
Annual Monitoring Report
Minerals and Waste
1 April 2005 – 31 March 2006
PUBLISHED: December 2006

PAGE
CONTENTS
Have your say
3
1. Introduction
4
2. Essex in Context
5
3. Scope of Report
6
4. Saved Policies
9
5. Performance against the Minerals and Waste Development Scheme
10
6. Minerals Policy Monitoring
14
7. Minerals Indicators
17
8. Waste Policy Monitoring
18
9. Waste Indicators
22
10. Gap Analysis
24
11. Conclusion
25
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Full List of Waste and Minerals Policies
Appendix 2 Summary of M & W Development Scheme Timetable
Appendix 3 Applications Determined
Appendix 4 Recycling & Composting Performance
2
Have your say
If you have any comments on the Essex Annual Monitoring Report 05/06, we
would like to hear from you. All comments will be considered within the
production of future Annual Monitoring Reports. Also if you would like to be
added to our mailing list and be contacted throughout the production of the
Essex Minerals and Waste Development Framework please contact us with
your details.
Essex County Council
Environment and Commerce
E2 Planning Development Control
County Hall
Chelmsford
CM1 1QH
Tel: 01245 435555
Fax: 01245 493474
E-mail: mineralsandwastepolicy@essexcc.gov.uk
3
1.
INTRODUCTION:
1.1
The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) resulted in major
changes in the planning system. Structure Plans were abolished and
Local Plans will be replaced by Local Development Frameworks
(LDFs).
1.2
Under the new system County Councils are required to produce an
Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) under Regulation 48 of the Town and
Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004,
which form part of the Minerals and Waste Development Framework.
1.3
The AMR is designed to provide a foundation for the formulation of
policies that will underpin the new Minerals and Waste Development
Documents and their future monitoring and review of the respective
policies.
1.4
It helps to provide a sound base of evidence, which is essential to
inform policy production, and to identify challenges and opportunities
facing the county. The AMR is also the main mechanism for assessing
the effects of the LDF and the performance of its policies. The results
of annual monitoring will feed into any future review or revision of
policies that may be required. The AMR therefore forms an integral part
of the waste and minerals development framework, by assessing
performance and making arrangements for the early review of outdated
or redundant planning policies.
1.5
To reflect this greater emphasis on policy monitoring, two of the nine
tests of soundness used by the Planning Inspectorate to assess
Development Plan Documents are concerned with the process of
monitoring, in particular whether:

policies are founded on a robust and credible evidence base, and;

there are clear mechanisms in place for implementation and
monitoring.
1.6
This AMR firstly concentrates on the amount of aggregates that Essex
is required to provide under the East of England regional
apportionment and the effect that the Policies in the adopted Essex
Minerals Local Plan First Review and Regional Spatial Strategy have
on the industry.
1.7
Secondly, the AMR considers the issues that are relative to waste
planning within Essex. The AMR looks at county data in relation to
waste data flows in addition to examining whether the Policies in the
adopted Essex and Southend-on-Sea Waste Local Plan and Regional
Spatial Strategy First Review have on the waste industry.
4
1.8
The AMR covers the period from 1 April 2005 to 31 March 2006.
However, where possible, to ensure that the report reflects the
performance against the current Mineral and Waste Development
Scheme (MWDS) timetable (revised in November 2006), up to date
commentary has been provided to ensure a comprehensive picture of
performance against the timetable.
2.
ESSEX IN CONTEXT:
2.1
Essex County Council is one of 6 county councils that make up the East
of England region. It is situated on the east coast of England and is
bordered by Hertfordshire to the west, Cambridgeshire and Suffolk to the
north and London to the southwest. The wider Essex covers the unitary
authority areas of Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock. The county of Essex
has the highest residential population in the East of England of 1,310,835
residents and 544,701 households (ONS, 2001).
2.2
The land area of Essex extends to over three thousand five hundred
square kilometres (3,500 km2) with an estimated 29% of it being arable
land, 60% pastureland, 4% woodland and 7% urban Essex also has over
300 km of coastline. The region is recognised for its combination of
traditional seaside resorts and new urban settlements. There are 2 sites
designated as Special Areas of Conservation and Protection, 7 national
nature reserves and 26 local nature reserves. Essex has over 13,900
historic buildings that are designated as Listed Buildings and 764
scheduled ancient monuments of which 34 are listed buildings.
2.3
Industry and business in Essex is predominately mixed. The
'retail/wholesale trade, hotels & restaurants' industry employs the most
people (26% of jobs) compared with 'public administration, education &
health' (21%) and 'finance & business activities' (20%) (Essex County
Council, 2002).
District and Unitary Authorities
2.4
In respect of the more immediate issues Essex faces, which influence
mineral and waste planning, are considered to be:
5
1
Development pressure (New build in Thames Gateway, Haven
Gateway and the M11 Corridor) that will impact upon minerals
reserves and sales, as well as influence recycling opportunities and
the use of secondary aggregate.
2
A reducing volume of landfill space adding pressure for alternative
means waste management, including pressure to increase
recycling rates and achieve an overall reduction in the amount of
waste produced in the county.
3.
SCOPE OF REPORT:
3.1
This is the second annual monitoring report produced by Essex County
Council.
3.2
The Essex AMR is concerned with the monitoring of the Minerals and
Waste Development Scheme (MWDS), prepared under the Planning
and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The MWDS outlines the minerals
and waste development plan documents, and non-development plan
documents to be produced by this authority. The MWDS sets out the
documents being produced by this Authority and the timetable and key
stages for production. Although it is appreciated that this AMR covers
the period from 1 April 2005 to 31 March 2006, the timetable in the
MWDS was revised in November 2006 to reflect changes to the original
timetable, which was put forward in April 2005.
3.3
The Scheme is the starting point to enable the public to understand and
get involved with the development plan process. It is intended that the
Scheme will be reviewed every year (in light of the Annual Monitoring
Report) to account for any changes to the timetable.
3.4
As stated, the first Mineral and Waste Development Scheme was
published in April 2005. Following the publication of that Scheme, a
revised timetable for the production of the Minerals Development
Document (MDD) and Waste Development Document (WDD) has now
been approved and published.
3.5
The MDD timetable has been revised to ensure that the timetable is
both realistic and in full compliance with the Town and Country
Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004. It has also
been necessary to consider the consequential impact on the production
of the Mineral Development Document and Waste Development
Document, again with regard to procedures, resources and realistic
timeframes. The MWDS was revised in November 2006.
6
3.6
The following documents comprise the Minerals and Waste
Development Framework:
a)
Minerals and Waste Development Scheme
This, the current document, is prepared in consultation with the
Government Office for the Eastern Region (Go-East). It is a
project plan and timetable for preparing minerals and waste
Development Plan Documents. It will enable anybody to see what
the County Council is to produce, and when.
b)
Statement of Community Involvement
The aim is to generate greater public involvement in both plan
preparation and determining planning applications. In order, to
encourage continuing public participation from the earliest
document production stages through to adoption. This document
is currently being prepared.
c)
Minerals Development Documents (MDD), comprising:
i.
ii.
iii.
d)
3.7
a core strategy
proposed allocations for minerals extraction and
related developments
Detailed development control policies (for minerals).
Waste Development Documents (WDD), comprising:
i.
a core strategy
ii.
proposed allocations for waste and related
development
iii.
review of the detailed development control policies, to
incorporate waste. This will result in one development
plan document for both minerals and waste with
detailed and generic development control policies.
e)
A Proposals Map
A factual and up to date depiction of the minerals and waste
allocations as identified in the respective development plan
documents.
f)
An Annual Monitoring Report (AMR)
An annual report to compare the production of the plans with the
MWDS and the extent to which the policies in development plan
documents are being successfully implemented.
The Essex Minerals Local Plan was adopted in January 1997, the
Essex and Southend-on-Sea Waste Local Plan was adopted in
September 2001 and the Essex and Southend-on-Sea Replacement
Structure Plan adopted in April 2001. These documents were prepared
under the Town and County Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and the
7
Town and County Planning (Development Plan) (England) Regulations
1999.
3.8
All of the policies in both the Minerals and Waste Local Plans, by virtue
of the new legislation, and the policies relating to waste and minerals in
the Structure Plan are to be saved for a 3 year period from the
commencement of the Act (i.e. until September 2007). During this
period new development plans will be prepared to ensure continuity
under these revised arrangements and ensure successful transition
from the old to the new development plan system.
3.9
This AMR will review the progress of these new plans and will also
assess the following:

The monitoring of saved policies from the adopted Minerals and
Waste plans.

The preparation of the new plans against targets and milestones
set out in the MWDS have been met, whether they are on schedule
and if the targets will be achieved.

Whether the County is maintaining the schedule and explanations if
failing to do so.

Where it is necessary to update the MWDS, in particular the
steps and time table needed to accommodate revisions will be
assessed.

Monitor implementation and effectiveness of the emerging
Statement of Community Involvement (SCI).
8
4.
SAVED POLICIES:
4.1
The following Local Plan Policies are automatically saved until
September 2007 under the new legislation. For a full text reference for
these policies, refer to Appendix 1.
4.2
Essex County Council Minerals Local Plan Adopted January 1997:
Policies MLP1 to MLP13 will be monitored.
4.3
The Essex and Southend on Sea Waste Local Plan Adopted
September 2001:
Policies W3A to W10H will be monitored.
4.4
The Essex and Southend on Sea Replacement Structure Plan
Adopted April 2001:
Minerals Section: Policies MIN1 to Policy MIN8 will be monitored
Waste Section: Policies WM1 to Policy WM3 will be monitored.
4.5
Statement of Community Involvement
A table has been included to demonstrate the progress of the SCI with
all major milestones included.
4.6
Regional Spatial Strategy
Regional Spatial Strategies set out Government’s planning and
transport policy for each region for a 15-20 year period. The strategies
provide part of the statutory framework for determining planning
applications, as well as for preparing both Local Development
Documents and Local Transport Plans.
4.7
The Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for the East of England is known
as the East of England Plan. The Examination in Public into the RSS
was carried out in November 2005 to January 2006. The EIP panel
report was subsequently published in June 2006. The anticipated
adoption date for the East of England Plan is summer 2007
4.8
Other than the RSS, the above development plan documents produced
within the Framework have equal status to the local development plan
documents within the Local Development Frameworks produced by the
District and Borough Councils. It is therefore necessary that the County
Council and the respective District and Borough Councils work closely
when allocating sites for development within their respective
documents
9
5
PERFORMANCE AGAINST THE MINERALS AND WASTE
DEVELOPMENT SCHEME FOR THE PERIOD 1 APRIL 2005 to 31
MARCH 2006
5.1
The tables below sets out the broad outline to documents that Essex is
required to produce and shows whether these documents met the
milestones as set out in the scheme and if not the explanation for the
delay to 31 March 06.
5.2
As referred to earlier, the MWDS has been revised and updated in line
with advice from regional government offices. The following tables
measure performance against the MWDS timetable approved in April
2005. Performance against the revised MWDS timetable approved in
November 2006 will be commented on in the 2006/07 AMR.
5.3
MINERALS DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT
Minerals Core Strategy, DC Policies and Site Allocations
Evidence
Gathering
Issues and
Options
Consultation
Preferred
Options
Consultation
Submission
Pre-Exam
Meeting
Examination
Receipt of
Inspectors
Report
Adoption
Core
Strategy
Jan/Feb 05
March/April
05
MILESTONES (at April 2005)
met? Site
met?
DC
Policies
Allocations
 April April–June

June 05
05
* July/Aug  July/Aug 05 
05
met?
Nov/Dec
05

Nov/Dec
05

Nov/Dec 05

March 06
July 06

March 06
July 06

March 06
July 06

Sept 06
March 07
Sept 06
March 07
Sept 06
March 07
April 07
April 07
April 07
10
Actual Position (at November 2006)
Core Strategy
DC Policies
Site Allocations
Jan/Feb 05
April-June 05
April–June 05
Evidence
Gathering
Issues and
Dec 05/Jan 06
(2nd consultation)
Options
Consultation
Preferred
Options
Consultation
Submission
Pre-Exam
Meeting
Examination
Receipt of
Inspectors
Report
Adoption
5.4
Dec 05/Jan 06
1st paper Dec
05/Jan 06
2nd paper March 06
– May 06
Refer to Revised MWDS
November 2006
WASTE DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT
Waste Core Strategy, DC Policies and Site Allocations
For the period of this AMR, work on the WDD had not commenced
MILESTONES (at April 2005)
met? DC
met? Site
met?
Core
Strategy
Policies
Allocations
Nov/Dec
April/May
April/May
06
07
07
Jan/Feb 07
June/July
June/July
07
07
Evidence
Gathering
Issues and
Options
Consultation
Preferred
May 07
Options
Consultation
Submission Nov 07
Pre-Exam
Meeting
Examination
Receipt of
Inspectors
Report
Adoption
Dec
07/Jan
08
July 08
Dec 07/Jan
08
Feb 08
Dec 08
Dec 08
April 08
July 08
Feb 09
Aug 09
Feb 09
Aug 09
Oct 08
Sept 09
Sept 09
11
July 08
5.5
STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
To monitor the SCI an action plan has been completed and will be
expanded and updated once the SCI has been approved. This action
plan is presented in summary form in Appendix 4.
Commencement (Scoping)
Stakeholder and Community
Engagement
Formal Consultation (reg 25)
Submission
Pre-Exam Meeting
Examination
Receipt of Inspectors Report
Adoption
Commencement (Scoping)
Stakeholder and Community
Engagement
Formal Consultation (reg 25)
Formal Consultation on Draft SCI
(reg 26)
Submission
Pre-Exam Meeting
Examination
Receipt of Inspectors Report
Adoption
5.6
MILESTONES (at April
2005)
Met?
January 2005
February/March 2005


June/July 2005
November 05
March 06
April 06
May 06
June 06






Actual Position (at
November 2006)
January 2005
February/March 2005
June/July 2005
December 2005
Refer to Revised
MWDS November
2006
SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS
There are no supplementary planning documents proposed at present
but this is under review in light of government guidance (PPS 10 and
MPS1).
12
5.7
REASONS FOR NOT MEETING THE APRIL 2005 MWDS
TIMETABLE
5.8
Impact of new and emerging legislation, policy and guidance: At
the time of publishing the Minerals Core Strategy, Issues and Options
Paper (March 2005) (*), the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) Draft Scope
had not been produced. In addition, further Interim Advice was
produced by the former Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in April
2005 on the production of the SA, which placed greater emphasis on
the production of the SA Scope in advance of the publication of the
Issues and Options paper. There was a potential risk that the
document may have been considered unsound at the Examination in
Public stage. It was therefore considered appropriate that work recommenced on the Minerals Core Strategy after the SA scope has
been finalised and that a revised Issues and Options paper was
produced. The timetables for all development plan documents have
been accordingly been amended to acknowledge the lead in time for
the production of the SA Scope.
5.9
Following the receipt of general advice, from the Department for
Communities and Local Government in August 2006, the timetable for
the preferred options stage of the MDD Core Strategy, DC policies and
site allocation has been put back. This is to allow for additional
consultation to ensure that the evidence base and mechanism for
determining the chosen options meets the relevant tests of soundness.
5.10 Delays in the adoption of the East of England Plan (RSS14): As a
consequence of the change in the MDD timetable, the WDD timetable
also needs a realistic timetable as well as sufficient resource allocation.
The commencement of work on the WDD, including revised timeframes
for consultation, has accordingly been revised. This, however, will not
unduly affect the outcome of the WDD within the regional context given
the delay in the Examination in Public of the East of England Plan.
5.11 Insufficient weight and/or resources allocated: The timetable has
been amended to reflect the level of both financial and staffing
resources as it has not possible to pursue both the Minerals and Waste
Documents at the same time. This has been further exacerbated as a
number of major strategic waste management planning applications
are to be submitted in 2006, in accordance with the existing adopted
Waste Local Plan and the Essex Waste Management Contract
Strategy.
5.12 Additionally, as a result of staffing resources, it has not been possible
to meet the original timetable for producing the SCI.
5.13 Changes to the political and organisational structure of the
County Council: The County Council has and is continuing to be
restructured, which was announced after the publication of the original
Scheme in April 2005. As a direct consequence of the change, the
13
former Planning Service Group was split between two groups. The
Development Control Branch, which has the statutory responsibilities
for Minerals and Waste planning including the production of the MDD
and WDD, was incorporated into the Environment & Commerce with
effect from 1 August 2005. Accordingly, the budgetary arrangements
for 2005/6 have been revised.
5.14 The political structure was revised following the May 2005 elections,
with amendments to the purpose, structure and frequency of the ‘Policy
Development Group’ previously used to consult members on the
emerging policy documents. The amendments to the arrangements,
including the powers of the Cabinet Member, have now been taken into
account within the revised timetable.
5.15 Delays or slippages in the collation of the evidence base: The
collation of the evidence base for the SA scope on the MDD has taken
longer that anticipated. The time taken to collect and collate the
Minerals information needs to be taken into account in the production
of the WDD.
5.16 As a consequence of the above reasons for not meeting the MWDS
timetable, the MWDS has now been revised. The revised Scheme
dated November 2006 has been approved by the Government Office.
The MWDS has therefore been revised to ensure that the timetable is
both realistic and in full compliance with the Regulations1. It has also
been necessary to consider the consequential impact on the production
of the Mineral Development Document and Waste Development
Document, again with regard to procedures, resources and realistic
timeframes.
6.
MINERALS POLICY MONITORING
6.1
Planning Applications: Over the year 39 applications, including those
with Environmental Statements, were determined.
Of these, 4
applications were refused. Of the 35 granted, 2 had legal agreements
that were signed. See Appendix 3 for a full reference list to all Minerals
and Waste Planning applications for the study period.
6.2
Minerals Planning Applications: 1stApril 2005 – 31st March 2006: All
decisions on Minerals Planning applications are targeted to be reached
within 13 weeks of the receipt of a valid planning application. The
national indicator against which performance is measured in BVPI
109a.
The performance figures for Essex are audited by an
independent auditor every year. The target for each year is set at a
higher level. For 2005 / 2006 the target was set at 50% of application to
be dealt with within 13 weeks. We achieved 45%. During the period
39 decisions were made.
1
The Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004
14
The following table displays the minerals planning applications that the
county determined.
Sand and gravel extraction
1
Other mineral related proposals
(inc. ancillary development.)
15
6.3
Only 1 application for mineral extraction made during the time period.
Permission was granted for a total of 206,000 tonnes.
6.4
Fifteen (15) applications not involving extraction are classified under
mineral applications because the applications are either tied to the
quarry or involve related development to the primary permission. One
(1) application was refused during the study period.
6.5
Policy Use in Development Control for Minerals Planning: Policies
in the adopted Essex Minerals Local Plan 1997 and Structure Plan
have been monitored to examine the effect that these policies have on
the decision making process. This policy performance will help in
assessing whether the policies are being actively used and are
effective and which polices should be considered for inclusion in the
Minerals and Waste Development Framework.
6.6
There is a gap however in knowledge regarding the monitoring of
Minerals and Waste policies at a District / Borough level in regard to
the effect that these policies have at the sub-county level. This gap is
likely to be addressed in future AMRs.
6.7
For a full text reference of Minerals Local Plan Polices and Structure
Plan Minerals Policies see Appendix 1.
6.8
Minerals Development Control Decisions (Usage in Brackets):
6.9
Minerals Local Plan Review 1997: For a full description of mineral
policies, refer to Appendix 1. The most frequently used Minerals Local
Plan Review policy in making decisions on mineral applications was
MLP13 which was used 13 times.
6.10 Policy MLP2 (1), MLP3 (4), MLP4 (2), MLP5 (2), MLP8 (5), MLP9 (4),
MLP 10 (3), MLP11 (5) and MLP 12(1) were the next set of most used
policies.
6.11 Policies MLP1, MLP6 AMD MLP7 appear not to be considered at all.
However, this does not necessarily mean that these policies have not
been considered throughout the development process. Such policies
may well have been considered by the developer at the pre-application
stage to inform and influence the development proposal. Furthermore,
a sub-county authority may have used such polices in their
development decisions.
15
6.12 Policy MLP 1 concerns the preservation of the landbank and would be
used for major applications for extraction. Policies MLP 6 concerns rail
depots for mineral importation and Policy MLP 7, inter-alia, encourages
marine wharfs. As no applications for Rail Depots or Marine Wharfs
were received in the AMR period, these polices have, correctly, not
been utilised. Nevertheless, these polices would continue to be
relevant should related applications be submitted in the future.
6.13 Replacement Structure Plan 2001: Concerning structure plan policies
the most frequently use polices were MIN6 (14) and MIN7 (7) with
MIN2 (1), MIN3(2) and MIN 8 (1) the second most frequently used.
6.14 Policies MIN4 and MIN5 appear not to be used at all, however, again,
these policies relate to specific forms of mineral related development.
The two policies concern safeguarding and have not been used as the
need to either safeguard mineral from surface development and protect
rail depots and wharfs has not arisen during this AMR study period.
6.15 Draft East of England Plan: With regard to the Draft Regional Spatial
Strategy Policies, the most frequent policy ENV17 (11), ENV16 (9)
AND ENV15 (8) while policies ENV18 (1) and ENV19 (1) were used the
least.
Information from the 2004-2005 AMR
MINERALS POLICY ANALYSIS 2004 – 2005 (Usage in Brackets)
The most frequently used policies in making decisions on minerals
applications are MLP2 (3), MLP3 (3), MLP4 (3), MLP8 (3), MLP9 (3),
MLP10 (2), MLP11 (1) and MLP13 (4).
Policies MLP1, MLP5, MLP6, MLP7 and MLP12 have not been
quoted in reports or decisions. However, these policies are
fundamental to the planning process and would have been taken into
when determining the application.
16
14
Minerals Local Plan Policy Usage
12
10
8
2004/05
2005/06
6
4
2
0
MLP1
MLP2
MLP3
MLP4
MLP5
MLP6
MLP7
MLP8
MLP9
MLP10
MLP11
MLP12
MLP13
6.17 Data Collection Issues
6.18 On the 1st January 2005 the Freedom of Information Act 2000 became
fully implemented. The new powers for access to information have
caused part of the Mineral Industry within the UK to withhold their sales
and reserves information on their sites. Due to this major problem
Essex along with other M/WPAs have been unable to collect sufficient
information on the Production of Primary Land Won Aggregates and
Production of Secondary/Recycled Aggregate for the period
2004/2005.
6.19 This issue has been resolved, so this Annual Monitoring Report for the
period 2005-2006 contains more accurate data, however certain
companies are still not cooperating in providing data and this data is
displayed in the section 4.
7.
MINERALS INDICATORS
7.1
Indicators measure the wider social, economic and environmental
background against which policies operate. As such they help relate
policy outputs to the local area. Under LDF monitoring guidance a set
of core indicators have been included which authorities are required to
address in the AMR. This AMR will focus on waste and minerals
indicators derived from the LDF Core Output Indicators (Update
1/2005) dated October 2005.
7.2
The following indicators will be measured against polices and decision
made by Essex against the adopted in the Essex and Southend-onSea Structure Plan 2001 and the Essex Minerals Local Plan 1997.
17
1. Production (in tonnes) of primary land won aggregates:
2. Production (in tonnes) of secondary/recycled aggregates.
7.3
The permitted reserve at 31 Dec 2005 was about 51 million tonnes.
Twenty four (24) Sites had a current sand and gravel reserve plus 4
long dormant sites with an estimated 1.1 million tonnes.
7.4
The Essex plan provision for sand & gravel supply is 4.41 million
tonnes per annum as set by the regional apportionment 2001-2016
which was approved by the Regional Planning Panel for the East of
England.
7.5
Aggregate Sales, Reserve and Land Bank for Essex (excluding
Southend and Thurrock)
Sales (figures from Annual Monitoring Survey)
2001
2002
2003
2004
Estimate
4.49 mt
4.57 mt 4.4mt
4.3 mt
2005
Estimate
4.1 mt
Average
2001-2005
Estimate
4.35mt
A
Essex plan provision Reserves (01.01.06) Landbank
p
(apportionment)
(Estimate)
by Regional
p
Million Tonnes
Million Tonnes
Apportionment
r
4.41 mt
51 mt
11.5 years
o
Approximately 150,000 tonnes are recorded annually as recycled /
secondary aggregates. This is considered to be under-recorded being
only that processed on mineral extraction sites.
7.6
To address this issue, work will be carried out to make realistic
estimates on the amounts of construction and demolition waste which
is recycled and transformed into secondary aggregate within Essex.
There is a current lack of data in respect of recycled C&D waste,
however as MPS1 now places emphasis on the reuse of recycled
material in the construction industry, it is likely that work will be
commissioned to inform the MDD in respect of secondary aggregate
production in Essex. The results of this work will set the baseline for
future figure monitoring comparisons within subsequent AMRs.
8.
WASTE POLICY MONITORING
8.1
Planning Applications: All decisions on Waste Planning applications
are targeted to be reached within 13 weeks of the receipt of a valid
planning application. The national indicator against which performance
is measured in BVPI 109a. The performance figures for Essex are
audited by an independent auditor every year. The target for each year
is set at a higher level. For 2005 / 2006 the target was set at 50% of
application to be dealt with within 13 weeks. We achieved 45%.
During the period 39 decisions were made.
18
8.2
Waste Planning Applications: 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006:
There were 23 waste applications determined during the time period.
8.3
A total of 16 applications were approved during the study period.
Nine(9) waste applications were withdrawn whilst 3 applications were
refused.
8.4
Three (3) other applications were for certificates of lawfulness one of
which was refused.
8.5
A complete list of the planning applications determined is included at
Appendix 3.
8.6
The following waste applications (not decisions made) the county
council received are listed below, (figures from 1 Apr 05 – 31 Mar 06)
Waste
Transfer
Treatment
Recycling
Facilities
Composting
Metal/ELV
Incineration
Landfill
11
9
6
5
0
0
0
8.7
Policy Use in Development Control for Waste Planning: Policies in
the adopted Essex Waste Local Plan 2001 and Structure Plan have
been monitored to examine the effect that these policies have on the
decision making process. This policy performance will help in
assessing whether the policies are being actively used and are
effective and which polices should be considered for inclusion in the
Minerals and Waste Development Framework.
8.8
There is a gap however in knowledge regarding the monitoring of
Minerals and Waste policies at a District / Borough level in regard to
the effect that these policies have at the sub-county level. This gap is
likely to be addressed in future AMRs.
8.9
For a full text reference of Waste Local Plan Polices and Structure Plan
Waste Policies see Appendix 1.
8.10 Waste Development Control Decisions (Usage in Brackets): The
most frequently used policies in making decisions on waste
applications were Policy W3A (10), W4B (5), W7D (4), W7E (4), W8A
(4), W8B (5), W8C (5), W10A (6), W10B (4) and W10E (18).
8.11
Policy W3B (1),W3C (1),W3D (1),W4A (2),W4C (2),W5C (1),W6A
(2),W7B (1),W7F (1),W7H (2),W10C (1), W10F (2) and W10G (2) were
the next set of most used policies.
8.12 Policies W5B, W5C, W7A, W7C, W7G and W10H appear not to be
considered at all. However, again, this does not necessarily mean that
these policies have not been considered throughout the development
19
process. Such policies may well have been considered by the
developer at the pre-application stage to inform and influence the
development proposal. Furthermore, a sub-county authority may have
used such polices in their development decisions.
8.13 Policy W5B concerns Clinical Waste applications. W5C relates to
sewage treatment works, W7A: indoor composting, W7C: Anaerobic
Digestion facilities, W7G: incineration, W10H: concerns waste
development with safeguarding areas for airports. As no applications
for development, related to these policies, were received in the AMR
period, these polices have, correctly, not been utilised. Nevertheless,
these polices would continue to be relevant should related applications
be submitted in the future.
8.14
With regard to waste Structure Plan Policies, the most recurrent
policies are WM3 (16) and WM1 (11) while policy WM2 (1) is the least
used.
Information from the 2004-2005 AMR
WASTE POLICY ANALYSIS 2004 – 2005 (Usage in Brackets)
The most frequently used policies in making decisions on waste
applications were Policy W3C (4), W4A (4), W4B (6), W6A (4), W7H
(4), W10C (4), W10E (12), W10F (6) and W10G (5).
Policy W3B (3), W3D (3), W7B (3), W7D(2), W7E(3), W8B (2) W9A
(3), W9B (3), W10A (3), W10B (3) were the next set of most POLICY
ANALYSIS 2004 – 2005:
W7A (1), W7D (2), W7J (1), W8A (1), W8C (1), W10D (1) and W10H
(1) were used the least.
Policies W5A, W5B, W5C, W7C, W7F and W7G appear not to be
considered at all.
20
18
16
Waste Local Plan Policy Usage
14
12
10
2004/05
2005/06
8
6
4
2
0
W3A W3B W3C W3D W4A W4B W4C W5A W5B W5C W6A W7A W7B W7C W7D W7E W7F W7G W7H W7J W8A W8B W8C W9A W9BW10AW10BW10CW10DW10EW10FW10GW10H
8.15 Data Collection Issues
8.16 On the 1st January 2005 the Freedom of Information Act 2000 became
fully implemented. The new powers for access to information have
caused part of the Waste Industry within the UK to withhold information
on their sites. Due to this major problem Essex along with other WPAs
have been unable to collect sufficient information on Waste arisings for
the period 2004/2005.
8.17 This issue has been resolved, so this Annual Monitoring Report for the
period 2005-2006 contains more accurate data; however a number of
companies are still not cooperating in providing data.
9.
Waste Indicators
9.1
Indicators measure the wider social, economic and environmental
background against which policies operate. As such they help relate
policy outputs to the local area. Under LDF monitoring guidance a set
of core indicators have been included which authorities are required to
address in the AMR. This AMR will focus on waste and minerals
indicators derived from the LDF Core Output Indicators (Update
1/2005) dated October 2005.
9.2
The following indicators will be measured against decisions and polices
adopted in the Essex and Southend-on-Sea Structure Plan 2001 and
the Essex and Southend-on-Sea Waste Local Plan 2001.
1. Capacity of new waste management facility by type.
2. The amount of municipal waste arising, and managed by
management type, and the percentage of each management type
representing the waste managed. The results of this indicator can
be seen in Appendix 5.
9.3
In October 2005 Consultants, appointed through the East of England
Regional Authority, produced a ‘Study of Existing Waste Facility
Capacity and Future Needs in the East of England. The results of this
study can be viewed at http://www.eera.gov.uk/category.asp?cat=589
9.4
The East of England Regional Assembly adopted a Waste
Management Strategy (RWMS) in 2003. The RWMS formed part of the
East of England Plan, which, as the Regional Spatial Strategy, which
has undergone an Examination in Public (EiP) and a panel report
published.
9.5
The RWMS exposed some significant gaps in the data available for
waste planning, including knowledge of current facilities in the region
for the treatment of waste, together with details of the throughput of
these facilities and their maximum capacity. The Regional Technical
Advisory Body on Waste (RWTAB) therefore commissioned
consultants to undertake the study of existing waste facility capacity
and future needs in the East of England. The study provides an
essential underpinning to the RWMS, including improved data on
capacity and need for the following main purposes:



9.6
to provide evidence to the EiP;
to facilitate the review and updating of the RWMS; and
to support Waste Planning Authorities (WPAs) in the preparation of
their own Waste Local Development Frameworks (LDFs).
The main objectives of the project were:



to develop a comprehensive database of all waste facilities(1) in
the region, including details of their location, capacity and
throughput, and the origin and destination of the material managed
at each site;
to assess the future requirements of the region to 2021, including
the production of projections, by waste stream, of waste generated
in the region together with an assessment of imports; and
to present a series of options for the combination of recovery
capacity required to manage waste in the region until 2021, in line
with the Regional Planning Body’s obligations under the new
PPS10.
9.7
The results of this study have been taken forward to inform the
emerging draft waste policies in the RSS
9.8
In order to establish a credible evidence base to inform production of
the Waste Development Document consultants have been appointed
by the county council. to establish the existing position in Essex. The
Essex study will there asses the waste arisings and waste
management capacity (something that has proven difficult in respect of
capacity and changing markets), whether the existing policies in the
Waste Local Plan have been effective in managing Essex arisings and
what the future ‘spatial strategy’ for waste management in Essex
should be.
9.9
The scope of the project should therefore focus on achieving the
following primary objectives:
1. The collection and presentation of data on current waste arisings
and disposals within Essex;
2. The collection and presentation of data on the capacity of existing
waste management facilities in Essex;
3. The presentation of waste forecasts using robust assumptions to
2021 (consistent with the RSS and PPS10), and;
4. An analysis of need comparing existing and future disposals and
arisings against existing and planned waste management capacity
(again consistent with RSS and PPS10 to 2021).
23
9.10 The results of the study are anticipated to be released in early 2007.
The study is will suggest the best approach to move forward the
monitoring and assessment of the data and site analysis to inform
future Annual Monitoring Reports
9.11 Waste Data Survey: In order to attempt to attain accurate waste
arising data, a waste survey was carried out by Essex County Council
in Summer 2006. The number of survey forms that were sent out
totalled 185 and up to October 2006, the council had received a total of
40 completed surveys.
9.12 This amount’s to about a 20% return rate on the survey to this date.
Since October 2006 the consultants carrying out the Essex waste study
are acquiring a fuller and more robust set of data, having sought a
greater response rate to the survey. The results of the waste arisings
survey will be reported in the next AMR.
10.
GAP ANALYSIS
10.1
There have been a number of issues that will need to be resolved by
the next AMR. For ease of reference, these gaps are listed below.
10.2
Status of Waste Core Strategy, DC Policies and Site Allocations
Document: The Revised Minerals and Waste Development Scheme
for Essex sets out why it is prudent for Essex to delivery a Minerals
Development Document before commencing work on its Waste
Development Document.
10.3
Supplementary Planning Document: There are no supplementary
planning documents proposed at present however if and when
Supplementary Planning Document’s are prepared they will be
monitored in subsequent AMRs.
10.4
Production Of Secondary/Recycled Aggregates: Lack of figures for
production of secondary/recycled aggregates.
10.5
There has been a lack of responsiveness to the Annual Monitoring
Waste Survey at this time and therefore we were unable to gather
information on the production of secondary/recycled aggregates.
Consultants will be undertaking a study into this area for an Essex
figure which should provide us with enough information for forward
planning over the next year. We will be working towards improving our
links with Industry and the Environment Agency to obtain this
information for the next AMR period.
10.6
Freedom of Information: Under the provision of the Freedom of
Information Act (2004) and Environmental Information Regulations
(EIR) 2004 require that all public bodies make information they hold
available to the public.
24
10.7
This has caused part of the Aggregates and Waste Industry within the
UK to withhold their sales, production and disposal information on their
sites. It is hoped that this can be fully resolved for inclusion within the
next AMR.
10.8
Monitoring of RSS Waste Policy: This will appear in future AMR when
the waste policies are confirmed by the Region and will be reported on
in subsequent AMR.
10.9
The Effect that Minerals and Waste Policy has at District Level: While
some background work has been undertaken in regard to this issue it is
at an embryonic stage to comment on fully in this AMR but will be
reported on in subsequent AMR.
11.
CONCLUSION:
11.1
Essex has failed to meet the milestones set out in the April 2005
Minerals and Waste Development Scheme (MWDS). Accordingly, the
MWDS has been revised in November 2006 having been approved by
the Government Office. Performance against the new scheme will be
represented and commented on in full in subsequent AMRs.
11.2
Whilst some monitoring of waste and minerals policy relating to their
effect on local plan policies has taken place, it has been scarce and
this requirement will be satisfied in future AMRs.
25
APPENDIX 1
Pol. No.
Policy
Replaced by
Minerals Local Plan Review 1997
MLP1
Minerals Reserves
MDD Core Strategy
MLP2
Mineral Need
MDD Core Strategy
MLP3
Transportation
MDD DC Policies
MLP4
Non-Preferred Sites
MDD Core Strategy
MLP5
Aggregate Recycling
MDD DC Policies
MLP6
Site Consideration
MDD DC Policies
MLP7
Dredged Materials
MDD Core Strategy
& DC Policies
MLP8
Agriculture
MDD DC Policies
MLP9
Working and Reclamation
MDD DC Policies
MLP10
Processing Plant and Buildings
MDD DC Policies
MLP11
Processing Plant and Buildings
MDD DC Policies
MLP12
Programming
MDD DC Policies
MLP13
Development Control
MDD DC Policies
Essex and Southend Waste Local Plan 2001
W3A
Sustainable Development, National Waste
Hierarchy & Proximity Principle
WDD Core Strategy
W3B
Identified national, regional, local need. Landfill
provision for plan period.
WDD Core Strategy
W3C
Essex Waste Only Policy. 25ktpa landfill & special
waste, .50ktpa non landfill
WDD Core Strategy
W3D
Non inert landfill void space reserved for that
waste
WDD Core Strategy
W4A
No unacceptable adverse effects to surface and
ground water
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W4B
No unacceptable adverse effects to surface and
ground water
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W4C
Highway/Transport Access
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W5A
Special Waste
WDD Revised DC
Policies & Core
Strategy
26
Pol. No.
Policy
Replaced by
W5B
Clinical Waste
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W5C
Sewage Treatment Works
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W6A
Promote reduction, re-use and recycling
WDD Revised DC
Policies & Core
Strategy
W7A
Criteria - indoor composting
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W7B
Criteria - outdoor composting
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W7C
location of Anaerobic Digestion facilities
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W7D
Secondary aggregate and inert waste recycling
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W7E
MRF's, Waste Recycling Centres, CA/WTS
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W7F
Scrap yards
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W7G
Incineration
WDD Revised DC
Policies & Core
Strategy
W7H
Landfill Gas Provision
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W7J
Mining of waste
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W8A
WM Facilities - schedule 1
WDD Waste Site
Allocations
W8B
Non Schedule 1 WM facilities
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W8C
Smaller scale WM Facilities (,25ktpa)
WDD Revised DC
Policies & Waste Site
Allocations
W9A
Preferred landfill sites.
WDD Revised DC
Policies & Waste Site
Allocations
W9B
Landfill/raising not for own sake - restoration need
WDD Core Strategy &
Revised DC Policies
27
Pol. No.
Policy
Replaced by
W10A
Conditions/legal agreements to ensure
compliance
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W10B
Full applications for WM facilities
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W10C
Landfill proposals with measures for feasible a
restoration.
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W10D
Landfill proposals with gas management
measures - special measures within 250m
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W10E
Wildlife protection and conservation
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W10F
Hours of operation
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W10G
Protection of public rights of way
WDD Revised DC
Policies
W10H
Airport Safeguarding
WDD Revised DC
Policies
Structure Plan Policies:
Minerals Section
Policy MIN1 – The Minerals Planning Authority will endeavour to ensure that
reserves of land – won sand and gravel are always available, with planning
permission sufficient for at least seven years.
Policy MIN2 – Land will be available for minerals working through the
planning process to provide an appropriate contribution to local, regional and
national needs.
Policy MIN3 - Proposal for sand and gravel working on sites other than those
listed in the Minerals Plan will only be permitted where:Policy MIN4 – Wherever possible, potentially workable minerals deposits will
be safeguarded from surface development that would sterilise the minerals
Policy MIN5 – Existing and potential aggregate importing facilities shall be
safeguarded
Policy MIN6 – Planning Permission for minerals extraction and related
development will be refused where there would be an unacceptable effect on
any of the following:Policy MIN7 – Proposal for minerals working will only be permitted where
proper provision has been made within reasonable time
28
Policy MIN8 The Minerals Planning authority will encourage the use of
recycled and waste materials as substitutes for primary aggregates.
Waste Section
Policy WM1 – The Waste Planning authority fully endorse the government’s
hierarchy of waste management.
Policy WM2 – for the period 1997 – 2010, provision will be made for landfill of
a proportion of London’s waste in accordance with regional advice.
Policy WM3 Proposals for waste management operations and related
development will be considered against certain criteria.
29
APPENDIX 2
APPENDIX 3
Minerals & Waste Applications Determined 1 Apr 05- 31 Mar 06
Site Ref Application
Application Detail
Number
13 421 18 ESS/48/01/COL/R
Review of Mineral Planning Permissions
13 421 19 ESS/49/01/COL/R
Review of Mineral Planning Permissions
14 457 23 ESS/56/04/TEN
Creation of new hard standings and erection of 5 buildings, including
offices, vehicle depollution unit, dismantling/work shops and storage
13 421 18 ESS/54/04/COL/REV Variation of cond 3 (operating times) attached to approved application
ESS/36/02/COL to allow the approved concrete batching plant to
operate on 5 days per annum between 1800 & 2100 hours Monday to
Friday & between 1300 & 1800 hours on Saturdays
32 457 00 ESS/05/05/BAS
The creation of a waste treatment facility for the purpose of accepting
highway gully waste material. Including stockpiling of treated material
in drainage pits, material drying, screening for the removal of ferrous
& non ferrous materials etc
22 457 02 ESS/17/03/EPF
Raising the level of the land by depositing approximately 5,200m3 of
topsoil
32 457 14 ESS/09/05/BAS
Erection of a steel clad buildings to enclose 2 bins for storage of
asbestos waste
14 421 27 ESS/13/05/COL
Cont of use of land for recycling of concrete & brick waste, coated
roadstone and soils, not in compliance with Cond 2 attached to
approved app ESS/05/00/COL, until 30 April 2007.
13 421 18 ESS/06/05/COL Creation of a hardstanding for the proposed siting of a replacement
sand and gravel processing plant to provide an even hard surfaced
area at a uniform level of 19.5m AOD
Decision
Date
13 Apr
2005
13 Apr
2005
21 Apr
2005
Decision
EIA
Granted
Yes
Granted
Yes
25 Apr
2005
Granted
13 May
2005
Refused
18 May
2005
19 May
2005
28 Jun
2005
Granted
29 Jun
2005
Granted
Granted
Granted
Granted
s106
32 421 02 ESS/10/05/BAS
Proposed temp. installation for a trial period not exceeding 5yrs of a
new enclosed municipal waste treatment facility to treat using air,
water & leachate no more than 15,000tonnes of mixed waste per
annum already received by the landfill site
31 457 15 ESS/22/05/BRW Construction of kiosk to house electrical equipment to control plant on
site
13 457 11 ESS/11/05/COL Application to permanently retain containment walls, together with a
conveyor and hopper for the existing recycling centre
11 421 12 ESS/24/05/UTT Cont of dev of a combined plant & anc facilities for the manufacture of
mortar & concrete using indigenous primary agg and primary &
recycled agg imported
14 457 10 ESS/04/05/TEN Change of use of part of haulage yard to form an extended waste
transfer station, including the erection of a new building for the sorting
& treating of mixed biodegradable & inert waste & the continuing use
of concrete crusher & wood chipper/shredder
14 457 24 ESS/27/05/TEN Construction of sewage pumping station, sewage treatment works,
access road and site fencing
11 Jul
2005
Granted
19 Jul
2005
03 Aug
2005
19 Sep
2005
Granted
27 Sep
2005
Granted
27 Sep
2005
Granted
12 421 10 ESS/21/05/BTE
28 Sep
2005
Granted
07 Oct
2005
Granted
10 Oct
2005
Granted
18 Oct
2005
Refused
Continuation of use of bagging plant, ancillary raw material bays and
stocking area without compliance with Condition 5 (hours of working)
attached to planning permission ESS/22/04/BTE
23 421 30 ESS/28/05/CHL Overnight and weekend parking of lorries associated with the
distribution of aggregates, together with a lorry wash and Portakabin
office
34 457 17 ESS/26/05/ROC Waste Recycling facility for gully waste, stockpiling, material drying.
Screening of ferrous & non ferrous materials & removal of non
recyclable material to an off site location - portakabins
12 457 27 ESS/30/05/BTE Change of use to waste transfer station/recycling centre including
new sorting shed re use of currently redundant buildings and use of
land for concrete crushing
32
Granted
Granted
31 457 07 ESS/23/05/BRW Removal of time limits to allow the continued use of land for green
waste composting on a permanent basis etc
23 421 11 ESS/49/04/CHL/ Proposed non-compliance with cond 39 & 40 of plng permission
REV
ESS/10/03/CHL to allow the continuation of the existing operations
until the remaining void is fully restored
35 457 07 ESS/33/05/CPT Continue use as a waste transfer station without compliance with
cond. 7 (nº of containers) attached to ESS/10/98/CPT to allow for 4
containers to store asbestos waste prior to disposal to landfill
31 Oct
2005
01 Nov
2005
Refused
01 Nov
2005
Granted
21 422 03 ESS/25/05/HLW
01 Nov
2005
Granted
02 Nov
2005
Granted
29 Nov
2005
Granted
05 Dec
2005
Granted
09 Dec
2005
12 Dec
2005
Granted
The cont of dev. for the production of coated roadstone without
compliance with cond. 5 (hrs of operation) 6 & 7 (night time noise
limits) as attached to ESS/31/01/HLW to allow extended night time &
Sunday working for a period not exceeding 40 days pa
23 421 11 ESS/18/05/CHL Use of land for recycling of construction & demolition wastes,
comprising crushing & screening within the existing sand & gravel
plant site to produce secondary aggregates for the construction &
allied industries
23 421 03 ESS/42/05/CHL Cont of Dev permitted under ESS/34/99/CHL, 'The siting of one
caravan for the use by security guards patrolling the existing minerals
workings', without complying with Cond 1, to allow for the retention
until 31/12/2009
12 421 35 ESS/20/05/BTE Cont of removal of materials in the course of construction of an
agricultural reservoir, PP ESS/20/04/BTE, without complying with
Cond 1 (accordance with approved plans), to allow the retention &
cont use of a haul road, wheel cleaner, weighbridge etc
34 421 15 ESS/36/05/ROC Permanent installation of a LFG flare within the existing LFG
Generation Plant
23 421 16 ESS/40/05/CHL Replacement mineral processing plant
33
Granted
Granted
Yes
23 421 34 ESS/31/04/CHL/ Dev. (mineral ext. for the construction of an irrigation reservoir) as
REV
approved under plng perm. ESS/37/00/CHL without complying with
cond 4 of the approved scheme relating to the open storage of
aggregates on site (revised stock pile size & location)
35 457 0 ESS/34/05/CPT Change of use to provide waste transfer station and erection of 3m
high litter sheeting to the existing 3m high fence
14 Dec
2005
Granted
16 Dec
2005
Granted
Retrospective permission for a material recovery and waste transfer 22 Dec
station at units 10-11 Heron Court incorporating proposals to increase 2005
the proportion of material recovered for recycling
Granted
Mineral extraction and progressive restoration of a western extension 31 Jan
2006
11 421 05 ESS/02/06/UTT Installation of additional micro turbine generating set and ancillaries 27 Feb
to existing electricity generating compound, to be powered by landfill 2006
gas from the landfill area (retrospective)
23 421 03 ESS/49/05/CHL Retention of an existing concrete batching plant, originally approved 27 Feb
under permission CHL/329/84 in a 'mothballed' state of un use until 2006
31 Dec 2009
34 421 07 ESS/32/05/ROC Continuation of use of the site for crushing, screening & storage of 01 Mar
concrete, demolition & plant hire with ancillary storage, workshop & 2006
associated buildings
ESS/53/05/BTE
The construction of a Dry Silo Mortar (DSM) plant within the main 02 Mar
12 421 10
processing and infrastructure area
2006
Granted
13 421 19 ESS/17/05/COL
Granted
32 457 04 ESS/38/05/BAS
23 421 16 ESS/44/05/CHL
12 421 14 ESS/08/06/BTE
Relocate approved inert recycling facility within the confines of
Colchester Quarry
The continuation of development at the site without compliance with
Cond 21 (Scheme of workings) and Cond 31 (Restoration Scheme)
attached to ESS/13/02/BTE to allow the site to be fully restored by
the 31 July 2007
34
29 Mar
2006
29 Mar
2006
Yes
Granted
Refused
Granted
Granted
Granted
Yes
14 421 13 ESS/63/04/TEN
Continued use of silt ponds without complying with condition 5 (time 30 Mar
limit) of planning permission TEN/334/89
2006
35
Granted
APPENDIX 4
Essex Household Recycling & Composting
Performance April 2005 - March 2006
AUTHORITY
Household Waste Household Waste Household Waste Total Household
Composted
Waste Arisings
to Landfill
Recycled
(Tonnes)3
(Tonnes)
(Tonnes)1
(Tonnes'2
BASILDON DISTRICT COUNCIL
BRAINTREE DISTRICT COUNCIL
BRENTWOOD BOROUGH COUNCIL
CASTLE POINT BOROUGH COUNCIL
CHELMSFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL
COLCHESTER BOROUGH COUNCIL
EPPING FOREST DISTRICT COUNCIL
HARLOW DISTRICT COUNCIL
MALDON DISTRICT COUNCIL
ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL
TENDRING DISTRICT COUNCIL
UTTLESFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL
Waste Collection Authority Total
Essex Total
Total HW Recycled & Composted 05/06
Other HW Collected 05/06
Countywide Recycling Rate5
|Total Household Waste Generated
82b
Household
Waste
Composted
2005/6
Statutory
Performance
Standard
2007/8
Statutory
Performanc
e
Standard
30%
21%
30%
24%
18%
30%
30%
18%
30%
18%
24%
30%
30%
21%
30%
24%
20%
30%
30%
20%
30%
20%
24%
30%
(%)
(%)
5,378.7
5,480.9
2,831.9
3,000.5
10,940.0
7,101.6
3,681.7
399.5
2,731.1
179.0
0.0
1,090.5
42,815.29
76,968.6
56,494.9
29,227.8
35,759.0
79,154.3
62,757.0
49,114.1
28,759.2
23,706.5
33,428.9
48,468.4
32,067.1
555,905.78
15.77%
20.84%
16.90%
15.62%
14.83%
18.78%
16.40%
18.49%
17.71%
14.01%
21.55%
22.19%
17.59%
6.99%
9.70%
9.69%
8.39%
13.82%
11.32%
7.50%
1.39%
11.52%
0.54%
0.00%
3.40%
7.70%
22.76%
30.55%
26.59%
24.02%
28.65%
30.09%
23.90%
19.88%
29.23%
14.54%
21.55%
25.59%
25.29%
19.70%
28.45%
24.28%
19.85%
26.83%
29.75%
21.54%
16.09%
21.36%
12.31%
19.94%
23.35%
22.81%
51,932.71
45,453.01
33,886.48
131,272.20
34.63%
25.81%
60.44%
57.59%
N/A
N/A
467,249.45
143,226.76
76,701.77
687,177.98
20.84%
11.16%
32.00%
29.83%
30%
30%
219,928.53
467,249.45
32.00%
|
82a
Household
Waste
Recycled
ECC Performance
Indicators
Total
Total recycled
recycled &
& composted
composted
2004/5 (%)
2005/6 (%)
12,138.0
11,776.0
4,940.8
5,587.1
11,734.7
11,783.7
8,056.2
5,318.0
4,198.8
4,682.9
10,442.9
7,114.5
97,773.753
59,451.87
39,237.93
21,455.11
27,171.36
56,479.50
43,871.82
37,376.26
23,041.70
16,776.65
28,567.03
38,025.43
23,862.07
415,316.74
ESSEX COUNTY COUNCIL4
Best Value Performance
Indicators
687,177.98
36