Meeting: Planning Committee (County Hall, Durham - Committee Room 2 - 17/08/2007 11:00:00 AM)
Item: A3 Applications to be Determined by the County Council
Report of Rod Lugg, Head of Environment and Planning
Sedgefield Borough: Proposal to vary Conditions 1 and 7 of Planning Permission T/APP/H1345/A/96/267255/P5 as amended by Planning Permission 7/2003/0045CM in order to: a) extend the date for completion of mineral extraction, b) revise the method of mineral extraction, c) revise phasing of inert landfill operations, at Bishop Middleham Quarry for W&M Thompson (Quarries) Limited
Introduction
1 Bishop Middleham Quarry is a limestone quarry (with a site area of 37.5 Ha), situated directly to the north of Bishop Middleham (see attached location plan). It is a regionally important producer of agricultural lime and harder limestone reserves are used for a range of crushed aggregates on construction projects throughout the region.
2 Planning permission for the extraction of limestone and reinstatement by infilling with waste at the Quarry was granted in 1983. An extension to the north west of the original quarry was granted on appeal in 1997 and a subsequent permission to alter the phasing for both mineral extraction and landfill operations was given in 2003.
3 Mineral extraction is currently taking place in the northern part of the extension area and landfilling is occurring in the central part of the original permission area and is due to commence in the extension area in late 2007. Mineral extraction is required to cease by 2009 and the site restored by 2021.
4 The operator has advised that it is not possible to meet the timetable for the completion of mineral extraction on the site and formal variation of existing planning conditions is therefore being sought. The submission to do this is supported by an update to the Environmental Statement submitted in 1995 which covers air quality, noise and vibration.
Proposal
The current proposal consists of three main elements:
a) Extend the date for completion of mineral extraction to
iii) While the Lafarge planning application to extend Thrislington Quarry is not part of the W&M Thompson proposal, the Parish Council is mindful of the severe cumulative long term effect of quarrying in and around Bishop Middleham should Durham County Council eventually approve the Lafarge application.
iii) A six year extension, even allowing for foot and mouth, seems excessive and looks like a deliberate ruse to achieve the initial permission.
Comment: Details of the underpass and the road above it were approved as part of the original permission granted on appeal. The crash barriers are required along the road above the site tunnel for highway safety reasons.
Comment: The proposals relate to the extension of time for mineral extraction and have no effect on landfill operations at the site.
Planning considerations
Policies
19 The principle of extraction and infilling at the Bishop Middleham site is established by the existing planning permission. The Committee therefore needs to consider whether extending the time period for extraction operations, changing the working method and landfill phasing scheme would be environmentally acceptable.
20 Policies M36 of the County Durham Minerals Local Plan [MLP] and W33 of the County Durham Waste Local Plan [WLP] require that proposals for mineral or waste working should incorporate suitable mitigation measures to ensure potentially harmful impacts from pollution by noise, vibration, dust and mud are reduced to an acceptable level.
21 MLP Policy M1 seeks the maintenance of at least a ten year landbank of crushed rock in the County. Permitted reserves at the quarry make a small but important contribution to the overall landbank which is currently in a healthy position at approximately 27 years (132 million tonnes). The quarry also contributes to supplying regional and national needs for aggregates and non-aggregates (agricultural lime). Continued extraction at the quarry in the period beyond 2009 would help maintain this contribution.
22 By 2009 it is estimated that approximately 2.2 million tonnes of limestone at the quarry would remain unworked. The MLP seeks to prevent the unnecessary sterilisation of mineral resources and this is also an important objective of the Government’s policy for minerals planning as set out in Minerals Policy Statement 1 (MPS1) ’Planning and Minerals’ (November 2006).
Residential amenity
23 The quarry lies immediately to the north of the village of Bishop Middleham and the closest properties along High Road are approximately 450m from the site access and approximately 290m from the nearest working phase of the quarry. Six properties are located to the north east of the boundary the closest being Highland House some 70m from the quarry boundary (approximately 111m from the extraction boundary). Farnless Farm lies some 70m to the east of the original quarry. Given that mineral extraction already exists and would not extend closer to residential properties than currently permitted, no significant new impacts are considered likely from the extension of time for extraction operations.
Dust
24 The applicant has stated that use of the D11 had previously resulted in periods when the control of dust emissions had been problematic. The change in working method would mean that mobile plant would operate in a smaller working area within the quarry void where dust suppression techniques can be applied more efficiently, increasing protection during windy periods. It is not expected that the use of conventional blasting techniques would create more dust than the current fracture blast method. Conditions are currently in place covering dust suppression at the site and would continue to be applied if planning permission is granted.
Noise
25 The principle noise source at the site was the Cat D11 dozer. This has recently been replaced with a 360 degree tracked excavator that has a lower declared sound power level and works at the quarry face which provides some noise attenuation. No increase in noise levels is expected as a result of the proposals.
Blasting
26 The proposals would increase blasting from once every 5 to 6 weeks (9 - 12 per year) to once every 3 to 5 weeks (15 - 20 per year) and would change the blasting technique from fracture blasting to face blasting. This together with the extension of time for extraction would result in an increase in the frequency and duration of blasting for a further 8 years (from 2007). Monitoring results show an overall compliance with existing planning conditions which set maximum levels for vibrations caused by blasts and it is not anticipated that the variation in blasting technique would result in any significant change in the vibration levels experienced from fracture blasting. Blasting activities would continue to be monitored if planning permission is granted.
27 Sedgefield Borough Council Environmental Health Officer has no objections to the proposal and noted that should planning permission be granted then existing conditions should be mirrored in any new consent.
Landscape and nature conservation
28 The site lies in open countryside within the Magnesian Limestone Escarpment of central Durham immediately north of the village of Bishop Middleham. An extension of time for extraction operations would prolong the visual effects of quarrying activities but continued operation over the specified period is unlikely to have any additional long term detrimental effect on the special character and quality of the area and surrounding residential properties.
29 The extension area (where the remaining mineral to be extracted is located) is relatively unobtrusive with views of the working being limited to the lane (unclassified road 35.17) where it passes between the existing quarry and the extension area. It is a minor trafficked road and well used as a footpath by local people. Fleeting views from the west can also be obtained from the A1(M) for persons travelling north. Views of operations and landfill phasing would be screened from the east by the existing screen mound.
30 The changes to the phasing of landfill operations would still achieve the approved levels for final restoration and would have no additional affect on the surrounding landscape or the final restoration date for the quarry of 2021.
31 Bishop Middleham Special Site of Scientific Interest lies immediately to the north of the original quarry. Given the nature of the proposals there would not be any significant effect on nature conservation interests in the vicinity.
Traffic and access considerations
32 The existing planning permission does not limit the number of vehicle movements. No changes are proposed to the current level of vehicle numbers or transport and access arrangements for the site and it is anticipated that the bulk of traffic movements for limestone extraction would be taken out via the existing access onto Stoneybeck Lane where vehicles would turn left to join the A177. The return loads of waste would use the reverse route. This level and routeing of traffic movements was deemed acceptable at the time of the earlier planning approvals relating to the site. All loads leaving the site go through an existing wheel wash prior to embarking on the public highway.
Recommendation and Reasons
33 Planning permission has been granted for mineral extraction and restoration through infilling with waste at the site. Mineral extraction is required to cease by June 2009 and the site restored by 2021. The applicant has indicated that for a number of reasons the completion of mineral extraction will not be achieved by this end date and requests an extension of time until 2015. No change in the timescale for restoration of the site is proposed.
34 Any extension of time would prolong the environmental impacts of the extraction operation in terms of traffic, visual intrusion, vibration, noise and dust. However these impacts are known and subject to existing controls. Recent monitoring results show general compliance with the relevant conditions and elements of the revised working method would assist in controlling noise and dust emissions.
35 The increase in the frequency of blasting at the site would result in a total of 15 - 20 blasts per year for an additional 8 years until 2015. However the applicant has a history of general compliance with the relevant planning conditions and it is expected that this would continue.
36 Without the extension to the period for mineral extraction approximately 2.2 million tonnes of workable minerals would not be worked and would be sterilised contrary to the broad aims of the County Durham Minerals Local Plan and Government Guidance for mineral working.
37 In these circumstances and given the need to fully utilise the remaining mineral resources at the site, I recommend that the application to vary planning Conditions 1 and 7 of the current planning permissions (relating to the extension to the period for mineral extraction and to references in approved documents as to the use of the D11 excavator and the existing landfill phasing plan) be approved, for the following reason:
(i) The proposal would ensure remaining mineral reserves at the site are not sterilised and that these can be worked in an environmentally acceptable manner within agreed limits and with limited impact on the visual and residential amenities of the surrounding area, in accordance with MLP Policy M36.
38 The Planning Committee may also wish to advise the applicant of its disappointment that mineral extraction has fallen significantly behind schedule and that it expects extraction to be completed within the revised timetable.
No departure
Background Papers: Planning application and supporting statement, plans and additional information on planning application file ref: CMA/7/64.
| Contact: John Byers Tel: 0191 383 3408 |