establishment Digest 433: Recycled Aggregates (1998)
43. Viridis Ltd - Optimising the use of Recycled and Secondary Aggregate in Hampshire Published Project Report PPR057 (August 2004). Work was carried out under a Partners in Innovation
collaborative construction research project part funded by the Department of Trade and Industry.
44. South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) - Overview of Hazardous Waste in South
East England (By Beyond Waste)
45. Environment Agency – Flycapture Waste Data – October 2004-September 2005
46. Project Integra website, accessed 04/01/06 www.integra.org.uk/recycling/index.html
47. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) – Best Value Performance Indicators
www.bvpi.gov.uk/pages/keyfacts_Step1.asp - accessed 10 January 2006
48. Hampshire County Council – Waste Management section
49. Environment Agency – National Waste Production Survey 1998/99
50. AggRegain Website – sustainable aggregates information service run by the Waste &
Resources Action Programme http://www.aggregain.org.uk/sustainable.html - accessed
16 January 2006
52. Government Office for the South East (GOSE)– Proposed Changes to Regional Planning
Guidance for the South East (RPG9)
53. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) - Municipal Waste
Management Survey
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/wrindustry.htm - accessed 6
January 2006
55. Hampshire County Council et al (2005) - More from Less: How to Make Better Use of
Hampshire’s Material Resources
56. Environment Agency Hazardous Waste Interrogator http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/apps/wastesurvey2/ - accessed 10/1/06
57. Project Integra - Waste Volumes & Performance 2004/05 (from Hampshire County
Council Waste Management section)
May 2006
213 of 226
Appendix 4
Minerals and Waste Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies
Consideration of Likely Significant Effect
May 2006
214 of 226
May 2006
215 of 226
Mineral and Waste Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies
Consideration of Likely Significant Effect
In October 2005 the European Court of Justice determined that the UK had not been
fully implementing the Habitats Directive in relation to development plans, and that the
Appropriate Assessment procedure should be applied in their formation. Guidelines on
the application of Appropriate Assessments to development plans are being produced
by ODPM. It is thought that consideration should be given to the potential impacts of
the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework documents in line with
the provisions of the Habitats Directive in advance of the amendments to the Habitats
Regulations and guidance from ODPM. As opposed to the Local Plan procedures,
Local Development Frameworks are composite documents made up of a range of
individual documents. Therefore the Appropriate Assessment procedure is applicable
to each document which forms the LDF with the potential for effects on sites
designated due to their nature conservation importance at the international scale,
known collectively as Natura 2000 sites, or individually as Special Protection Areas,
Special Areas of Conservation and Ramsar Sites. This section therefore considers only
the potential impacts of the Core Strategy policies in relation to such sites. Matters
concerning the selection of preferred sites with regard to the Appropriate Assessment
procedures will be dealt with at a later stage in the process.
Policy DC2 of the Strategy has been written to protect sites designated due to their
nature conservation importance at the international scale (Natura 2000 sites). This
policy, in conjunction with other policies which ensure waste minimisation and reduce
landfill thus minimising the need for landfill sites, safeguard sites designated for their
international importance to biodiversity in Hampshire. With these safeguards in place it
is not thought that this ‘core’ strategy will have a significant effect on the Hampshire’s
Natura 2000 sites.
May 2006
216 of 226
May 2006
217 of 226
Appendix 5
Initial Race and Equality Screening Assessment
May 2006
218 of 226
219 of 226
Initial Race and Equality Screening Assessment
This screening assessment is carried out on the Strategy as an individual planning policy document, and not on the overall minerals and waste
planning services as a whole.
Background: The Strategy of the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework is a document, part of a grouping of policy and
procedure documents. The Strategy sets out the broad strategic policy basis for minerals and waste planning in Hampshire, Portsmouth, Southampton
and the New Forest National Park. The Strategy is being developed jointly by Hampshire County Council, Portsmouth and Southampton City Councils
and the New Forest National Park Authority.
May 2006
Impact unevenly on people from
different age groups?
Impact unevenly on a particular
gender? (male, female, transgender)
Age
Gender
'Could the policy, strategy, plan or
service…'
Prevent some people from using the
service?
Issue
Question
General Access
May 2006
No
No
No
Yes/ No/
Don’t Know
Response
If Yes or No please provide evidence
Details
The Strategy is not gender specific, and
will not in itself impact unevenly on
members of the public of different
gender.
The Strategy is not age specific, and
should not in itself affect its availability to
members of the public of any age,
provided it is available in a variety of
formats and locations and a plain English
check is carried out.
There is nothing in this document that
might prevent the public using it,
provided it is made available in a variety
of formats (e.g. electronic, different
languages, for disabled people) and
locations. However, it is a technical
document and a ‘plain English’ check
should be carried out prior to publishing it.
220 of 226
0
0
0
(See note
below)
Scoring **
Issue
Race
(remember to
score 3 points for
a yes answer in
this section)
Disability
May 2006
No
Exclude people who require interpreting
or translating facilities?
No
Exclude service users who require
information in alternative formats?
No
No
Exclude service users with certain
disabilities because of physical access
issues?
Impact unevenly on certain ethnic
minority groups?
No
Yes/ No/
Don’t Know
Details
The strategy will be made available in
alternative formats, if requested.
Provided it is available in alternative
formats, and in locations which are fully
accessible. Mineral and waste facilities,
with public access, should be accessible
to disabled people. The strategy should
reflect this requirement.
The Strategy will not in itself impact
unevenly on people with disabilities,
provided appropriate steps are taken to
make it available in other formats for the
benefit of those with sensory impairment.
221 of 226
Response
Impact unevenly on people with a
mobility, sensory, learning, or mental
health disability?
service…'
Question
0
0
0
0
0
(See note
below)
Scoring **
Impact unevenly on people’s sexual
orientation?
Impact unevenly on those who live in
deprived areas or come from lowincome groups?
Sexual
Orientation
Anti Poverty/
Social Exclusion
service…'
Impact unevenly on different religions or
beliefs?
Issue
Question
Religion and
Belief
May 2006
No
No
No
Yes/ No/
Don’t Know
Response
Details
There are no proposals in the strategy
which are likely to encourage
development in deprived areas or near to
low income groups. When considering
where to locate sites neighbouring uses
will be considered as will employment
opportunities. Applications will be
considered on their merits and
unacceptable development will not be
permitted.
The Strategy does not relate specifically to
any sexual orientation.
The Strategy is not Religion or Belief
specific.
222 of 226
0
0
0
(See note
below)
Scoring **
Issue
Localities
May 2006
Impact unevenly on certain areas?
Impact unevenly on those who are on
low wages or in part-time or seasonal
employment?
service…'
Question
No
No
Yes/ No/
Don’t Know
Response
Details
The Strategy is not directed at any
specific parts of Hampshire, Portsmouth,
Southampton or the New Forest and is
unlikely to have uneven impacts, other
than reduced development in
environmentally protected areas.
There are no proposals in the strategy
which are likely to encourage
development near to low income groups
or those in part-time or seasonal
employment. When considering where to
locate sites neighbouring uses will be
considered as will employment
opportunities. Applications will be
considered on their merits and
unacceptable development will not be
permitted.
223 of 226
0
0
(See note
below)
Scoring **
Issue
Total Score (out of 32)
No
No
Impact unevenly on rural communities?
(e.g. communities with poor transport
links, access to fewer local amenities,
etc.)
Will it impact unevenly on other groups
within the community that have not
already been mentioned?
Yes/ No/
Don’t Know
Response
Details
The Strategy is not directed at specific
communities, and will not have uneven
impacts.
The Strategy is unlikely to adversely
impact rural communities, especially
given its emphasis on locating
development near and accessible from
suitable transport routes. When compared
against urban and suburban
communities. Copies of the Strategy will
be available throughout Hampshire, at a
variety of locations, including those within
rural communities.
224 of 226
service…'
Question
**
Scoring for responses
Yes for race = 3; Yes for other issues = 2; Don’t Know for race = 2; Don’t Know for other issues = 1; No = 0
Other effects that
vary across
different groups
May 2006
0/32
0
0
(See note
below)
Scoring **
May 2006
225 of 226
May 2006
226 of 226
This document can be made available in large
print, on audio cassette, in Braille and in some
other languages.
For more information, please contact the
Minerals and Waste Planning Group:

by telephone on: 01962 846746

by email on: [email protected]

or by writing to:
Minerals and Waste Planning
Environment Department
The Castle
Winchester
SO23 8UD