HARDSTANDING that has covered a field used as a storage area will have to be removed due to flooding and pollution risks.

The area on the Severn Bridge Industrial Estate, in Caldicot, does have outline planning permission, from 2023, for industrial units but a further application for details including access, appearance, landscaping and layout has yet to be decided since it was submitted in September last year.

Monmouthshire County Council, which issued an enforcement notice in February requiring the hardstanding be removed and the site returned to its former condition, said Chorley-based owners FI Real Estate Management has yet to compete works to comply with conditions from the 2023 permission or submit a SUDS sustainable urban drainage system application.

The firm appealed the enforcement notice and claimed planning permission for the hardstanding should be granted and also said rather than take enforcement action the council should have instead asked it to submit a retrospective planning application to gain approval.

It is using the site to store around 20 shipping containers, vehicles and used tyres among other items, which will be allowed to remain.

However both its claims were dismissed by independent inspector N Jones who considered the appeal on behalf of Planning and Environment Decisions Wales and visited the site at Pill Row in June.

Jones said the work hadn’t complied with Welsh planning policy related to flood risk and accepted the council’s concerns as development hadn’t addressed concerns over water run off it could increase the flood risk elsewhere and could also pose a pollution threat to the adjacent Nedern Brook.

The site is within a potable, or dinking water, Source Protection Zone (SPZ).

Their report stated: “I saw that the hardstanding’s position is located within seven metres of the Nedern Brook, and whilst I have seen no evidence of any pollution incidents as a result of the development, I consider that the open storage uses, including the parked vehicles and used tyres could, in the absence of a suitable drainage scheme, increase the risk of pollution entering the watercourse, thus harming potable water supplies.”

Jones also stated the hardstanding couldn’t remain for even a temporary period, despite there being permission for further development, as drainage issues haven’t been fully addressed or resolved.

They said: “Given the likely flood levels predicted for the appeal site, I

do not consider the risk should be allowed to subsist, even for a temporary period.”

The inspector also said the work to remove the hardstanding would have to be completed within six months, as required by the council, and rejected a plea for an 18 month compliance period.

Jones stated: “The evidence suggests that the hardstanding was laid in only a few weeks, there is no evidence that the appellants would encounter any particular difficulties in removing the hardstanding or in restoring the site to its condition prior to the breach taking place within the six-month period.”