Landfilling of Waste
14.16 Prior to 1996 the West Yorkshire Waste Regulatory Authority provided data on waste arisings and site capacities in West Yorkshire and this information was set out in the Waste Disposal Plan (1996) which was prepared to meet the requirements of Section 50 of the Environmental Protection Act (1990). The Environment Act (1995) made provision for the formation of the Environment Agency, which included waste regulation, previously carried out by local authorities. At the same time the Waste Disposal Plan for West Yorkshire prepared under Section 50 of the Environmental Protection Act (1990) was repealed.The Environment Agency's 'Strategic Waste Management Assessment 2000' for the Yorkshire and the Humber region indicates that the majority of the waste produced in the region was disposed of by landfill. In the period 1998/99 this amounted to some 13 million tonnes, of which 8 million tonnes was biodegradable household, industrial and commercial waste. Landfill sites licensed for biodegradable waste in the region have a life expectancy of 7 years with landfill sites in West Yorkshire having a life expectancy of 8 years. There is no detailed information by individual district included in this report.
14.17 Within Calderdale there are a number of waste transfer stations (see list 1 in Table 14.1 below) and landfill sites (see list 2 in Table 14.1 below). There are a number of sites within Calderdale (e.g. the Spaniard Hall mineral working site and Upper Hazel Hurst Farm) which are exempt from licensing and import inert waste (excavation waste and soils) to reclaim the site, or for the purpose of improvement to agricultural land, the landscaping of areas and the restoration of mineral working sites.
| 1) TRANSFER STATIONS IN CALDERDALE |
|
| 2) LANDFILL SITES IN CALDERDALE |
|
14.18 The Environment Agency has provided some information on wastes produced at county and district level in the region in its 'Strategic Waste Management Assessment 2000'. However, the Regional Technical Advisory Body, which will give guidance to planning authorities on the management of waste in the region, has yet to report. This means that the UDP has proceeded without the detailed statistical data on waste or advice on the need to provide a regionally self-sufficient network of waste management facilities which are located close to where the waste is produced. In the absence of this information the ‘Area of Search’ approach has not been adopted in the UDP but instead a criteria based approach has been used for the provision of waste management facilities.
14.19 The effectiveness of the Landfill Directive, landfill tax and other factors promoting a movement up the waste hierarchy by reducing the amount of waste going to landfill will only become apparent over time. A key element of the Council’s waste strategy is the need to divert more waste from landfill by limiting the amount of land available for landfill and by encouraging options higher up the waste hierarchy.
14.20 The Council is still dependant on landfill as a means of disposal and achieving the reduction, re-use and recovery of waste could be a long process with significant impacts only being made after 2005. For some wastes, disposal by landfill may remain the best practicable option (such as those which are difficult to re-use or recycle). Even waste that has been treated has a residual element that needs to be disposed of and, as a result, there will still be a need for waste to be disposed of by landfill in the foreseeable future. There are also instances when landfilling can assist in the reclamation of degraded and contaminated sites and in the restoration of mineral working sites, provided measures to protect amenity and the environment are incorporated into such schemes. In addition, the importation of inert waste to raise levels for agricultural improvement is becoming increasingly common as farmers seek to diversify and gain an extra income. Such schemes normally require planning permission. However, these proposals often result in disruptive tipping activities in the countryside with heavy goods vehicle movements on narrow roads. Against a background of changed national priorities for agriculture there are other options to resolve such problems on low lying and ill drained land in all but the most compelling circumstances and opportunities for nature conservation and tree planting should now be considered.
Policy WM 3
Landfilling of Wastes
Proposals for the landfilling of residual wastes will only be permitted where they can be considered to be one or more of the following:-- they are small-scale extensions to existing operational landfill sites where the benefits of the scheme outweigh any adverse impacts which the development is likely to cause; and/or
- they are at former mineral working sites that cannot be satisfactorily reclaimed by any other means; and/or
- they are at sites that are contaminated, degraded or despoiled and cannot be reclaimed by other means;
- the proposal will not lead to unacceptable environmental, amenity, safety, traffic or other problems;
- the development preserves or enhances Conservation Areas and does not adversely affect Listed Buildings or their settings, Scheduled Monuments and other sites of historic interest, where these are material considerations;
- the development does not cause harm to the Green Belt, agricultural land, landscape, the natural environment and habitat sites and species including sites subject to statutory protection;
- the proposals provide for the restoration of the site, especially where opportunities for biodiversity enhancement are maximised and, in the case where sites are to be restored to agriculture, forestry or amenity uses, an aftercare scheme of an agreed timescale following restoration; and
- the provisions of other relevant UDP policies are met.