The phased extraction of sand and gravel, inclusive of mineral processing, all ancillary works, equipment and associated infrastructure and progressive restoration.

The Principal Planner introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, he drew Members’ attention to the location, layout and elevations. 

Members had undertaken a site visit and had viewed the site and had assessed the impact of a proposal on the surrounding area. 

Members noted the additional information as set out in the Schedule of Additional Letters circulated prior to the meeting.

Councillor R Cotham, representing Claverley Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Councillor E Aldridge, representing Worfield and Rudge Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

Mr H Richards, representing local residents, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15) Councillor Tina Woodward, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement and then left the table, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.  During her statement, the following points were raised:

·         There had been a high level of objections and concerns raised regarding the implications the quarry would have on such a sensitive Green Belt location;

·         Issues remained regarding the complex hydrological setting of the site.  Those who were familiar with the location and relied on the water from the site for their livelihoods and personal water supply continued to raise concerns;

·         She questioned how introducing a hydrological monitoring scheme without a greater understanding of the complexity of the perched water, springs and current flows and water deposits over the whole site would be effective – small changes may not be viewed as serious until it was potentially too late.  The Environment Agency had highlighted its preference to address the lack of site specific data and conceptual uncertainties, including baseline date, prior to the granting of planning permission;

·         The ancient woodland of Cannebuff and its companion landscape in the Green Belt was worthy of the highest protection the Council could offer, as per the adopted National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2018; however, this should not come before the needs of the local residents affected by the potential quarry but should be considered in conjunction with each other - the landscape and the people fit together;

·         Two Identified residents whose respective health conditions would be highly disadvantaged should their homes be affected by airborne particles.  She was concerned that the haul route ran along two sides of Naboth’s Vineyard and remained close to proposed works even as amended.  During the site visit she noted that the wind swept over the proposed site towards Gardenland;

·         She referred Members to the many concerns expressed regarding the safety and speed of traffic on the A454;

·         She acknowledged had taken into account the Officer’s report regarding the need for this quarry set against Shropshire Council’s relevant Policies and the Minerals Local Plan for Staffordshire 2015 to 2030, Local Aggregate Assessment October 2017, based on their figure of 5 million tonnes per annum and projected production capacity;

·         She urged refusal, but if granted she welcomed strengthened conditions regarding the impact on private water supplies, including alternative supplies such as mains water connection at the applicant’s cost and for Members to explore the option of introducing a 50 mph speed limit for the full length of the route, introduction of speed cameras, flashing signs to indicate when quarry vehicles are at the junction with the A454 and a financial contribution from the applicant to fund any necessary highway safety improvements.

Mr D Hardy, the agent, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.  With the permission of the Chairman and due to the fact that additional speakers had been permitted to speak against the proposal, the applicant was permitted to speak for up to six minutes.  He responded to questions from Members and confirmed that an alternative access located to the north east of the site had been discounted as not being as suitable as the proposed access arrangements. He confirmed that appropriate conditions to control dust levels would be attached to any permission.

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans and noted the comments of all speakers.  In response to questions and concerns the Principal Planner provided clarification on landbank requirements for Shropshire and Staffordshire and confirmed that there would be no development of the site at Barnsley Lane.  He further explained that the proposal was compliant with SAMDev policy MD5(3).  Health issues were addressed in the report and Regulatory Services had not objected.  Detailed air quality monitoring would apply.  In terms of hydrology sufficient information had been submitted to allow determination.  The Environment Agency had not objected and appropriate conditions relating to hydrology would be attached to any permission.  A further clause could be imposed requiring the applicant to compensate any affected third parties in the event that, notwithstanding the applicant’s consultant’s conclusions, adverse impacts on local water supplies were encountered.  Additional funding could also be sought from the applicant to address highway safety concerns.  A Local Liaison Group, convened and managed by the applicant, would provide a forum for the local community to share information and discuss any concerns with the applicant.

RESOLVED:

That, as per the Officer’s recommendation, planning permission be granted, subject to:

·         The conditions and legal obligations as set out in Appendix 1 of the report, subject to:

The wording “unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority” being deleted from Conditions 30, 33, 35 and 37; and

The amendments to conditions as suggested by the Environment Agency and as detailed in the Schedule of Additional Representations.

·         A financial contribution from the applicant to fund the cost of establishing a 50 mph speed limit and highway safety measures up to 3 kilometres from either side of the access along the Bridgnorth Road A454;

·         A clause to address investigation, mitigation and compensation in the event of any adverse impact on the local water supplies;

·         That the applicant convene and manage a Local Liaison Group; and

·         That delegated authority be granted to the Principal Planning Officer to make minor amendments or additions to any conditions as deemed necessary.

(At this juncture, the meeting adjourned at 03:28 pm and reconvened at 03:35 pm.)