SOC Officer Report

Planning Statement Statement on behalf of the Planning Authority relative to: Extend the time for landfilling operations at Wright's Pit North to continue until 31st December 2030, plus 1 year to enable the restoration scheme to be completed by 31st December 2031 Wrights Pit North Landfill Off Cranstal Road Bride Isle Of Man PA Reference 21/01000/B Prepared on behalf of the Planning Authority by Head of Development Management Mr S Butler Department of Environment Food and Agriculture, Planning & Building Control, Murray House, Mount Havelock, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 2SF. Email [email protected]. Tel 01624 685950

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The site is situated at the northern end of the Island at the Point of Ayre, accessed off the A16 to the south of the lighthouse. It is approximately 4km north of Bride, to the north of an active mineral site and to the east of a designated Area of Special Protection for Birds, managed as a nature reserve. - 1.2 The site is approximately 4.15 hectares surrounded by a 2m high chain link fence (there is no other fixed site infrastructure). A mini digger is used on site to cover waste and prepare void. Vehicles access the site using the weighbridge facilities at Balladoole Civic Amenity Site and via the gated entrance. Deliveries are Monday to Friday 9:30 - 15:30. - 1.3 It forms part of a complex of sites which have been used since 1991 for was disposal. The sites have been operated on the 'dilute and disperse' principle (meaning there is no engineering lining or cap). Landfill gas is diffused to the air and leachate migrates to the Sea. - 1.4 Planning Approval to infill the WPN former sand pit was initially approved in 1996, with landfill undertaken in two cells. Subsequent applications have been submitted to take account of changing circumstances. Cell 1 (the eastern area) is no longer operational and the site has undergone restoration and aftercare, and Cell 2, the western area, remains operational. The use of the site for deposit of waste has been continuous since 2012, however at a lower rate than anticipated, and so significant void space remains.

2.0 PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks:

o Retrospective planning approval to extend the duration of landfilling operations at WPN from 1 January 2020 to present day.
o Planning approval to extend the duration of landfilling operations at WPN from present day to 31 December 2030.
o Planning approval to extend the time for completing the site restoration at WPN to 31 December 2031
o No proposed change to waste streams or final proposed contours previously approved under 12/01671/B) - these are set out at 2.3.13 of the EIA.

2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment Report (dated December 2021) explains the background to the proposed development:

o WPN is a strategic waste disposal facility for landfill of up to 5,000 tonnes per annum (tpa)
of inert and construction and demolition waste
o It is a former quarry and the only remain landfill site within the complex
o Planning Approval to landfill was given in 1996 with various amendments since, most recently in 2013 which extended life to 2019 and increased tpa to 5,000 (from 2,500)
o To ensure the continued provision of a strategic waste disposal facility for the Island's existing C&D waste streams, the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) is proposing to extend landfilling operations at WPN (from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2030) and to extend the timing of the site restoration scheme (to be completed by 31 December 2031). The extension of landfilling operations at WPN is possible because the quantity of C&D waste disposed of there in recent years has been less than predicted such that void space remains available for landfilling.

2.3 The EIA sets out two alternatives (2.5.1 - 2.5.14) do nothing and cease landfilling immediately and restore straight-away. The former is identified as having negative environmental impacts (and would also be unlawful given the existing planning breach), the restoration alternative would result in no strategic waste landfill site in the interim period until a new site can be established.

2.4 EIA Contents

2.4.1 An EIA has been produced that includes the information below.

o Chapter 1 sets out background and approach, as set out above. It also sets out the need for the facility - as it provides for disposal of C&D waste that cannot (either because of processing
or legislative issues) be reused/recycled, incinerated or exported and an alternative site has not yet been developed and clarifies the consenting regime (planning approval and waste disposal license) and need for EIA.
o Chapter 2 Project Description - this chapter provides the background to and a detailed description of the proposed development, and a consideration of the alternatives to the proposed development.
o Chapter 3 Legislative and Planning Framework - this chapter identifies the principal laws and plans relevant to the proposed development.
o Chapter 4 EIA Methodology - this chapter provides a description of the EIA process including screening, scoping (4.3.2) and impact assessment. The sets out the definitions of magnitude of impacts (4.6.2), sensitivity of receptors (4.6.3), value of receptors (4.6.4), likelihood
of impact (4.6.5) and a resulting impact assessment matrix (table 4.1).
o Chapters 5 Geology, Hydrogeology and Hydrology, 6 Transport and Highways, 7 Landscape and Visual Impact, 8 Ecology, and 9 Air Quality - these chapters provide the baseline conditions, impact assessments and mitigation measures associated with the proposed development.
o Chapter 10 Findings and Conclusions - this chapter presents a tabulated summary of the EIA's results.
o Chapter 11 References - this chapter includes a list of all cited references that are used to inform the EIA; such as guidance documents, research papers, etc.

2.4.2 Appendix A Drawings includes the following drawings.

o Existing Ground Levels WPN 2/2 - shows the East part of the site which has already been restored (Cell 2) and the current active area (Cell 1). Plan is dated 16.12.20, based on data from survey May 2020.
o Proposed Top of Waste Contours WPN 3/1 - site will have a flatter area to Northern half (to a similar level to the adjacent restored Cell), and then slope away to the South meaning that the overall site - cells 1 and 2 - will have a lower area in the South-Western quarter.
o Proposed Restoration Contours WPN 3/2 shows the slope to the South-Western corner lessened over the main part of the site, but a steeper slope on the Western half of the Southern boundary.
o The proposed cross sections WPN 3/3 illustrate the depth of filled and proposed use of minimum of 700mm of restoration materials on top of the waste

2.4.3 The following are also included:

o Appendix B - Extract from previous approval (12/01671/B) in relation to development proposals and method for remediation and restoration
o Appendix C - Site Survey (Updated and res-submitted in January 2022)
o Appendix D - Ground Monitoring Report (2020)
o Appendix E - Ecological and Management Isle of Man Review (2018)
o Appendix F - Bird survey of Wrights Pits and Ballacallow Landfill Sites (2018)
o Appendix G - Landfill Working Plan (2009)
o Appendix H - Transport and Highways Data (January - February 2021)

2.5 Void Space

2.5.1 The use of the site for deposit of waste has been continuous since 2012, however at a lower rate than anticipated, of approximately 1,267 tpa (EIA 2.3.14). At the time of the last planning approval (12/01671/B) there was approximately 17,300m3 of void space, equating to 26,000 tonnes of waste and an anticipated disposal of up to 5,000 tpa. Actual waste deposited has been 7,451 tonnes in total and so much void space remains (EIA 2.3.17).

2.5.2 The most recent site surveys (May 2020 and August 2021) indicated a remain in void space of 14,400m3 and 13,160m3 respectively. Meaning approximately capacity for 19,740 tonnes in August 2021 (EIA 2.3.20). Assuming a disposal rate of 1,267 this equates to over 15 years capacity.

2.6 Site Restoration

2.6.1 The EIA (2.4.8 - 2.4.11) sets out the proposed final restoration/landform and acknowledges it is "very unlikely" the void space will be filled by 2030 (The EIA sets out three scenarios for waste deposition up to the end of 2030). Under the average demand scenario, there will be approximately 5,802m3 of void space at WPN when landfilling operations cease at the end of 2030. The EIA states,

"Accordingly, a fill material will be imported to WPN by road and then tipped and distributed over the waste up to the required level. The nature and source of the fill material is not known at the time of preparing this EIA Report (December 2021) (e.g. due to uncertainties relating to the construction industry, particularly given the potential influence that Covid 19 may have on the Island's economy), but it is expected that the DOI will investigate opportunities for undertaking recovery operations in order to partially or wholly convert waste(s) into fill material rather than the use of the Island's non-renewable resources (e.g. aggregates) as fill material. It is anticipated that the DOI will discuss options for the selection of the fill material(s) with DEFA approximately six months before the end of landfilling operations".

2.7 Environmental Management and Monitoring

2.7.1 Section 2.3.23 - 2.3.33 sets out the environmental monitoring.

o 2.3.24 sets out the site monitoring infrastructure currently in-situ for leachate monitoring, including 16 new boreholes drilled in 2018 (See planning history). The most recent annual report

(2020) is included at Appendix D of the EIA.

o 2.3.30 sets out the site monitoring infrastructure for the gas monitoring wells (boreholes) distributed around the overall complex
o 2.3.31 - 2.3.33 sets out ecological monitoring (site surveys) noting monitoring not undertaken in 2020 due to Covid and so latest report is from 2018 included in Appendices E and F
o 2.4.7 Sets out the current site working plan and that the operations will continue to work to in relation to Site Infrastructure, Environmental Control Measures and Monitoring and Site
operations, including hours of operation.

2.7.2 In light of the findings of the EIA:

o No additional mitigation is proposed in relation to Geology, Hydrogeology and Hydrology (5.3.15)
o No additional mitigation is proposed in relation to Highways (6.3.27, 6.3.33 and 6.3.41)
other than in relation to impact on the Local Highway Network associated with Site Restoration Works (6.3.46 - 6.3.45) where mitigation is proposed (management and scheduling, to be set out in a Construction Traffic Management Plan (6.3.49 - 6.3.59).
o The site restoration scheme approved under PA12/01671/B will be undertaken at WPN (Appendix B) and so no further mitigation measures are required in relation to landscape (7.3.14).
o The site restoration scheme approved under PA12/01671/B will be undertaken at WPN (Appendix B) and so no further mitigation measures are required in relation to ecology (8.3.9)
o Mitigation measures in relation to dust are to be controlled by a Dust Management Plan, as set out at 9.3.11 - 9.3.16, which will include dust from haulage.
o With the continued use of the previously approved approach to gas management, no further mitigation measures are required and there will remain a negligible residual impact on air quality

- 3.0 POLICY

3.1 The application site is within an area covered by the 1982 Development Plan. It is not zoned for development, within an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance and Nature Conservation Zones, Nature Reserves & Sites of Ecological Importance for Conservation. - 3.2 The Strategic Plan (2016) contains a number of relevant policies. In particular Waste Policy 1 states,

"Waste management installations, including landfill sites, civic amenity sites and facilities for the bulking up, separation, recycling, or recovery or materials from waste will be permitted provided that:

(a) there is an acknowledged need for the proposal in accordance with the approved Waste Management Strategy;
(b) there is no unacceptable adverse impact on local residents in terms of visual amenity, dust, noise, or vibration or as a result of the traffic generated thereby;
(c) there would be no unacceptable adverse effect on: i. landscapes, geology/geomorphology and features of special interest or attraction; ii. Ancient Monuments or their settings; iii. Registered Buildings or their settings, or features of architectural importance; iv. the character and appearance of Conservation Areas; v. sites of archaeological interest; vi. sites containing species or habitats of international, national or local importance; vii. land drainage and water resources; viii. areas of woodland or the Island's timber resources; or ix. designated National Heritage Areas.
(d) the proposal is acceptable in terms of access arrangements and highway safety;
(e) in the case of landfill sites working shall be in accordance with a phased scheme of restoration and landscaping;
(f) the proposal does not sterilize other significant mineral deposits; and that
(g) the proposal will not have an unacceptable adverse impact on airport safety by, for example, increasing the risk of bird strike. Landfill will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that there is no alternative method for managing that waste. An application involving the installations or facilities referred to in this Policy will require the submission of an Environmental Impact Assessment".

3.3 It is considered that there are a number of wider policies that are relevant, as summarised below:

o Strategic Policy 1 promotes reusing scare indigenous building materials;
o Strategic Policy 4 - protection of the land quality and nature conservation, and no unacceptable environmental pollution or disturbance;
o Strategic Policy 10 - highway safety;
o General Policy 2 - general 'Development Control' planning considerations, including local amenity;
o General Policy 3 - restrictions on development in the countryside other than in certain circumstances, including, "development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative";
o Environment Policy 1 - protection of countryside and ecology;
o Environment Policy 2 - protection of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's);
o Environment Policy 4 - protection of ecology (habitat and species);
o Environment Policy 7 - protection of watercourses, wetlands, ponds and dubs;
o Environment Policy 22 - prevention of pollution;
o Environment Policy 23 - improvements to existing facilities must consider existing neighbours;
o Environment Policy 24 - requirement for Environmental Impact Assessment (supported by detail in Appendix 5);
o Environment Policy 40 - protection of archaeology;

o Business Policy 1 - promotion of job creation; and
o Transport Policy 8 - requirement for Transport Assessments for major developments.

3.4 The Strategic Plan states at paragraph 12.2.13 that, "Whilst the Energy from Waste Facility began operation in September 2004, there will continue to be a need for landfill sites: (a) for municipal solid wastes until the Energy from Waste Facility becomes operational; (b) for incinerator wastes thereafter; and (c) for inert and mixed wastes which cannot be recycled, reused, or incinerated". Other Legislation and Policy - 3.5 The EIA at section 3 identifies the Legislative and Planning Framework. It notes that:

o "The provisions of the Public Health Act 1990 have not changed since PA12/01671/B. Accordingly, the DOI is still obligated under this Act to ensure the availability of strategic waste disposal facilities for the disposal and management of wastes in accordance with the principles
of self-sufficiency and proximity" (3.2.1) o "The need to ensure sufficient waste disposal capacity is emphasised throughout the planning framework under the 2016 Strategic Plan and the 2018 Waste Strategy" (3.3.1)

3.6 The more recent Waste Strategy (2018) identifies a need to ensure on-going infrastructure and scheme to dispose of solid waste and that failure to so would severely damage the economy. It states (p9) that,

"The Strategy needs therefore to undertake a pragmatic response to the waste hierarchy to: ensure the provision of strategic disposal capacity for residual incinerables, non-incinerable inert and non-incinerable problematic wastes".

3.7 The Waste Strategy Core Policy 1 relates to managing and monitoring sites to ensure standards, Policy 2 relates to self-sufficiency.

- 4.0 PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 There are a number of applications relating to the site. The most relevant is PA12/01671/B for, "Extend the time for landfill operations for a further five years plus one year to enable the restoration scheme to be completed, importation of c.5000 tpa of mixed inert and C&D wastes over the five year period and development of an amended alternative restoration scheme to reflect the projected volume of imported materials". This was approved on 29.05.13, subject to conditions:

o C1. Confirmation of documents to which the approval related;
o C2. Time period of approval (for tipping and restoration);
o C3. Capping Requirements;
o C4. Rabbit proofing;
o C5. Restoration Requirements;
o C6. No water or contaminants on highway;
o C7. Work must be in accordance with approved plans;
o C8. Boundary fencing;
o C9. No water or mud to drain onto highway;
o C10. Working hours;
o C11. Final landform;
o C12. No household waste or incinerator bottom ash; and
o C13. Notification if frogs or lizards found.

4.2 Planning was at the time part of DOI and therefore it was a Department application, to be considered by an inspector and determined by CoMIN. The inspector's report notes the history of the site, that there is an "Area for Surface Mineral Working" allocated in the vicinity of the site, the relevance of General Policy 2 Waste Policy 1, and that the site history is a material consideration that could be set against land use zoning restrictions.

4.3 The inspector notes the tension between continued lorry movements through Bride and that an unfilled landfill void is a public asset. The site is noted as being relatively remote with no issues raised in relation to hydrogeology or ecology. It is also noted as not being a large site with limited lorry movements per day on average. He notes the 2012-22 Waste Policy & Strategy, the apparent difficulty with progressing new sites or disposal off-island. The final profile was considered acceptable (subject to provision for revisions if necessary). Consideration is given to what issues should and should not be controlled by conditions. - 4.4 Planning Application 19/01439/B for, "Variation of condition 2 of application 12/01671/B for the continued deposit of inert and mixed construction/demolition waste and associated site restoration, to extend the approval for a further 12 months" was submitted on 24.12.2019. Under the call-in process Council confirmed they wished to determine it, and accordingly it was publicised and referred to the Cabinet Office so that they might arrange a Public Inquiry. Before the inquiry took place, DOI determined that they wished to extend the life for longer and so the application was put on hold and then withdrawn on 04.10.21 (after the submission of the current application). This means that the landfill activities which have, and continue, to place from 01/01/20 onwards are unauthorised and as such the current application is in part retrospective. - 4.5 22/00048/B was for, "Installation of 16 groundwater monitoring boreholes at Current And Former Landfill Site, Cranstal, Bride" - approved 28.03.2022 (1 condition - remediation when no longer required). - 4.6 22/00086/B is for, "Extend the time for landfilling operations to continue until 31st December 2030, plus 1 year to enable the restoration scheme to be completed by 31st December

An additional waste type is also requested for landfilling of non-hazardous dredged material arising from activities carried out under statutory provisions for ports and harbours and/or for flood risk management" (pending).

- 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 The following is a summary of the responses received to the application as formally advertised (following call-in by CoMIN and amendment of application description and details) full responses can be viewed on-line. It should be noted that technical consultees were informally alerted prior to formal consultation and initial comments received from this are also available online (under 'correspondence').

5.1 Bride Commissioners (24.04.22) comment that,

"The Commissioners felt that a 9 year extension was excessive. Unfortunately, there is likely to be one or two new Administrations between now and then and things get forgotten. It has been suggested that a 5 year review be made on the site and this will also ensure that finding a new facility to use as waste disposal, will not be left until the last minute".

5.2 DOI (Highways) (24.01.22) provide a detailed assessment of traffic flows and conclude that they do not object subject to a condition requiring a traffic management plan for the restoration phase,

"Highways DC finds this proposal to be acceptable on revision of the description to extend landfill to 2030 and restoration during 2031 allowing time for an alternative site to come forward. The activity at the site and traffic routing is long standing with the retention of speed reducing measures in Bride and the site's vehicle access. The proposed continuance of land fill and restoration are unlikely to have a significant negative impact with similar patterns of movement to the assessment for PA 12/01671/B and incorporated into current flows. For landfill, this predicted four to eight two-way HGV movements per day with contingency and 10 two-way light goods vehicle movements. On restoration there would be a significant change in the number of

HGV's requiring additional management. Accordingly, Highways DC raises no opposition subject to a condition / agreement for approval of details for a CTMP".

5.3 DOI (Highways) confirmed on 07.03.22 they note the changed description notified on 4 March 2022 and their response of 24.01.22 continues to apply. - 5.4 DOI (Flood Risk) (24.01.22) Do not oppose. - 5.5 Manx National Heritage (04.02.22) raises the following points:

o Acknowledges that WPN still retains the physical capacity for land fill but feels that other factors such as the environmental threat of rising sea levels and further loss of habitat should be considered as part of this application.
o Highlight the habitat value at the Ayres, that the mosaic of slow growing vegetation is
only able to survive due to its ability to adapt to such nutrient poor conditions and that the shrub heath provides a valuable habitat for wildlife such as ground nesting birds, lizards and a number of invertebrate species.
o Only support continuing of landfilling to 31.12.22
o Would ideally like to see landfilling operations cease with immediate effect and site restoration undertaken in accordance with the scheme previously approved under PA12/01671/B but accepts that this option does not allow time for a replacement to be found and the further extension of the landfill is needed.
o Recommend that the need for locally derived sand and gravels to be used in restoration be a condition of the planning approval, should it be granted.

5.6 DEFA (Ecosystems Policy Team) have made two comments. - 5.7 On 08.02.22 they comment that:

o They agree with the recommendation in section 4.5.4 of the Ecological and Management Review (2018) about reviewing the restoration and management activities
o They recommend a condition for a review of the WPN restoration and management plan to be undertaken and implemented
o They highlight recent survey information and recommend a condition for the protection
of breeding birds, common frogs and viviparous lizards (update of 2012 condition) - "If at any time, frogs or lizards are found on the site, or breeding birds are found or suspected to be present on site, work should stop and DEFA shall be notified and given time to advise".

5.8 On 14.03.22 they comment that:

- A number of groundwater and leachate monitoring boreholes are located in and around the Wrights Pit North Site for the monitoring of basic water quality parameters and some heavy metals.
- Recommend a condition that should the borehole monitoring data show evidence of high leachate contamination into the surrounding area, then the landfilling operation will need to be reviewed as additional environmental protection and remedial measures may be required (of particular concern is the potential impact of leachate contamination into the designated Ayres Gravel Pits Area of Special Protection for Birds which is located just to the west of Wrights Pit North, as well as West Coast Marine Nature Reserve (MNR) and Ramsey Bay MNR to the north and east).

5.9 DEFA (Environmental Protection Unit) (13.05.22) comment,

"Approval of this application will not require any variation to the existing Waste Disposal Licence as attached WDL/05/2020/V3 regulated by the Environmental Protection Unit, we have no objection".

5.10 Construction Isle of Man (19.11.21) write in support of the application, highlighting the potential negative impact of early closure of the site on the construction industry.

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 It is considered that the main issues are:

o Whether there is a continued need for the landfill
o The environmental/amenity impacts of continuing operation
o The implications for final restoration

- 6.2 WHETHER THERE IS A CONTINUED NEED FOR THE LANDFILL

6.2.1 It is clear from the Waste Strategy (2018) that there is a need for a strategic landfill site, and that alternative provision has not yet been made to Wrights Pit North. The findings of the Inspector in relation to the previous application are noted.

6.3 THE ENVIRONMENTAL/AMENITY IMPACTS OF CONTINUING OPERATION

6.3.1 The findings of the Inspector in relation to the previous application and the comments received in relation to this application are noted. There are no significant concerns which would justify insisting on closure of the site, especially given the findings in relation to the continued need for the site.

6.4 THE IMPLICATIONS FOR FINAL RESTORATION

6.4.1 It appears likely that some form of alternative restoration scheme will be required, and the application provides an opportunity for a balanced and considered approach to achieving this. The proposal indicates it may be that this requires the importation of significant quantities of virgin aggregates, which would not be a sustainable use of scare resources and contrary to Strategic Policy 1. A condition could be attached clarifying the need to consider the final scheme prior to the cessation of tipping and prevent unnecessary use of virgin aggregates (also noting the points raised by MNH).

- 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 There is an accepted need for a strategic waste landfill site, as evidenced in the Waste Strategy (2018) and alternative provision to Wrights Pit North has not yet been made. No significant environmental, amenity or health concerns have been raised. The site is an existing and established site with existing void space, which is a public asset. It is therefore recommended for approval for the reason, and subject to the conditions, as set out in appendix A.

7.2 The conditions attached to the previous approval have been included, updated as necessary (including, given legislative changes, conditions now must have reasons, and these have been added). - 7.3 A condition is not recommended to require the development to be operated in accordance with the details set out at paragraph 2.4.7 of the Environmental Impact Assessment prepared by Anthony D Bates Partnership dated December 2021 (paragraph 2.4.7 sets out the current site working plan and that the operations will continue to work to in relation to Site Infrastructure, Environmental Control Measures and Monitoring and Site operations, including hours of operation) as these matters of detail would be more appropriate controlled by the site's waste management licence.

Appendix A - Recommended Conditions and Reason for Approval Reason for Approval

There is an accepted need for] a strategic waste landfill site, as evidenced in the Waste Strategy (2018) and alternative provision to Wrights Pit North has not yet been made. No significant environmental, amenity or health concerns have been raised. The site is an existing and established site with existing void space, which is a public asset.

Conditions

C 1. The total amount of waste tipped at the site from 01.01.20 to 31.12.30 shall be no more than 5,000 tonnes in each calendar year.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure the development takes place in accordance with the approved details.

C 2. Subject to the other conditions in this notice, no waste shall be deposited at the site other than those types as set out in paragraph 2.4.3 of the Environmental Impact Assessment prepared by Anthony D Bates Partnership dated December 2021, and no household waste or incinerator bottom ash shall be deposited on the site.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure the development takes place in accordance with the approved details. The introduction of new waste streams would necessitate a fresh planning consideration of the need for the site and the methods of working.

C 3. By the 31st December 2030 the importation of waste to the site shall cease and by 31st December 2031 the site shall be restored and all equipment, plant, buildings and fencing (subject to condition 12) shall be removed from the site and its locality, save for that required in connection with the on-going management of the approved scheme of restoration.

Reason: To control the overall life of the landfill and to ensure that the site is restored in a timely manner.

C 4. Subject to the other conditions in this notice, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans WPN 1/1 (Site Location Plan), WPN 2/1 (Site Setting), WPN 2/2 (Existing Ground Levels), WPN 2/3 (Aerial Photograph) WPN 3/1 (Proposed Top of Waste Contours), WPN 3/2 (Proposed Restoration Contours) and WPN 3/3 (Cross Sections). Reason: To ensure that the development takes place in accordance with the approved details.
C 5. No water, mud or contaminants shall be permitted to drain, flow or be transferred by vehicle wheels on to the highway, including at the access to Wrights Pit North. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

C 6. The boundary fences around the site shall be retained on site unless otherwise required by conditions 3 or 12 as set out in this notice. Reason: In the interests of public safety to prevent access until the site is safely restored.
C 7. Unless otherwise required by other conditions set out in this notice, no deliveries shall be made to the site outside the times of Mondays to Fridays between 0930 hrs and 1530 hrs

Reason: To prevent night time working and to prevent vehicle movements through residential areas on route to the landfill outside of acceptable working hours, in the interests of amenity and highway safety.

C 8. If at any time, frogs or lizards are found on the site, or breeding birds are found or suspected to be present on site, the Department shall be notified and work halted until advice has been provided. Reason: In the interests of protecting ecology.
C 9. As the approved landfill progresses the site shall be capped with layers of selected sand and gravel, so as to provide a suitable substrate for the development of the proposed restoration scheme. Provision shall be made for the free drainage of rainfall and for the free emission of landfill gas.

Reason: To ensure that the site is filled and capped in a manner that allows the restoration scheme to be successfully implemented and to prevent the build-up of leachate or landfill gas.

C 10. Unless otherwise required by other conditions set out in this notice, the site shall be restored in accordance with the scheme and phasing details set out in Appendix B of the Environmental Impact Assessment prepared by Anthony D Bates Partnership dated December 2021, including:

- Restoration Scheme - paras 3.25 (substrate), 3.26 - 3.27 (Construction of the Restoration Landform), 3.28 (Topsoil placement), 3.29 (drainage), 3.30 (landcover), 3.31-3.32 (detailed restoration techniques); and
- Landscaping Scheme - paras 3.33 (sowing of Nurse Crop Species), 3.34-3.35 (Harvesting of Heathland Brash and Seed), 3.36 (Preparation of Heathland Brash and Seed), 3.37-3.38 (Application of Heathland Brash and Seed), 3.39 - 3.40 (Placement of Soil Stabilisation Blanket), 3.41 (Protection of the Restored Area), 3.42 - 3.44 (Aftercare and Management), 3.45 (Monitoring). Reason: To ensure that the site is restored in accordance with the approved details.

C 11. Unless otherwise required by other conditions set out in this notice, the landform in each completed phase and surface restoration phase shall accord with the landform and contours shown in drawings WPN 3/1, WPN 3/2 and WPN 3/3. Reason: To ensure that the development takes place in accordance with the approved details.

C 12. Prior to any final restoration, a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing to the Department which sets out the potential for rabbit ingress to negatively impact on the restoration of the site and includes measures to mitigate any negative impacts identified (which may include measures to prevent ingress). The restoration of the site shall include the implementation of any approved measures in relation to rabbits.

Reason: To ensure that the ingress of rabbits does not negatively impact on the restoration of the site.

C 13. Prior to the commencement of restoration activities, details of any materials to be imported to the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department, and the restoration shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved information. Reason: to ensure that any restoration materials imported onto the site are appropriate.
C 14. No later than the 31st December 2028 details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department of the contours of the site, rate of filling since 1st January 2020 and projected fill rate up to the 31st December 2030. In the event that the projected fill rate will not result in the approved contours being achieved, the details shall include a lower level restoration scheme or an alternative method for achieving the contours proposed, and the site shall be restored in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: To ensure that details of tipping rates are provided and in the event that an alternative restoration scheme is required, that details are provided in a timely manner to avoid either unnecessary delays to the restoration of the site or the unnecessary importation of virgin aggregates to the site.

C 15. No later than 31st December 2028 a comprehensive review of the restoration and management requirements of Wrights Pit North as a whole shall be undertaken and submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The review shall set out any proposed amendments to the restoration scheme (or method of implementation of that scheme) to ensure that a holistic solution is achieved. Such a review shall include a summary of the experience gained from how other phases were restored. The restoration shall take place in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: to ensure that the application takes place in accordance with the recommendations of the prepared by Anthony D Bates Partnership dated December 2021 (Appendix E - Ecological Review 2019).

C 16. Prior to the commencement of restoration activities (no later than during 2031), the operator shall ensure that they have in place Management Plans for Traffic and Dust which comply with the details as set out in paragraphs 6.3.49 - 6.3.59 and 9.3.11 - 9.3.16 of the Environmental Impact Assessment prepared by Anthony D Bates Partnership dated December 2021. Reason: to minimise the dust and traffic impact of the restoration works.

C 17. Unless otherwise required by other conditions set out in this notice, the site monitoring as set in paragraphs 2.3.23 - 2.3.33 of the Environmental Impact Assessment prepared by Anthony D Bates Partnership dated December 2021 shall be undertaken and the results provided to the Department. In the event that the borehole monitoring data shows evidence of high leachate contamination into the surrounding area, then the operator shall provide details of additional environmental protection and remedial measures, including in relation to the designated Ayres Gravel Pits Area of Special Protection for Birds, the West Coast Marine Nature Reserve (MNR) and Ramsey Bay MNR to the north and east).

Reason: to ensure the proposed monitoring is undertaken, the results reported and any issues arising in relation to key sites addressed in the interests of the protection of biodiversity.

Plans/Drawings/Information on which recommendations have been based and upon which any approval should rely.

Amended Cover Letter dated 11.01.22 Revised Application Form (dated 17.01.22), which confirms full approval being sought for operational development (e.g. involving building or engineering works) Environmental Impact Assessment Report and NTS (dated December 2021 and received with letter dated 11.01.22) EIA Appendix A, B and D-G (Received 23.08.2021) including the following drawings:

o Location Plan (included within the EIA) WPN 1/1
o Site Setting (including blue line boundary) WPN 2/1
o Site Setting (including blue line boundary) imposed on aerial photograph WPN 2/3
o Existing Ground Levels WPN 2/2
o Proposed Top of Waste Contours WPN 3/1
o Proposed Restoration Contours WPN 3/2
o Cross Sections WPN 3/3
o EIA Appendix C (received with letter dated 11.01.22)
o EIA Appendix H (received 08.11.21)

SOC Officer Report

Source & Provenance